Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Europe asks Turkey to “free” school of Ecumenical Patriarchate
Asia News ^ | September 30, 2006 | Franco Pisano

Posted on 09/30/2006 2:42:39 PM PDT by NYer

Set up in 1842, the school was de facto shut down in 1971, because only Turkish young people of Orthodox faith can attend, and there are too few of them. The patriarchate hopes the visit of Benedict XVI may help obtain respect for religious freedom and minority rights.

Istanbul (AsiaNews) – This year, the wiring was redone after the old wooden windows were replaced by aluminium ones last year; the walls are painted in pretty old rose and white colours; the benches are writing desks: high, carved in black wood, with tops that open and inlaid wooden chairs. Empty. There are no pupils. No one.

Set up in 1842, the Theological School of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople is situated at the top of a small island in Marmara Sea, Haliki, one hour and a half away by boat from Istanbul, rich in forests and holiday villas. No cars or other means of transport are allowed to circulate on the island, so to get around, and even to go up to the school, which dominates the island, one must take a coloured cart drawn by two horses. Such carts serve as taxis.

Doroteos, the Orthodox priest responsible for the school, tells visitors it was founded on the site of former sacred settlements: there are ruins dating back to the IX century. Destroyed or damaged by not infrequent earthquakes, the current building is completely anti-seismic and has the shape of a Greek “p”, in honour of St Paul. It was operational during the Ottoman Empire, and continued to undertake its role of formation under the Turkish Republic... until 1971.

Since then, it has been de facto closed. Only Turkish students of Orthodox faith would be allowed to attend, but the Orthodox community in Turkey, which at the time the school was set up had nearly 200,000 members, today only has a few thousand, less than 5,000. In Haliki, there were 180 Christians, now there are 25. Thus, there are never enough Turkish students of Orthodox faith wanting to attend this school. “We have asked to enrol five students, but they told us it would cost too much and they sent them to other schools,” said Doroteos. “The solution naturally is there: it would suffice to allow foreign Orthodox students to attend.” But for such students, the government would impose a three-month visa. The patriarchate has title deeds testifying to the ownership of the school, but even this is not secure.

However the government has appointed, as per the law, a deputy director, who is a woman. She is called Perla. She does not give her surname, limiting herself to explaining that her current work consists of sending post to the Education Ministry. To the question, “what dealings have you with her?” one of the few Orthodox there replied: “human”.

The atmosphere is surreal. Everything is clean, neat and empty: the refectory, the main hall, with pictures of past rectors on walls covered with red fabric, and an icon of Our Lady on a seat in the centre, and the library. “There are 60,000 volumes on 33 different subjects,” said Doroteos. “There are antique books too. Students come from the United States or from Australia, to prepare their degree thesis. Naturally they cannot stay here for more than three months.”

And there is also a small apartment for possible visits by the Ecumenical Patriarch. The current patriarch, Bartholomew I, studied and later taught here, and he continues to visit “even once a month”. Metropolitans and religious come; their visits are related to studies. A metropolitan is staying there at the moment.

The Ecumenical Patriarchate maintains that the closure of the school constitutes a violation of Article 40 of the Losanna Treaty, in which Turkey committed itself to guaranteeing minority rights, and of Article 24 of the Turkish Constitution, that guarantees freedom of worship and education. These guarantees are also upheld by Article 9 of the European Constitution on Human Rights, which Turkey is signatory to. Now, however, it seems that Europe is making moves: a few days ago, a European Parliament resolution called on Ankara to allow the Patriarchate to run the “seminary” of Haliki.

As for Bartholomew I, he makes no secret of his hopes that the visit of Benedict XVI to Turkey in November may help boost religious freedom and minority rights, both Catholic and Orthodox.



TOPICS: Activism; Current Events; History; Ministry/Outreach; Moral Issues; Orthodox Christian; Religion & Culture; Religion & Politics; Theology
KEYWORDS: bartholomewi; patriarch; pope; turkey
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-27 last
To: kosta50

Truth be told, the Roman Empire wasn't a Christian nation when the precedence of sees based on the importance of the city they occupied was begun, but Rome ranked first as the capital, even when Diocletian was adorning the Church with martyrs and defiling his soul with violence, even as Alexandria ranked second as the second most important city in the Empire, and so forth.

Like it or not Washington is the capital of the Empire now. And I use that word without prejudice--post 9/11 I decided American imperialism is a good thing.


