LOL. Touche.

Otherwise a good response.

Rabbi, if I may offer this tidbit of information in order to add a broader context to the decrepit patriarchate of Jerusalem and the interference of government entities in its operation, I believe no apology is necessary. The “virtual house arrest” to which the present patriarch is subject to by the Israeli government is little consequence. This is more or less the case with all of our Old-World patriarchates, including the Bartholomew who is by his own admission, a hostage of the Turkish state (as is Ignatius IV of Antioch who is even more restricted by his overlord Bashir al-Assad).

We Orthodox have been playing far too many dhimmi games over the years. Indeed, the scandal of the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusalem is that it is a complete dependancy of Istanbul. As such, it has no control over its internal affairs, cannot elect its own bishops, and is run for the benefit of the Greek-born elite which will not allow the indigenous population any influence in its affairs. This includes their studied refusal to ordain any celibate Arab men to the priesthood.

Also, Mr. Michalopulos I would gladly have my article printed in a major media outlet such as The Wall Street Journal or The New York Times…how do you suggest we accomplish this, short of sending it to their editorial staffs and pray that they include it in the letters to the editor and only after they have edited it to their liking.

Although you wrote this to George Michalopulos, placing a short editorial might not be as hard as you think. I would start with the Chicago Tribune. You have standing in Chicago, they will look twice at an editorial authored by you, and newspapers are always looking for material. The thing is you don’t win debates in editorials, you just make your point and it has to be cogent — usually 800 words or less. (Lead with a story, thus my suggestion that a mention of Archbishop Damaskinos at the outset would have been stronger.) I’ve had editorials placed in larger markets. A connection helps but I am sure you have some. Or try Monatos & Monatos. Their Rolodex has to be stuffed with media people. Also, editing usually involves style, not content. Once accepted, editors don’t like to change your meaning or voice.

There is also the internet. I don’t know the circulation of Greek America, but chances are that more people read your editorial here than in the magazine. I just did a quick Google search. Your editorial that I posted here was picked up by at least ten other internet outlets (including some in Greece), maybe more (I stopped on the second page). I know this because they link back. It has exponential effect.

You can take issue with some of the comments and the rule here is that the commentators speak for themselves. I am sure that in due course they will. That aside, the publication of your editorial here has put it in front of a boatload of people who would otherwise have not seen it.

Then I hear more recent stories about extensively observant Jews spitting on Greek Christians on the streets of Jerusalem.

I wonder how it happens the more extensive emphasis on pietistic things we see, the more poorly those so doing treat ‘them’. We see it in many cultures.

Your Grace, thank you for taking the time to respond to my critique of your otherwise fine essay. I am more than flattered, indeed honored that you chose to do so.

If I may respond to your last criticism (regarding which I wished that your essay had been published in a major media outlet). Personally, I don’t know how one goes about doing this, but considering that you are a bishop I would think that newspapers such as The New York Times, might have welcomed your reasoned response. Or perhaps your local paper. It seems to me (and if I’m wrong about this, please forgive me) that religious leaders have an “inside track” so to speak when it comes to local media. I know this from my own experience with my hometown paper. Even though I am our parish’s liaison with the local paper, not everything I send in is given consideration. However when my pastor calls the religion editor, then that’s another story. I don’t want to belabor the point but your essay deserved to be read on a national level (even though I don’t necessarily agree with every point).

Second: One of the major reasons I liked your essay in the first place was because I did sense your outrage at what this Greek bishop wrote. That was obvious from the text as well as context of your essay. Everything you said was true as far as it went. My criticism was that the anti-Semitism that this bishop displayed was more than being from “some quarters” of Orthodoxy.

How to resolve this problem? At the risk of being rhetorical (because this is something you could not effect yourself), I still stand by the general feeling that the Phanar should have issued a statement categorially criticizing him. The fact that they did not do so shows moral cowardice to my mind (and of course dredges up the usual complaints against the Phanar, i.e. they are universally speaking for the Church when it comes to global warming but all of a sudden get parochial when it comes to distancing themselves from localized embarrassments).

