The Turkish Orthodox Church filed a lawsuit against the Patriarchate of Constantinople. Modern Orthodox Turks

The Ukrainian scenario threatens to be suicidal for the Ecumenical Patriarchate...

Phanar opened up the abyss under him. Being a tiny island that existed for many centuries only by the grace of God and the care of the Russian Orthodox Church, lost in one of the Istanbul quarters, the Ecumenical Patriarchate has shown such universal ambitions that it cannot cope with.

Those who pushed Patriarch Bartholomew to adventure , have already shown in the Middle East what their strategic tricks are worth. However, the ministers of the Ecumenical Patriarchate must also look at things more soberly. Alas, the Phanariots have long turned from servants of the Church into church bureaucrats.

One Sunday morning, the author of these lines, who was in Istanbul for tourism purposes, had a chance to go to Phanar on a supposed Sunday service. And it turned out that there were no services there, not only on weekdays, but often on Sundays. At the same time, as the guards confirmed, the patriarch was in place, and everyone else too. There is no time to pray to God alone. And these Phanariots want to assert their primacy in Orthodox world? But with such claims, there may be nothing left from the Phanar.

Attempts to create "national" Orthodox churches, on which the Ecumenical Patriarchate rests, will inevitably affect it itself. Yes, Turkish Orthodox Church(TPC) has already filed a lawsuit against the Patriarchate of Constantinople and Patriarch Bartholomew. The plaintiff claims that the Phanar does not have the authority to send its “exarchs” to Ukraine and give autocephaly to anyone there. The status of the Patriarch of Constantinople, according to the Lausanne Peace Treaty of 1923, is limited to the celebration of divine services for the Greeks living in Turkey. And that's it! The TOC called Bartholomew’s actions a “crime,” according to “both Turkish law and the Treaty of Lausanne, which clearly spelled out him [the Ecumenical Patriarch. - D.M.] responsibility and terms of reference”. The TOC believes that due to the abuse of authority, Bartholomew can no longer stay in Turkey.

The non-canonical TOC was formed in 1922 by the decision of the Turkish government, which was trying to create a national church that was not associated with Greek Orthodoxy. Today this church has three temples, five congregations and less than 1,000 parishioners. It is officially registered as a religious structure, and can have and expand its church property. Currently, the Turkish Orthodox Church is headed by Patriarch Eftim IV (Erenerol), in the world Pasha Yumit Erenerol, the grandson of the founder of the church, Eftim I.

So far, the TOC has not been recognized by any of the 15 local Orthodox churches in the world. However, in the logic of the Ukrainian scenario, the Turkish state has every reason to declare the TOC the “national church” and register the Phanariots as a foreign entity. Then all the church property of the Ecumenical Patriarchate will pass to the TOC, and the Turkish authorities, like the Ukrainian authorities, will apply for its recognition. And why should the Turks refuse this to anyone if Bartholomew has already laid the path?

The impetus for such a development of events can be given by the Phanar's further steps planned by him for the near future. At the end of October - November, Bartholomew intends, together with the Romanian Orthodox Church, to begin the next phase of the split of the Russian Orthodox Church: he plans to grant autocephaly to the Moldavian Orthodox Church, with its subsequent transfer to the rule of the Romanians. The Ecumenical Patriarch has his own benefit here - he would have been repaid in this case Orthodox parishes Gagauzia. Of all the Turks living in Moldova, the Orthodox Gagauz (150,000) are closest in their dialect to the Anatolian Turks. Many of them moved in previous years to Turkey, and in recent times they come there to work. Total Gagauz in Turkey can reach 50-75 thousand Greeks, while in Turkey there are no more than 2-3 thousand.

Thinking about the "Moldovan maneuver", Bartholomew expects to strengthen his position in Turkey, but here he may be disappointed. For the TOC, the Gagauz are the main target environment, since other Orthodox Turks (Chuvash and Yakuts) are quite far from the language and culture of Anatolia and are much more firmly integrated into the ROC. Bartholomew will not get the Gagauz, they are not serfs, but free people. Rather, they are destined to become an additional bridge between the Russian Orthodox Church and the TOC, and, consequently, between Turkey and Russia. After receiving the Phanar's property and expanding the flock at the expense of the Gagauz, the TOC may well join a number of recognized small Orthodox churches.

