Just like supposedly the EO & RC churches will be uniting in IB, will the Oriental Orthodox churches be reuniting? Misterxeight 02:24, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
- I haven't got that far. I'm still working on how they managed to retain a hold on large parts of IB, while *here* they kind of went under around the time of Timur.
I think it should be noted that the metropolitans aren't "under" the Catholicos the bishops are "under" the Pope of Rome (*here*) -- the patriarch is really a first among equals, not a feudal lord. This goes for Orthodox churches in general as I understand it. Elemtilas 17:38, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- Indeed! Thanks for the reminder, Padraig! Trying to work on something this big, only able to do it in fits and starts, is a recipe for forgetting things. Geoff
Location of Assyrian Metropolitan of Europe
I figure there's been enough immigrants to Europe who are of the Assyrian faith that they have a Metropolitan See overseeing them. I've tentatively placed it in Constantinople, on the grounds that it's close to Turkey, and Turkic links are strong enough that you probably have had some westward flow of people. But is that the best place for it?
Where in Europe might a lot of immigrants from the Persia/Central Asia/Mesopotamia/India/China region of the world gather? Geoff 00:20, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- Besides Esca? ;) Possibly along the Mediterranean coast. I have to say I'm impressed with the work you've done in this area. Very nice! Elemtilas 13:17, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
Why would place it in the Konstantinoupolis if you want it to be strong to its Turkish influences? Misterxeight 21:49, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
- Like I said, I'm quite open to move it. I want it actually in Europe (therefore Istanbul was out), and Constantinople seemed as likely as anywhere. We could put it somewhere else if you'd prefer. Venice, perhaps, or somewhere in the Two Sicilies. Any takers?
- Oh, while I'm thinking about it, it's perhaps getting toward time to de-prop this. Geoff 23:17, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
- Constantinople is the capital of Greece, but it is just across the strait from Turkey and is bound to have a huge Turkish minority. Remember, the population exchanges between the countries didn't happen *there*. Benkarnell 01:01, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Actually, in terms of the exchange there kind of was, sorry. I have some notes about what happened to lead Greece to where it is now and after GW-II a bitter Greece goes on to a Spanish expulsion of the Jews level banishment. The (mainly Italian) western Christians are banished, Muslims, Turks (regardless of what religion), and people deemed "odd" were used as scapegoats, such as the Mormons and Neopagans. When Constantine came to power in 2007, he lifted the ban of Muslims. Peoplesuch as Greece's Head Strategist Mihai Popeşcu cameback from exile in Xliponia and right now Muslims from acros the world are being welcomed with open arms. Misterxeight 14:38, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
- I believe it's QSS that the Turks didn't expel the Greeks. I think that implies that the Greeks didn't expel the Turks - it would have invited retaliation. Discrimination, oppression, ghettofication, all are fine, but I'm (~75%) certain that expulsion and genocide are off-limits based on QSS. Later, when I have time, I'll try to find the source of my suspicions. Benkarnell 15:59, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
I guess an apartheid level discrimination could work as well. Then if they want to leave they can. That'll of course be grounds for a Millet System that the new government could enact. Ironic Misterxeight 16:42, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
- Hm. It may be that the Assyrian Metropolitan wouldn't want to set up shop in a city that historically repressed his religion. But Constantinople would be the logical choice - the most Turkic city in Europe, no doubt. Benkarnell 20:00, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
It's not the religion, its the practitioners. The most Turkic city Europe, maybe not. I think putting them in Turkish only cities somewhere else in Greece might be the most logical choice if exile isn't. Misterxeight 20:34, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
- Actually, the more I think about it, Venice might be a good option. Trading culture; historic links with Byzantium, a low-intensity rivalry with same... It would be within reason that the Metropolitanate was originally constituted in Constantinople, then moved later as conditions became unfavourable in that city. What do you guys think? Geoff 22:08, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
Didn't tentions between Venice and the Ottomans worsen after the Battle of Lepanto? Misterxeight 22:48, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
In my opinion other Turkic ethnicities would be welcome to settle down in Greece, but people from the peninsula of Anatolia, the very ones descended of the Ottomans would definately not be. I'm fine with Constantinople having tons of Turkestani mmigrants and aspects, but not Turkish people. Misterxeight 23:46, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
- Ok. Stet Constantinople. Though I suspect the Metropolitan gets in trouble with the Greek authorities at times by speaking out on behalf of minorities (even Muslim Ottomans), to the extent that they get treated with the dignity that is theirs as children of Adam and image-bearers of God. Assyrians have been on the wrong end of the persecution stick enough that they don't want to see anyone getting treated that way. Geoff 11:55, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
Well I'd like to think the Greek government allows free-speech to all, but maybe some bigotted, crusty old politicians might not see that way. Misterxeight 13:12, 11 April 2009 (UTC)