A case study in a Greek Orthodox Diocese

1 Church and Philanthropy in the Healthcare Sector: A case study in a Greek Orthodox Diocese

Penelope A. Christos Ν. Dimitrios A.

Anastasiadou Tsironis Αndreadis Theologian, Lab Technical Assistant, Dr. Theology, Special Laboratory-Teaching Staff, Department of Oral Medicine –Pathology, Dental School, Aristotle As. Prof. Contemporary Social Theory, Sector of Ethics and Sociology Dep. of Theology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki As. Prof. Department of Oral Medicine-Pathology Dental School, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki

University of Thessaloniki Corespondence: e-mail: apinelop@dent.auth.gr

Abstract

Philanthropy gains a special content in philanthropic work offered by physithe Orthodox Tradition as it is consid- cians, nurses and several specialists, in ered to be the epitome of effective con- assistance to patient care. Eventually, cern for one’s neighbor and eventually such benchmarking identified divergent one of the highest virtues. The histori- issues focusing on evidence of the intercal review of the philanthropic work of temporal shift in where and how health the Orthodox Church in the healthcare care is provided to patients. However, sector, from the Early Christian peri- specific convergence points have also od, through the Byzantine Empire and been identified, based on the unchangthe era of Ottoman domination, to the ing Christian values, as well as on the newly established Greek state, unfolds fundamental criteria of diaconal work, in the present paper. At the same time, setting the value of human life over and the contemporary structure and opera- above any historical context. tion of the social multi-specialty clinic, Keywords:established by the parish of the Holy Orthodox Church philanthropy; Orthodox Metropolis of Neapoli and Stavroupoli Diocese; healthcare sector; historical in Greece, is also presented. The above background. mentioned review supports the benchmarking of such social multi-specialty clinic philanthropic action and that of the historical Church Diaconia in the field of health care. First of all, it should be stressed that contemporary medical care is a state concern; however, within the current financial depression this Citation: Anastasiadou P., Tsironis Ch. & Andreadis D. Church and Philanthropy in the Healthcare Sector: A case study in a Greek Orthodox Diocese. Theology & Culture. 2020; 1(2): 11-27. Doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19373.92642 social multi-specialty clinic provides

It is a fact that philanthropy, both as a concept and as an act, has gained several interpretations1 and forms throughout the centuries (Church of Greece, 2001, p. 23). Such forms bear historical burden and any decoding efforts unfold aspects of the long course of a culture, an era, and most of all a whole country. The term philanthropy is found in the Greek dictionary meaning the love for fellow human beings2 (Tegopoulos, Fitrakis, 1993, p. 818). This term has Greek roots and is interpreted as the love, affection and active interest of man for his neighbor – an interest not limited to friends or relatives but rather extending to all fellow humans (Kostandelos, 2008, p. 37). In the Orthodox Church Tradition, philanthropy3 is defined as the prevention or remedy of moral, spiritual or material needs for people who are in misery or poverty (Church of Greece, 2001, p. 23). According to the above mentioned Tradition, Church is a solid God-human body founded and headed by Christ with all its faithful members as its body. Thus, in such unbreakable body, when one member suffers, all other members “sympathise” with him/ her4. In this sense, the full meaning and content of philanthropy5 is evident from the establishment of the Church up to nowadays (Stathopoulos, Bourikos, 2007, p. 142).

However, philanthropy as an act of love crosses a variety of fields, among which health as well. In fact by early 20th century, health is considered an indi-

1 Cf. “Proper definitions are critically important to the analysis and expression of ideas (…)”. See Sulek, 2010, p. 193. 2 Cf. The Modern Greek Dictionary refers to the concept of aid – mainly financial – to the needy. See Dictionary of the common Modern Greek Language, 2009, p. 1424. 3 “The Christian understanding of philanthropy expresses itself very clearly as diaconia, as service to one’s fellow man; from the beginning this service formed a central element of the life of the church”. See Vantsos, Kiroudi, 2007, p. 257. 4 Cf. “so in Christ we, though many, form one body, and each member belongs to all the others” See Romans 12: 5. 5 Cf. “Early Christian philanthropy was informed by the theological concept of the imago Dei, that humans were created in the image of God (…). The Christian understanding of the imago Dei, viewed in the light of the doctrine of the Incarnation, was to have four important consequences for practical ethics (…). The first was the impetus that the doctrine gave to Christian charity and philanthropy. (…). Just as God loved humans, so they were expected to respond to divine love by extending love to a brother, who bore the image of God (…).Love of God and devotion to Grist provided the motivation for love of others that had its practical outworking in charity. Compassion was regarded as a manifestation of Christian love (…) and an essential element of the Christian’s obligation to all people. (…). Yet Christian love was not only to be extended merely to fellow Christian but to neighbors and even enemies”. See Ferngren, 2009, p. 98-99.

