Pages

Showing posts with label RELIGION. Show all posts
Showing posts with label RELIGION. Show all posts

September 4, 2014

, , ,

Secrets of Agia Sophia Featured in Dan Brown’s "Inferno"


Dan Brown’s latest novel "Inferno" sends protagonist Robert Langdon (rumored to soon be played by Tom Hanks again) to Constantinople and to Agia Sophia. The plot begins to unfold on page 334. Brown’s tweedy Harvard iconographer Robert Langdon turns to Sienna Brooks – a British-born misfit genius who gallops around the world with him in his adventures – that they are "in the wrong country”. And off they go to Turkey and to Constantinople. Once there, and under the gilded dome of the cathedral-mosque-museum of Agia Sophia, we learn that the traditions of East and West are not as divergent as we might think.

His choice to focus on the mysteries of Agia Sofia are surely plenty. The dome and minarets of this sacred site are the symbols of Constantinople. This is the only building in the world to have served as a Catholic Cathedral and as the seat of two religions, Greek Orthodox Christianity and Sunni Islam and before all of that even paganism.

The building which we all see today is to a great extent, despite the rebuilding work carried out after regular earthquakes, the building that was consecrated on December 27th, 537 by Roman Emperor Justinian. It would be the greatest church in Christendom for a thousand years, until St. Peter’s in Rome was completed.

Agia Sophia’s massive dome and gigantic proportions were believed by many to have been the work of the divine. It heavily influenced the architecture of mosques and churches and it’s grandeur was said to have led Russia to convert to Orthodox Christianity, over Catholicism.

Relics such as the shroud of Mary, nails from the true cross and the tombstone of Jesus were some of its treasures, until the city was ransacked during the Fourth crusade.

The secrets of Agia Sophia are as follows:

  •     The current building of Agia Sophia is the third structure constructed at the exact same location. After the construction of the first two, this “great church” (Megale Ekklesia) was constructed. It wasn’t called Agia Sophia at first; it was actually called the Great Church for a long time.
  •     Agia Sophia is The East Roman Patriarchate Church. St. Sinod Assembly had been convened at the rooms located in the South front aisle of the Agia Sophia.
  •     The second Agia Sophia’s West wall ground work are available for viewing, and some monumental parts of it welcome the visitors with lambs that symbolize the apostles.
  •     In addition to Agia Sophia’s main construction, two other buildings that are predicted to be baptisteries and that date back much longer than the main construction itself exist. One of these is located in the northeast and is referred to as the treasure building, whereas the other baptistery is located in the southwest.
  •     The Agia Sophia includes pieces belonging to Anatolian and Middle Eastern civilizations that date back to the Eastern Roman period, Western Roman period and even the Pagan period. These include the Beautiful Door dating back to second century B.C from Tarsus as well as cubes, countless columns, marbles and many more artifacts from the Hellenistic period.
  •     The Agia Sophia includes not only priests and patriarchs but also a monastery, situated close to the main courtyard, where many priests resided.
  •     The main ground where Agia Sophia rests has been elevated with the remains from old buildings and construction residue, and the square rests on a foundation of several civilizations’ remains.
  •     The Agia Sophia is the site where Byzantine Emperors were crowned. They would be welcomed by the patriarch and crowned in a designated area within the church naos.
  •     All the mosaics within the Agia Sophia contain human figures and date back to 842 A.D. All pieces from previous periods have been destroyed due to iconoclasm.
  •     Particular pieces within the Agia Sophia were taken outside of Turkey during different periods and are now being exhibited in various museums in Europe.



Divers Attempt to Unravel Mysteries Beneath Agia Sophia

Goksel Gulensoy tried to reveal the hidden secrets of Agia Sophia lying beneath the surface in his new documentary. Along with a team of two divers and four spelunkers they dove in the waters under this historical for Christianity Church to learn more about the reservoirs which are connected to Topkapi Palace and Underground Cistern.

Although he began his studies in 1998, he was  only able to complete his 50 minute documentary (titled In the Depths of Agia Sophia) in 2009.

He was the first to explore the reservoir close to the entrance, (which is apparently 12 meters deep). While investigating the area, the divers discovered two thick pieces of wood as well as a bucket which they claim turned into dust when they were touched.

In the second reservoir the divers found a dozen flasks that were dated from 1917, glass from chandeliers, a chain with two rings and various pieces of stained glass.

The International Speleological Society of Bogazici then began searching of the tunnels under the main hall of Agia Sophia. They found two stone tunnels towards to Sultanahmet Square and Topkapi Palace. Both ends of the tunnel split into two after 50 meters but the passages were blocked.

One member of the search team, Aydin Menderes, moved towards the direction of Topkapi Palace until he spotted daylight between the stones. He then used a pen camera and saw that he had reached the palace yard. He then returned to enter yet another tunnel which led to two more rooms.

While there, he discovered various broken jugs and the remains that are expected to belong to the grave site of St Antinegos who was the first to be buried in Agia Sophia. At the same time they also apparently found the remains of Patriarch Athanasius.





References - OCC247 and the National Turk




August 22, 2014

,

Greek Orthodox Priest Helps Prison Inmates Buy Their Freedom

A soft-spoken 83-year-old Greek Orthodox Priest has dedicated his life to an unusual quest: buying prison inmates their freedom. Gervasios Raptopoulos has taken advantage of a quirk in the Greek justice system which enables people jailed for minor offenses to walk free by paying off a fine.

The rule only applies to people convicted of offences that carry a maximum five-year sentence and is calculated at five euros per day, on average. People serving time for crimes such as petty fraud, bodily harm, weapons possession, illegal logging, resisting arrest and minor drugs offences fall into this category. However finding sufficient funds to buy a way out is typically only a luxury the rich can afford.

Raptopoulos has helped more than 15,000 convicts secure their freedom over nearly four decades, according to records kept by his charity. His funds come from private donations but the on-going Greek financial crisis is putting a strain on the coffers. "Where people would offer 100 euros ($135), they now give 50 ($67).

But that doesn't stop us," he said. Father Gervasios holds up a letter, in Arabic, copies of which are handed out to all prisoners his charity frees, in their own language, explaining why they receive the help in the northern port city of Thessaloniki.

OCC247


August 7, 2014

, ,

United States to Turkey: Reopen Halki Seminary

President Barack Obama meets Tuesday, April 7,...
April 7, 2009, President Barack Obama meets with Greek Orthodox Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew  (credit: Wikipedia)
In an annual report released by the Department of State at the end of July, the Obama administration has yet again pressed Turkey to live up to its commitment as a democracy to ensure religious freedom, citing the need to reopen an Eastern Orthodox seminary that’s been closed for decades. Turkey is a “tier 2″ country according to the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), meaning it’s not a “country of particular concern” (i.e., a country, according to the Department of State, “engaged in or tolerated particularly severe violations of religious freedom” that are “systematic, ongoing and egregious”) but there are certain worrisome tendencies.

According to USCIRF, these include: listing one’s religion on ID cards, the troubled religious freedom climate in Turkish-occupied Cyprus, a failure to officially recognize certain minority groups such as the Alevis, rising anti-Semitism, and an overall deterioration of both online and off-line privacies and freedoms throughout the past year. In other words, Turkey is no Burma, but it’s not behaving well either. The Department of State and USCIRF’s reports, as well as recent statements from members of the Obama administration highlighted a particular issue that’s been troubling the Eastern Orthodox community for decades, namely the reopening of Halki Seminary.

Located off the coast of Istanbul on the island of Halki (Greek) or Heybeliada (Turkish), the seminary was once a training center for a number of key Orthodox figures, including Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I, the “head” of the Orthodox Church. However, following a decree that all private educational institutions either tie themselves to a state university or shut down, Halki was forced to close its doors in 1971. And while the closure “was not directly aimed at the Halki Theological School,” it’s become a sticking point for already-strained Greek-Turkish relations. In Greece’s (and the U.S.’) view, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and President Abdullah Gul have done nothing but issue hollow promises. Meanwhile, other AKP officials have issued quid pro quos, one going so far as to state in December 2013 that Turkey will not take a step until Greece…opens Fethiye Mosque in Athens.” The Obama administration has taken up the issue of Halki in an effort to keep Turkey reneging on its responsibilities as a democratic state.

Reopening the seminary demonstrates a real commitment to minority rights and religious freedom, two cornerstones of any healthy democracy. Furthermore, as USCIRF’s report and statements from the president and vice president demonstrate, reopening Halki is viewed as a step to securing minority groups’ trust, which can only lead to a stronger, healthier state. It’d send a clear message that the Turkish government is committed to working with, not against, minority groups.
     “The right to decide who the Patriarch is, is not the business of any State to determine….The right to reopen Halki Seminary is basic. And the protection of the holy places and the heritage sites in Turkey is absolutely necessary. It is basic. It is the essence of religious freedom,” said Biden earlier in July at the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America’s 42nd Biennial Clergy-Laity Congress in Philadelphia.
     “And as my friends in the community know, I’ve had that direct discussion with Prime Minister Erdogan, whom I know well…. I’ve been direct; and I believe, I believe that there’s some reason for optimism. That’s one of the reasons I went from championing the cause in the Senate to championing the cause as Vice President – telling anyone who would listen that it’s long past time to realize the long sought-after goal of reopening Halki Seminary.”
Biden’s statement echoes one made by President Obama five years ago on Turkey’s need to commit to a forward-thinking democracy.
     “Freedom of religion and expression lead to a strong and vibrant civil society that only strengthens the state, which is why steps like reopening the Halki Seminary will send such an important signal inside Turkey and beyond,” emphasized the president. 
For Turkey, now would be a good time to send that important signal.