The National Greek (Hellenic) Church has not been delighted with the claims of Bartholomew for a long time, but out of a sense of national solidarity, it has not yet placed any special obstacles on him. However, under the conditions of the spread of world Orthodoxy among the national quarters begun by Bartholomew (suicidal for the Phanar), the Church of Greece may well wish to transfer under its omophorion the parishes in Crete still controlled by the Ecumenical Patrarch, and most importantly, such a precious shrine as Mount Athos, where out of 20 monasteries 17 - Greek. And why shouldn't the Russian Orthodox Church support these aspirations? Thus, the legal inconsistencies around the status of Athos, which arose by the grace of the Phanar, can also be settled, and relations between the Russian Orthodox Church and mainland Greece can be significantly improved.

In this regard, draws on Special attention visit to Sochi of the Egyptian President al-Sisi. Under the new conditions, one of the topics of his talks with V. Putin could be the situation in the future Orthodox world of Patriarch Theodore II of Alexandria.

Commemorated second in the diptych of the heads of local Orthodox churches and supported the Russian Orthodox Church in its dispute with Constantinople, he, according to the importance of Alexandria in the formation ancient christianity may well be the first. It was here, in Egypt, that the world's first Christian monasteries of St. Anthony and St. Paul were created and are still operating. For Egypt, which considers itself a part of the Greater Holy Land and believes that it has much more rights to do so than, for example, Turkey, receiving such an honorary championship in the Orthodox world is prestigious in itself. Note that there are at least 8-10 million Eastern Christians living in Egypt compared to a few thousand in Turkey.

The actions of the Phanar may not lead to an expansion of unprecedented proportions, but to its complete marginalization and subsequent oblivion. And it will certainly be a pity, because along with this Istanbul quarter, an important part of Byzantine culture. However, how to save those who do not want it? The initiators of the “Ukrainian autocephaly” from Washington and Kyiv will be rewarded fairly quickly by history, but the hierarchs who succumbed to the call of the sweet-voiced sirens will have to answer before the judgment of God.

And what awaits them in earthly life? It is possible that last resort for Bartholomew, the same St. Andrew's Church in Kyiv (near the house of Mikhail Bulgakov) will appear, which was presented to the Ecumenical Patriarch by the generosity of Poroshenko. And in the interlocutors of Bartholomew there will be a ghost of such Bulgakov's literary hero like Woland. Who knows, maybe this whole move from inhospitable Istanbul to beautiful Kyiv was deliberately planned. However, Tomos enthusiasts promised the Ukrainians something else, not expensive dependents. And then it may seem very strange to the inhabitants of Ukraine to distribute the national-cultural and religious heritage to who knows who and who knows why...

Dmitry MININ

Istanbul, 14 November. A campaign is expanding in Turkey demanding to ban the activities of the Patriarchate of Constantinople and transfer it to Greece. It is held on the initiative of the St. Nicholas Foundation, and has found support from various organizations in the country, RIA Novosti reports.

"Our actions aim to ban the Patriarchate of Constantinople in Turkey, which claims to be granted a status similar to the Vatican. We are supported various organizations- public, humanitarian and political," Muammer Karabulut, head of the fund, told RIA Novosti.

According to him, Turkish citizens can express their attitude to the problem of the patriarchy by interactive voting in the Internet. From this Saturday, it has been organized on a special website "Patriarchy to Greece," said the head of the St. Nicholas.

One of the first initiatives to ban the activities of the Patriarchate of Constantinople in Turkey was supported by the so-called Patriarchy. Independent Turkish Orthodox Church.

"The Patriarchate of Constantinople is the religious institution of Greece, where it should be," church spokeswoman Sevgi Ernerol said.

"Turkey is a secular and democratic state, and no religious organization has the right to practice on its territory political activities. Patriarch Bartholomew I of Constantinople, who calls himself Ecumenical, violates not only Turkish laws, but also illegally appropriates leadership over the Orthodox world," the representative of the Turkish Orthodox Church said.

According to Ernerol, "Bartholomew, using certain forces in the United States, hatches plans for the split of Turkey and subordination to the Patriarchate of Constantinople of the Russian Orthodox Church."