vidual asset. Health services are offered in hospitals, which operate as philanthropic foundations in which the elderly, deprived, disabled and orphans are treated. Public intervention takes only the form of health protection against infectious and contagious diseases, especially epidemics. However, since early 20th century, the viewpoint that health is a national wealth and a collective asset with a social dimension, as it safeguards social cohesion, is gradually gaining ground (Paparigopoulos – Pechlivanis, 2009, p. 36-37). Several institutions can assist the above mentioned cohesion, and Church is one of them. The present paper, in the form of a historical review, investigates the historical contribution of the Church in the field of health care6. However, the conduct of field research in the modern social multi-specialty clinic7 ensures the tracing of both convergence and divergence points in the philanthropic work of the Orthodox Church over the centuries.

1. Orthodox Church and Philanthropy in the Healthcare Sector: Historical Background

¨For, I was a stranger and you welcomed me I was naked and you gave me clothing I was sick and you looked after me (…)¨ Mt. 25: 35-36.

1.1 Philanthropy in Early Church

It is a fact that in Early Christian communities the virtue of love was a focal point8. Besides, the example of Christ was still vivid; with his earthly activity, he established the ideals of mercifulness and love for the neighbor9, in the form of active assistance10. This assistance concerned those in need, such as the poor, orphans and sick. However, there is no active guidance or specialized care for the treatment of patients, apart from visit and prayer. Of course, treatment as a sign of active love was welcomed, but involvement of official medicine had not been established yet (Miller, 1998, p. 66-67). According to

6 See Tsironis, N. Ch. (2007). Globalization and local communities: Social ethics and community work. Thessaloniki: Vanias. 7 Established by the parish of the Holy Metropolis of Neapoli and Stavroupoli in Greece. 8 “If I give all I possess to the poor, (...) but do not have love, I gain nothing. (...). (...) the greatest of these is love. See A΄ Corinthians 13: 3, 13. 9 Cf. The parable of the good Samaritan: Lk. 10: 25-37. 10 Cf. “In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead”. See James 2:17.

other sources, given that at the time there was no social care or solidarity, patients were treated only if necessary or available. However, experts support that Christian Diaconia towards patients in the form of conscientious nursing, palliative care, as well as the provision of food and drink, even without any specialized medical knowledge, managed to reduce mortality to 2/3 or even more (Ferngren, 2009, p. 121). In this sense, the philanthropy of the faithful to the needy due to some physical illness is evident in early Christianity (Ferngren, 2009, p. 113-114), following Christ’s example. Actually, as the years passed by and the number of the faithful increased, they ordained deacons (from the Greek word Diaconia) to effectively assist the Church philanthropy and welfare. Care for the poor, widows, orphans, patients, prisoners and slaves was among their tasks, while in times of natural disasters, epidemics11 and famine, the early Christian community provided remarkable assistance12 (Stathopoulos, Bourikos, 2007, p. 148-149). Regarding the contributors of the aforementioned help, it should be stressed that deacons and bishops raised money from the rich to help the deprived (Miller, 1998, p. 67). Furthermore, the church, seeing people’s needs grow, worked towards the establishment of philanthropic foundations, such as the almshouses, nursing homes and hospitals13 (Church of Greece, 2001, p. 23). As far as healthcare sector is concerned, Christians, endangering their own lives, paid visits to the patients’ homes to treat them and take care of all their needs (Stathopoulos, Bourikos, 2007, p. 149). More specifically, deacons had as their main concern to meet and relief the patients’ physical needs, while deaconesses would take care of the poor, especially sick women. At the same time, they encouraged other Christians to visit and assist patients (Ferngren, 2009, p. 114). Remarkably enough, in periods of epidemics, when there was an increased need for assistance, Christians were committed to treat both fellow-faithful and infidel patients as well (Stathopoulos, Bourikos, 2007, p. 149).