From cracking down on social media sites to corruption scandals, the past year has raised serious question about the health of Turkish democracy. Erdogan should take any opportunity he can get to reassure Turkish citizens, the EU, and the U.S. that he’s committed to real reform, not just hollow gestures. Perhaps living up to one decades-old promise would be an easy way to start.

American Hellenic Institute - Facebook


July 30, 2014

,

Roum & Aramean communities Rally in the Holy Land

This past Sunday, members of the Greek Orthodox and Aramean communities staged a peaceful protest in Haifa, in order to express their outrage at the continued persecution of their brethren throughout the Middle East. Participates gathered with signs and flags, and called for a peaceful resolution to the war in Gaza, as well as for an end to the on-going Genocide of Christians in Syria and Iraq.

Demonstrators expressed their dissatisfaction with the West for remaining silent while Christians are being raped and murdered in Iraq and Syria. Calling on the International Community to stand up, and protect the indigenous ethno-religious minorities of the Middle East. They also asked western countries to defend the indigenous Assyrian community of Mosul, who have recently been forced to flee their homes, in hopes of escaping the wrath of ISIS.

The protest was held, in solidarity, with the worldwide call of action by the Assyrian Diaspora. We Demand Action is a Global initiative to support the protection of the Assyrians (including Syriacs/Chaldeans) and other minorities in Iraq and Syria. To learn more about #WeDemandAction or to find a rally in your area, please follow them on Facebook: www.facebook.com/DemandforAction or on Twitter: twitter.com/demandforaction

For more photos and to stay up-to-date with Operation Antioch visit us on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/operationantioch

Stay up-to-date with Operation Antioch Scandinavia by visiting our Facebook page at
https://www.facebook.com/operationantiok

For more information on what is happening to the ethnic Greeks of Syria and what you can do,
Visit our blog at http://operationantioch.blogspot.com

Learn more about the organizers of Operation Antioch
http://daimonesofhellenism.blogspot.com



July 18, 2014

,

Ukranian Priests Mirdered For Helping Self-Defense Forces

The mutilated bodies of two priests from Slavyansk and of two sons of one of them were found, confirmed the adviser of the Minister of Internal Affairs of Ukraine Anton Gerashchenko.
     "We found a grave of two priests from Slavyansk, who were tortured and killed by the Ukranian nationalists. The whole country and the whole world will know about the terrible atrocities that terrorists conducted. You will learn about it from concrete evidence," said Gerashchenko.
He said that the priests were killed for helping self-defense forces. According to him, the bodies of two sons of one of the priests were found in the grave as well. On July 8 the Ukrainian Orthodox Church announced that a priest of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church was kidnapped in Donetsk, Kiev Patriarchate Archpriest Yuri Ivanov.

In late May, an Orthodox priest Vladimir Maretsky who was detained by the Ukrainian military, was released and reported that he was beaten, in order for him to confess in his assistance to self-defenders.

Before that, the head of the Odessa diocese Metropolitan Agafangel confirmed the threats from the radicals.

In early April, the priest of Russian Orthodox Church Oleg Mokryak and the head of the Union of Orthodox Citizens of Ukraine Valery Kaurov were persecuted by Ukrainian Security Service, which found in their words calls for separatism.

Secretary of the Odessa diocese, Archpriest Andrei Novikov left his hometown and moved to Moscow after "the same investigator, who recently came for Archpriest Oleg Mokryak with Ukrainian Security Service, called him."
     "I'm sure if this government keeps its position, it will handle the physical liquidation of the Moscow Patriarchate in Ukraine," said Novikov to the newspaper Vzgliad.

Voice of Russia

June 26, 2014

,

Religion & spirituality influence health in different but complementary ways

Religion and spirituality have distinct but complementary influences on health, new research from Oregon State University indicates.
     "Religion helps regulate behavior and health habits, while spirituality regulates your emotions, how you feel," said Carolyn Aldwin, a gerontology professor in the College of Public Health and Human Sciences at OSU.
Aldwin and colleagues have been working to understand and distinguish the beneficial connections between health, religion and spirituality. The result is a new theoretical model that defines two distinct pathways.

Religiousness, including formal religious affiliation and service attendance, is associated with better health habits, such as lower smoking rates and reduced alcohol consumption. Spirituality, including meditation and private prayer, helps regulate emotions, which aids physiological effects such as blood pressure.

The findings were published recently in the journal Psychology of Religion and Spirituality. Co-authors were Crystal L. Park of the University of Connecticut, and Yu-Jin Jeong and Ritwik Nath of OSU. The research was supported by a grant from the John Templeton Foundation.
     "No one has ever reviewed all of the different models of how religion affects health," said Aldwin, the Jo Anne Leonard endowed director of OSU's Center for Healthy Aging Research. "We're trying to impose a structure on a very messy field."
There can be some overlap of the influences of religion and spirituality on health, Aldwin said. More research is needed to test the theory and examine contrasts between the two pathways. The goal is to help researchers develop better measures for analyzing the connections between religion, spirituality and health and then explore possible clinical interventions, she said.


June 23, 2014

,

SHOCK - Welcome To The New World Order - The 1st Church-Mosque-Synagogue To Be Built in Germany!

Berlin thinks it is making religious history as Muslims, Jews and Christians join hands to build a place where they can all worship. The House of One, as it is being called, will be a synagogue, a church and a mosque under one roof.

An architecture competition has been held and the winner chosen.

The striking design is for a brick building with a tall, square central tower. Off the courtyard below will be the houses of worship for the three faiths - the synagogue, the church and the mosque. It is to occupy a prominent site - Petriplatz - in the heart of Berlin.

The location is highly significant, according to one of the three religious leaders involved, Rabbi Tovia Ben Chorin. "From my Jewish point of view the city where Jewish suffering was planned is now the city where a centre is being built by the three monotheistic religions which shaped European culture," he told the BBC.

Can they get on? "We can. That there are people within each group who can't is our problem but you have to start somewhere and that's what we are doing."

The imam involved, Kadir Sanci, sees the House of One as "a sign, a signal to the world that the great majority of Muslims are peaceful and not violent". It's also, he says, a place where different cultures can learn from each other.

Each of the three areas in the House will be the same size, but of a different shape, architect Wilfried Kuehn points out.

Each faith will keep its distinctive ways within its own areas, Pastor Hohberg says.



Source OCC247


June 13, 2014

, ,

Turks Visit Mount Athos & Describe Experiences To Turkish Press

Two Turkish professionals recently visited the "Garden of the Virgin" monastery on Mount Athos and related their experiences to the Turkish press.

In an article in the Turkish Hürriyet -which was published on June 8th, 2014- publicist Ertugrul Ozkok along with architect Ali Esad Göksel, who both visited -and lived- at Mont Athos for a period of three days after receiving an authorization from the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew himself said that:
     "Like most Turks, I first heard about Mount Athos in the work "Aynaroz Kadısı" of Musahipzade Celal. After I discovered it, I read enough and wanted time to go. Eventually I went with the help and the permission of the Patriarch.
     "After Mecca, Yemen, Vatican and Bhutan, we are now at Mount Athos... at the "Garden of the Virgin"... Just after the boat carrying me and the architect Ali Esad Göksel turned, we saw the beautiful building on the hill. We have at hand the admission that was given to us by the Patriarchate of Fener (This is how Turks refer to our Patriarchate for propaganda purposes).
     "I also take my headphones from my bag and put music that I had arranged beforehand, Anna Netrebko singing 'Pie Jesu'. I feel happy that I did something that I dreamed for years, isolation on Mount Athos...
     "I face the Dionysiou monastery; one of the most beautiful churches in this region in Greece called Mount Athos. We will live in this monastery for 3 days and 3 nights. From the moment you set foot on the land, you lose all contact with the world.
     "The boat leaves us and goes in two minutes. Waiting with our luggage, we don't see anyone greeting us. The monastery is at the end of a steep and long road. We had to start walking. Climbing with our heavy suitcases, within the first 10 meters we understood what ascetic life is. At that exact moment a voice saved us. Up there on balconies someone shouts: "Wait we are coming"
     "A little later we find before us a 4x4 van. Favored we finish with the passions of monasticism, at least until we get to the monastery. Inside two priests in black robes are sitting. One says "Welcome" in Turkish, so we met Father Gabriel who for three days will guide us and help us in everything... The vehicle climbs the steep hill and stops somewhere that looks like a castle gate, we get our luggage and we enter. The landscape reminds us of the series Game of Thrones. In the middle of the courtyard there is a church with walls painted in burgundy and white. We go next door and climb the stairs. Before we go to the room that we stay, we enter a parlor. They offer raki and lukumi. Our first impression: They aren't scary people like we were taught by young, those priests with the black beards. Instead, all of them treat us very friendly. Indeed, we feel that they were keen for this reason that we are Turks.
The first menu of the monks: Potatoes with eggs
     "Because we arrived a little late to the monastery, we couldn't watch the evening service. They prepared food and we eat within the menu of the monks, potatoes with eggs, olives, bread, tomato and an orange.
     "On 6 and half in the evening everything stops, so we go up to the room. Father Gabriel closes slowly the inner courtyard of the monastery and the heavy door separating our room from the outside space. The courtyard is at once immersed in silence.... Life ends early evening but starts very early in the morning. You wake up at 03.00 for the morning service".

