OPINION
• MUSTAFA AKYOL
Thursday, July 29 2010 19:51 GMT+2
Your time is 
 

Why did the Turkish Caesar crucify the Ecumenical Patriarch?

Font Size: Larger|Smaller
Mustafa AKYOL

Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew recently said on American TV that he feels “crucified” in Turkey. And many Turks got upset with him.

His All Holiness is right, though, to complain about the Turkish Republic. The latter has kept the Halki Seminary, the only institution to train Orthodox priests in the country, closed since 1971. Even the title “ecumenical” is lashed out at by some Turkish authorities and their nationalist supporters. Every year, international reports on religious freedom point to such pressures on the Ecumenical Patriarchate with concern, and they are right to do so.

But why does Turkey do all this? Why is it is so repressive?

(HH) Ottoman pluralism

In fact, things were much better long ago. The first Turkish ruler to reign over the Ecumenical Patriarchate was Mehmed II, the Ottoman Sultan who conquered Constantinople in 1453. In line with the Islamic tradition of the acceptance of the “People of the Book,” the young sultan granted amnesty to the patriarchate. He also gave the institution many privileges and much authority, no less than that which existed previously under the Byzantine emperors.

The Ecumenical Patriarchate thus became the head of one of the empire’s several “nations,” to be joined later by Armenians and Jews, which all enjoyed autonomy in their affairs in the centuries to come. That’s why, in the 18th century, the Greek Patriarch in Jerusalem praised the Ottoman throne with quite generous words:

“God raised out of nothing this powerful empire of the Ottomans, in place of our Roman [Byzantine] Empire… The almighty Lord has placed over us this high kingdom, for there is no power but of God… [And] He puts into the heart of the Sultan of these Ottomans an inclination to keep free the religious beliefs of our Orthodox faith.”

In the 19th century, the non-Muslim peoples of the empire also achieved the rights of equal citizenship with the Muslims. That’s why the late Ottoman bureaucracy and the Ottoman Parliament included a great number of Greeks, Armenians and Jews – something you can never see in republican Turkey. The Halki Seminary, opened in 1844, is a relic from that bygone age of pluralism.

What destroyed this Pax Ottomana, as some historians call it, was nationalism. It affected the peoples of the empire one-by-one, including, toward the end, the Turks. A great many conflicts happened between the latter and the rest, and the colossal collapse of the great empire left a bitter taste in the mouths of all. The Armenians, who suffered the worst tragedy in 1915, never forgot and forgave.

What the Turks rather remembered was the “treason” of the other components of the empire, and especially that of the Ecumenical Patriarchate. The latter had cheered for the Greek armies when they invaded western Anatolia in 1919. From that point onward, the institution, in the eyes of many Turks, became the “fifth column” of their untrustworthy neighbor. Hence, the seminary suffered the worst crackdowns during times of crises with Greece and Greeks Cypriots.

All this means that a part of the problem is just the curse of history. But you can either trap yourself inside the misfortunes of history, or take some lessons from it and then move on. To date, unfortunately, the Turkish Republic has often chosen the former option.

This has something to do with the fact that this Republic is constructed as an authoritarian, not democratic, basis. All authoritarian states need “internal enemies,” and the Turkey has had no shortage of them. A short list would include the liberals, the Kurds, practicing Muslims, the Marxist left, and Christians of all sorts.

All these groups, somehow, fail to conform to at least one of the two main pillars of the state ideology: A self-styled secularism that bans anything but “the secular way of life,” and a fierce nationalism that abhors anything it deems “non-Turkish.”

(HH) No king but the deep Caesar

Today, the real obstacle to the liberalization of the Ecumenical Patriarchate is the same state ideology, and its supporters, the staunch Kemalists. The latter, a bit like the proponents of another crucifixion that happened two millennia ago, have no king but Caesar, and no value but the State’s supremacy.

I saw a good manifestation of this last Tuesday night in a live discussion aired on CNNTurk. The deputy from the all-Kemalist CHP, Muharrem İnce, who opposes the reopening of the Halki Seminary, became angry during the talk. “Do you know who most wants to open the seminary in this country,” he loudly asked. “The Islamists! They want this, because they want to open Islamic schools as well.”

Yes, this is indeed the position increasingly adopted by Turkey’s Islamic opinion leaders, who realize that religious freedom must be championed for all. They, after all, have a good frame of reference in the pluralism of the Ottomans.

