Turkey and the Patriarch
July 9th 2007 06:26
Sandro Magister, who writes at www.chiesa.com, today posted about the Turkish Supreme Court denying the title "Ecumeniical" to the Patriarch of Constantinople, aka Byzantium, aka Istanbul.
The treatment of the Patriarch is a vexed question, even in provincial Adelaide. I recall at one ALP convention, as a delegate of the SDA, that I voted on a proposition that the Fanar be given extra-territorial status, rather like the Vatican. I rather think there might have been an alliance between the right and the ethnic left on this issue - just to let people know who was in charge. Look to the recent Senate preselection. That, though, is a whole 'nother question.
Not that Ankara trembled.The Advertiser, on the other hand, in a witty pun, editorialised on "Santa's little helpers" - such cleverness! And such a grasp of Australian history! They were more worried, I suspect, by the ascendancy of what they chose to call "The Machine", - as in rage against - especially by failed factional wannabes. I'll have further things to say about The Adertiser on another occasion.
While the fate of this ancient See might seem irrelevant, it is a testing point of much vaunted, though clearly non-existent, Islamic tolerance. The Byzantine Empire was there before the Ottomans!
The treatment of the Patriarch is a vexed question, even in provincial Adelaide. I recall at one ALP convention, as a delegate of the SDA, that I voted on a proposition that the Fanar be given extra-territorial status, rather like the Vatican. I rather think there might have been an alliance between the right and the ethnic left on this issue - just to let people know who was in charge. Look to the recent Senate preselection. That, though, is a whole 'nother question.
Ecumenical?
While the fate of this ancient See might seem irrelevant, it is a testing point of much vaunted, though clearly non-existent, Islamic tolerance. The Byzantine Empire was there before the Ottomans!
| 30 |
| Vote |
Subscribe to this blog