Perhaps a more full-throated condemnation of this Greek bishop’s diatribe would have sounded something like this?

“His Eminence likewise betrays a profound historical ignorance when he lumps certain individuals into his grand Zionist conspiracy theory. For example, identifying the Rockefeller family as being Jewish is ridiculous. As a mere perusal of the historical record would show, the Rockefellers are of German-Anabaptist descent and have no Jewish ancestry. This fact alone shows that the bishop in question is subject to believing half-truths, canards, and propaganda. As for the idea that anti-Semitism exists in the Orthodox liturgical texts, this is unfortunately true. However much of this language is based on theological differences between Rabbinical Judaism and Christianity and not the Darwinian-secularist ethos which animates contemporary anti-Semitism.”

It was in this sense that I considered your fine essay to be “amateurish,” not because of what it said (and the marginal publication in which it was published) but because of the lost opportunity that this bishop’s unfortunate remarks unleashed.

Again, thank you for responding to me as well as for your initial essay. I meant no offense. If anything, I was gratified that a bishop in the GOA actually contributed something of value to the common culture. As you may know from my (and others’) writings on this blog, the deafening silence that comes out of the GOA on many matters is most regrettable.

I remain, your servant, George

Overall, I was gratified to see the piece and applaud you for writing it — which I indicated in my original comments. “Serviceable” merely means that the editorial accomplished what it set out to do. No pejorative was intended or implied.

Father,

May I ask why you felt it necessary to add any commentary regarding the quality of my writing on an article which appeared in another publication? Say, that, “I wish it went to an editor first (the story of Archbishop Damaskinos should have led the piece) but overall all it’s a serviceable editorial.” Is rather offensive. Had you properly read the response you would understand that the story of Archbishop Damaskinos as well as Metropolitan Chrysostomos (who you omitted in your remark) was used as supportive documentation of my thesis.

Yes, Mr. Allen I agree that, “…that there has been pervasive anti-semitism within traditional Orthodox cultures and communities for a long time” that is exactly what I meant when I wrote, “There is no doubt that there are persons who identify themselves as Greek Orthodox Christians who do not abide by the teachings of Jesus Christ. Anti-Semitism is one of a number of “gravely offensive and totally unacceptable” attitudes that such persons may display, along with a host of other sinful attitudes as well as actions. This is the reality of the broken world in which we live. Thus, the ugliness of anti-Semitism may, indeed, be alive within the formal “boundaries” of the Greek Orthodox Church as Rabbi Rosen suggests. But it is by no means “well.” Along with every other form of hate, it is routinely condemned—and never condoned. The shocking statements of a bishop in Greece should not be mistaken as a revelation of Church doctrine, but rather as the sad, ugly and hurtful rant of someone who deviates from what the Church actually teaches.”

How did I miss the mark?

Rabbi Rosen,

You state in a post here and in a private email response to me the following:

“Bishop Demetrios claims that “the Israeli government and Jewish religious groups and sects in Israel harass or impede the work of the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusalem”. If such is the case, I would appreciate these being brought to my attention. The Patriarch of Jerusalem, Theopholis III, with whom I have a close friendship and for whom I have much respect, has not expressed such opinions to me, on the contrary. If Bishop Demetrios knows otherwise, I will be happy to pursue and strive to combat any such actions.

Of course His Beatitude Patriarch Theolphilos III of Jerusalem has not expressed such opinions to you! For it took the Israeli Government over three years to recognize his election as Patriarch thus having him, essentially, under house arrest!

Also, let us not forget the St. John’s hospice fiasco a number of years ago, or the fact that the Greek Orthodox Churches in Bethlehem and in other places behind THE GREAT WALL of Israel have to endure so much just to survive with check points and not to mention not being allowed the basics of human life, namely water, save for once every 50 days or so!

