Asia News | June 30, 2007
The Patriarch of Constantinople has expressed his concern following a recent verdict defining him as a “Turkish subject” spiritual guide only to the Greek Orthodox minority in Turkey. Experts speak of a “political” move which goes against the European programmes of the government, a dangerous precedent which may influence the fate of the Country’s religious community.
Istanbul (AsiaNews) – The Patriarch of Constantinople has expressed his “profound sorrow” at a sentence which June 26 contested the ecumenical right of the Patriarchate of Constantinople, defining it as a Turkish body responsible for the worship of the Greek orthodox minority in the country. According to the Court, Bartholomew I cannot bear the title “Ecumenical Patriarch” for the Orthodox world. Religious affairs experts in Turkey describe it as a “political” verdict, which raises “concerns” for the fate of religious minorities in the country.
In a statement published yesterday the Patriarchate clarified that “the primacy of the Patriarchate has been an honorary, spiritual and historical orthodox title for over 17 centuries. In the Christian Orthodox world the primacy establishes the hierarchy and expresses a pure religious state, this has theological relevance”.
. . . more
J R
der Turki seem to think that they are the world. We decide who is the Ecumenical Patriach and we define Orthodoxy. Islam can never define Orthodoxy or any Christian activity.
Sincerely,
J R Dittbrenner
The more ominous threat is that Turkish authorities will use this court ruling to speed up the confiscation of Church property, further erasing the Christian presence in Istanbul.
It is, for all intents and purposes, a slower, cleaner, quieter pogrom. Instead of scaring the Christians away with rape, murder and arson the way they did in the fifties, the Turks are using zoning laws and other regulations to leave Christians with no place to reside in the city.
Dean, you are correct. Turkey should be held accountable to the western code of conduct among nations. Unfortunately for them, that code is founded on Christian anthropology and Christian ethics–watered down to be sure, but still a strong influence. Even in a secularized form, Islam simply does not share the same values. It is a perfect example of why your contention that we can get along without acknowledging and acting upon the theological divide that separates us is unworkable.
Oh, by the way, given the large number of Muslim physcians implicated in the latest bombings and attempted bombings, it would certainly seem to weaken the contention you have made a number of times that it is only the poor and dispossessed who are terrorists.
Each time we attempt to treat Muslim states as if they share the same western, Christian pragmatisim, we dig ourselves into a deeper hole. Here is a case where you might actually be right with your contention that Bush is an idiot. Unfortunately, you seem to share the same blind spot. Even on this issue it is evident.
Michael: All your points are valid. Our attempts to impose western-style democracy in Iraq have been a dismal failure. Saudi-Arabia is tied to the West through thousands of business ventures, yet funds the most radical clerics and fundamentalist groups. Turkey, which should be the most progressive and western-leaning of all the Muslim countries, instead often displays streaks of violent nationalism and religious intolerance that are inimicable to modern Western values.
As Missourian and I have discussed before the question is whether those features of Islam which we find so disagreable are intrinsic to that faith – fixed and immutable, or whether Islam has the capacity to evolve into something better, given the right conditions. As Christians who have been taught to see the good in people and work for peace our idealistic impulse is to believe that Islam can evolve. Yet as you point out, events continue to prove otherwise and such hopes may not be realistic.
Professor Bacevich writes:
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-bacevich18jun18,0,7510324.story
So if Turkey cannot abide by the rules of the European Union, it should not be allowed to join – it should be, as preofessor Bacevich writes “quaratined”, along with the rest of the Muslim world. A frank discussion with the Turks is needed. In this respect, the election of Sarkozy in France, who is urging a reevaluation, but not yet a rejection of Turkey’s EU membership, represents a positive develpment.
Here’s an article from the WSJ supporting Michael’s observation regarding the group of Doctors arrested in the latests terrorist plot, and lack of connection to poverty as an explanation.
Princeton Economist Says Lack of Civil Liberties, Not Poverty, Breeds Terrorism, David Wessell, WSJ, July 5, 2007;
Also here: http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2007/07/lack-of-civil-l.html#more