Here's a synopsis of the Middle East situation by prof. Mazin Qumsiyeh:

In the Middle (Dark) Ages, there was instability/mayhem in Europe. In those decades, the Arab and Muslim world lived its golden age of secularism, discovery, and science. Europe was divided between secularists and religious zealots trying to maintain Church domination. But the Arab world, unlike Europe is not left to its own devices to evolve. We are not independent to guide our future whether in Egypt or Syria. The implanting of Israel here as a spoiled child of Western imperialism and the subsequent continuing interference prevented either secular or Islamic forces to gain real independent power. It also prevents natural evolution. Imperial forces toppled secular nationalists represented by Gamal Abdulnasser and through the Egyptian military prevented political Islam from taking a foot hold.  There is a game of occasionally supporting one faction over another as long as that faction leaves Israel and Western Corporate interests alone.  This is the strategy of divide and conquer.

Citizens of Western Countries must demand that their governments stop supporting this sick game of divide and conquer that also fosters Christian, Islamic and Jewish fanaticism. Long-term, there will be separation of religion from state politics whether in Palestine (Israel as a “Jewish state”) or in Egypt or elsewhere.  We will have our own renaissance.  But for now, perhaps it is important that all forces (left, Islamic etc.) to join hands against the real enemy and gain true sovereignty of our countries.  It has been nearly a hundred years since the Sykes-Picot agreement (1916) and the Balfour Declaration (1917).  Is it not time to end the mayhem that they generated?  This will give us space for then arguing and pushing for whatever form of government people choose. In that case, diversity of ideas will be an asset not a hindrance. This will give us space and substance for natural evolution. 

Lenin & Francis

Here's a meditation by Richard Rohr:

Shortly before he died, Lenin is supposed to have said that if the Russian revolution were to take place over again, he would have asked for ten Francises of Assisi rather than more Bolsheviks. He eventually realized that something imposed by domination and violence from above only creates the same mirrored response from below. It is just a matter of time. He realized that the only communism that would ever be helpful to the world was the voluntary and joyous simplicity of a Francis of Assisi. (As a Franciscan, I am indeed a “communist” as we share all things equally and from a common purse.) That element of the practice of the early church (Acts 2:44) and of Jesus (John 13:29) was never expected of the rest of us. (One does wonder why some things become mandated from one mention by Jesus, and other things are totally forgotten?)

Voluntary simplicity was normally not lived by the clergy—certainly not the higher clergy—and therefore why would we, or could we, ask it of the rest of the church? Jesus was training the leaders first, because you can only ask of others what you yourselves have done. He was initiating them as spiritual elders, much more than ordaining them as “priests” (which is an Old Testament word never used for his apostles) or church ministers. Francis tried to correct that by refusing ordination and also by his rush toward simplicity.

Once we saw the clerical state as a place of advancement instead of downward mobility, once ordination was not a form of initiation but a continuation of patriarchal patterns, the authentic preaching of the Gospel became the exception rather than the norm—whether Orthodox, Catholic or Protestant. The first human “demon” that normally needs to be exposed is the human addiction to power, prestige, and possessions. These tend to pollute everything.

Once we preach the true Gospel, I doubt if we are going to fill the churches.