Yes, my Good Rabbi, I know you will tell us that you and the AJC assisted in having Patriarch Theophilos III properly recognized, and world Orthodoxy appreciates it I am certain of it; but you attempted to once again, to artfully and subtlety hold the Israeli government “blameless” in its treatment of non-Jews. This is simply not true.

Mr. George Michalopulos writes that I, “…never addressed the Greek bishop’s remarks at all” in my response to Rabbi Rosen. This is blatantly not true. Allow me to highlight a few quotes from my own article.

1. “Rabbi Rosen rightly objected to recent remarks by a hierarch of the Church of Greece made during a television interview last December. The remarks were clearly derogatory to the Jewish people and obviously based on a profound ignorance of history along with conspiratorial paranoia. Indeed, the Jewish people were not alone in their offense, and Greek Orthodox Christians around the world were shocked and embarrassed.”

2. “The shocking statements of a bishop in Greece should not be mistaken as a revelation of Church doctrine, but rather as the sad, ugly and hurtful rant of someone who deviates from what the Church actually teaches.”

3. “I certainly do not blame Rabbi Rosen or any of my Jewish colleagues or friends for being offended by the rant of the Metropolitan of Piraeus—I was likewise offended, even outraged.” and in the same paragraph, “This was in the “background” of very offensive comments by a Greek Orthodox cleric.”

Also, as far as my essay being “an amateurish attempt” as Mr. Michalopulos states, I ask, who else in the Hierarchy of World Orthodoxy has written anything about this subject, anywhere? Also, Mr. Michalopulos I would gladly have my article printed in a major media outlet such as The Wall Street Journal or The New York Times…how do you suggest we accomplish this, short of sending it to their editorial staffs and pray that they include it in the letters to the editor and only after they have edited it to their liking? I also do not believe that Greek America Magazine is, “a joke of an ethnic magazine that has minimal readership,” obviously Fr. Johannes Jacobse reads the publication, as do so many others…also, Greek America Magazine ASKED for the article…

Thank you for your comment on this blog. We appreciate your clarifications and obvious expression of good will.

Yours,

Fr. Hans Jacobse

Indeed Bishop Demetrios’ suggestion that in ultra-Orthodox Jewish circles such a pathology exists in relation to Christians is correct and should be condemned as we have done so on a number of occasions when such animus has been manifest. However I think a fair person might agree that there is a difference between the misbehavior of rank and file members and bigoted statements by a high ranking religious official.

Indeed I did call specifically for condemnation from Archbishop Ieronymos of Greece and happily eventually the Synod in Greece did issue a statement on the matter. My call to Patriarch Bartholomew was due to the fact that the Ecumenical Patriarchate has an official dialogue structure/partnership with the Jewish world represented by IJCIC of which I am past president.

Furthermore I responded with gratitude to Archbishop Demetrios’ letter and publicly acknowledged with appreciation that of Metropolitan Emmanuel on behalf of Patriarch Bartholomew. Moreover the fact that anti-Semitism is to be found in the Orthodox Church (and I have received a number of complaints in this regard over the years regarding statements and sermons that have been heard and communicated to members of the Jewish community in Greece and elsewhere) is in no way to diminish from the great acts of selfless love and deliverance that many Orthodox Christians and prelates have demonstrated to Jews and others.

Bishop Demetrios claims that “the Israeli government and Jewish religious groups and sects in Israel harass or impede the work of the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusalem”. If such is the case, I would appreciate these being brought to my attention. The Patriarch of Jerusalem, Theopholis III, with whom I have a close friendship and for whom I have much respect, has not expressed such opinions to me, on the contrary. If Bishop Demetrios knows otherwise, I will be happy to pursue and strive to combat any such actions.

I believe that a healthy relationship is one which is both honest and self critical and my respect and affection for all that is positive in the Orthodox churches is on the record. I do not believe that such appreciation should hold us back from criticism and calls to action where warranted.

Rabbi David Rosen