Source Hürriyet

,

OPINION - The Relationship of Hellenistic Thought & Greek Orthodox Fathers

This opinion piece originally appeared in The Patristic and Byzantine Review, 1990, IX, 2&3. HellasFrappe found it very fascinating and decided to republish it. We want to point out that HellasFrappe does not agree or disagree about the arguments that are presented in this article, we just want our readers to enjoy a great analysis about a subject that is sometimes deemed as taboo by many of our fellow Hellenes. It is also a great piece which explains -more or less- why Hellenes of the Orthodox faith are sometimes misread or misunderstood by Hellenes of the Ancient Greek religion. Read it with an open mind, and as always all opinions are welcomed... good and bad. Enjoy!

by Father Gregory Telepneff and Bishop Chrysostomos - The relationship between Hellenistic thought and the theology of the Greek Fathers is one which is frequently misunderstood by Western theologians, not only because they look rather superficially at classical Greek philosophy itself, but also because they often overlook the clear process of development, during the first few centuries of Christianity, that led to a remarkable unity of thought in the Greek Patristic understanding of the cosmos and man. Thus it is that various theologians and Church historians hold forth with pompous and sweeping, if naive and sometimes unctuous, pronouncements against the "Platonic" or "Aristotelian" foundations of this or that Eastern Patristic notion. Indeed, even many an ingenuous scholar has eulogized the Greek Fathers with tales of their woeful fall to the traps of Hellenistic paganism.

One cannot deny, of course, the existence of certain affinities between the corpus of Patristic writings, both Eastern and Western, and Hellenism. Nor would we wish to disclaim certain general intuitions, as it were, held in common in these respective systems of thought. But the Greek Fathers, in "borrowing" language, images, and ideas from the Greek philosophers, maintained, in this process, views that are wholly at odds with the cosmology and anthropology of the Greek ancients. One might even say that their debt to Hellenistic thought is not so much that of a student to his mentor as that of a sculptor to his stone.

The Greek Fathers built with the basic materials of Greek philosophy, but what they produced was different in form and in intent from that philosophy. The very vision of what it was they were to form from the stone of the Greek ancients, in fact, flowed from a view of man and the universe that the Greek classical philosophers would have considered "revolutionary."

The Greek Fathers believed and taught that God had acted through Israel and the Jewish people to prepare the human mind and heart for the coming of Christ. They also felt that the "fullness of time" rested in the Hellenes. Providence had appointed the Greeks, too, if not the Roman Empire itself, as a vehicle for the spread of the Faith.

One would perhaps not wish to call this appointment a "covenant;" but certainly it was not, for the Greek Fathers, adventitious. There were, according to the Fathers, hints of Christian truth in Hellenism, and some of its ideas could be employed in the promulgation of the Christian Faith. Thus, the Fathers were eclectic—and not, as many suppose, syncretic—in their incorporation of Hellenism into the process of Christian theologizing. St. Justin the Martyr, for example, though he characterizes Plato as a "Christian before Christ," emphasizes that many Platonic ideas about the soul and the world are incompatible with Christian teachings.

St. Gregory the Theologian suggested that, though Hellenistic language was useful to the Christian theologian, it had to be "baptized" and "transformed" to convey adequately the Christian experience. The "old skins" could not completely hold the "new wine." For the Greek Fathers, the final criterion in any decision to use the "tool" of Greek philosophy in teaching Christian truth was whether or not it conformed to Christian spiritual experience, the life and experience of the Faith. Hellenistic wisdom was never thought to be adequate in and of itself. St. Gregory of Nyssa summarizes what we have said, when he writes that:
    ...pagan philosophy says that the soul is immortal. This is a pious offspring. But it also says that souls pass from body to body and are changed from an irrational to an irrational nature. This is a fleshly and alien foreskin. And there are many other such examples....It acknowledges [God] as creator, but says He needed matter for creation. It affirms that He is both good and powerful, but that in all things He submits to the necessity of fate. [1]
Ultimately, for Gregory of Nyssa Greek philosophy was as if "always in labor but never giving birth." [2]

I. P. Sheldon-Williams, in his general investigation of the relations between Christian and Hellenistic thought, [3] very much supports what we have said about Hellenism and the Greek Patristic tradition. He identifies, in particular, three Hellenistic ideas about the cosmos and the person which are at odds with early Christian (essentially Greek Patristic) thought: the eternity of the cosmos, the inherently divine nature of the human soul, and the dualistic belief that the soul is a substance distinct from the body and, therefore, ultimately destined to a disembodied existence.

The most compelling support for Sheldon-Williams' insights is the fact that the three major areas of divergence between Christian and Hellenic thought which he identifies mirror, and quite closely so, those very principles of Christian doctrine which Synesios of Cyrene, Christian bishop of Ptolemais [ca. 410] and a former Platonic philosopher, had such difficulty accepting before his conversion. In his "105th Letter," Synesios cites what were initially for him problematic areas of Christian thought: the denial of the eternity of the world; the denial of the pre-existence of souls (a corollary to the doctrine of the soul's syngeneia or inherent co-naturality with the Divine); and the doctrine of the resurrection of the body. To be sure, his confession confirms, as Sheldon-Williams also contends with us, that the Hellenic world and the spiritual milieu of the Greek Fathers, at very least with regard to the foregoing important issues, were anything but a marriage of like Weltanschauungen and similar cosmologies and anthropologies.

The classical Greek doctrine of the eternity of the cosmos stands in total contradiction to the Christian belief that God created the world ex nihilo, and thus the nature of the universe is wholly different for the Hellenistic thinker and the Greek Father. The primary ontological categories in Hellenistic thought, the intelligible and the sensible realms ("God" at the height of the intelligible), are foreign to Patristic thought. The Church Fathers divide reality into Uncreated (God) and Created realms, distinctions between the intelligible and noetic and the sensible and material belonging to the created realm. [4] The dualistic ontology of the Hellenistic philosophers constitutes a metaphysics which is not only at odds with that of Christian ontology, but which, more specifically, cannot accommodate the Christian notion of redemption. The structure of Hellenistic ontology renders the Christian doctrine of redemption meaningless, [5] since the Christian ontology of the Greek Fathers is decidedly theocentric and rests on the restoration of creation to its Creator. This ontology is incompatible with an ontology focused on essentially intellectual elements.

Thus, because they believed in its essential immortality and incorruption, the pivotal Christian doctrine of an incarnational scheme to redeem the soul from sin and ontological corruption is wholly absent from the thought of the ancient Greek philosophers. [6]

According to Hellenistic philosophy, the soul is enlightened by gnosis, which reminds it of and recalls it to its extant, but obscured original, pristine state. The soul is not in need of the ontological renewal or transfiguration afforded by the Incarnation of God; nor is it necessary for one to overcome "sin." In the mind of the ancients, God and the "novus homo," if the latter term even obtains in the Hellenistic tradition, were to be reached and attained through gnosis and intellectual contemplation; while, in Christian teaching, God in essence is never available to the intellect and spiritual revelation transcends the capacities of human knowledge as such. [7]

The Christian doctrine of enlightenment and the restoration of the soul also centers on divine Grace. Since the soul is not inherently immortal or divine, the human person must "acquire" something above and beyond human nature, in order achieve salvation, enlightenment, the restoration of the soul, and communion with God. Moreover, the soul, according to the Greek Patristic view, cannot acquire this "something" (knowledge or vision, if you will) by its own power. Instead, it must rely on a Divine act, the Grace of divine revelation and the Grace of the Incarnation, by which potential perfection is offered to mankind in the ontological restoration of the human soul. Indeed, the difference between the Hellenistic (and especially Platonic) vision of human enlightenment and that of the Greek Fathers centers on two radically different views of God and the world, on a "Metaphysics of Intellect" and a "Metaphysics of Grace." [8]

Hellenistic somatology, finally, conceives of the body as an illusion which binds and frustrates the actions of the divine soul—a "prison," in Platonic parlance, holding man captive. Though uncareful observers often attribute such Hellenistic beliefs to the Greek Fathers, these beliefs in fact stand, as Sheldon-Williams rightly contends, in sharp and total contrast to Christian somatology and its doctrine of the "rehabilitation" of the body. [9] A fundamental element of Christian teaching is that the the body will be resurrected with the soul at the Parousia, and no small part of Greek Patristic writings is devoted to the explication and defense of this dogma. By the same token, since the "lower" psychic [10] and sensible faculties of the body participate in the its general restoration, it is not only the body, but physical perception and the senses that are transformed in the spiritual life and fully regenerated at the General Resurrection. Christian theosis, or divinization, is fulfilled in the Resurrection, when the wholeness of the body and soul are restored. This Patristic teaching could not be more greatly removed from the Hellenistic idea of enlightenment and the escape of the human soul from the chains of the body.