Therefore it is not an accident that the more Muslim-minded AKP government has shown more goodwill on this issue, as the Ecumenical Patriarch himself acknowledged in an interview published in the Daily News yesterday. His All Holiness also said that the real obstacle is probably “the deep state.”

Yet no excuse beats success, and it is still the government’s duty to set the Ecumenical Patriarchate free – something which should be done immediately.


 

33 Comments   Bookmark and Share  printer friendly PRINTER FRIENDLY

READER COMMENTS

Guest - mok10501
2010-01-30 14:33:39
  Since when "Ecumenical" title was given to a priest who is called Patriarch of the Greek Orthodox only? Can't you see the Russians? They have their own Patriarch as in the case of Bulgarians and Romanians do. You can't even have a mosque in Athens but you are in favor of opening the Halki seminary, never mind the suffering of the muslim Turks' in the Western Thrace. Is that what makes you tolerant Mr. Akyol?
 

Guest - Mike - Australia
2010-01-16 18:04:07
  I can’t understand as to why the Greek Government doesn’t do unto the Turks of Thrace as has been done to the Greeks in Turkey since 1923. It should be remembered that the Greek Turks are in Thrace pursuant to the 1923, Treaty of Lausanne. The Treaty has been violated by Ankara many times since 1923 as far as Greeks who were living in Turkey is concerned. Why does the Greek government have to play the game and entertain Turks in Greece when the Greeks in Turkey have been so persecuted that they have been virtually wiped out.
 

Guest - raz
2010-01-10 07:55:55
  yes, this Mr Akyol is speaking the language of Ali KEMAL... there is no doubt about this- it will be seen in the years to follow, too
 

Guest - PhilipD
2010-01-06 16:56:47
  good article Mr. Akyol; Turkey needs more people like you! a response to Vural Korkmaz as he referred to the Treaty of Lausanne; can he please read Article 16 and explain Turkey's subsiquent actions in Cyprus and continuous inventions of 'rights' in the Aegean?: The Treaty of Lausanne Article 16 of the treaty states: "Turkey hereby renounces all rights and title whatsoever over or respecting the territories situated outside the frontiers laid down in the present Treaty and the islands other than those over which her sovereignty is recognised by the said Treaty, the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned." Article 20 goes on to say: "Turkey hereby recognises the annexation of Cyprus proclaimed by the British Government on the 5th November, 1914." Article 21 continues: "Turkish nationals ordinarily resident in Cyprus on the 5th November, 1914, will acquire British nationality subject to the conditions laid down in the local law, and will thereupon lose their Turkish nationality. They will, however, have the right to opt for Turkish nationality within two years from the coming into force of the present Treaty, provided that they leave Cyprus within twelve months after having so opted. Turkish nationals ordinarily resident in Cyprus on the coming into force of the present Treaty who, at that date, have acquired or are in process of acquiring British nationality in consequence of a request made in accordance with the local law, will also thereupon lose their Turkish nationality. It is understood that the Government of Cyprus will be entitled to refuse British nationality to inhabitants of the island who, being Turkish nationals, had formerly acquired another nationality without the consent of the Turkish Government." Article 27 concludes: "No power or jurisdiction in political, legislative or administrative matters shall be exercised outside Turkish territory by the Turkish Government or authorities, for any reason whatsoever, over the nationals of a territory placed under the sovereignty or protectorate of the other Powers signatory of the present Treaty, or over the nationals of a territory detached from Turkey. It is understood that the spiritual attributions of the Moslem religious authorities are in no way infringed."
 

Guest - Birol
2009-12-29 13:41:56
  The author is one of the first people I look to in this paper. However, I must agree with Vural Korkmaz. Under Ottoman rule, Turkish subjects suffered and were left poor, illiterate & ignorant. Despite this, they continued to fight for their country, which was suffering from years of war. To that, the Turkish people will forever love Ataturk and the many great soldiers of that era. The problems of the present are not caused by whether there are islamic schools or not, it is merely the absence of demcracy, which is still struggling to gain a foothold. With regards to the religious schools, the CHP should look to the Medrese's of Pakistan to see how the results of unregulated religious schools can produce unbalanced views from its students. Ottoman pluralism should be a source of great pride for todays Turks.
 

