Last Update 23:29
Thursday, 22 August 2019

Coptic group rejects constitutional proposal that Christians be subject to the church in family law

Little-known group of Coptic-Christians calls for Copts to be subject to Islamic Law – which, unlike church law, allows for divorce – under Egypt's new constitution

Sherry El-Gergawi, Wednesday 26 Sep 2012
Nader & Ghaleb
Nader El-Serafy spokesman of "38 Coptic" group (L) Judge Edward Ghaleb the head of the Rights and Freedoms committee in the constituent assembly (R) (Photo: courtesy of light-dark.net)
Share/Bookmark
Views: 3340
Share/Bookmark
Views: 3340

The dispute between Coptic and secular activists on one hand and Islamist political forces on the other over Article 2 of Egypt's constitution – which states that Islamic Law is "the main source of legislation" – ended in compromise.

While the article would remain as it was in Egypt's 1971 constitution, two new articles would be added to the national charter – one making Egypt's Al-Azhar the "exclusive reference" for issues related to Islamic Law, and another ensuring that Egypt's Christians and Jews would be subject to their own confessional regulations concerning religious and personal-status issues.

Now, however, Article 2 has become the subject of a new Coptic-Coptic dispute after an obscure Coptic group, dubbed the '38 Copts Association,' rejected the above-mentioned compromise. The group derives its name from a 1938 decree by the Coptic Church's Holy Synod – later overturned by late Coptic Pope Shenouda III – granting Copts the right to divorce.

The group demands that, as Egyptians, they should be constitutionally subject to Islamic Law, which – unlike Coptic law – allows for divorce.

On Sunday, the group addressed the social dialogue committee of Egypt's Constituent Assembly, which is tasked with drafting a new constitution.

The group justified its request to the committee, which is headed up by the Muslim Brotherhood's Mohamed El-Beltagi, by stating that Islamic Law "protects the dignity of the Abrahamic religions" and "grants Christians and Jews equal rights with Muslims."

In an official memorandum to the committee, the group stated: "There is no such thing as Christian jurisprudence. For this reason, the Bible instructs us to adhere to the laws of the state."

Therefore, the memorandum concluded, Egyptian Christians should "follow Islamic Law since it represents the main source of legislation in Egypt."

According to association head Rafiq Farouq, the 1938 decree had allowed Copts to divorce, but this changed under Pope Shenouda, who had made adultery the sole reason for divorce. The group, therefore, wants Egypt's Copts to be subject to Egyptian civil law, which is – according to the constitution – derived in turn from Islamic Law.

"I want to be treated like a Muslim, to whom I'm not inferior," asserted Farouq. "We reject attempts by the Coptic Church to insert an article into the new constitution making Copts subject to the church's rulings."

At the hearing before the Constituent Assembly, the group also demanded that Coptic marriages be subject to civil law, as is the case with Muslim marriages. The group added that the new constitution should guarantee all Egyptians the right to marriage, as it does other basic rights.

At one point, an argument erupted between group members and Judge Edward Ghaleb, who serves as both head of the Coptic Church's lay council and head of the Constituent Assembly's rights and freedoms committee.

According to Ghaleb, the group's grievances are of an "individual" nature, while the constitution is meant to address general principles. He added that the assembly would look into Coptic grievances, but stressed that the new charter was being written "for all Egyptians."

Ghaleb, who made the comments in his capacity as head of the rights and freedoms committee (not as lay council head), went on to say that the church should be left out of civil, political and partisan issues, and focus primarily on spiritual matters.

Other Coptic groups, meanwhile, reacted to the 38 Copts' proposal with fury.

The 'Copts without Restrictions' movement, for its part, a Coptic rights group established in the wake of last year's revolution, declared on its Facebook page that "the claimed desire by certain Copts to adhere to Islamic rulings is a fabrication."

The movement went on to accuse the 38 Copts Association of "representing only themselves," insisting that the memorandum presented to El-Beltagi's committee had been issued by a group "pursuing its own agenda."

"Christian law is the law of the single spouse, whether you like it or not; its rulings emanate from the Bible alone," the group's statement read, going on to describe the 38 Copts as "a few individuals who have deviated from the fundamentals of our faith against the Church."

