The AWR team returned to Beni Suef to continue investigations about Izbat Bushrá. Their efforts to visit the village, however, were rebuffed by concerns expressed by the church about disturbing the volatile situation there.
Article full text:
The second attempt by the AWR team to visit ‘Izbat Bushrá intended to clarify further the situation within the village as well as to collect the bishop’s account of the tensions. The AWR team, this time more numerous, had been assured of meeting with Bishop Stephanus, and, unlike the previous visit, the bishop did indeed appear, flanked by his deputy Fr. ‘Abd al-Quddūs, the same priest who had met with the AWR team on the first visit. Beverages were offered at 10:30am, signaling the start of a meeting that was to proceed uninterrupted until 3:00pm. It must be noted that while Bishop Stephanuswas present during most of the meeting, occasionally nodding in approval or clarifying an aspect of the Church’s account, most of the discussion was conducted through Fr. ‘Abd al-Quddūs.
On the subject of the government’s treatment of Copts in general, Bishop Stephanus lamented the passing of the era in which the Tsar of Russia and not the government of Muhammad ‘Alī was responsible for the welfare of the Coptic community. Fast-tracking to the present situation, he claimed the Egyptian government authorities enter into Church life more than what is necessary. Even so, Bishop Stephanus tacitly acknowledged the skill of his predecessor, Bishop Athanasius, in resolving church building disputes by continual compromise with the authorities as well as the local Muslim population.
The discussion moved away from generalizations and onto the more urgent case of ‘Izbat Bushrá and the recent developments happening within the village, including the church’s perspective thereof. This preceded an immediate assurance that the AWR team would be able to visit the village were the decision solely up to church authorities. In need of clarification, the AWR team pressed the bishop to describe ‘Izbat Bushrá, to which the latter complied, duly helped by his deputy and the newly arrived priest from ‘Izbat Bushrá itself – Father Ishāq Kastūr. In the eyes of the bishop ‘Izbat Bushrá is a village of which around 50% of the inhabitants are devout Christians (roughly 65 families). The village has two buildings used for Christian worship, with the problem being these structures can only accommodate a third of the congregation. When questioned on the possible reasons behind the violent acts of vandalism on the main place of worship, which made the village infamous in the first place, the bishop remained silent, letting Fr. ‘Abd al-Quddūs speak for him. Allegedly, the recent tensions between the Muslim and Christian communities had been largely provokedby one Sharīf Sayyid and his deputy Samīr ‘Abd al-‘Aziz, both officers within the local security forces. So upset was Fr. ‘Abd al-Quddūs he was prepared to denounce the misconduct of the officers face to face. At this point, the bishop himself added that it was his deep desire to see the central government authorities intervene and take issue with the incidents.
At this point, the AWR team volunteered to speak directly with Sharīf Sayyid and hear his version of the events. Despite the shocked reactions of ‘Abd al-Quddūs, the bishop reluctantly agreed, though not without his deputy circulating his lack of enthusiasm for the idea. The idea, however, was discreetly put on holdas time drew on, during which the AWR team again voiced their desire to visit ‘Izbat Bushrá . Another cautious response was given which emphasized that, while the church itself had no problem with the initiative, state security would no doubt block the request. Prudently however, the team had cleared their visit and right of access to ‘Izbat Bushrá prior to the meeting with the Coptic authorities and hence was in the capacity to assure the bishop and his entourage of the willingness of the central authorities to let them proceed with their investigative work. They responded in turn, claiming the central authorities might have authorized the visit without informing the regional branch, and that this miscommunication would obstruct the team’s efforts to reach the village. A timely call to Cairo contacts revealed, however, that the regional authorities were perfectly aware of the AWR team’s presence within the area and had no objection to the visit to ‘Izbat Bushrá ,on the contrary, claims of obstruction by the bishopric were advanced as explanation for the delay. When confronted with the new suggestions that the regional security forces ensured safe passage, the bishopric responded by pointing out that the delicate peace negotiations currently underway could be undermined by the entry of foreigners onto the scene. The AWR team’s entry, it claimed, could put not only the negotiations at risk, but also threaten the safety of local Christians, as the Muslim community and authorities would doubtless be furious regarding the escalation of media attention. The AWR team could only meekly agree, though privately voiced doubts as to the timely apparition of the argument. The bishopric once again apologized for the delay, assured the team of their non-involvement in the visit’s obstruction, and generously treated the team to a meal. During the meal, the bishop warmed to the idea of having his priests complete an investigative questionnaire regarding the events in the region. The team firmly re-confirmed their intentions to visit the village, to which the bishop reluctantly agreed, but insisted upon a prior visit to a church and “Sunday school”.
This visit took the AWR team to al-Fashn where they were presented with three Christian villagers from ‘Izbat Bushrá who recounted their grievances in the presence of Fr. ‘Abd al-Quddūs. They also held the local authorities responsible for the escalation of tension, confirming the version of events proposed by the bishopric. During the course of the exchange, the three men expressed initially their delight at seeing the acquisition of the building for the priest from a local Christian, as well as at the ecclesiastical renovation. They then added that the local security forces were responsible for the recent spate of problems, having urged the local residents to destroy the wall enclosing the priest’s property. This was but one of the many examples, the men claimed, of the Christian’s inability to live in freedom. Furthermore, the men alleged that the security forces compelled the Christian community to leave the building on multiple occasions. Consistent with the previous discussions with clergy members, the trio held one security officer in particular to blame for the tensions, although when asked of his name, none of them were able to provide it. When asked about the possibility of attending another church, since the situation in ‘Izbat Bushrá was clearly untenable by their very admission, the men responded that the nearest church was 15 to 20 km away and hence impossible to attend regularly, if only due to travel costs. In an impassioned statement, the trio reiterated the concern of the Christian community of their inability to give their children a Christian upbringing, stating that it was their greatest fear that their children would grow up without knowing God. On several occasions they stressed their grievances were not directed against the Muslims but simply towards the state apparatus which, one claimed, makes it impossible to live a Christian life in Egypt. Finally, on the subject of Christian worship within ‘Izbat Bushrá, the men denied that the building had been used as an underground place of worship, since they argued that the law forbade them, and as law abiding citizens they scrupulously respected the law. This appeared to be in contradiction to previous statements issued by the bishopric itself.
Alas, the AWR team was unable to visit the village itself due to time constraints but remains determined to do so, with the approval of the government security authorities.