The late Protopresbyter Georges Florovsky has also dealt extensively in his writings with the relationship between Patristic thought and Hellenism. [11] He emphasizes especially the transformation which Hellenistic thought underwent as it was incorporated into the thought of the Greek Fathers. In one characteristic passage, he writes that:
    Usually we do not sufficiently perceive the entire significance of this transformation which Christianity introduced into the realm of [Hellenistic] thought... It is sufficient to point out just a few examples: the idea of the createdness of the world, not only in its transitory and perishable aspect but also in its primordial principles. For Greek thought the idea of "created ideas" was impossible and offensive. And bound up with this was the Christian intuition of history as a unique—once-occurring—creative fulfillment, the sense of movement from an actual "beginning" up to a final "end," a feeling for history which in no way at all allows itself to be linked with the static pathos of ancient Greek thought. And the understanding of man as person, the concept of personality, was entirely inaccessible to Hellenism, which considered only the prosopon or mask as person. And finally there is the message of Resurrection in glorified but real flesh, a thought which could only frighten the Greeks, who lived in the hope of future dematerialization of the spirit....These are the presuppositions and categories of a new Christian philosophy....[12]
One of the most important differences between Hellenistic pholosophy and Greek Patristic thought cited by Father Florovsky is their divergent concept of time and history. This subject deserves our special attention, since it helps to focus the more general distinctions in cosmology and anthropology noted by Sheldon-Williams. Father Florovsky says specifically of time and history:
    Greek philosophy was dominated by the ideas of permanence and recurrence. There could be but a disclosure [i.e., in history] of the pre-existing fulness. [Even] Aristotle made this point with a complete frankness: 'What is "of necessity" coincides with what is "always," since that which "must not" cannot possibly "not-be." ...If, therefore, the "coming-to-be" of a thing is necessary, its "coming-to-be" is eternal. ...It follows that the "coming-to-be" of anything, if it is absolutely necessary, must be cyclical, i.e., must return upon itself....It is in circular movement, therefore, and in cyclical "coming-to-be," that the "absolutely necessary" is to be found' (de gen. et corr., II.2, 338a).[13]
Florovsky concludes that: "Greek philosophy was always concerned rather with the 'first principles' than with the 'last things'.... [In the Greek conception], no increase in 'being' is conceivable.... The true reality is always 'behind' ["from eternity"], never 'ahead.'" [14]

As Father Florovsky's clear statements aver, Christian thought and Hellenism part ways with regard to the eschatological and historical nature of human experience and the cosmos. Even for Aristotle, who moved away from some of the accepted categories of earlier Hellenistic thought, history was still not history as such, but a disclosure of a pre-existing fullness. His entelecheia, or teleology, while linear in form, is still rooted in the notion of fixed, eternal, and pre-existing forms. Teleological development is simply a "disclosure" in individual development of an end. History, whether personal or universal, therefore, never leads to the creation and development of new and unique forms or modes of existence; it is not directive in its nature. Aristotelian and Hellenistic thought in general could not tolerate the idea that a thing could become more perfect in kind by acquiring some characteristic which was not implicit in its nature from the beginning. [15] The eternal cosmos, in its essential principles or logoi, exists from the very inception, or arche, of existence in a state of full perfection. Any sense of "regaining" one's lost original nature (as in the Neo-Platonic epistrophe) is, therefore, still always an historically "unproductive" act. One simply returns to the primordial state, and both personal and universal history have only a provisionary significance; history adds nothing to the essence of a being.

In the Greek Patristic scheme of things, history is significant, since it records a productive sequence of events both in the personal and universal sense. It is a productive unfolding in time and space of something creative: a move toward the eschaton and the restoration of the fallen universe —a restoration which embodies perfection and which moves the creation from glory to glory, from lost perfection to "greater perfection." If we understand this Christian notion of time and space, then we come to see the absurdity of attributions of Platonic world-views, by some Western scholars, to such renowned Greek Fathers as St. Gregory of Nyssa and St. Dionysios the Areopagite. The Greek Fathers speak of movement into eternity in a manner which gives meaning to historical existence, since the virtues, spiritual character, and "perfection" are "acquired" in embodied existence and in time and space. Indeed the very flesh indissolubly linked to the human soul during the course of embodied existence is "translated" into eternity and participates in divinity. It is not shed but transformed. Though not everything in temporal empirical existence is so transformed—but only that which has a referent in the divine and eternal realm—, there is obviously a very fundamental divergence between the Greek Patristic understanding of the importance of historical existence and that of the Greek ancients.

Let us here emphasize that the Christian idea of "productive" free-will is a direct outgrowth of the emphasis which the Greek Fathers place on the entry of historical, empirical bodies into eternity. By exercising choice, the human being accomplishes a spiritual task within history. Though this task is ultimately perfected in the eschaton, it is actualized by free action in time and space. The ancient Greek view of the cosmos is a-productive, as it were. For the Hellenistic philosophers, though the universe is in motion, this motion is inefficacious, since it effects no alteration in the essences or ideas of things. [16] Empirical "reality" is defined only with reference to these essences of things and constitutes what is essentially a "closed" ontology. Their ontological scheme is inconsistent with the dynamic Patristic idea that creatures are not only created out of nothing, but that they are also created in a state of relative spiritual immaturity. History describes the process of attaining to perfection: a productive passing of time in which the human will and person have critical meaning.

Father Florovsky has also placed great emphasis in his writings on another essential area of concern which highlights the differences between the Hellenistic philosophers and the Greek Fathers: human personhood. [17] Here, especially, we see that Hellenistic philosophical terms and categories are radically transformed in their Patristic usage. In fact, the Greek Patristic concept of personality is a uniquely Christian contribution to the history of thought. As Florovsky notes, in their understanding of the relationship between the human soul and the body, the Greek Fathers were actually closer to Aristotle than to Plato. [18] Prima facie, this appears strange, since, strictly speaking, Aristotelian anthropology and cosmology make no claims for life after death: nothing human passes beyond the grave, and man's singular being does not survive death. Nonetheless, Father Florovsky argues that Aristotle understood the unity of human existence, of the body and soul, at an intuitive level. Aristotle understood better than any of the Greek philosophers the empirical wholeness of human existence, and thus empirical existence and the human personality took on an importance for him that could not be detached from the eternal elements of the soul. And so he discounted the idea of a transmigration of souls to other bodies, in that he could not free himself from a compelling respect for the unity of these two elements of the human person. He never came to attribute permanence or an immortal dimension to the person, but the foundations for such an attribution are everywhere to be found in his thought.

The Greek Fathers, according to Florovsky, drew on Aristotle's notion of the mortal unity of body and soul and effected a synthesis, of sorts, from this and the impersonal [19] and eternal Platonic nous of Plato. [20] The Patristic witness affirms the integrity and eternal dimension of empirical, embodied, and uniquely individual human existence and, at the same time, pays homage to the noetic qualities of existence that Plato reserved only for the soul. There is a direct continuity of the person from the mundane to the spiritual realm, not only by virtue of the resurrection of the body, but because individual personality, formed and shaped in time and space, survives in its uniqueness outside time and space. In essence, this Patristic synthesis is a rejection of body-soul dualism, since the life of the material body and its sensible faculties acquire an ultimate significance, or at least possess a referent in the eternal or divine realm. In their transformation of Platonic and Aristotelian precepts, the Greek Fathers were able to convey with loyalty the unique Christian idea of the person, without indeed tainting that teaching with the foibles of Hellenistic dualism.

Professor [now Metropolitan] John Zizioulas, following Father Florovsky's observations about the synthesis of Platonic and Aristotelian concepts by which the Greek Fathers formulated a Christian statement of personhood, makes some interesting comments about the implications of this synthesis for a Christian ontology. His arguments also provide an opportunity to see the crucial differences which separate Greek Patristic and Hellenistic thought at the most fundamental of levels. Zizioulas observes that Aristotle's notion of man as a psychosomatic entity void of an eternal or permanent quality renders impossible the conceptual union of the "person" [prosopon] with the "substance" [ousia] of man. Thus Aristotelian man has no true ontology. For Plato, the soul can be united with another physical body; through reincarnation, it can assume another "individuality" and thus ensure a kind of human, but not unique, personal continuity. Greek philosophical thought, then, is unable to endow human individuality with unique permanence and, therefore, with a true ontology of the person. This is partly because, for the Hellenistic sages, being, in the final analysis, is an eternally existing unity (in spite of the multiplicity of existent things), [21] and every differentiation within the course of embodied human existence is nothing more than a falling away from the unity of true being. [22] Individual human personhood compromises ontological unity. Hellenistic notions of the universe lead to a kind of "ontological monism," [23] from which not even God—merely the first of the hierarchy of intelligible beings—can escape. Moreover, Zizioulas notes, from the standpoint of Hellenistic ontology, humans are never free to add or contribute anything significant to "being" or existence. True being, in its essential sense, exists already from the arche of existence. In the words of Plutarch, "no particular thing, not even the least, can be otherwise than according to common nature and reason [logos]." [24] For the Greeks, Zizioulas concludes, existence is therefore determined by a pre-existing necessity.