The group went on to warn the Constituent Assembly against framing constitutional articles at odds with traditional church teachings.

"If El-Beltagi and his group [the Muslim Brotherhood] want to hear the true voice of the Copts, he will hear our roar… which will shake the ground under his feet if the Constituent Assembly – which is invalid to begin with – adopts constitutional articles that touch on the core of our Christian faith."

The Coalition of Egyptian Copts, another group devoted to safeguarding Coptic rights, similarly blasted the 38 Copts, describing the group on its Facebook page as unrepresentative of Egypt's large Coptic-Christian community. "They're a very small group, not exceeding a couple dozen members," the coalition said of the little-known association.

The coalition went on to urge the 38 Copts to "resolve their personal problems within the framework of the Church," which, it said, "is entirely capable of resolving its congregants' difficulties."

The coalition's statement concluded: "It is impossible for Copts, who represent some 20 million Egyptians, to agree with the group's demand to be subject to Islamic Law on personal-status issues."

Egypt's Coptic community, the largest concentration of Christians in the Middle East, is believed to represent between 10 and 15 per cent of the country's overall population of 90 million.

Short link:

 

Email
 
Name
 
Comment's
Title
 
Comment
Ahram Online welcomes readers' comments on all issues covered by the site, along with any criticisms and/or corrections. Readers are asked to limit their feedback to a maximum of 1000 characters (roughly 200 words). All comments/criticisms will, however, be subject to the following code
  • We will not publish comments which contain rude or abusive language, libelous statements, slander and personal attacks against any person/s.
  • We will not publish comments which contain racist remarks or any kind of racial or religious incitement against any group of people, in Egypt or outside it.
  • We welcome criticism of our reports and articles but we will not publish personal attacks, slander or fabrications directed against our reporters and contributing writers.
  • We reserve the right to correct, when at all possible, obvious errors in spelling and grammar. However, due to time and staffing constraints such corrections will not be made across the board or on a regular basis.
5



Sam Boulis
28-09-2012 05:45am
0-
0+
Copts
I think that bunch should become muslims,the Coptic Church has it's own rules that had been in effect for a long time, this group should become part of the Brotherhood, i don't really care if they if they left the Coptic Church, Have a good life under the other law.
Email
 
Name
 
Comment's Title
 
Comment
4



M V L
27-09-2012 11:13am
1-
4+
Civil law
Civil law should reflect current human values - some of these are timeless and others change with the evolvement of people. The timeless values can be religion inspired whereas religion may not always be in tune with current practical realities. People marry mostly with good intentions but often with a wrong premise - meaning they are looking for happiness through the other person whereas in reality one has to find happiness within one's self. Obviously with this premise many marriages are doomed to fail. Should the law oblige people to live in misery if that would be the case for Coptic Christians or give them the right to change? Why not allow people to divorce under civil law and if they want to respect the laws of their religion they won’t. In addition the law of the land should be the same for all its inhabitants – no difference – different laws for different religions amount in reality to discrimination based on religion and opens the door for a precedence for other religion
Email
 
Name
 
Comment's Title
 
Comment
3



Carole T
27-09-2012 10:08am
0-
3+
Why have to choose at all?
I understand that Egypt is primarily an Islamic country but why should the constitution play to Islam over any other religion? Let the constitution state law not doctrine. Let each person follow the tenants of his religion as long as it does not disrupt the balance of the running of government. The constitution should merely state that each person has the right to practice his religion according to his personal preference.
Email
 
Name
 
Comment's Title
 
Comment
2



Nafez, Beirut
26-09-2012 02:33pm
1-
8+
Divorce is not ideal, but it can solve problems
When Copts are made to choose between adultery and divorce, they should be able to choose dvorce. Yhe Curch is not God on Earth.
Email
 
Name
 
Comment's Title
 
Comment
1



Aladdin
26-09-2012 01:03pm
7-
3+
Relgions & Politics
Relgions are intended for personal life guide; not the state affairs. egypt was goverened by Islamic low for over 500 yrs regarding marriage, divorce, inheritance, etc. Let every group do what they like regarding their personal life.Coptic marriage/divorce should be governed by church.
Email
 
Name
 
Comment's Title
 
Comment
Latest

© 2010 Ahram Online.