Statement by Presiding Bishop Edmond L. Browning of the Episcopal Church, April 3, 1997

The Middle East, the Holy Land, the home of our faith and still home to more than 10 million Christians, is poised on the brink of an uncertain future.

Its people are searching for a future that could be based either upon the hope for justice and loving coexistence or one that will bow to past antagonisms and an endless cycle of violence and discord.

After my visit to the region--to attend a meeting of Anglican Primates in Jerusalem and to travel to Gaza and the West Bank, Cyprus, Lebanon and Syria--I am more convinced than ever that it is critical for the international community to support those who are working for a peaceful future.

Perhaps no two cities capture more clearly both the hopes and the fears of the region than the Holy City of Jerusalem and the war-torn but miraculously tenacious city of Beirut. During our time in Jerusalem we learned of the horrendous murder of Israeli children at the "Island of Peace" between Israel and Jordan. We also witnessed the beginning of the highly controversial construction of the new settlement in East Jerusalem, accompanied by predictions that the fateful decision by the Israeli government might derail the fragile peace process. And in Jerusalem itself, a touchstone of faith for three religions, we experienced a increasing level of distrust.

In Beirut we saw a city that has emerged from 16 years of civil war and external invasions with a seemingly indomitable will to recreate a society in which Christians and Muslims live and work together. Out of the ashes of war is rising a "new," reconstructed Beirut that also clings to the "old" in its attempts to recapture Lebanon's unique vocation of pluralism and coexistence in a region too often torn by national and sectarian rivalries. We were moved and encouraged by the role of the Middle East Council of Churches in this process of reconstruction and rehabilitation.

From our visits with religious and political leaders several common themes emerged:

1. Throughout the region people are deeply worried about the future of the peace process and disappointed by the role of the United States as a sponsor of that process. The repeated vetoes by the U.S. of United Nations Security Council resolutions produced both anger and incredulity among Muslims and Christians alike. They questioned the basic fairness of a process in which one side expressed almost uncritical support of only one partner in the process.
2. Many expressed concern about the emigration of Christians, a growing phenomenon throughout the region stemming from a variety of reasons--worries about religious extremism, a shaky economic climate, the constant threat of war.
3. We walked through dusty refugee camps of Gaza and southern Lebanon where, in some cases, several generations of Palestinians stubbornly cling to the hope that the international community will remember their plight as they try to survive with diminishing support from the United Nations.
4. The Lebanese expressed frustration with the continued ban on travel to that country by American citizens, arguing that the ban is no longer justified by the security situation and may even be punitive toward Lebanon as a result of its role in the peace process. The ban is particularly galling to U.S. churches that have had a long and honourable tradition of work there.
5. From all of our conversations we sense incomprehension and deep hurt over the caricatures of the people of the Middle East in much of American society. We were constantly urged to ask members of our churches to visit and experience not only the problems but also the strength of diverse cultures seeking new ways to live together in peace.

We returned from our trip with a renewed commitment to the people and the churches of the Middle East--and a resolve to work for peace. I pledge my own personal efforts to communicate what we learned to church and government leaders and to work for a just and loving policy toward the peoples of a land that is still holy.

From 'The Times' Saturday April 5 1997

Rejoice that the Church is human too

by The Rt. Rev. John Hind

St Augustine wrote confidently of the Church: "We are the Easter people, and Alleluia is our song!" From the resurrection of Jesus, the Church emerged as God's sign and agent of the new life He wills for the entire world.

Despite the shortcomings of its members and some of the negative publicity the Church attracts, these days between Easter and Pentecost provide a particular focus for reflection on the nature and purpose of god's Easter people. It is important to keep emphasising the sense of new life and salvation at the heart of the Christian message, especially in the face of the cynical comment by a 19th-century critic that "Jesus preached the Kingdom of God, and what we got was the Church". It was meant as an insult but, like many similar gibes, was closer to the truth than the critic intended.

Over the centuries, there has been no shrotage of people ready to draw attention to the contrast between the nobility of Jesus's message and the frequent failures of his followers, individually and corporately, to live up to it.

It is a saving grace that probably the larger number of critics are from within the Church. Even among unbelievers, the complaint is often not that the Church is Christian, but that it is not Christian enough. "Call yourselves Christians?" is one of the more polite forms of complaint.

None of this should surprise us. Jesus himself, in the tradition of the Old Testament prophets before Him, was sharply critical of the way in which the institutions of religion can deflect and distract people from God. Faced with this ever present danger, self-examination, repentance and a purpose of amendment of life are essential exercises for us all. We should not resent criticism of our lifestyle and our institutions. We should rather ask if there is any truth in the criticisms.

There is, however, a way of criticising the Church that suggests not just that Christians and their earthly institutions are fallible, but that the idea of embodying religion in institutions is somehow wrong. "institutional religion" has a bad name. We live in an age in which institutions generally have a bad name. It is good that we are not as overawed by hierarchies, as in previous generations, and good that freedom of speech is welcomed, enabling hypocrisy to be exposed. But these goods can spill over into what has been called the "culture of contempt". We are in danger of considering cynicism a virtue.

The simple fact is that institutions will always be with us. They are part of the God-given way in which the world works. Because they work under human influences, they will be prone to distortion and sin. That does not invalidate them.

Christians believe that this world is not only made and sustained by God, but that it is restored and renewed by Him. The flesh, meaning our earthly life, in all its aspects, may be weak but it is still capable of being the bearer of divinity. Human beings can be redeemed, and so too can their institutions.

In Easter week, Christians celebrate not only the resurrection of Jesus Christ but also our own share in His resurrection.

The Church - God's Easter people - is precisely one way in which the message of the Kingdom of God is embodied . No human individual, philosophy or institution is perfect; but here in the Church, there is a community that shares completely in the ambiguities of earthly life but is at the same time one with the world to come.

God's Easter people rejoice that even institutions can rise again - and again. "Alleluia!" they sing, as they love this strange, mixed body of saints and sinners, in which life is a constant struggle but the joy of Heaven is a present reality as well as a future hope.

This is a way of looking at life which is good news indeed, not for religious interest groups, but for people everywhere struggling to make sense of a world in which the highest treasures are contained in earthly vessels.

John Hind is Bishop of Gibraltar in Europe.