The initiative to ban the activities of the Patriarchate of Constantinople in Turkey was also supported by representatives nationalist organizations, united in the "Platform national forces"The day before, they held a picket of the patriarchate in Istanbul.

"We will not allow the transformation of part of Istanbul into the Vatican," one of the leaders of the Platform, the head of the Union of Turkish Lawyers, Kemal Kerincsiz, told RIA Novosti.

"We condemn the authorities who are not capable of putting an end to Bartholomew's ecumenical lawlessness," the interlocutor noted. He pointed out the inadmissibility of the violation by the head of the Patriarchate of Constantinople of the existing laws concerning its status. According to Turkish law, Bartholomew I is the leader of a small Greek community, said the head of the Union of Advocates.

Ecumenical activity of the Patriarch of Constantinople in last years repeatedly became the subject of serious controversy in the political circles of Turkey on the status of the patriarchate.

Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul recently drew a line under them, saying that the status of the Patriarchate of Constantinople would remain unchanged.

At the same time, he referred to the Lausanne Agreement of 1923, which resulted in the formation of modern Turkey, and said that "there is not a word about the status of the patriarchy and the Patriarch."

Reference. According to the "Hierarchy of Churches" website, the Turkish Orthodox Church, unrecognized by the local Orthodox Churches, was formed in 1922 by order of the Turkish government, which was trying to create a "national" Orthodox Church, not associated with Greek Orthodoxy. The church was headed by Pavel Karakissaridis, a Turkish-speaking Greek from Asia Minor. It was an attempt to tear the Greeks living in Turkey away from Greece and make them patriots of young Turkey.

This idea failed - except for a small number of Orthodox Turks, and a minimum of Greeks, no one went into this new formation. Paul himself, after proclaiming himself "patriarch", took the name Eftim and changed his Greek surname to Turkish - Ernerol. At the beginning of the existence of the church, Eftim managed to get a small number of followers, on June 1, 1923 they tried to kidnap Patriarch Meletios IV, and on October 2, Pope Eftim besieged the Synod of the Church of Constantinople and appointed his own synod, trying to carry out a coup in the Church, and for a short time occupied the building of the patriarchate.

After the election of a new Patriarch of Constantinople in December of that year, the self-proclaimed pope and patriarch repeated the action, but this time the police quickly expelled him. In 1924, he captured the Church of Mary in Galata (a district of Istanbul where largest number his supporters). On June 6, it was decided to move the residence of the "Turkish Orthodox Patriarchate" from Kayseri to Istanbul. In 1926, Eftim took over the second church in Galata. However, the Turkish government soon stopped supporting the church openly, and after the death of Atatürk, it lost support altogether.

In 1956, Eftim captured two more Orthodox churches in Galata. After Eftim fell ill, his son Turgut (George) Ernerol took the throne under the name Eftim II. The church has always been extremely small, but existed until recently and even had two communities outside of Turkey (it is not clear how real). World Orthodoxy does not recognize this movement due to numerous canonical violations, up to the married episcopate and Turkish nationalism. After the death of Eftim II, his brother Seljuk Ernerol became patriarch. As the site "Hierarchy of Churches" notes, except for the Ernerol family, there are no more believers in this church, the temples do not function due to the lack of priests.

The heads of this religious organization were:

Eftim I (Ernerol) (September 15, 1922 -1962)
Eftim II (Ernerol) (1962-1991)
Eftim III (Ernerol) (1991 - December 2002)

The Ukrainian scenario threatens to become suicidal for the Ecumenical Patriarchate

Those who pushed Patriarch Bartholomew to adventure have already shown in the Middle East what their strategic tricks are worth. However, the ministers of the Ecumenical Patriarchate must also look at things more soberly. Alas, the Phanariots have long turned from servants of the Church into church bureaucrats.

Residence of Bartholomew in Istanbul's Phanar quarter

One Sunday morning, the author of these lines, who was in Istanbul for tourism purposes, had a chance to go to Phanar for a supposed Sunday service. And it turned out that there were no services there, not only on weekdays, but often on Sundays. At the same time, as the guards confirmed, the patriarch was in place, and everyone else too. There is no time to pray to God alone. And these Phanariotes want to assert their primacy in the Orthodox world? But with such claims, there may be nothing left from the Phanar.