Guest - Gavur
2009-12-28 21:33:17
  Once again, Bravo Mr. Aykol. Slowly but surely, you are gaining the vision and confidence to introduce the Armenian Genocide more and more into the main thesis of many of your articles. To understand the present, you have to take a cold, hard look at the past. With every article (which in turn, sends the Kemalists into a frothy, howling, furor), you help destroy the shackles of nationalism, and give a push and a nudge to wake this country out of 90 year coma. The importance of your work cannot be underscored. Btw, look back a little further. The Armenian Genocide in reality, began in 1896. It reached it's bloody apex in 1915. The problem with mentioning this however, is that it completely destroys the thesis of the murders being a part of a larger war (it wasn't).
 

Guest - michael mohan
2009-12-28 06:55:29
  @ David... you have hit it right on the head there, turkey has to be the size of bulgaria in order to be accepted in the EU. here, here... !!! finally someone said it out loud. and to the greek nick person, turkey's leaders arent all that into EU...they are just still courting it bec breaking off is hard to do, plus it helps them to pass some of the laws they would otherwise have a more difficult time passing thru the meclis... there u go... it is all rational choice...
 

Guest - kevin
2009-12-27 22:22:19
  Very good article! According to Germans who were allies of the Turks during WW1, said the Armenians areas were quiet and not causing problems when the genocide started happening.Remember, the men were sent off to "labor battalions." Hence many men were taken away! Their hunting rifles which they were allowed to have was taken way before the genocide. Remember, there were 4-5 massacres by Turks within a 20 year period before 1915! Before you take the Turkish governments false lies, read other sources than biased Turkish sources. A good book is written by a Turkish author, Tanner Akcam.
 

Guest - David
2009-12-27 18:04:20
  Dear Author, what do you mean by: ---"The Armenians, who suffered the worst tragedy in 1915, never forgot and forgave."--- Are you talking about the same group of people who helped Russia destroy our country and kill our citizens? Turks were already fighting for their lives to survive in the War, then they got backstabbed by Armenians in the East, in their hope of forming their new Armenian country. How can Turks ever forgive and forget that? They wanted Turkey to be divided, that is worse than death itself. Nobody is denying a large number of Armenians and Turks died in the War and these internal conflicts, but the Author is making it seem like Turks did something so awful, and Armenians are angels. Also, "internal enemies"?? Of course Turkey had problems until recently with their neighbors, Greeks, Armenians, and Kurds. These people wanted to divide Turkey for themselves. We are suppose to put this fact behind us, and live like nothing happened, OR, we take slow and cautionary steps to avoid such thing ever happening again? Look at some Kurds today, they STILL want their Kurdistan within Turkey. How can Turks NOT be worried? Too many non-sense going in Turkey... by the time Turkey joins EU, we'll be the size of Bulgaria.
 

Guest - Santa Clauss
2009-12-27 12:00:42
  Congratulations for an excellent article! Although I reserve some objections to minor points of your article I can but praise your courage to pinpoint the nationalistic "approach" to say the least of the Turkish Republic as it has been applied to Greeks, Armenians and recently Kurds. It is actually in your honor to call by and accept the Ecumenical title of the Patriarchate at Constantinople. Indeed Istanbul or Constantinople as the historical name is, is a great universal imperial city for the Turks, the Greeks, the Armenians and even the Albanians and the Balkan Slavs. As the title of the Ecumenical (aka Universal) Patriarch implies a commonly neglected title attributed to the City (the Polis) is New or Second Rome. As New Rome the city remained the natural capital of both the medieval 2nd Roman Empire of the east and the later Ottoman Empire. This heritage is one that modern Turkey and Greece should praise and maintain instead of trying to extinguish. Indeed, Kemalists in Turkey and ancient Greece lovers in Greece target and dismiss the Ottoman legacy and Byzantine-Romaic legacy respectively as it never existed. Both cultures when combined span a period of more than 1,500 yrs and were both pluralistic, multiethnic, multicultural, multilingual as you correctly put it.
 

Guest - Kim
2009-12-27 01:45:54
  What makes you think that Turks should treat the Patriarchate better, while Turks in Greece can not even elect their own religious leader, for example? I challenge you to do a one-to-one comparison of the rights given to the Turks in Europe and the ones enjoyed by Christians and others, incuding the Patriarchate in Turkey. You may be surprised to see that Turkey is doing better than the rest of Europe in terms of minority rights despite all the black propaganda.
 