It is also important to note that the term prosopon, or "person," originally denoted in Greek theatre the mask worn by an actor as he played various roles. In Hellenistic philosophy the term continued to convey the idea of a temporary "role" assumed or played by an individual in his temporal life. It is not used to describe the true "hypostasis" of an individual and ultimately remains without ontological content. [25]

To the classical Greeks, Zizioulas contends, personhood was no more than an adjunct to concrete ontological being. [26] Of course the Greek ancients had intuitions about individual personality; [27] this one cannot deny. The point is that these intuitions were never so strong as to prompt the Hellenistic philosophers to find in temporal existence real significance—anything beyond the temporary and illusory world of the "mask"—and again, therefore, to find in the individual personality traits suggestive of a genuine ontology. [28]

In Patristic thought, personhood has ontological authenticity because in synergy, in conjunction with the will of God, the human is responsible for his or her own destiny. The soul is not inherently immortal, but only so with regard to its syngeneia with the Divine realm. The soul possesses divinity "thetically", that is, in a thetic participation—a participation by free will—in God. God has of course given eternal life to humankind as an act of His own will and energies. But there is also a higher level of existence, in which the person comes to virtuous well-being and full communion with God. It is this level of participation that the creature must acquire within the course of embodied historical existence and by an exercise of the will. Thus a personal encounter with God in temporal existence, in an historical context, and in an "existential" way, one might say, brings the human person (and, as we have noted above, both peronal and universal history) into the eternal realm, endowing him, in this synergistic interaction, with its energetic character—a character inaccessible to the human person in Hellenistic thought. [29]

In the Greek Fathers, the historical existence of the person—the individual human person as a psychosomatic whole of complementary elements of soul and body—is linked to the eternal human essence, the individual logos, or genuine identity. Human empirical existence is given an ontological foundation in the Patristic identification of hypostasis with prosopon and with its translation or movement into eternal existence. Even the very course of the productive acquisition of virtue by which the personality attains to genuine ontology is, for in the Greek Fathers, a participation [metousia], or "sharing," in divine existence and therefore possesses an eternal dimension itself. Certainly our discussion, along many dimensions, of man and the cosmos in Hellenistic and Greek Patristic thought leaves little doubt that the Greek Fathers cannot be accused by any justifiable criterion of contamination by the dualism and cosmological and anthropological limitations which rendered history, the body, human existence, and temporal experience ontologically insignificant for the Greek ancients. Rather, a careful and objective examination of the larger paradigms and presuppositions which underlie these two approaches to reality, as it were, reveals that the Greek Fathers—if we may express this without pejorative implication—" contaminated" Hellenistic philosophy by borrowing its insights into ontological truth, its terminology, and to some extent its philosophical methodology and adopting them to the revelations of Christians truth—"baptizing" them and transforming them. Only the most superficial or polemical observer, even from such a cursory treatment as our present one, can truly argue that the Greek Fathers were anything but seekers after old bottles for new wine, readily and acutely conscious that, lest the new wine be spoiled in these old vessels, they had to cleanse and purify them of their former content. Such is a proper image of the Greek Fathers as they undertook to use, transform, and remold Hellenistic thought.

Endnotes

  • 1. "Life of St. Moses," II.40. In Classics of Western Spirituality. Paulist Press, 1978.
  • 2. Ibid., II.11.
  • 3. See his chapters in the Cambridge History of Later Greek and Early Medieval Philosophy, ed. A. H. Armstrong. Cambridge University Press, 1967. Pp. 426ff.
  • 4. Ibid, p. 426.
  • 5. Ibid.
  • 6. Father John Romanides very persuasively argues that the idea of salvation from sin and ontological corruption is a fundamentally Biblical concept in his essay, "Original Sin According to St. Paul," St. Vladimir's Quarterly, IV (1&2), pp. 5-28. For those who wish to pursue the issue of restored human ontology, see Constantine Tsirpanlis, "Aspects of Maximian Theology of Politics, History, and the Kingdom of God," The Patristic and Byzantine Review, 1 (1982).
  • 7. L. Bouyer, review of The Origins of the Christian Mystical Tradition (A. Louth), Sobornost, IV (1), pp. 70-74.
  • 8. Sheldon-Williams, Cambridge History, p. 427. One might argue that later Hellenistic philosophers, such as Plotinus, come closer to a Christian mestaphysics. Despite such contentions, even later Hellenistic thought ultimately purports that it is the "purified mind," reduced to a state of pure simpliccity, which "reaches" God. A Christian concept of effective Grace is wholly absent from such a scheme. See in this regard H. Drrie, "Was ist 'spätantiker Platonismus'? berlegungen zur Grenzziehung zwischen Platonismus und Christentum," Theologische Rundschau, N.F. 36, esp. pp. 293, 301ff.
  • 9. Ibid., p. 426.
  • 10. The Patristic thymos and epithymia and the Hellenistic nous and logistikon.
  • 11. See his Collected Works (Nordland; Bchervertriebsanstalt, 1972-), "Creation and Creaturehood," "Redemption," "The 'Immortality' of the Soul," and "The Last Things and the Last Events," chaps. in Vol. III; "The Patristic Age and Eschatology," chap. in Vol. IV.
  • 12. Ibid., Vol. VIII, p. 32.
  • 13. Ibid., Vol. IV, pp. 68-69.
  • 14. Ibid.
  • 15. Cf. E.S. Mascall, The Openness of Being. N.p., 1971. P. 246.
  • 16. Cf. J. D. Zizioulas, Being As Communion. St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1985. Pp. 71f.
  • 17. In particular, see his chapter, "The Patristic Age and Eschatology," Collected Works, IV, pp. 63-78.
  • 18. Ibid., p. 75.
  • 19. The doctrine of merempsychosis denies the personal continuity of the soul in Platonism.
  • 20. Florovsky, Collected Works, IV, p. 77.
  • 21. Zizioulas, Being, p. 29.
  • 22. Plotinus tries to solve this dilemma by offering positive "reasons" for this falling away, but he ultimately attributes only a derived "goodness" to these "reasons," which fall short of the ideal "good."
  • 23. Zizioulas, Being, p. 29.
  • 24. Ibid., pp. 32f. Interestingly enough, Professor Zizioulas believes that Plutarch linked the logos with nature and fate, another element in Hellenistic ontology that the Greek Fathers would have rejected prima facie.
  • 25. Ibid., pp. 31-33.
  • 26. Ibid., p. 34.
  • 27. Cf. G.C. Stead, "Individual Personality in Origen and the Cappodocian Fathers." In Origeniana: Premier Colloque International des tudes Origniennes, eds. H. Crouzel et al. Bari, 1975. See esp. his remarks on Proclus.
  • 28. Zizioulas, Being, p. 35.
  • 29. Ibid., p. 39.



June 5, 2014

,

Earliest Images of Jesus’ Unearthed in Egyptian Tomb

A team of Catalan archaeologists believes it has unearthed one of the earliest images of Jesus Christ buried deep in an ancient Egyptian tomb.

Experts at the University of Barcelona discovered an underground structure in the ancient Egyptian city of Oxyrhynchu which may have acted as a resting place for a number of priests.

More than 45 tonnes of rock had to be moved in order to access the hidden room. Another unidentified structure found nearby during this process is currently being investigated.

Once inside, the team found five or six coats of paint on the walls, the last of which was from the Coptic period of the first Christians.

The underground structure was also reportedly decorated with Coptic images and may contain one of the earliest-known representations of Jesus Christ, The Local has reported.

Dr Josep Padró, the Emeritus Professor at the University of Barcelona who led the expedition, described the find as “exceptional”.

He told the La Vanguardia newspaper that the figure is that of “a young man with curly hair, dressed in a short tunic and with his hand raised as if giving a blessing”.
“We could be dealing with a very early image of Jesus Christ,” he added.

May 29, 2014

, ,

TRIBUTE - May 29, 1453: Remembering the Fall of Constantinople (VIDEOS)

Today HellasFrappe remembers one of the seminal events in history, the Fall of Constantinople on May 29th, 1453. Constantinople, which in modern times is known as Istanbul, was arguably the center of medieval Christian civilization. It was the largest and richest urban center in the Eastern Mediterranean Sea during the late Eastern Roman Empire, (mostly as a result of its strategic position commanding the trade routes between the Aegean Sea and the Black Sea) and contained the most beautiful churches in the world. It was also the center for the longest-lived empire in history: The Byzantine Empire.

It remained the capital of the eastern, Greek speaking empire for over a thousand years and it was the richest and largest European city, exerting a powerful cultural pull and dominating economic life in the Mediterranean. Visitors and merchants were especially struck by the beautiful monasteries and churches of the city, particularly Agia Sophia, or the Church of Holy Wisdom.