Attempts to create "national" Orthodox churches, on which the Ecumenical Patriarchate rests, will inevitably affect it itself. Thus, the Turkish Orthodox Church (TOC) has already filed a lawsuit against the Patriarchate of Constantinople and Patriarch Bartholomew. The plaintiff claims that the Phanar does not have the authority to send its “exarchs” to Ukraine and give autocephaly to anyone there. The status of the Patriarch of Constantinople, according to the Lausanne Peace Treaty of 1923, is limited to the celebration of divine services for the Greeks living in Turkey. And that's it! The TOC called Bartholomew’s actions a “crime,” according to “both Turkish law and the Treaty of Lausanne, which clearly spelled out him [the Ecumenical Patriarch. - D.M.] responsibility and terms of reference”. The TOC believes that due to the abuse of authority, Bartholomew can no longer stay in Turkey.

The main temple and the official symbols of the TOC

Eftim I

The impetus for such a development of events can be given by the Phanar's further steps planned by him for the near future. At the end of October - November, Bartholomew intends, together with the Romanian Orthodox Church, to begin the next phase of the split of the Russian Orthodox Church: he plans to grant autocephaly to the Moldavian Orthodox Church, with its subsequent transfer to the rule of the Romanians. The Ecumenical Patriarch has his own advantage here - in this case, the Orthodox parishes of Gagauzia would go to him. Of all the Turks living in Moldova, the Orthodox Gagauz (150,000) are closest in their dialect to the Anatolian Turks. Many of them moved to Turkey in previous years, and recently they have been coming there to work. The total number of Gagauz in Turkey can reach 50-75 thousand Greeks, while there are no more than 2-3 thousand left in Turkey.

Gagauz people in national clothes

Russian St. Panteleimon Monastery on Mount Athos

In this regard, the visit to Sochi of the Egyptian President al-Sisi attracts special attention. Under the new conditions, one of the topics of his talks with V. Putin could be the situation in the future Orthodox world of Patriarch Theodore II of Alexandria.

President of Egypt Al-Sisi and V. Putin

Commemorated second in the diptych of the heads of local Orthodox churches and supporting the Russian Orthodox Church in its dispute with Constantinople, he, according to the importance of Alexandria in the development of ancient Christianity, may well become the first. It was here, in Egypt, that the world's first Christian monasteries of St. Anthony and St. Paul were created and are still operating. For Egypt, which considers itself a part of the Greater Holy Land and believes that it has much more rights to do so than, for example, Turkey, receiving such an honorary championship in the Orthodox world is prestigious in itself. Note that there are at least 8-10 million Eastern Christians living in Egypt compared to a few thousand in Turkey.

Patriarch of Alexandria and All Africa Theodore II

The actions of the Phanar may not lead to an expansion of unprecedented proportions, but to its complete marginalization and subsequent oblivion. And, of course, it will be a pity, because along with this Istanbul quarter, an important part of Byzantine culture will go into the past. However, how to save those who do not want it? The initiators of the “Ukrainian autocephaly” from Washington and Kyiv will be rewarded fairly quickly by history, but the hierarchs who succumbed to the call of the sweet-voiced sirens will have to answer before the judgment of God.

And what awaits them in earthly life? It is possible that the last refuge for Bartholomew will be the same St. Andrew's Church in Kyiv (near the house of Mikhail Bulgakov), which was donated to the Ecumenical Patriarch by Poroshenko's generosity. And in the interlocutors of Bartholomew will be the ghost of such a Bulgakov literary hero as Woland. Who knows, maybe this whole move from inhospitable Istanbul to beautiful Kyiv was deliberately planned. However, Tomos enthusiasts promised the Ukrainians something else, not expensive dependents. And then it may seem very strange to the inhabitants of Ukraine to distribute the national-cultural and religious heritage to who knows who and who knows what.

Subscribe to us

The Turkish Orthodox Church has filed a lawsuit against the Patriarchate of Constantinople and Patriarch Bartholomew, reports .

According to the press secretary of the Turkish Patriarchate Sevgi Erenerol, the lawsuit was filed against the backdrop of a decision to proceed with granting autocephaly to the church in Ukraine. According to her, the lawsuit states that "this case is political and far from religion."