Guest - Ant
2009-12-27 01:35:55
  (1) Ottoman system embraced the principles of religious and social freedom to its peoples, level of which was unheard of considering its contemporary states. This lasted until the Empire became economically weak. At that point, Western powers planted "nationalism" in the minds of numerous Ottoman peoples (Arabs, Greeks, Armenians, etc.) in the hopes to dismantle the Empire. Soon enough, ethnic Turks, who had no self awareness as an individual nation, had been reduced to "second class citizens" in their own state. Ataturk then succeded to wake up Turkish nationalism as a response to all of this. Given the circumstances of the time, Turkish nationalism was the only way to salvage what was left of Ottoman Empire. Hence, the Republic of Turkey was inevitably based on Turkish nationalism. There's nothing wrong in this, as this seems to be the dominant regime in today's World order. (2) Despite a full century, the Western plan of re-organizing and controlling the Near East has never come to an end and still been going on strong. It is likely to go on as long as the natural resources remain in the region. So called "Armenian issue", "Kurdish Issue", "Iraqi Issue", "Iran issue", "Cyprus issue", and even "Afghanistan issue" are a part of this plan. Brand-new issues are in the make as we read these comments. Some examples, "Pontus issue", "Alevi issue", etc. These "issues" are necessary to keep the region ripe for destabilization and external control by the West. (3) Also, it's funny some Europeans feel they have the right to criticise Turkey about minority rights, etc. while they display some of the best examples of double standards and oppression of minorities in their own lands. Take the issue of 'education in Turkish language in Europe' for starters. I don't think there's enough room in this window to even list some examples. Those living in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. Hope this helps.
 

Guest - BAHAEDDIN
2009-12-27 00:51:11
  THANK GOD TURKEY HAS STILL HAVE SOME COMMON SENSED, INTELLIGENCE PEOPLE. THANK YOU DAILY NEWS. AS A MACEDONIAN BORN TURK I AM PROUD OF MY OTTOMAN PAST AND NOBILITY DISPLAYED MY FOUNDING FATHERS TO OTHER BELIEVERS. MY GRANDMOTHER' S ADVISE WAS TO US DO NOT TRANSGRESS ANY OTHER FAITHS PEOPLE ALWAYS, EVEN THOUGH SHE SUFFERED HORRIBLE ATTROCITIES IN BULGARIAN, GREEK( KOMITACIS) TERRORISTS HANDS. I ALMOST CRIED WHEN 60 MINUTES(CBS TV PROGRAM) SHOWED MY BELOVED PROPHET HAND PRINTED AND SIGNED DECLARATION TO GIVE OTHER BELIEVERS RIGHT TO PRACTICE THEIR WORSHIPS. I WOULD SUPPORT THE TURKISH GOVERNMENT EFFORTS TO SHOW SULTAN MEHMED' S GENEROUSITY ONCE MORE. THANK YOU
 

Guest - Emir Soler
2009-12-26 23:23:48
  Christoph@ I can see success the story of Greece with EU? Aren’t they in big trouble? Let me help you to get Greece out of trouble.” Greece should get out of the EURO, buy back its debts, balance its budget, regulate its money supply and reform the banking system and tell the IMF to FO" Turkey got the potential to grow behind China, India, Brazil; we are talking about %5 upwards growth from 2010/2011. Banking system is one of the most modern in the world, that’s why during financial crises not a single Bank in Turkey was in trouble. Foreign investment is up, tourist numbers are going up n up. All looking rosy for Turkey and you know it.
 

Guest - Mustafa
2009-12-26 22:29:10
  When I read Mustafa AKYOL I feel like I m reading an article from Ali KEMAL...
 

Guest - Vural Korkmaz
2009-12-26 22:15:00
  The Treaty of Lausanne (July 24, 1923) composed of 143 articles defined and regulated the status of Greeks in Turkiye and Turks in Greece. If Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, or any citizen of Greece, or Greek government, or any citizen of Turkiye of Greek heritage thinks the word and/or the merit of this treaty is violated by Turkish government, he/she should go to UN or any other international justice organization such as the World Court, instead of complaining about Turkiye how bad it is in the American press. As long as they abstain from doing so, there is no issue to discuss and they have no right to create baseless issues and sensationalize them. But I do not think Bartholomew or any other Greek will resort to a legal remedy. Throughout the short history of the Republic of Turkiye, Greeks, as well Armenians, always preferred to create baseless issues and sensationalize them. That way they obtained better results.
 

