Popes, Patriarchs, Turks and Religious Repression

Originally posted by The Hidden Face I wonder why the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Orthodoxy must be placed in Istanbul, where is a city of the people who are %99 percent Muslims. Once Ataturk tried to terminate it but didn't manage it because of the fact that the Western powers -especially England- wanted it to stay in Istanbul for some political reasons, which were quite understandable in the British view. But what do the Greeks who are truly faithful believers think of the existence of the Patriarchate in a muslim city? Wouldn't it be much more beautiful If the Patriarchate were placed in Athens, where is a glorious Greek city with full of human civilization from the deep past to the present.

Hey Ako! Glad to see you around again.

I'm sorry, but that is absurd. The issue is not politics, the issue is religious freedom--the ability to freely practice one's religion

Most of the cases when government fools around with religion I think it is about politics, and I don't think this is an exception. I think there is an attitude in that region to think muslim = turk, christian = greek, this attitude is means that anti-greek attitudes are directed against the partiarchy as well.

Originally posted by BG Turk Unlike many other countries where secularism is considered t be the strict seperation of church and state, in Turkey is viewed as the complete domination of the state over the mosque. The Turkish state is interfering with Islam all the time.

Thats true, but there is a difference between muslims interfering with Islam, and muslims interfering with Christianity (or Christians interfering with Islam). The government of turkey should not be interfering with the patriarchy. Actually only in a "secular" turkey is this possible, under the Ottoman Shariah the free practice of Christianity is a God given right (quite literally)

Originally posted by Mortaza Also I should agree with them. Who would like someone who is important for 250 million christian. Specially inside of a muslim city.

I would love it. If I were ruling turkey I'd try to make the patriarchy of constantinople as strong as possible, because politics wise, this means your in possesstion of something very valuable for your potential enemies.
In the dieing days of the arab emirates of sind. The emirate of multan managed to survive much longer than its neighbours. This is because they were in possestion of a idol that was very valuable to the local hindus. The hindus, who would otherwise have been the Arabs enemies, wanted to ensure that the idol was safe and that meant ensuring that the arab government of multan was safe. When enemies armies came to the gates of multan the arabs would drag the idol to the walls of the city and threaten to smash it.
I think a strong and protected patriarchy would do more to reconcile greek-turkish differences that anything else.

I wonder why the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Orthodoxy must be placed in Istanbul, where is a city of the people who are %99 percent Muslims.

Because it has always been there. Just like the patriarchies in Alexandria and Damascus. I think a patriarchy in exile is a bad idea, it should stay in Istanbul.

Originally posted by Leonidas well if Jerusalam become 99% jewish, does make the al asqua mosque less muslim? No. Despite politics and control, nothing can change the significance of that spot in the minds of muslims. Like wise nothing can change the significance of the patriach.

Well said.

I heard that the Patriarch of Istanbul is not accepted as the leader of the Orthodox world. The Russian Orthodox church rejects this, the Assyrian Orthodox church has its own leader, so do the Copts and so on.

Originally posted by Omar al Hashim Originally posted by Leonidas well if Jerusalam become 99% jewish, does make the al asqua mosque less muslim? No. Despite politics and control, nothing can change the significance of that spot in the minds of muslims. Like wise nothing can change the significance of the patriach. Well said.

First of all I forgot to say this: I am more than glad to see Akolouthos in the forum again.

 

Concerning the issue of the Patriarchate, In principle, I want all the people around the world to be happy. So I wish there was an untouched Ecumenical Patriarchate in the Holy City Constantinople, which would spread all beautiful things to the entire world. How much it would be fascinating, wouldn't it? But there's no holy city in Turkey for Greeks. Likewise there's no world for Al-qaida to convert entire world to Islam brutally, and no Central Asia for The Pan Turkists, for instance, to built up a monster-like Turkic super state. No, just because of the reality, which has always been unacceptable for daydreamers and romantics.

 

As long as the Ecumenical Patriarchate exists in Istanbul, Turkey harasses the Patriarchate due to some political reasons. And as long as Turkey exists, there will be no vatican-type state in Istanbul. So as a neutral person, I am considering this two undeniable facts, and giving you a simple and good-looking solution: Move it to a beaufiul Greek City in where the believers are able to be living peacefully, happily and proudly. What you have been doing is just challenging the Turkish State without any possible goal and then desperately saying to the world that Turkey is bad boy. In this aspect, yes, this is quite similar to the Jarusalem issue between Israel and Palestine, indeed. Palestinians, who have been doing almost nothing to improve their quality of life, and have been doing everything to provoke Israel. 

 

Istanbul isn't a holy city, as well as Jarusalem. No city is "holy". I can't even believe how much holy Constantinople and Hagia Sophia were for the Ottomans. It's probably due to my secular education. With a good secular educational system, the Greek believers could change their mind.

 

So you wouldn't have a problem with someone in America persecuting Muslims and then saying, "Well, if you don't like it you can move back to the Middle East. This is a christian country."?

 

I say to the Turkish community of Germany that nationalism and islamism committed by the Turks in Germany are -I am sorry to say-awful. They went to there to make some money, not to annoy native people. They should be integrated within the main community culturally and socially, If they are willing to be living in there as a resident. So It depends on which Muslims we are talking about, If the issue is the American MidEasterners living in the middle ages of Islam, yes, I would say that s/he should go back to where s/he came from. For him/her, and for society.

 I understand that Turkey has been trying to rush through secularisation and I must ask our Turkish members as to how much difficulty other religious groups in Turkey face as compmared to that of the Patriarchate.

I fail to see how the Patriarchate, even with status as a legal entity and the right to own a tiny patch of land, presents a credible threat to the Turkish state. And I agree that Turkey could make a lot of money from tourism out of the Patriarchate.

I fail to see how the Patriarchate, even with status as a legal entity and the right to own a tiny patch of land, presents a credible threat to the Turkish state. And I agree that Turkey could make a lot of money from tourism out of the Patriarchate.

Originally posted by Theodore Felix I personally think that for the good or for the bad, the Patriarchate of Constantinople is moving closer and closer to it's way towards abolishment.

You think that Turkey will go that far? Hmm, that would be extremely interesting indeed!

Why don't the Greeks move it to Mt. Athos instead and declare that a new home for the Patriarch?

Because the Patriarcate of Constantinople has a very high religious and historical importance for Orthodoxy. No Patriarch (on his own will) would consider doing sth like this. Only way this can happen is if the Turkish state confiscates all their (remaining) properties and kicks them out!

Originally posted by Mortaza By the way, If there is reunion between catholics and orthodox, It is more dangerous for Turkey.If there would be such action, Turkey should try to stop it with empowering or even supporting the Patriarchate of Constantinople..

Let's wait a few more hours; maybe the Pope is going to say sth important on this issue


Edited by Neoptolemos - 30-Nov-2006 at 01:03

Even the thought of the movement of the Patriarchate shows historicall and spiritual ignorance.The Patriarchate of Constantinople cannot and will never move from Constantinople/Istanbul.The Patriarchate is there for almost 1.700 years,under the political rule of 2 great Empires.Even before the Patriarchs there were bishops and Archbishops.The very Church of Constantinople was founded by St.Andrew the Apostle.We are talking about a Christian existence and tradition in the City for almost 2.000 years.2.000 years!Spiritually,Constantinople/Istanbull is a sacred place for the Orthodox people,because the historicall Patriachate is there.

In other words,it's pure nonsense even to think of moving the Patriarchate from Constantinople.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ecumenical_Patriarchs_of_Constantinople

271 religious leaders,271........


Edited by Spartakus - 30-Nov-2006 at 14:13