“Bartholomew does not have the authority to send his exarchs to Ukraine and give autocephaly to its church.

The status of the Patriarch of Constantinople, according to the Lausanne Peace Treaty of 1923, is limited to serving Greeks living in Turkey,” Erenerol said.

She also stated that Bartholomew exceeded his powers and interfered in the internal affairs of countries.

Other local churches also reacted to the actions of Constantinople. The Primate of the Orthodox Church in America, Metropolitan Jonah (Paffhausen), called on the parties responsible for the schism of Orthodoxy "to repent and stop the madness."

According to him, granting autocephaly to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC) is a "great temptation to evil." At the same time, in his opinion, the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC) had no other choice but to terminate relations with Constantinople. He suggested that

granting autocephaly could lead to serious confrontation in Ukraine, noting that believers will defend their churches, “as they were protected from confiscation in the Soviet Union from.

Serbian Patriarch Irinej believes that the decision of the Patriarchate of Constantinople to grant autocephaly to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC) may turn out to be “catastrophic”.

“Today our Church is in great temptation. The temptation that befell our first hierarch, the ecumenical patriarch: to make a decision that could be disastrous for the Church... to recognize a schismatic church and even give it autocephaly,” the clergyman said about the decision to grant autocephaly to the UOC.

He stressed that Bartholomew "did not have the right" to make such a decision, which threatens the integrity of other Orthodox churches.

“In the movement that led to the schism, and not only in the canonical territory of the autonomous Ukrainian Orthodox Church … the possibility of creating new divisions in other local Churches is opening up,” Irinei is concerned.

The concern of the Serbian patriarch about this is not surprising. The jurisdiction of the SOC extends not only to Serbia, but also to Macedonia and Montenegro, with the latter operating a schismatic self-proclaimed Montenegrin Orthodox Church.

The head of the Serbian church recalled that "the granting of autocephaly cannot be the prerogative of only one Patriarchate of Constantinople", such decisions are made only with the consent of all local Orthodox churches.

Irenaeus warned the Patriarchate of Constantinople against granting the Ukrainian Church unilaterally, because this "will not bring harmony and peace to the Ukrainian land, but, on the contrary, will cause new divisions and new schisms."

Indeed, after the Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church decided to break off relations with Constantinople,

the threat of a split hung not only over world Orthodoxy, but also over the UOC-MP.

Being part of the Russian Orthodox Church, the UOC supported the decision of the Synod, but some clergy are ready to come under the jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarchate.

The hierarch of the Moscow Patriarchate, Metropolitan of Pereyaslav-Khmelnitsky and Vishnevsky Alexander (Drabinko), declared himself a cleric of the Patriarchate of Constantinople.

“At the last meeting, the Patriarchate of Constantinople canceled the transfer of the Kiev Metropolis to the Moscow Patriarchate. Since then, we can consider that the territory of Ukraine is the territory of the restored metropolis of the Patriarchate of Constantinople. Actually, from that moment on, we are, today, the clergy of the Church of Constantinople, ”said Metropolitan Alexander.

Thus, the clergyman violated the decision of the Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church, which forbids the clergy of the Russian Church to interact with Constantinople.

Roman Lunkin, a leading researcher at the Institute of Europe and president of the Guild of Experts on Religion and Law, notes in a conversation with Gazeta.Ru.

According to the expert, according to the rules, the Ukrainian priest should now be anathematized, but this decision can only be made by Metropolitan of the UOC-MP Onufry.

At the same time, this is not the first time that Drabinko opposes the official position of the UOC of the Moscow Patriarchate. In 2012, the Holy Synod of the UOC-MP even accused him of misbehavior and removed him from the post of head of the Department for External Church Relations. As emphasized at the meeting, the metropolitan "sowed confusion and suspicion among the episcopate and the clergy."

By the time this decision was made, Drabinko had been an assistant for many years to Metropolitan Vladimir of Kiev and All Ukraine, who was then ill.

Already this year, in the spring, he signed an appeal to Bartholomew with a request to grant independence to the UOC. Around the same time, he published an article on the lb.ua website in which he explained the need for autocephaly.

Moreover, the metropolitan accused Russia of trying to annex Ukrainian territory.