Guest - wolf
2009-12-26 20:26:35
  Christoph, you are right, of course. We see that 5 million Turks have left Turkey to enjoy a better life in terms of education, rule of law, health care, human rights, purchase power, clean environment etc. And a recent study showed that 78% of Turkish youngsters would like to move to another country (the West). So if we can get support from EU, which we allready do, to improve our country, I think it is great and I hope we one day should be able to join the EU. Just imagine our youngsters having the chance to go abroad to study at foreign universities, widen their views of the world etc. It would be fantastic. I dont really see why people are so worked up about Sarkozy. EU has all the time said minimum 10-15 years and then all the people of today will be replaced and Turkey will be in a much better shape than today. There are unfortunately the paradox of extreme nationalists in Turkey who, with their "love for their country" create more harm than good. Those people are not able to understand that in todays world countries' success is not meassured by your ability to destruct (i.e. weapons, macho power language, force, threat etc) but instead success is a country's ability to create, to build, to educate, to create good living conditions where people feel happy and free, to be able to benefit from international networks and free movement. Some peopel are still stuck in some mentality that we are still under som siege and we have to watch out for foreigners who want break up Turkey and spread "propaganda". But what they do not realize is that the reason that our economy has developed so well lately is because of the foreign connections in terms of investments, out sourcing, foreign firms who have established local offices, we have been able to learn best practice etc etc. But I am still hopeful. It is in many ways a wonderful country, but unfortunately we have lost so many opportunities in the past to make it an even better place for ourselves.
 

Guest - Christoph
2009-12-26 18:21:29
  Mr. Soler, Turkey's leadership is still interested in the EU even if Turkey's citizens aren't. Because they are wise enough to know that without entry into the EU Turkey has no economic future in the 21st Century. The YeniLira is not a currency that is widely accepted around the world, the EURO is. Turkey cannot borrow money from foreign banks at good rates because your credit rating is poor. Entry into the EU would vastly improve that. Nationalist elements in Turkey proclaim they have a future without being in the EU, but they don't know what they are talking about. Without the discipline that requires Turkey comply with EU accession requirements your nation will be just another big, poor middle east nation. And intelligent Turks know that.
 

Guest - istanbul
2009-12-26 16:36:04
  agree with you emir@ thoug the current EU knows turkey is getting big economy every year and her ınfluence in the regıon is increasing but consıderıng ıtself as a christian club and bıg powers of ıt( especially france dont want turkey to come and take ıts place napolyon sarkozy knows ıt:)) were to be honest to say the truth everythıng would be more easier frankly lıke most of turks I thınk the goverment should stop thıs process and ımmedıately solve our ınternal ıssues that requires priority ımagıne ıf we hadnt spend that amount of money we spend to prevent terrorısm. we make money but its just we cant spend ıt to better places to make better lıfe for ourselves I belıeve once those ıssues are solved then you should see ıf one person talks about EU or anythıng...
 