This city was especially important for preserving manuscripts of Greek and Latin authors throughout a period when instability and disorder caused their mass destruction in Western Europe and North Africa. The influence of the city on the west, over the many centuries of its existence, is incalculable. In terms of technology, art and culture, as well as sheer size, Constantinople was without parallel anywhere in Europe for a thousand years.

On the day after Orthodox Easter in 1453, the Ottoman siege began.

The horror of the fall of the City is best described by the following two citations. The first is an eyewitness account from George Sphrantzes, a close friend of the Emperor Constantine and one of his ministers.
    “As soon as the Turks were inside the City, they began to seize and enslave every person who came their way, all those who tried to offer resistance were put to the sword. In many places the ground could not be seen, as it was covered by heaps of corpses. There were unprecedented events: all sorts of lamentations, countless rows of slaves consisting of noble ladies, virgins, and nuns, who were being dragged by the Turks by their headgear, hair, and braids out of the shelter of Churches, to the accompaniment of mourning. There was the crying of children, the looting of our sacred and holy buildings. What horror can such sounds cause! The Turks did not hesitate to trample over the body and blood of Christ poured all over the ground and were passing his precious vessels from hand to hand;
    “Christ our Lord, how inscrutable and incomprehensible your wise judgements! Our greatest and holiest Church of Saint Sophia, the earthly heaven, the throne of God’s glory, the vehicle of the cherubim and second firmament, God’s creation, such edifice and monument, the joy of all earth, the beautiful and more beautiful than the beautiful, became a place of feasting; its inner sanctum was turned into a dining room; its holy altars supported food and wine, and were also employed in the enactment of their perversions with our women, virgins, and children. Who could have been so insensitive as not to wail Holy Church? - This account comes from “The Fall of the Byzantine Empire A Chronicle by George Sphrantzes 1401-1477 Translated by Marios Phillipides
The following passage pertains to the horrible fate suffered by the Grand Duke Lukas Notaras and his family. The quote comes from Franz Babinger’s Mehmed the Conqueror and his Time:
    “…the Sultan prepared a great banquet near the imperial Palace. Drunk with wine, he ordered the chief of the black eunuchs to go to the grand duke’s home and bring back his youngest son, a handsome lad of fourteen. When the order was transmitted to the boy’s father, he refused to comply, saying he would rather be beheaded than allow his son to be dishonored. With this reply, the eunuch returned to the sultan, who sent the executioner to bring him the duke and his sons. Notaras took leave of his wife and accompanied by his eldest son and his son in law Cantacuzenos, followed the executioner. The sultan ordered all three beheaded. The three heads were brought to the Sultan; the bodies remained unburied. Notaras, popularly known as the “pillar of the Rhomaioi (Romans) had once declared “Rather the Turkish Turban in the City than the Roman miteir”. His wish had been fulfilled”.
Editor's Note: Before reading HellasFrappe's tribute to the Fall of Constantinople, and/or watching the documentaries that we have posted it would be wise to remember that on this sad day for Christianity, Turkish Muslims and extremists celebrate with glamorous festivities (and what's more... there has also been discussion in Turkey on how to declare this day a national holiday.

(The following information was taken from Kritovoulos, History of Mehmed the Conqueror, trans. Charles Riggs, pp. 70 – 80. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1954)

After centuries of decline, the Byzantine Empire finally fell through a new weapon called gunpowder. At the time Islamic janissaries, who were baptized Christians converted to Islam, and they shattered the famous gates of Constantinople and brought an era of the world to an end five hundred and fifty odd years ago.

The Ottoman Turks were originally based in western Anatolia and had risen to prominence as a frontier principality on the eastern borders of the Byzantine Empire during the thirteenth and fourteenth century. By the mid-fifteenth century, the Ottoman sultanate had conquered much of Anatolia, Greece, Thrace, and the Slavic-speaking regions south of the Danube; in effect, they had replaced the Byzantine Empire as the dominant power in the Balkans and the Aegean.

The culmination of Ottoman expansion in southeastern Europe was the conquest of Constantinople on May 29th 1453, which was accomplished after a fifty-four-day siege by Sultan Mehmed II (r.1451–1481), known as “the Conqueror” following his capture of the Byzantine capital.

The conquest of Constantinople had a tremendous impact both on the Ottoman sultanate, which was transformed into an imperial state with far-reaching aspirations and claims to legitimacy, and on Christian Europe.

Most Latin Christians viewed the fall of Constantinople as a devastating blow to Christendom and as an event far more worrisome than the fall of the last Crusader stronghold of Acre in 1291. Not only did the symbolic and religious significance of the city resonate deeply with many Christians, but its capture by a strong expansionist Islamic power provoked anxiety within Europe.

Almost immediately there were renewed calls for crusades against the Ottomans. Although similar initiatives were earlier organized by the Papacy and defeated by the Turks, first at Nicopolis in 1396 and then at Varna in 1444, there was an increased sense of urgency associated with the post-1453 crusades.

Fears of the extension of Ottoman power deeper into Christian Europe were confirmed when Mehmed II besieged Belgrade (unsuccessfully) in 1456, Negroponte (successfully) in 1470, Rhodes (unsuccessfully) in 1480, and, more alarmingly, launched an assault on the Italian peninsula, capturing Otranto in 1480.

Although the Ottoman threat to Europe eventually subsided, the memories of the conquest of Constantinople remained as powerful as ever and the event itself - which terminated the last remnant of the Roman Empire as far as most Europeans were concerned - was lamented as one of the great tragedies in history.

Alternatively, there are some - notably in the Muslim world - who actually consider May 29th 1453 to be a day of celebration and victory since it marked a transformative development in the history of the Ottoman Empire.

I personally find it abhorrent that anyone would celebrate conquest - any conquest - let alone one which was carried out with such brutality.

I believe that to combat these trends of idealization and chauvinism, it is imperative to present facts about the events in question and demonstrate that while there are a whole range of emotions and reactions which once can have to the conquest of Constantinople, celebration or happiness should never be one of them. As will be seen, even Mehmed II himself lamented upon entering the city and seeing it in ruins.

The following account was written by Michael Kritovolous of Imbros (d. 1470) - a Greek Christian governor who was in the service of Mehmed II - shortly after the events described. His account is vivid, embellished, and detailed. It is modeled upon the writing styles of the ancient historians Thucydides and Josephus.

Although dedicated to the Ottoman sultan and praising many of his accomplishments, the account captures the sense of loss and devastation felt by many European Christians following the conquest of Constantinople in 1453.

As a former subject of the Byzantine Empire himself, Kritovolous represents the conquest as an important event which signified the end of the nearly 1100-year old Byzantine Empire. Overall, his account of the city’s fall reflects his contradictory feelings about the event, in that he openly admired the sultan’s military ability (which he called “in no way inferior to those of Alexander the Macedonian”), while lamenting the final disappearance of the Byzantine Empire.

The conquest of Constantinople

I have provided some excerpts of the work in order to provide ample material for all to reflect upon the events which brought about the end of the Byzantine Empire, one of the greatest civilizations in history. The excerpt I have chosen from the work (which is rather long) deals with the Ottoman entrance into the city:
     “Sultan Mehmed, who happened to be fighting quite nearby, saw that the palisade and the other part of the wall that had been destroyed were now empty of men and deserted by the defenders. He noted that men were slipping away secretly and that those who remained were fighting feebly because they were so few. Realizing from this that the defenders had fled and that the wall was deserted, he shouted out: “Friends, we have the City! We have it! They are already fleeing from us! They can’t stand it any longer! The wall is bare of defenders! It needs just a little more effort and the City is taken! Don’t weaken, but on with the work with all your might, and be men and I am with you!”
By saying this, he led them himself. And they, with a shout on the run and with a fearsome yell, went on ahead of the Sultan, pressing on up to the palisade. After a long and bitter struggle, they hurled back the Romans from there and climbed by force up the palisade. They dashed some of their foe into the ditch between the great wall and the palisade… the rest they drove back to the gate.

Death of Emperor Constantine XII Palaiologos

He had opened this gate in the great wall, so as to go easily over to the palisade. Now there was a great struggle there and great slaughter among those stationed there, for they were attacked by the heavy infantry and not a few others in irregular formation, who had been attracted from many points by the shouting. There the Emperor Constantine, with all who were with him, fell in gallant combat.

The heavy infantry was already streaming through the little gate into the City, and others had rushed through the breach in the great wall. Then all the rest of the army, with a rush and a roar, poured in brilliantly and scattered all over the City. And the Sultan stood before the great wall, where the standard also was and the ensigns, and watched the proceedings. The day was already breaking.

Great Rush, and Many Killed

Then a great slaughter occurred of those who happened to be there: some of them were on the streets, for they had already left the houses and were running toward the tumult when they fell unexpectedly on the swords of the soldiers; others were in their own homes and fell victims to the violence of the Janissaries and other soldiers, without any rhyme or reason; others were resisting, relying on their own courage; still others were fleeing to the churches and making supplication — men, women, and children, everyone, for there was no quarter given. The soldiers fell on them with anger and great wrath.

