Talk:Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Christianity  / Eastern Orthodoxy      (Rated B-Class)
	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.
B	This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy. See also the Eastern Christianity Portal. (with unknown importance)
Assessment comments This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

WikiProject Greece      (Rated B-Class)
	Greece portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Greece, an attempt to expand, improve and standardize the content and structure of articles related to Greece.
If you would like to participate, you can improve Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, or sign up and contribute in a wider array of articles like those on our to do list. If you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. (comments)
Top	This article has been rated as a Top priority article
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

WikiProject Turkey (Rated B-Class)
	Turkey portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Turkey, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Turkey-related topics. Please visit the the participants page if you would like to get involved. Happy editing!
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
Low	This article has been rated as low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	edit · history · watch · refresh To-do list for Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople:
No to-do list assigned; you can help us in improving the articles in the same category

Dogface, we do too call the EP the "Church of Constantinople." See, for example, the [list] of Autocephalous Churches on the OCA website. If the EP prefers to not call itself that then someone should say so, but as far as I can tell pretty much everyone else does, so to say the term is "not used" isn't accurate. --Csernica 00:15, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Contents 1 External links 2 Sources and Contentions 3 Contentions 4 Rename/move proposal 5 Big list o' names 6 Big overhaul 7 Turkish name 8 After the Fall of Constantinople - Citations 9 Languages 10 Fair use rationale for Image:Constantinople seal.gif 11 OrthodoxWiki as a source 12 Patriarchate of Constantinople

[edit] External links

Think thay may be usefull, and expecially if someone will make an article for each metropolis this could be both an information source and an external links reference ready to be put at the end of each article.

Archdiocese of Constantinople http://www.patriarchate.org/

Metropolis of Rhodes http://www.imr.gr/

Archdiocese of Crete ? http://www.iak.gr/

Archdiocese of America http://www.goarch.org/

Archdiocese of Australia http://home.it.net.au/~jgrapsas/pages/index.htm

Archdiocese of Great Britain ??? http://www.nostos.com/church/

Archdiocese of Italy http://www.ortodossia.it/

Metropolis of Korea http://orthodox.or.kr/english/e_main.htm

Metropolis of Canada http://www.gocanada.org/

Metropolis of Argentina ??? http://www.saeamerica.org/en/omogeneia/

Metropolis of Central America ??? http://www.saeamerica.org/en/omogeneia/

Metropolis of New Zealand http://www.imnz.org.nz/

Metropolis of Hong Kong http://www.cs.ust.hk/faculty/dimitris/metro/hkmetropolis.html

Metropolis of France http://perso.wanadoo.fr/eglise.orthodoxe.grecque/

Metropolis of Germany http://www.orthodoxie.net/

Metropolis of Austria http://www.agiosgeorgios.at/

Metropolis of Belgium http://www.eglise-orthodoxe.be/

Metropolis of Scandinavia ??? (see below)

Metropolis of Switzerland ???

Metropolis of Spain and Portugal http://igrejaortodoxa.web.pt/

Church of Finland http://www.ort.fi/

Church of Estonia http://www.orthodoxa.org/

American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Church http://www.acrod.org/

Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA http://www.uocofusa.org/

Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Canada http://www.uocc.ca/

Albanian Orthodox Diocese of America http://www.goarch.org/en/otherpatriarchal/alb.asp

Russian Orthodox Archdiocese of Western Europe http://www.exarchat.org/

Belorussian Orthodox Church in the world http://www.goarch.org/en/otherpatriarchal/bel.asp

Update: I have searched, but I can find no evidence of a Metropolis of Scandinavia. Both the Parish of the Protection of the Theotokos (Denmark) [1], St. Nicholas (Norway) [2] and the two churches of the Holy Transfiguration (Sweden; [3] (Stockholm) and [4] (Överkalix) belong to the Russian Orthodox Archdiocese of Western Europe (Constantinople Patriarchate). Valentinian ^(talk) 23:45, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sources and Contentions

I have two problems with this article.

1. It states that the Apostle Andrew was the founder of the Patriarchate of Constantinople. While it seems that the Orthodox regularly claim this, it appears that it is unfounded. For example, the Catholic Encyclopaedia[5] says:

In the fifth century we meet with a spurious document attributed to a certain Dorotheus, Bishop of Tyre at the end of the third century, according to which the Church of Byzantium was founded by the Apostle St. Andrew, its first bishop being his disciple Stachys (cf. Romans 16:9). The intention of the forger is plain: in this way the Church of Rome is made inferior to that of Constantinople, St. Andrew having been chosen an Apostle by Jesus before his brother St. Peter, the founder of the Roman Church.