However, Dybenko is not really a major figure in the Ukrainian church, Lunkin notes. “He is a metropolitan without a diocese. Surely he followed Constantinople in search of a “good life” and some more worthy role in creating a unified Ukrainian church,” the expert says.

At the same time, Dybenko is not the only Ukrainian priest who, even before the current split, was opposed to Moscow. There are several dozen such clergymen in the UOC-MP, says Lunkin.

Nevertheless, even despite this, the threat of a split within the UOC-MP cannot be considered serious.

“And there are several factors for this. Firstly, Ukrainian politicians turned on the church. This could not but affect the opinion of the clergy. Secondly, there is a clear understanding in the UOC-MP that Bartholomew's actions are illegal. And finally, few people in the UOC-MP want to associate themselves with the schismatic Filaret, who now looks like the most likely candidate for the role of head of the Ukrainian church united by Constantinople,” the expert argues.

HTML code to embed on a website or blog:

In Turkey, on the canonical territory of the Patriarchate of Constantinople, very few Greek parishioners remain. The Orthodox community was partially replenished by Russians who moved to the country for permanent residence. But among the flock of the Patriarchate there are also Turks who have accepted Orthodoxy. There have been more and more of them lately. In Greece they publish Orthodox literature in Turkish and publish materials about converts. Ahmed and Necla are two of the thousands of Turks who have changed their faith in recent years, and they, unlike others, do not hide it at all. They told the Bulgarian website "Doors to Pravoslavieto" about their spiritual quest, which led them to Orthodoxy, and what it means to be a Christian in Turkey. We offer this conversation to the readers of the Pravoslavie.Ru website.

/p>

– The Turkish press explains the current numerous baptisms in the country as a “return to their roots” of Turkish citizens of Greek or Armenian origin. And in your case, did national origin play a decisive role in your becoming a Christian?

Ahmed: Origin plays a role in some cases, but not in ours. Personally, I was born in Cappadocia, I have ancestors who came from the Caucasus. As far as I know, there were no Christians in my family. Entering the Orthodox Church is a consequence of my personal choice.

Nejla: My mother is from Kavala and my father is a Pontian. In my family, some people speak Romaic (a local dialect Greek used by the Islamized population. - Yu.M.). But the decision to leave Islam and embrace Orthodoxy was my personal choice, regardless of my background.

– Historically, Turkish identity is so closely linked to Islam that many Turks are completely unprepared to accept the idea of being both Turk and non-Muslim. How do you look at it?

N .: Indeed, many people do not consider you a "Turkish" if you profess another religion, especially if you are a Christian or a Jew. They think that you belong not just to another religion, but to another people.

A: This is due to historical reasons. The Ottoman order created an ethnic division into millets along religious lines. For example, all Orthodox formed an "Orthodox ethnos", and the administration did not attach importance to their national origin, whether they were Bulgarians, Serbs or Greeks. In Cappadocia, where I come from, religion was what divided the inhabitants into Romans and Turks. Orthodox in the Talas region, my native land, spoke Turkish as their mother tongue and even served the liturgy in Turkish. But it was precisely their belonging to the Orthodox Church that defined them as part of the "Romaic people."

However Turkish history knows other great examples. In the past in different parts Turkish diaspora, Turkish communities adopted Christianity. There are Christian Turks in Central Asia, Orthodox Gagauz in Romania, there are thousands of Turks who converted to Christianity in Turkey itself. Just because they are Christians does not mean they are not Turkish. And now I am a Christian, but at the same time I am 100% Turkish, and Turkish is my native language. So this division of people along religious lines is becoming more and more obsolete. People are still surprised when they hear that a certain Turk is a Christian, but little by little this is starting to be accepted as normal.

- What is your profession?

N .: I am a nutritionist and participate in volunteer activities.

A .: I was a manager in a large state-owned company and lived for some time in the USA. Then he had a business in Belgium.

– Ahmed, probably, the decision to convert to Christianity arose at a time when you lived and worked in a Christian country?

A .: No, the soil was prepared much earlier. Unfortunately, in Turkey, Christianity is presented as something coming "from outside". This is a mistake, because Orthodoxy is part of the history of our land. This is evident from the privileges that Mehmet the Conqueror gave to the Patriarchate of Constantinople.