For one thing, they were actuated by the hardships of the siege. For another, some foolish people had hurled taunts and curses at them from the battlements all through the siege. Now, in general they killed so as to frighten all the City, and to terrorize and enslave all by the slaughter.

Plunder of the City

When they had had enough of murder, and the City was reduced to slavery, some of the troops turned to the mansions of the mighty, by bands and companies and divisions, for plunder and spoil. Others went to the robbing of churches, and others dispersed to the simple homes of the common people, stealing, robbing, plundering, killing, insulting, taking and enslaving men, women, and children, old and young, priests, monks—in short, every age and class.

Here, too, a Sad Tragedy

There was a further sight, terrible and pitiful beyond all tragedies: young and chaste women of noble birth and well to do, accustomed to remain at home and who had hardly ever left their own premises, and handsome and lovely maidens of splendid and renowned families, till then unsullied by male eyes  - some of these were dragged by force from their chambers and hauled off pitilessly and dishonorably.

Other women, sleeping in their beds, had to ensure nightmares. Men with swords, their hands bloodstained with murder, breathing out rage, speaking out murder indiscriminate, flushed with all the worst things - this crowd, made up of men from every race and nation, brought together by chance, like wild and ferocious beasts, leaped into the houses, driving them out mercilessly, dragging, rendering, forcing, hauling them disgracefully into public highways, insulting them and doing every evil thing.

They say that many of the maidens, even at the mere unaccustomed sight and sound of these men, were terror-stricken and came near losing their very lives. And there were also honorable old men who were dragged by their white hair, and some of them beaten unmercifully.

Well-born and beautiful young boys were carried off. There were priests who were driven along, and consecrated virgins who were honorable and wholly unsullied, devoted to God alone and living for Him to whom they had consecrated themselves ...

Tender children were snatched pitilessly from their mothers, young brides separated ruthlessly from their newly-married husbands. And ten thousand other terrible deeds were done.

Plundering and Robbing of the Churches

And the desecrating and plundering and robbing of the churches - how can one describe it in words? Some things they threw in dishonor on the ground - icons and reliquaries and other objects from the churches. The crowd snatched some of these, and some were given over to the fire while others were torn to shreds and scattered at the crossroads.

The last resting-places of the blessed men of old were opened, and their remains were taken out and disgracefully torn to pieces, even to shreds, and made the sport of the wind while others were thrown on the streets… And holy and divine books, and others mainly of profane literature and philosophy, were either given to the flames or dishonorably trampled underfoot. Many of them were sold for two or three pieces of money, and sometimes for pennies, not for gain so much as in contempt.

Holy altars were torn from their foundations and overthrown. The walls of sanctuaries and cloisters were explored, and the holy places of the shrines were dug into and overthrown in the search for gold. Many other such things they dared to do.

Those unfortunate Romans who had been assigned to other parts of the wall and were fighting there, on land and by sea, supposed that the City was still safe and had not suffered reverses, and that their women and children were free - for they had no knowledge at all of what had happened. They kept on fighting bravely, powerfully resisting the attackers and brilliantly driving off those who were trying to scale the walls. But when they saw the enemy in their rear, attacking them from inside the City, and saw women and children being led away as captives and shamefully treated, some were overwhelmed with hopelessness and threw themselves with their weapons over the wall and were killed, while others in utter despair dropped their weapons from hands already paralyzed and surrendered to the enemy without a struggle, to be treated as the enemy chose.

In the same manner [as described above], the Ottoman naval forces streamed into the City victoriously through the other gates, smashing them and throwing them down. Thus, the whole naval force, scattering through the whole City, turned to plunder, robbing everything in their way, and falling on it like a fire or a whirlwind, burning and annihilating everything, or like a torrent sweeping away and destroying all things ... Churches, holy places, old treasuries, tombs, underground galleries, cisterns and hiding places, caves and crannies were burst into. And they searched every other hidden place, dragging out into the light anybody or anything they found hidden.

Going into the largest church, that of the Holy Wisdom (Agia Sophia), they found there a great crowd of men, women, and children taking refuge and calling upon God. Those they caught as in a net, and took them all in a body and carried them captives, some to the galleys and some to the camp.

Surrender of Galata to the Sultan

Upon this, the men of Galata, seeing the City already captured and plundered, immediately surrendered en masse to the Sultan so as to suffer no ills. They opened their gates to admit Zaganos [Pasha] and his troops, and these did them no harm.

The entire army, the land and naval force, poured into the City from daybreak and even from early dawn until the evening. They robbed and plundered it, carrying all the booty into the camp and into the ships ... Thus, the whole City was emptied and deserted, despoiled and blackened as if by fire.

One might easily disbelieve that it had ever had in it a human dwelling or the wealth or properties of a city or any furnishings or ornaments of a household.  And this was true although the City had been so magnificent and grand. There were only ruined homes left, so badly ruined as to cause great fear to all who saw them. There died, of Romans and of foreigners, as was reported, in all the fighting and in the capture of the City itself, all told, men, women, and children, over four thousand, and a little more than fifty thousand were taken prisoners, including about five hundred from the whole army.

Entry of the Sultan into the City and His Grief

After this, the Sultan entered the City and looked about to see its great size, its situation, its grandeur and its beauty, its teeming population, its loveliness and the luxury of its churches and public buildings and of the private houses and community houses and those of the officials.

He also saw the setting of the harbor and of the arsenals, and how skillfully and ingeniously they had everything arranged in the City - in a word, all the construction and adornment of it.

When he saw what a large number had been killed, and the ruin of the buildings, and the wholesale ruin and destruction of the City, he was filled with compassion and repented not a little at the destruction and plundering. Tears fell from his eyes as he groaned deeply and passionately:
      “What a city we have given over to plunder and destruction!”
Kritovoulos’ Personal Lamentation for the City

With the conquest, the City’s possessions vanished, its goods summarily disappeared, and it was deprived of all things: wealth, glory, rule, splendor, honor, brilliance of population, valor, education, wisdom, religious orders, dominion - in short, of all. And in the degree in which the City had advanced in prosperity and good fortune, to a corresponding degree it was now brought down into the abyss of misfortune and misery.

While previously it had been called blessed by very many, it now heard everyone call it unfortunate and deeply afflicted. And while it had gloriously advanced to the boundaries of the civilized world, it now filled land and sea alike with its misfortunes and its ignominy, sending everywhere as examples of its misery the inhabitants - men, women, and children - who were scattered disgracefully in captivity and slavery and insult.

The City which had formerly ruled with honor and glory and wealth and great splendor over many nations was now ruled by others, amid want and disgrace and dishonor and abject and shameful slavery. While it had been an example of all good things, the picture of brilliant prosperity, it now became the image of misfortune, a reminder of sufferings, a monument of disasters, and a by-word for life.”

(Editor's Note: ..''σώπασε κυρα Δέσποινα και μην πολυδακρύζει ...,πάλι με χρόνια με καιρούς πάλι δικιά Σου θάναι'')



May 28, 2014

,

Concern For Future Of Greek Orthodox Church of America - Who Ought to be the Next Archbishop?

The following opinion piece was published on mignatiou from Mr. Efsthatios Valiotis who holds a degree in theology and is a well known business leader that lives and works in the New York Metropolitan area. Mr. Valiotis says he sees a new period of tribulations ahead for the Greek Orthodox Church in America with unpredictable consequences in store for its unity and future. This is a MUST READ!

NEW YORK – I foresee a new period of tribulations ahead for the Greek Orthodox Church in America with unpredictable consequences in store for its unity and future, if the Ecumenical Patriarchate does not show some serious decision making. I am alluding to the fact that, sooner or later, Archbishop Demetrios’ tenure will come to an end. Notwithstanding his tireless ministry, he did turn 86 this past February.

It appears as if the Phanar has already started giving initial thought to the scenarios surrounding his successor. Some people are already making haste to ensure that this day will not be too far off, as was the case with the ever-memorable Archbishop Iakovos. The Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America has no leeway left for experimentation and erroneous choices. It has come to a major crossroad in its history.

The Archbishop’s role is critical. Although now is not the time to examine the historical reasons behind this, the Church in America takes on more than just a spiritual role – it also exercises leadership over an entire ethnic group. Therefore, the question of the election/appointment of the next Archbishop of America concerns us all, regardless of whether or not we are members of a parish community, actively involved in community affairs, or indifferent to ecclesiastical affairs.

For example, there is the fact that the Archbishop represents the Greek American Community at the White House during the annual celebration of Greek Independence. At the same time, we are aware of the Church canons and traditions in choosing the head of the Church in America. We are under the Ecumenical Patriarchate’s jurisdiction, and we believe in this institution and its mission. We do not want the Church in America to break away from the Patriarchate because of disagreement. These positions are clear.

However, we ask that this time around, the Ecumenical Patriarchate – and specifically, Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew – give a great deal of consideration to the concerns and wishes of the Greek American Community, and not repeat the mistake of 1996. The election/appointment of a new Archbishop – when that time arrives – must be based on the realities, needs, and prospects of the Greek American Community.