11 Cf. “It was the Christian belief in personal and corporate philanthropy (…) that introduced (…) the concept of social responsibility in treating epidemic disease. The only care of the sick and dying during the epidemic of 312-13 was provided by Christian churches”. See Ferngren, 2009, p. 117-118. 12 Cf. “The Christian philanthropy (...) had to show to the orphans the parents’ care, to the widows the spouses’ care and protection, compassion for the disabled, shelter for the foreigners, food for the hungry, water for the thirsty, clothes for the naked, visit for the sick, help for the prisoners”. See Church of Greece, 2001, p. 23. 13 Cf. “(...) related with the philanthropic activity of the Church, the monasteries (...) were the numerous philanthropic foundations of Byzantium: orphanages, nursing homes, hostels, hospitals which enjoyed the generous support of the pious emperors and the rich donations in real estate”. See Kostantelos, 1994, p. 139.

Undoubtedly, Byzantium was linked to the accreditation and domination of Christianity (313 AD) as the official religion of the Roman Empire. Philanthropy was one of the characteristics of the Byzantine culture14. Such activity comprised, among others, the financial support of widows, orphans, foreigners, the poor and the homeless. Also, necessary initiatives were instituted to release slaves, prisoners and captives. In addition, there were provisions for the unemployed in order to acquire skills in a variety of crafts and thus join the labor market (Stathopoulos, Bourikos, 2007, p. 151, 158-160). The 4th century BC philanthropic foundation of Vasileiada was the hallmark of philanthropy in the healthcare sector operating a hospital ward, among others. This foundation was called after its founder, Saint Basil [Vasileios] bishop of Caesarea15 , while it was considered to be the first system of organized philanthropy and the most renowned refuge for the weak (Kostandelos, 2008, p. 209)16 as well as the root cause of the later nursing institutions. It was established during the famine of 368/370 AD and was divided into wards in order to host and treat, with the help of medical staff, the poor, homeless, orphans, lepers, sick, disabled and abandoned children (Ferngren, 2009, p. 124,125).

Of course, a number of philanthropic foundations were established in the years that followed, demonstrating the organized care for the weak. Such foundations are orphanages, usually run by a clergyman (Stathopoulos, Bourikos, 2007, p.159) while in the healthcare sector hotels and almshouses make their appearance in the 4th and 5th centuries AD. The latter are established by local Churches for the purpose of providing hospitality, food and primary healthcare to the weak (Church of Greece, 2001, p. 25). It should be noted that the above mentioned healthcare was included in the pastoral duties of priests and monks who visited sick people in both hospitals and their homes (Kostandelos, 1994, p. 150). However, hotels and almshouses were later converted into hostels and hospitals, closely related to the hospitals established in late 19th and early 20th century17. The medical sectors developed in such foundations

14 Cf. “The necessary material goods for hospitality and philanthropic work came mainly from the monks’ work, the Christians emperors’ and state officials’ donations”. See Vlassopoulos, 2006, p. 59. 15 Saint Basil [Vasileios] studied rhetoric, grammar, philosophy, astronomy, geometry and medicine. Analytically on Saint Basil [Vasileios] bishop of Caesarea. See Ioannidis, 1992, p. 92-98. 16 More specifically on Vasileiada See Kostantelos, 2008, p. 209-211. 17 Cf. “(...) the Church played a leading role in the development of structures for the patient care, laying the foundations for the birth of the modern Hospital”. See F. Avgoustidis,

were surgery, internal medicine, ophthalmology, while there was a separate wing for women. Furthermore, among others, a leprosarium for the treatment of leprosy patients was also operating (Church of Greece, 2001, p. 25). A characteristic example of the 12th century Christian philanthropy in the healthcare sector was the Christian foundation of the Monastery of the Christ Pantokrator (Miller, 1998, p. 16)18. This monastery was founded in 1136 AD after an imperial initiative and comprised a hospital as well as other similar healthcare units. Pantokrator’s Hospital19 Comprised clinics and was staffed by physicians, medical assistants, surgeon assistants, pharmacists, midwives and nurses, who treated a variety of diseases, such as diseases of the eyes, intestines etc. (Kostandelos, I. D., 2008, p. 225-227, 229). It is worth mentioning that in the above mentioned Hospital, the monks, occasionally at first and then permanently, were engaged in the patients’ care (Pollak, 2007, p. 437).