Guest - Vural Korkmaz
2009-12-26 14:54:25
  Mustafa Akyol is BSing again.The purpose of Ottoman Sultan in granting "privileges" to his Christian and Jewish subjects was not really secularism or pluralism at all. If the Ottoman sultan really loved and respected his Christian and Jewish subjects, he should not had invaded their country causing tremendous sufferings and destruction. The sole purpose of Ottoman Sultan in granting "privileges" to his Christian and Jewish subjects was to create an alternative loyal set of subjects to his Turkish subjects. Even before the Sultan conquered Istanbul and other Christian lands, his empire in a whole was made up of all non-Turks. The third most powerful man in his empire was the chief eunuch, a black man from Africa. White eunuchs were usually Russian. His entire government, his viziers (ministers) and grand vizier (prime minister), was made up of devshirmes who were recruited from Christian and Jewish families of Eastern Europe and Anatolia, trained and educated to be his professional military soldiers, officers, governors, mayors, ambassadors, viziers, grand viziers, etc. His most powerful admiral Barbarous was a Greek pirate. Not a single Ottoman sultan was a child of a woman of Turkish origins. They (36 of them) were all children of women of non-Turkish and Christian races. The entire Ottoman system of oppression had no Turk in it. Turks were only the most ignorant, the poorest and totally powerless of all his subjugated subjects. The Sultan wanted that way. Because he did not trust Turks. He was afraid of Turks. He thought one day if and when Turks gained enough power and confidence, they would rise up and topple his system of oppression. Because Ottoman dynasty established its rule in Anatolia by destroying all Turkish states, principalities and chiefdoms of the land with brutal and bloody wars. Turks always in a state of war with Ottoman empire. Nobody called him/herself as "Turk" because being a Turk under Ottoman yoke was the most embarrassing thing to be. Since the Turks under his yoke were the most unreliable minority, Ottoman sultan wanted to create an alternative group of subjects loyal to him. The economy of Ottoman system of oppression was built on conquest, plundering and looting which provided a great part of his loyal devshirmes' income. When the empire could not expand anymore because of the great distances his armies had to travel in one season of war and Europeans became too strong to beat and plunder their possessions, Sultan's loyal devshirme armies were the first to rebel and cause all kinds of troubles for him. As soon as his "loyal" and "privileged" subjugated millets (nations) Greeks, Armenians, Serbians, Hungarians, Romanians, Bulgarians, and others became strong enough they all rebelled and gained their independence. They all massacred, raped, tortured Ottoman Turkish subjects and drove them out of their homes and countries. Turks suffered tremendously as if they caused all the troubles Ottoman Christian subjects suffered. It was truly ethnic cleansing by former Ottoman "loyal" Christian nations. They all ignored the fact that Ottoman sultan used his Christian subjects as devshirmes to oppress the very Christian nations under his yoke. The only subjugated nation Ottoman sultan mistrusted the most, the Turks were left in his empire. Yet when Turks were fighting their war of independence under the leadership Ataturk, the Ottoman sultan declared Ataturk a traitor and sentenced him to death. Sultan's all former "loyal" millets, including the very "privildged" Ecumenical Patriarchate, all former Ottoman Greeks and Armenians, stabbed Turks on the back when Turks were fighting their own independence war.
 

Guest - Emir Soler
2009-12-26 14:17:17
  Christoph @ You have never written a comment without the blackmail of Turkey’s entry to EU. Just for your information, stop bringing EU to scare mongering to Turkish society, Public interest at Turkey for EU is all time low. Turkey is not on hurry to join the EU. By the time Turkey come to join the EU, it won't be any EU to join. Looking at the performance of Greeks and few others they already discredited the EU fiscal policy. Keep your EU comments to yourself, I rather see Turkey out of EU that in it. Turkey with 80 Million Dynamic young population in the world, with booming economy as well as regional power on his own right, can be run from Ankara rather than Brussels.
 

Guest - niko foti
2009-12-26 14:13:24
  Bravo Daily News for printing this excellent article Re: the Ecumenical Patriarchate and his Hollness Patriarch Bartholomew writen by a true an justifiable news man as Mr.Mustafa AKYOL.He sees the worst form of Cancer that has grown in Secular Turkey and there is not (one Doctor free to eliminate the desease) which has been planted by the Nationalist and extremists elements of a county that pretends to tolerate relligious freedon and the human rights of all his citizens,We are all brothers in the eyes of Allah or God. and the prosecution of any religious freedom in any Counry is Anathema,Wake up Brother Turks, Be free men in spirit and heart for your fellow men and dont worry that the Patriarch or the Seminary in Halki opening will harm your Nation. It's about time to open your eyes and join the word in peace and prosperity for all Turkish peopleand the rest of the world. Perhaps if you do the right thing God or Allah will reward you for your Generocity and Windsom. Thankyou.
 

Guest - Agis A
2009-12-26 13:14:40
  congratulations for your article.very fair and objective.mr Akyol if there are more writers like you one thing is certain our neighbourhood will see more peaceful days and more brotherly relations.
 

Guest - Ali Alibey
2009-12-26 12:52:21
  Excellent article. thank you! @ S.B.: "Secularism but only the Secularism is going to be the foundation of this republic." Well said, but does that mean that in your eyes Atatürk was not a secularist because he didn't have a problem with the patriarch and the seminary?? Are you a better secularist than Atatürk??
 