The first question that must be answered involves the qualities that the prelate who will succeed the present-day Archbishop ought to possess. Integrity, ecclesiastical ethos, spirituality, and theological knowledge constitute the primary elements in choosing a successor, which ought to be accompanied by lengthy experience ministering to the Greek American Community. In other words, he should be a resident of the United States and come from the clergy of the Greek Orthodox Church in America. This position is clear and I believe that it expresses the wishes of the majority of Greek Americans.

The second question involves the prelate who ought to be named Archbishop Demetrios’ successor. There might be some subjectivity present here, but in order for an argument to be convincing, it must be based on the facts relative to this archbishopric, the candidates’ capabilities and personality, as well as the pastoral ministry he has exhibited up until today. In other words, the qualities that would enable him to become our leader.

I would hope that the rationale behind this article is evident – especially to those in the know. I do not want to touch on the consequences that would follow in the event that the Ecumenical Patriarchate chooses not to hearken to the thoughts and concerns that are prevalent in the Greek American Community, this time around either.

I will limit myself to quoting the well known ancient Greek axiom: “the wise man doesn’t make the same mistake twice.” As for making the same mistake a third time… well, that would prove most dangerous…



May 26, 2014

Patriarch and Pope sign common declaration in Jerusalem

The Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew and Pope Francis met on Sunday in Jerusalem in the framework of celebrating the 50th anniversary since the meeting of Athinagoras and Paul VI, when both the Orthodox and Catholic Churches lifted mutual excommunications and opened a new period of discussion.

On Sunday both religious leaders prayed together at the Church of the Holy Sepulcher and then they pledged to pursue ecumenical dialog in a common declaration. The relevant declaration calls for the protection of family, peace, the common good, the protection of the natural environment and of course religious liberty.

Patriarch Bartholomew and Pope Francis called for “communion in legitimate diversity” between both Churches and said that they "look forward in eager anticipation to the day in which we will finally partake in the Eucharist banquet”.


May 16, 2014

,

Deutsche Welle: Bartholomew on the Future of Agia Sophia & Ukraine

Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, during his latest visit to Germany a few days ago, was interviewed by Deutsche Welle. Among other things, the Patriarch spoke about Agia Sophia possibly becoming a mosque and the situation in Ukraine. Below are excerpts:
     "In Nicea and Trebizond they have become (mosques). Formerly also in Vizye of (Eastern) Thrace. Ultimately I don't believe Agia Sophia in Constantinople will become a mosque, but logic and the real interests of Turkey will prevail, which is to maintain it as a museum. I have said it publicly in my statements and in interviews. I also said it to the President of UNESCO, as Agia Sophia is under the protection of this international organization. Today Agia Sophia is a museum that is open to the world. Indeed hundreds, even thousands come to it every day. And Turkey receives a large income from selling entrance tickets. I also said about Agia Sophia in Trebizond: It will only be a mosque to Muslims; but as a museum it is for the whole world. It is not worthwhile for Turkey to tread this path and quarrel with the whole Christian world, with the entire civilized world. I said in an interview with all my courage and boldness that if Agia Sophia is to become again a place for the worship of God, it must become again a church because it was built as a Christian church, not as a mosque. And in any event, the conversion of it to a mosque would be against the will of the founder of the Turkish republic. Mustafa Kemal made it into a museum. Now if it is converted back into a mosque, it is contrary to the wishes of the founder of the Turkish republic. From every viewpoint, it is in the interest of Agia Sophia for it to remain a museum."
The Situation in Ukraine
     "The issue is purely political. I think that in Ukraine East and West collide, to say it simply. The E.U. and the U.S.A. is on one side and the Russian Federation is on the other. It is a matter of political influence. Besides prayer, we cannot do many things. Before this current crisis we had the problem of the schism in the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, a schism from which have come three factions of Orthodox churches, with one being canonical and the other two being non-canonical and unrecognized by any other church, but they do not cease to be our Orthodox brethren.
      The Ukrainians received Christianity and civilization from Constantinople through Cyril and Methodios in Moravia. Vladimir the prince, when he sent envoys to Constantinople and they investigated the Liturgy in Agia Sophia, they were so impressed that when they returned to Ukraine they told the Prince: We knew not whether we were on earth or in heaven, and that the greatest religion was Orthodoxy. Having said this, Vladimir decided to have the people baptized Orthodox. And of course, at that time there was no Russian patriarchate. Everything was done through Constantinople and by the Ecumenical Patriarchate, which until and before 300 years ago sent her bishops there.
       I want to say that I am pained for the Ukrainians because they were spiritually and ecclesiastically born and bred from the Church of Constantinople. Six years ago I visited Ukraine at the invitation of the then President Viktor Yushchenko, who honored me very much and tried to make a move for the reunification of the Orthodox, which so far has not borne fruit. But we have not abandoned the matter. It is our duty and that of the Ecumenical Patriarchate and the whole of Orthodoxy to restore unity to the Orthodox Ukrainian people."
Translated by John Sanidopoulos.

May 14, 2014

,

CHRISTIANITY - Are We What We Believe?

By Protopresbyter Fr. Themistokles Mourtzanou (Translated By John Sanidopoulos) - Christians today often feel isolated from society and the world. We believe that being a Christian is a status that is an occasion for rejection, contempt or indifference.

Christianity is now considered an ideological system, a religion, useful for society and for some people, but not an essential component of human identity. Many do not believe in the Resurrection of Christ, which is key to the faith, or even if they believe, it only has theoretical validity. It does not transform their lives, but merely gives it a past in regards to the ideological parts, and also a future, as people want to believe that after our death there is some sort of life, and maybe we will return at some point, when evil and death have ended in this reality.

When the Disciples of Christ began to preach the Gospel and the Resurrection to the Jews, the first Christians gathered in the Temple of Jerusalem to hear the teaching, but also to rejoice in the miracles that took place from the Apostles in the name of Christ. The Book of Acts at this point notes the following: "No one else dared join them, even though they were highly regarded by the people" (Acts 5:13). Of those who were in the Temple, no one dared join them, but the people greatly respected them. This sentence is a consolation for us today, because it shows the attitudes of people have not changed. Although the Jews believed in the God of the Old Testament, we would say they were religious, they understood that the faith in Christ could not go unnoticed, and though it gave another dynamic and meaning to life, they did not dare to approach and adhere to the Apostles. They were curious to hear, but did not dare join the Church. They did not dare to accept the truth, being those who crucified Christ. And though they felt within themselves that life in the world was changing, they did not want to take the big step to surpass themselves and their mindset, but they remained with the old.

This attitude against the Resurrection, against Christ, against the Church has survived throughout the centuries by those who believe that faith in Christ should be confined within the limits of religion, and they do not dare to approach the entrance to a relationship of life and truth with Him in the Church.

They are observers of the life that Christ brought.

They are those who are possessed by a spirit of compromise with the world and its reality and do not want to dare take the great plunge to taste another life.

They are those who are cowards inside, because they do not want to break with the established attitudes that prefer their faith to be a religious ideology, harmless to the processing of life into a miracle of love, eternity and light.

They are those who operate by rationality, who want evidence to justify their faithlessness or faith, yet without being ready to accept the change.

They are those who defer their problems to the future, because their living concerns prevail, or their secular goals, or the joy of their earthly life.

They are, lastly, those who deny the Resurrection, who refuse to accept that God exists and loves humanity so much, that He became obedient unto death in order to conquer death.

"They were highly regarded by the people." If you do not belong to any of the previous categories, then this plea is for us a great challenge. They held the Apostles and the Christians in great esteem. Even though they did not unconditionally accept their faith, they saw their lives, which were in accord with the way taught by Christ. They saw the love they had. They saw their humility. They saw their participation in worship. They saw their sacrifices for others. They saw the truth that emitted from their life. They saw their determination of faith. They saw their prayers. They saw the grace of God. They saw the dynamism the teachings of the Gospel brought and their continuous preoccupation with it. They saw the feeling of the presence of Christ within their hearts, that transformed their lives. They saw the miracles. They saw God being glorified. They saw that their faith was not confined to a religious ritual. In other words, they saw their authenticity and originality. They were what they believed! For this reason, even those who were the least trained, or most simple, held the Christians in honor.

In a time of questioning, indifference, exclusion, and the restriction of Christianity to a religious ritual or an entrapment of a social welfare mechanism in favor of the weak, our faith is the power that consoles us for that function as a "residue" that still loves the Risen Christ. For He is the Alpha and the Omega of our lives, even though our sins plague us and inflict us. And our faith in Him crystallizes our life. We are what we believe. If we try to follow this path, then the life of the Church will have meaning not only for us, but also for those who refuse it or who dare not to take the great plunge, by accepting the Resurrection as the only proposal of life that redeems and gives meaning to yesterday, today and unto the ages for all of human life.


The articles posted on HellasFrappe are for entertainment and education purposes only. The views expressed here are solely those of the contributing author and do not necessarily reflect the views of HellasFrappe. Our blog believes in free speech and does not warrant the content on this site. You use the information at your own risk.