2. It doesn't cite its sources.

FWIW, just because the CE says something doesn't make it true. The anti-Orthodox POV of that publication is pretty explicit. —Preost ^talk contribs 21:24, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

I know it doesn't mean it's true, but it does represent a somewhat justified alternative viewpoint from a source of some repute (at the very least, it is cited as a source in other articles on the site). This article neither cites its sources nor acknowledges that there is some dispute on the matter. Hairouna 05:49, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Apparently someone has now removed ther remarks about the Apostle Andrew, but now there is no history here at all. Surely we can add some citable history: if there is contention, we should cite the contending sources. - Jmabel | Talk 20:54, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Contentions

Hi, I think that I can say something about the apostle Andrew: 1) it is sure that the patriarchate was not founded by the apostle Andrew because in the first centuries of christian life Costantinople was but a part of Antioch patriarchate and it raised to the rank of an independent one, and after some even to the first of all orthodox patriarchates, only much time after this 2) the apostle Andrew can be considered on the other side as the founder of the costantinople first christian communities in the first century after chirst, starting an apostolic succession arriving to the patriarchate 3) we can probably have no scientific proofs about the fact that saint Andrew was really the founder of the first Costantinople communities, but it is a matter of fact that: the undivided church, of which also the western popes were between the most authoritative members before the schism of 1066, and its uninterrupted tradition, always accepted the apostolic origin of the see of costantinople as undoubted. At the time, the independent patriarchates were all and only the sees who could claim an apostolic origin, that is, Rome, first of all because founded by Peter, chief of the other apostles, and then exactly Antioch, Alexandria, Costantinople and Jerusalem 4) the consideration that the story of saint andrew was invented only to give the primate to costantinople at the place of rome is totally inconsistent, because, as i have said, peter was considered as the chief of the apostles by the undivided church, and rome the first apostolic see before costantinople, also in the eastern parts of the church, and that the date of foundation was not considered the most important thing (otherwise the first see should have been Jerusalem, and so nay neither rome nor costantinople). This fact makes me think that the catholic enciclopedia is generally inaccurate on this matter at all. the present orthodox church still consider costantinople as the first patriarchate only for the fact that rome separated and then is not part of the church anymore. For all the acts of the church done before the schism, rome is still considered as the first patriarchate even in the orthodox present church. 5) Specularly, and linking again to point 3, the present Roman catholic church also DOES still recognize the apostolic foundation of costantinople by Andrew because this was stated in all the general councils before the schism, in which the see of rome was present, and that it still recognizes as a still valid part of its history still to now. Controversies can sometime have been aroused but the official teaching of both the two churches still recognize its common origin, and it is therefore not the case, at least for what concern this matter, to have any other problems. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.90.54.65 (talk • contribs)

1. Please. It's "Constantinople". You keep leaving off the first "n". It's driving me nuts.
2. The conventional date for the schism is 1054. 1066 was the year of the Norman conquest of England. But even 1054 is merely a convention. The events of that year did not significantly affect relations.
3. The Popes of Rome were the most senior in rank and enjoyed a primacy in honor. They were not "most authoritative". This is precisely the bone of contention between East and West about the role of the Papacy, and it would be incorrect to assert only one side's version as fact in the article.
4. Part and parcel with that is the idea behind the ranking of the various Patriarchates. In the Eastern view it had to do with the importance of the cities, not the Apostolic foundation of the churches as such. This is reflected in Canon 3 of I Constantinople, Canon 28 of Chalcedon, and Canon 36 of Trullo. None of these are accepted by Rome, but the clearly reflect the Eastern view of the matter, that Rome's primacy was due to its being the old capital of the Empire and not because its bishops are successors to Peter in any unique way. In fact, cities with churches of Apostolic foundation are fairly common in the East and not limited to the Patriarchates. (Read your Bible. A number are mentioned, and many others were not.)
5. Nevertheless, your basic point that the claim of the church in Byzantium as having been founded by St. Andrew is on shaky ground is valid. It doesn't mean terribly much though, since this argument is no longer used as support for Constantinople's position. TCC (talk) (contribs) 21:53, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rename/move proposal

[edit] Big list o' names

I think the gigantic list of folks involved in the patriarchate should be significantly trimmed. It would be better included in a "List of..." article, but I'm not sure that's really even warranted, either. Perhaps a list of those on the holy synod might be sufficient. —Preost ^{talk contribs} 23:26, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Big overhaul

Okay, I've significantly rewritten the article. A lot could probably use references, to be sure. I've undertaken this rewrite as part of the WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy Collaboration of the Month. —Preost ^{talk contribs} 15:26, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Turkish name

The correct Turkish name should be "Fener Rum Patrikhanesi" or "Istanbul Rum Patrikhanesi" --Hattusili 09:55, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, the correct official name is "Istanbul Fener Rum Patrikhanesi". E104421 12:09, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

It is the name used by Turkey and noone else in the world. Funny, but better keep this for "internal consumption"... Hectorian 14:06, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

It's the name used by the patriarchy itself. E104421 14:57, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Used by the patriarchate in what context? Miskin 14:59, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