1.3 Philanthropy during the Ottoman Domination and in the Early Hellenic State

Undoubtedly, the conquest of Constantinople by the Ottomans in 1453 AD marks the weakening of the Byzantine state (Anastasopoulos, 2010, p. 126, 128). During this unfavorable period, Church continues to play an important role with regard to social and charitable work (Christodoulos – Archbishop of Athens and All Greece, 2004, p. 41). Besides, as already mentioned, the philanthropic tradition of Church in the healthcare sector is deeply rooted in the Early Christian era. During the Ottoman domination, the philanthropic activities of the Church continued and extended in the establishment and operation of several foundations and monasteries for the care of the suffering, poor, orphans, widows and the deprived. The social work of the Church included the burial of the poor and foreigners, the care for the elderly, disabled and unprotected infants (Stathopoulos, Bourikos, 2007, p. 162-165).

The social and philanthropic work of the Church continued after the liberation from the Ottoman domination, in the newly established Greek state. Some of the fields of action of such philanthropic work are healthcare, treatment of epidemics, distribution of medicines and clothes, protection of the deprived, children, large families and the organization of bread lines. It should be noted

2015, p. 77. 18 Details on the services provided, staff, administration and medical treatment at the Monastery of Christ Pantokrator See Miller, 1998, p. 18-26. 19 For all philanthropic foundations in Constantinople such as Hospitals, Hostels - Hotels, Nursery Houses, Nursing Homes, Orphanages, Almshouses, See Ecumenical Patriarchate, 2011, p. 386-403.

that, during the same period, financial assistance from several philanthropists established hospitals and orphanages to relieve the deprived (Stathopoulos, Bourikos, 2007, p. 166-169).

2. Orthodox Church and Philanthropy in the Healthcare Sector: A case study in a Greek Orthodox Diocese

Pictures from the Holy Metropolis of Neapoli and Stavroupoli social multi-specialty clinic reception and examination room for children and adults.

Eventually, Church in modern Greece keeps rendering its philanthropic action. Undoubtedly, the Orthodox Church of Greece is a philanthropic institution offering a rather costly and multi-level work to every fellow-man, regardless of race and religion. Nowadays, the Church operates more than 1000 philanthropic foundations with the help of volunteers. The money spent annually to support such work exceeds € 30,000,000 (euro)20. Clearly, in the aforementioned amount the voluntary work of numerous people should be added on the one hand, and on the other, the supply of several goods – food,

20 Cf. “The European Union could distinguish three systems of state and church relations. The first basic system is characterized by the existence of a “state” church. In this case, there are basic interconnections between the state and the church. The system of (...) Greece (...) comes under in this category. It should be noted, however, that the Church in Greece is not just a state church but is characterized as the dominant one”. See, Petrou, 2004, p. 158. And Cf. “The Church’s finances and property brought it to (...) conflicts with the State (...). In the twentieth century (...) an important part of the monastic land passed to the state (...). In 1952 (...) the State officially took over the pay of the Clergy (...). In 1987 the (...) law (1700/6.5.87) proposed the nationalization of almost all of the ecclesiastical property. The Church reacted strongly (...). The problem of the financial relationship between the Church and the state remains (...)”. See Kokosalakis, 2011, p. 338-339.

As far as the healthcare sector is concerned, apart from the patients’ support in general (Christodoulos – Archbishop of Athens and All Greece, 2004, p. 35-36) and home care (Stathopoulos, Bourikos, 2007, p. 179), the church also provides for the purchase of medicines and patients’ transfer abroad for additional medical care, while also paying special attention to young drug addicts and people suffering from AIDS. In addition, there are foundations21 under the aegis of the Church of Greece for the relief of the chronic patients (13), the disabled (10), the mentally ill (3) and the blind (1), as well as Hospitals (4) Primary healthcare units (6), more than 100 blood banks, (Christodoulos – Archbishop of Athens and All Greece, 2004, p. 42-43), a hospice and physiotherapy centers (Church of Greece, 2001, p. 28).

At this point, it is worth mentioning that healthcare is primarily offered by the state through nursing institutions. Moreover, the Greek Constitution provides for the healthcare, anticipating it as an individual and social right22 . The above mentioned constitutional recognition and safeguarding of the individual and social right of health, indicates the importance the Greek law attributes to this right, as well as the principle of respect and protection of human dignity. Of course, health law entails both individual and social components. More specifically, the individual right to health is defined as the right to abstain from any kind of interference with the personality, the physical and mental integrity, as well as the human freedom; while the right to healthcare is defined as a social right to health (Mitrosyllis, 2009, p. 29-31). Based on this assumption, preserving and continuing the philanthropic work of the Church is rather ambiguous from a skeptical point of view23. Social care issues are a duty and obligation of the state towards its citizens and, of course, it should not be left to the philanthropists’ benevolence (Peter, 2004, p. 407). In addition, in other sources it is stressed that the extensive health services network 21 For the whole philanthropic work of the Church of Greece; See Church of Greece, 2001, p. 28. 22 More specifically, the Constitution of Greece states: State care for citizens’ health: Article 21: “3. ¨The State shall care for the health of citizens and shall adopt special measures for the protection of youth, old age, disability and for the relief of the needy¨. See, Greek Parliament, The Greek Constitution. Part II: Individual and social rights. Retrieved from: http:// www.hellenicparliament.gr/Vouli-ton-Ellinon/To-Politevma/Syntagma/article-21/. 23 Philanthropy, as an act, is considered to be an outdated and incomplete form of social care, at the same time, it manifests the social superiority of the philanthropist, against the inferiority of the recipient. As a result, social marginalization, exclusion, inaction and entrapment of the needy is created. For this reason and in the Church, the concept of philanthropy has been replaced with that of diaconia. However, in Greece and in church in particular the use of the term philanthropy is still used. More specifically, See Petrou, 2004, p. 407-408.

of the Church is not associated with the structures of the Ministry of Health and Social Solidarity – thus there is no observance and control of such services (Oiconomou, 2012, p. 20). However, it is underlined that the Church, apart from its salvific mission (F. Florovsky, 1989, p. 191), does not ignore the difficulties and material needs of people (Church of Greece, 2001, p.20), especially in the current global economic crisis (Tsompanidis, 2012, p. 71). This crisis reveals, among others, the issues of unemployment, poverty, income decline and job insecurity. Such issues greatly affect public health24 as they increase the rate of mental health problems, suicide, mortality, substance abuse, increased health problems in children and teenagers, etc. (Poulopoulos, 2011, p. 305-306).

The case study we focus on also seeks to alleviate the above mentioned negative issues and support the weak. It concerns the structure of the social multi-specialty clinic run by the parish of the Holy Metropolis of Neapoli and Stavroupoli25. This multi-specialty clinic was inaugurated in October 2013 by the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew and started operating in January 2014. The above mentioned clinic26 provides the socially vulnerable groups and the deprived27 of the parish28, with free medical services in more than 20

24 Cf. WHO (World Health Organization): “Health is a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity”. Preamble to the Constitution of WHO as adopted by the International Health Conference, New York, 19 June - 22 July 1946; signed on 22 July 1946 by the representatives of 61 States (Official Records of WHO, no. 2, p. 100) and entered into force on 7 April 1948. The definition has not been amended since 1948. Retrieved from http://www.who.int/suggestions/faq/en/. 25 Available information on the entire social and philanthropic work on the site of the Metropolis. Access at: http://www.imnst.gr/wp/. 26 The social multi-specialty clinic includes the following facilities: Two examination rooms for children, including children with special needs, an adult examination rooms, a cardiograph, a stethoscope, baby scales, and a lecture room to inform the public on several topics. 27 However, socially vulnerable groups are required to provide the following: their identity card or passport, a certificate from an insurance fund that they are uninsured (or insured yet with low or no income), a tax bill of up to € 7,000, a marital status certificate, a recent PPC, or OTE (Telecommunications company) account, or a certificate of permanent residence, and their unemployment benefit card. 28 Those visit the social multi-specialty clinic should be residents of the following parishes: Polichni, Meteora, Neapoli, Stavroupoli, Kordelio, Sindos, Neochorouda, Nea Magnisia, Oraiokastro, Paliokastro, Sykies, Ampelokipi, Pefka, Asvestohori, Retziki, Filiro, Chortiatis, Eyosmos, Ilioupoli, Diavata, Efkarpia, Pentalofos; however, it is underlined that any needy resident of another parish will not be excluded either.

specialties29, blood tests30, vaccines for the children and drug administration31 . The philanthropic work is administered by the Holy Metropolis of Neapoli and Stavroupoli, aided by the constant assistance of numerous volunteers32 .

The main entrance for the social services of the parish of the Holy Metropolis of Neapoli and Stavroupoli, under Metropolite Barnabas, located at 11 Mitropoleos Str., Neapoli Thessaloniki, Greece.

As regards the assessment of such work, it should be noted that from the establishment of the multi-specialty clinic to date, 1,140 children and 1,099 adults have been examined; 22,724 drugs have been administered, while 11,100 other medicines are still available. It is worth mentioning that, from the surplus medicines of the clinic, a variety of social structures, such as Hospitals, social pharmacies, Doctors in the World, prisons, etc, benefit as well33 .