Since childhood, I had some idea of Christianity, albeit through the prism of Islam. Many Muslims have great respect for Christians, which is due to the fact that the Koran recognizes Jesus as a prophet. In general, Muslims respect the Blessed Virgin Mary. I think you have seen how crowds of Muslim believers gather in the Roman churches of Istanbul to bow to the shrines and ask for help. In Turkey, we are ready from childhood to accept the message of Christianity.

If there are problems, then they are connected with the education that is received on both sides, and with ignorance. For example, many Muslims do not understand the meaning of the doctrine of Holy Trinity and they think that we worship three gods, that Christianity is a polytheistic religion. I say this not in terms of criticizing Islam, but simply quoting given fact as an example of ignorance.

- And yours, Nejla, the search also began in Turkey?

N .: Yes, when I studied at the university. My family as a whole was a believer, but without literally following all the precepts of Islam. I considered myself a Muslim until I started to move away from Islam while studying in Ankara. My parents left me freedom in regards to religion. Being in Islam, I felt an emptiness that needed to be filled. I read and searched myself. I entered the path that led me to Orthodoxy.

– Therefore, your path to Orthodoxy is the result of “local” experience, without influence from abroad.

A .: Any influence of American or European Christianity can only harm. I didn't feel good at all with the Christians there. They pushed me away from Christianity by turning it into psychotherapy. They go to church on Sunday to talk. But religion aims to fill some other void. In Europe, Christianity has been reduced to holidays without any connection to religion. Take, for example, Christmas. Many people say "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas". In Europe, people have a superficial connection with Christianity, without understanding its spiritual meaning.

– And how do local Christians differ from Europeans?

N: The fact that it is much closer to the essence and tradition of Christianity.

A .: And the fact that more believers.

N .: We go to the temple every Sunday, we read together Holy Bible every evening, we pray together, we try to fulfill all the requirements of our religion.

– Do you keep in touch with the local Orthodox community?

N .: Yes, I read for the Turkic-speaking believers (laughs).

– Probably, it is difficult for you to follow the service when it is all in Greek?

A .: Before any service, we prepare in advance at home. And we also have a bilingual edition of the New Testament, so we can follow the service in the Turkish text as well. It is important to understand in order to participate.

– The tragic fact of the apostasy of Father Euthymius from the Patriarchate of Constantinople in the 20s of the last century and the founding of the schismatic “Turkish Orthodox Church” made it very difficult to introduce Turkish in the Greek parishes of Constantinople, although other Christian denominations have long done so.

A: Yes, it is. We hope that over time the Orthodox Church will also have a liturgy in Turkish. Today, only the Creed is read in Turkish. The problem with the successors of Father Euthymius also needs to be solved – it is impossible to have hostility between the Churches. All Orthodox in Turkey must submit to the Ecumenical Patriarchate.

– Have you experienced a negative reaction in society after you were baptized? Are you oppressed?

A .: I didn’t see any negative and I can’t say that I feel harassment.

N .: I did not meet a negative reaction. My family was surprised but respect my choice.

– Do you think that there are many others in Turkey who will follow your example and convert to Christianity?

A .: and N .: Yes, many.

“However, until now, few people have been baptized.

N .: The fact is that there are much more people who were actually baptized than those who “show” that they were baptized. They are afraid of the reactions of the people around them. They are secret Christians.
A: Yes, there is fear. But this must change, as well as the attitude of society towards those who have changed religion. In any case, the Orthodox Church does not engage in any kind of proselytism. On the contrary, there are high requirements for those who want to come from other faiths. It is necessary to go through a long catechesis and test the sincerity of desire.

– So, it was not easy to enter the Orthodox Church?

N .: Yes, in past years, but we have been very striving for this.

– Do you feel fear because of attacks on Christians, such as, for example, the murder of the Catholic priest Father Santoro in Trabzon and the murder of Christians in Malatya? Who do you think is behind these attacks?

A .: I don’t think that something like this can happen in the capital. As Turkey negotiates with the European Union, the country is apparently changing. Turks are becoming more open and tolerant. But some radical circles naturally react to these changes. This is dark forces who have nothing to do with the state and are on the periphery of society.

Translated from Bulgarian by Yuri Maksimov