Guest - peter
2009-12-26 12:14:49
  Congratulations for an excellent article that explains history and culture.With people like you better days will be ahead. Afterall 'peace at home and peace in the world' was never literally applied. It was translated as 'peace at home as long as you listen and peace in the world as long as no one opposes our expansionists policies'
 

Guest - Blue
2009-12-26 11:59:21
  If the Greeks want an ecumenical patriarch, they should set one up in Greece and stop trying to convert the Turkish Greek orthodox patriarch into an ecumenical one.
 

Guest - S.B
2009-12-26 11:56:53
  Iranian mullahs and the Greek Government are going to praise this article more than anybody else. Sadly enough writer still don't get this."Secularism but only the Secularism is going to be the foundation of this republic".Neither the Patriarch nor the writer and AKP are going to be able to change this.
 

Guest - blue
2009-12-26 11:52:35
  As I understand it, the Patriarch was not ecumenical under the Ottomans, but only extended to within the borders of the empire, so why does Mr. Akyol continue to refer, incorrectly, to an ecumenical patriarch - possibly, he doesn't know what it means.
 

Guest - Christoph
2009-12-26 11:34:53
  Turkey's official and unofficial hostility to the Orthodox Church has continued over many decades and through both nationalist and Islamist governments. Closing of the Halki seminary, expropriation of Church properties, toleration of right wing extremist violent demonstrations, promotion or at least approval of the phony 'Turkish Orthodox Church', punitive taxation against Christians-there have been many, many means used to oppress the Church. With this in mind and with Turkey as an applicant nation for the EU there should not be one minute more delay in reopenning Halki. The AKP political leadership needs to demonstrate actions not just words, when it comes to promoting the rights of religious minorities.
 

Guest - wolf
2009-12-26 10:36:05
  When I read this, and many other explanations of all our present problems, on how everything is derived from the past, I ask myself, why can we not handle our present better? We still have events taking place 100 of years ago, which are still giving us loads of problems today. If we compare with Europe, where we first had the 2nd world war where over 20 million of people were killed, the worst genocide in history, and all countries hated each other. But 20 years after the war, Europe is up and running and today is in perfect shape again. The second and more recent event was fall of the iron curtain. Again, two old enemies (the east and the west) are now getting along very well, and many former Easter European countries have, only 15 years after the collapse of the east, joined the EU and are now doing very well. So can we not do the same, i.e. sort out our historical disputes and move on to make a better country for our people today, instead of constantly talking about our glorious past, how strong we will be in the future and just further whip up nationalism?
 

Guest - Georgios
2009-12-26 03:07:23
  Brilliant article. Unbiassed and true.
 

Guest - ali
2009-12-26 02:30:18
  Look at who is talking. An Islamist cobweb covered mind. Where is 1919, where is 1971, where are you living Mr Akyol? Even in 1919, as you reminded us very clearly, Atatürk and his friends did not attempt to close the Patriarchate or its schools, when, then Patriarch and his subjects were greeting the invading Greek Army. We are talking about 1971 now, but you are 52 years late. That is why you confuse historic events with each other. The Turkish revolution was not against non-Muslim peoples, but against cobweb covered Islamist minds like you. It seems that you know it very well, and attack to Turkish state by every opportunity. You are the last one who should say something about the non-Muslim communities. No one believes in your hypocrite approaches. The days of sheiks, outdated madrasas, softas, caliphates, sultanates, the era of ignorance has passed for Turkey Mr Akyol. The AKP government has been there for eight years, say to them that they should open the Halki Saminary, accept the Ecumenical title of Orthodoxy, and remove this shame, at least they can do something for the sense of humanity, can’t they?
 

Guest - Peace-man
2009-12-26 01:38:22
  Turkey is a great country and can become even better! If the school of Halki is reopened and if all the restrictions on the Ecumenical Patriarch are lifted then Turkey will become a true example of religious tolerance. It is time Turkey proved to itself, and the rest of the world, that it is a mature democratic country and modern in every way. I would visit Istanbul to visit a free Patriarchate, and I would bring ALOT of tourist dollars with me!
 

WRITE A COMMENT

Verification code
E-mail is required in case we need to communicate with you. It will not appear on the website and will never be used for any other purposes.
Comments policy: The Daily News seeks and supports freedom of expression and this commitment extends to our readers. Constraints include comments judged to be in violation of Turkish press law. We also moderate hate speech, libel and gratuitous insults.












Home | To Top | User Agreement and Privacy Policy | Rights and Permissions | Contact Us | Company | About News Room| RSS RSS Feed