21 posted on 10/02/2006 9:02:32 PM PDT by The_Reader_David (And when they behead your own people in the wars which are to come, then you will know. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: The_Reader_David
Like it or not Washington is the capital of the Empire now

The center of today's Orthodox world is in Moscow, like it or not. That's where the EP should be.

22 posted on 10/03/2006 6:30:08 AM PDT by kosta50 (Orthodoxy is pure Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: kosta50
I am going to level with everyone on this.

Well, leveling is always in order. :)

But without opening a can of theological worms, let me just say that the 4th Ecumenical Council seems to ascribe a little more weight to Leo, Archibishop of Rome, than the fact that he held a once-important historic see.

And for some counter-leveling in all charity, I think that is easier for folks under the omophorion (I hope I used that right) of the EP of Constantinople to want to "move" the patriarchate to Moscow or wherever. Because, as far as I know, Constantinople was the only patriarchate of the five that was created for largely political reasons and not because its importance as an Apostolic See was firmly established by the 4th century. The story of St. Andrew aside (and who am I to deny it?), I'm not aware that Byzantium/Constantinople figures very much at all in Eusebius's History.

I am certainly not opposed to Constantinople's rank but I think that the historicity/apostolicity of the see could be a minor issue to you because, well, it was really never Constantinople's strong suit. That's not a criticism, mind you, just a sociological observation.

23 posted on 10/03/2006 10:02:52 AM PDT by Claud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: kosta50

And just for the record, so you know from where I come from in all this, I think that Hagia Sophia's current condition is a crying shame, and it should be returned in all its former glory to the EP posthaste.


24 posted on 10/03/2006 10:06:38 AM PDT by Claud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Claud
But without opening a can of theological worms, let me just say that the 4th Ecumenical Council seems to ascribe a little more weight to Leo, Archibishop of Rome, than the fact that he held a once-important historic see

Let me say that I agree with everything you wrote. No problems or issues there. Yes, of course, +Leo was given the full weight. Yet some things were taken away from him too. No one doubted or questioned that +Leo was first among other patriarchs. The Orthodox still recognize that. We are discussing not if but what that entails.

Our non-communion is not based on ranking but on theological differences; we simply do not profess the same faith (as the Orthodox see it).

I am Serbian Orthodox and we really don't consider ourselves to be "under" EP's omophorion; I would venture to say the Church of Greece is held captive by him, but his presence is a symbolic representation of our faith and in that sense he does reflect all of us to the world.

25 posted on 10/03/2006 11:28:13 AM PDT by kosta50 (Orthodoxy is pure Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: kosta50
The Orthodox still recognize that. We are discussing not if but what that entails.

Of course... I completely agree, and like I said, I'm not here to tackle that issue. :)

However, I am interested in your thoughts on how easily a patriarchate can be moved...it's something I've been asking myself and haven't answered to my own satisfaction. Almost no reason why New York should not be a quasi-patriarchate at this point (although these things work differently in the Latin church). But then again, why is Baltimore the Primatial see of America? And why Canterbury and not London?

History is inextricably woven in to the rights and status of a patriarchate...I suppose there's no *theological* reason why one can't be moved, but maybe geographical tradition is at least as worth defending (where it can be anyway) as other aspects of tradition.

26 posted on 10/03/2006 12:22:37 PM PDT by Claud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Claud
However, I am interested in your thoughts on how easily a patriarchate can be moved...it's something I've been asking myself and haven't answered to my own satisfaction

I would say unless the Turks physically destroy the Patriarchate and expel the Ecumenical Patriarch, it won't and can't happen. Under such circumstances, a pan-Orthodox Synod (council of all Orthodox Patriarchs would have to meet and decide, and in this case the decision would be a one of sympathy — for all the Orthodox would for that moment be Greeks.

I would say, the Patriarchate would be built on the Greco-Turkish border, as close to Istanbul as possible and they would probably build the biggest Orthodox church in the world, and would remain there until the Turks, by the grace of God become Orthodox one day.

If for some reason the issue of moving the Ecumenical Patriarchate were to come up for a different reason (although I can't imagine what), the most logical place would be Moscow. Russian Patriarch represents over 80% of the world Orthodox, and the Patriarchate would be in the heart of the Orthodox world, not on its fingers as it is today.

But in either case, the decision would have to be made by a pan-Orthodox Synod and then approved by the laity and lower clergy, always keeping in mind that love does not impose.

27 posted on 10/03/2006 5:54:30 PM PDT by kosta50 (Orthodoxy is pure Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-27 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson