DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**biannaruh** · 11-28-2007, 11:37 AM

Hi,

I initiated the question of why the Constantinople still had a Patriarchate, only because I understood that the whole idea of a 'Patriarchate' was linked to the power and influence that a city had over others, and not as an attack against the Patriarch himself. When Constantinople was declared the new capitol of the Roman Empire (the New Rome), the city gained a new status and prestige, and then a Patriarchate. When Constantinople fell, the centre of the Orthodox world moved to Moscow, and so it too gained a new status, and so forth.

So the question is, does it work both ways? Does the status of a Patriarchate change when it loses power? If Constantinople has very few Christians, indeed, if it is not even in a Christian land anymore, should it still exercise the power it does? Moreover, from what I gather from this messageboard, should Constantinople still have this authority given that many Orthodox believe the Patriarch is exercising his power wrongly (ie: for ecumenism, etc)?

It is worth remembering that the Patriarchates of Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem are also in countries which, for centuries now, can hardly be considered majority Christian, let alone majority Orthodox. Yet, these patriarchates retain the same significance as they always have. The "power" of a Patriarchate is not temporal, but spiritual. Whenever a patriarchate assumes temporal power, that's when things go sour (as, sadly, the mediaeval papacy shows us ...)

11-28-2007, 11:37 AM	#42
biannaruh Join Date Nov 2005 Posts 445 Senior Member	Hi, I initiated the question of why the Constantinople still had a Patriarchate, only because I understood that the whole idea of a 'Patriarchate' was linked to the power and influence that a city had over others, and not as an attack against the Patriarch himself. When Constantinople was declared the new capitol of the Roman Empire (the New Rome), the city gained a new status and prestige, and then a Patriarchate. When Constantinople fell, the centre of the Orthodox world moved to Moscow, and so it too gained a new status, and so forth. So the question is, does it work both ways? Does the status of a Patriarchate change when it loses power? If Constantinople has very few Christians, indeed, if it is not even in a Christian land anymore, should it still exercise the power it does? Moreover, from what I gather from this messageboard, should Constantinople still have this authority given that many Orthodox believe the Patriarch is exercising his power wrongly (ie: for ecumenism, etc)? It is worth remembering that the Patriarchates of Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem are also in countries which, for centuries now, can hardly be considered majority Christian, let alone majority Orthodox. Yet, these patriarchates retain the same significance as they always have. The "power" of a Patriarchate is not temporal, but spiritual. Whenever a patriarchate assumes temporal power, that's when things go sour (as, sadly, the mediaeval papacy shows us ...)
	Quote