I added the attested name and definition. Miskin 20:49, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't think that it is good for Turkey's image to include the Turkish term Hattusili and E104421 proposed. It reveals that Turkey is the only state in the world not recognizing the ecumenality of the Patriarchate. So, I'm surprised they actually want this Turkish name to be there! Anyway! Their call!--Yannismarou 17:16, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Rum Ortodoks Patrikhanesi is actually *the* official name. The Fener name is unofficial. This name, despite common misunderstanding is not derived from, nor does it mean "Patriarchy of the Istanbul Greeks" as you seem to imply. Rum->Roman->Romanioi. This is the name used since the time of Mehmed II, who by the way also used among his titles, the title Kayzer-i Rum -> Caesar of the Romans. The Ottomans greatly supported the Patriarchy's claims to be the "true" Roman church. To pertain to "Rome" is not exactly a put down??? Anyway, the Patriarchy uses this title in Turkish. I also added a citation from historian Ilber Ortayli's book as he makes a reference to the official legal name. Free smyrnan 19:03, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] After the Fall of Constantinople - Citations

Regarding the administrative and legal jurisdiction of milletbasi --

"..The famous millet system, developed in the main for the govenance of the Greek and Armenian communities, was extended in similar form to the Jews. According to this system, as interpreted at that time, each of the religious communities of the empire was organized internally, subject to its own laws in matters of religion and personal status, administered under the authority of its own religious chief." Lewis, Bernard, "The Jews of Islam", p.125-126 ISBN 0-691-00807-8

"..They were ... organized into millets or nations, self-governing communities preserving their own laws and usages under a religious head responsible to the central power for the administration and good behaviour of his people." Lord Kinross, "Ottoman Centuries: The Rise and Fall of the Turkish Empire (1977)" ISBN 0-688-08093-6 , p. 112-113

"The patriarch's temporal duties and his power had by the eighteenth century become immense. He was the millet bashi (head of the millet) and ethnarch (secular ruler) of the Orthodox population. Since he was a high official in the Ottoman government and part of the askeri bureaucratic class, he was entitled to a standard with two horsetails (an Ottoman governor or general had three, the sultan six). The patriarch was responsible to his ruler for the behaviour and loyalty of his flock. He was also given important duties connected with tax collecting and the maintenance of public order. His judicial functions were particularly significant for the Christian population. The church had full jurisdiction over a wide range of affairs, including matters relating to marriage and the family and, in practice, commercial cases involving only Christians. Although criminal cases, such as murder and theft, were theoretically under the control of the Muslim judicial system, the Orthodox courts often handled these as well as long as no Muslim was involved. In administering justice the church based its decisions on canon law, Byzantine statutory law, local customs and church writings and traditions. Ecclesiastical courts could hand out penalties such as imprisonment, fines and exile, along with the denial of the sacraments and excommunication." Jelavich, Barbara, “History of the Balkans, 18th and 19th Centuries” (1983), ISBN 0-521 27458-3 p.52

I consider these, which I did take out the trouble of typing in as well as citing, to be sufficient. Please remove the citation needed link -- actually citing particularly the Jelavich source would be useful. --Free smyrnan 06:17, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Languages

Does my Church actually allow all these languages? I mean all the Churches I've been to have only been said in Greek, only the homily was in English, which was said by a younger priest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.194.63.161 (talk) 18:09, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

The prevailing Orthodox practice is to recite the liturgy in the language of the congregation: Arabic in Syria, English in England, French in France. Familiar exceptions are the Slavonic churches, whose liturgies are usually in Old Slavonic (not modern Russian, Serbian, Czech, Bulgarian, etc.) and the Church of Greece, which is in Koine Greek, i.e. the language in which the New Testament was originally written. But the difference from modern idiom is not, in these cases, great enough to prevent the worshippers from understanding what's being said. The usual practice of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North and South America, most of whose parishes continue to celebrate the liturgy in Greek and most of whose members speak English or Spanish as their first language, is the big exception. Tom129.93.17.174 (talk) 20:11, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Constantinople seal.gif

Image:Constantinople seal.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:12, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] OrthodoxWiki as a source

The article states that it is based in part on another Wiki, in direct violation of policies on reliable sources and verifiability. I'm not sure what to do about that short of gutting the article and starting over. Feedback and suggestions are welcome. Pairadox (talk) 07:30, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Patriarchate of Constantinople

Isn't it a violation of NPOV to redirect here from "Patriarchate of Constantinople", when there is also an existent Armenian Church of Constantinople that has a Patriarch and a historical Latin Church of Constantinople as well? Deusveritasest (talk) 06:23, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

It seems pretty clearly in keeping with standard practice since it's by far the most common usage. As a similar example, Pope is about the Roman Catholic leader, despite there also being a Coptic Pope, among others. --Delirium (talk) 16:33, 10 December 2008 (UTC)