Cyprus-Forum.com

[brother]

26 OCTOBER 2004



Beware the Priests Playing Politics'

That's the sentiment of Loucas Charalambous, as expressed here:

AS IF the officials of DIKO, ignorant journalists, deputies, government ministers and presidential aides were not enough, President Papadopoulos has now recruited the priests as well in the wretched campaign against the Annan plan. This campaign, which the president has been orchestrating from behind the scenes, is aimed at ensuring that people will reject the plan in the referendum to be held next month as part of the agreement Papadopoulos signed in New York.

The priests have become actively involved in politics once before and made a monumental mess of things. It was the priests who created the Cyprus problem back in 1963. It was the government run by the priests, which, just two years after the signing of the London-Zurich agreements, violated its signature and provocatively ignored the opposition of both Greece and Turkey, in its effort to change them. The results are well-known – the unified state was dissolved and the two communities were geographically separated, thus creating the pre-conditions for a bi-zonal federation and at worst partition.

But even this federation, the result of the recklessly opportunistic policy pursued by the priests then, is today being opposed by – with the exception of Glafcos Clerides – all the surviving associates and supporters of that cleric establishment (who are as culpable), such as Papadopoulos, Dr Lyssarides, Christodoulos Christodoulou and other leading lights of the Akritas organisation.

This is why I cannot help laughing every time I hear the idiotic argument of the rejectionists that, supposedly, “there is no guarantee the Turks will go ahead with the implementation of an agreement and not renege on it”. I consider Papadopoulos’ demand (included in the list of seven changes he put forward to the UN) about “ensuring the implementation of the provisions of the agreement” as being without historical justification. If there is one side that would be justified in seeking guarantees with regard to the implementation of the plan it should be the Turkish side. Because, unfortunately, the last time we signed an agreement with the Turks, those who violated it and overturned it were the Greek Cypriots led by the priests.

As laughable as this demand was the concern expressed by Papadopoulos a few days ago: how would the settlement be implemented, when Rauf Denktash, who is strongly opposed to the Annan plan, would be the co-president for 30 months? Then again, Denktash has stated, at least 20 times, that if the plan is accepted he will resign. He will therefore not be co-president and the position will go the person that the Turkish Cypriots elect.

In contrast, the Turkish Cypriot side is justified in asking how the agreement would be implemented with Papadopoulos – the second in command of the Akritas organisation – as co-president. This is the same Papadopoulos who believes the Annan plan “legitimises the invasion” and who puts his closest advisor Tasos Djionis on television to terrify people and make them think acceptance of the Annan plan would be an unmitigated disaster. Our president should exercise a little restraint every time he opens his mouth, as his own weaknesses and inconsistencies are there for all to see,

Under the circumstances, it is inevitable that we should be worried about the recruitment of the priests in the campaign against the plan. We had thought that we were done for good with priests playing politics. How can we not be worried hearing the Bishop of Paphos calling for our withdrawal from the negotiations? How can we not be worried when he is sent to Athens to meet the foreign minister and the aspiring ‘ethnarch’ of Greece, Archbishop Christodoulos, who has announced that if we accept the Annan plan we will no longer be allowed to speak Greek in Cyprus? How can we not be worried when the new aspiring ‘ethnarch’ of Cyprus, Bishop Nikiforos of Kykkos appears in the media more often than the politicians, and has been organising political ceremonies in church, involving the hapless Virgin Mary (he commissioned a special prayer to her that was heard last Sunday) in his absurd political games?

Until today, the column had been urging readers to beware of our politicians. Today, it is obliged to warn them to beware of the priests. They, as our recent history has shown, are even more dangerous than the politicians, when they start to play.

[Bananiot]

Where did you fish this one from brother? It goes back to March 2004! Since it talks about the priests, you may like to know that according to the bishop of Paphos, the church won 17 million cyprus pounds in the stock exchange in 1999-2000 during the big bubble. Of course, being next to god, he does not know basic economics. He does not know that this money was lost by lapless bananiots that were lured for a quick profit. Back in April he promised refugees to give them compensation for properties lost in the north if they voted no. Do you think he will keep his side of the promise?

Not bloody likely!

[brother]

I read it a long time ago and after being on this forum and realising how blind some people are i felt it important to let them read and hopefully learn a few truths.

[Piratis]

The Church of Cyprus has power for more than 1500 years. They have been involved in politics for as long as they have existed. In the past they have been involved much more than they are now.

The argument that the priests were recruited by Papadopoulos is ridiculous. It is like saying that if Cleredes was in in power they would react differently. We all know what their beliefs are, and we know very well that they do not expect anybody to "recruit" them to express their beliefs.

Sure, the priests shouldn't get involved. But the Americans shouldn't get involved either, and they shouldn't give all those millions to support the "yes" campaign.

[brother]

This is some basic facts that exist, why get so angry when you know my ambition is to show the truth and be shown the truth, we must learn to accept there is short comings all around us.