Part of panel on "Identity and Integration: The Dilemmas Facing Contemporary Christian Communities in the Middle East"
This paper explores the roots of Maronite isolationism in the community’s historic geopolitical and religious identity, recognising the central role of the Church and arguing its internal politics to reflect in microcosm the dilemmas facing the community at large. The character and identity of Maronite Christianity are bound up with the land of Lebanon as an historic refuge, and as resting-place of Maronite saints and martyrs. Standing at the intersection of East and West, the Maronites also set great store by their traditional allegiances. Although firmly grounded in the East, they have frequently sought protection through association with the West – notably by alliance with France and communion with Rome. The creation and independence of Greater Lebanon as a modern state have successively recast Maronite relationships with neighbours and the West, posing the new question of Lebanese identity. Conflicting identities in Lebanon led to confrontation in the 1975-90 Civil War. On the face of it, the war was characterised by a radical Muslim-Christian polarisation, but internally each sect saw progressive fragmentation as multiple unresolved identities sought expression. Rather than descend into the tangled web of Christian party politics, which were complicated by local, family, economic and strategic interests, this paper proposes that the politics of the Church demonstrate most clearly the key dilemmas and alternative solutions, as well as their historical roots. ‘The religious organisation of the community has provided it down the centuries not only with a constant frame of reference, but also with a receptacle for its historical experience’ [Salibi, 1988: p.229]. Insecurity placed a premium on traditional legitimacy, and religious institutions were compelled to step forward. Embodying Maronite identity, they spoke and acted from their received experience. Interestingly however, not all Church institutions acted in unison; rather, they represented opposing strands or interpretations of identity, each equally authentic in its recourse to communal memory. The monastic orders advocated, in the words of their former superior, ‘a principle of vocational self-defence, because for them, to defend their existence is to defend, at the same time, their values and doctrine’ [Naaman, 2005: p.71]. Thus a driving sense of insecurity found expression in a militant refusal to integrate. The patriarchs, on the other hand, preached reconciliation according to the principles of the 1943 National Pact. Following their predecessors’ formative national roles, their view reflected an historic investment in Lebanon as primary defence against regional insecurity.