29 It should be noted that initially only a Pediatric Department operated, with the rest later staffed by volunteers – physicians. Therefore, currently the following specialties are available: a General Practitioner, a Dermatologist, a Speech Therapist, a Neurologist, a Pediatric Surgeon, a Rheumatologist, a Pulmonologist, a Pediatrician, a Gynecologist, a Hematologist, a Psychologist, an Internist, an Endocrinologist, a Neurological Surgeon, a Cardiologist, an Orthopedic, an Urologist, a Psychiatrist, a Vascular Surgeon and an Oncologist. 30 Voluntary treatment of a specific number of patients in the Vioiatriki Private Medical Center – 55 Koloniari St., Ksirokrini, Thessaloniki. 31 Medicines are voluntarily offered by citizens. 32 The social multi-specialty clinic comprises: 29 physicians, 5 nurses for the registration and organization of drugs in alphabetical order and expiration date, one clinic administrator, one secretary for appointments and file archiving and one general assistant. 33 Specifically the medicines go to the following: Theageneio Hospital, Evangelismos tis Theotokou Monastery, Ormylia Chalkidiki, Euromedica, Geniki Kliniki of Thessaloniki, Doctors in the World, Mount Athos-Skiti Agia Anna, Social Pharmacy of the Municipality of Pavlos Melas and Municipality of Neapoli-Stavroupoli, Multipurpose Regional Medical Center of Megisti Kastellorizo, Thessaloniki General Detention Faciliti (Diavata Prison).

Regarding the future aspirations of the multi-specialty clinic, we emphasize, on the one hand, the unselfish disposal of the parish and the volunteers to continue their philanthropic work and, on the other, the aim of enriching the variety of medical equipment. As for the volunteers in the social multi-specialty clinic, holding solidarity and humanity as their priority, they emphasize the need to continue their philanthropic work as they realize that poverty is a burning issue as such; yet, combined with illness it constitutes a major social issue34. In addition, according to the World Health Organization, the social issue is based on the assumption that health inequality cannot benefit society as a whole, since health and welfare are necessary factors for economic and social development (WHO, 2012, p. 1). On their part, patients are grateful for the philanthropists who selflessly care for their treatment, hoping that the structure will keep benefiting the needy in the future35 .

3. Orthodox Diocese and Philanthropy: A Fundamental principal

As evident from the above, the initiative for the establishment of the social multi-specialty clinic of the Holy Metropolis of Neapoli and Stavroupoli, is based on the relief for the weak. The parish, the living cell of ecclesiastical life, performs a variety of social activities, one of which is volunteering36. Volunteering, as an ardent nexus of social responsibility and solidarity, seeks to alleviate human pain and resolve the various issues of the local community. In addition, the parish is a potential network of volunteer cooperation37, further assisted by the local government and several cultural institutions. Thus, volunteer parish activities38 are considered positive for their contribution to

34 All information comes from an on-site study, a patient file study as well as an interview from the competent employee, Ms Maria Charalampidou. At present there are no written sources. 35 All information comes from the file and the competent employee, Ms Maria Charalampidou. 36 On the general and in-depth investigation of the phenomenon of volunteering. See Polyzoidis, 2006. 37 Cf. “Philanthropic and voluntary organizations are undoubtedly highly esteemed by Greeks (...). The positive opinion, however, is not presented as voluntary participation: only 27.3% of the population has thought seriously about volunteering (... )”. See Polyzoidis, 2006, p. 116-117. 38 Cf. “Theoretically, personal motivation for voluntary activity is distinguished into altruistic, self-centered (...) and feelings of commitment. (...)The motivation due to feeling of commitment comprises moral and religious duty, contribution to the local society, reciprocity (...)”. See Polizoidis, 2006, p. 71.

the activation of values such as solidarity39, altruism40 and humanity (Prot. Kalliakmanis, 2002, p. 27, 30, 45-46). The above mentioned activation of values is of great significance as they are fundamental principles of individual and collective cohabitation that members of a community accept, while their observance implies and supports social cohesion. Consequently, through mapping the diverse social values, all priorities, ways of action as well as any potential malfunction of individual and social life can be explained.

In the Orthodox Christian tradition, such values are based on love, unity and freedom. Within the philanthropic activity of the parish, these values are translated into 1) love for the diaconia/ help for the weak; 2) recognition of the value of every human being, which promotes unity, equality, peace, justice; and 3) philanthropic work through the volunteer’s free will. At this point, however, it should be underlined that such values also form the basic criteria for performing diaconia41 of the parish, which are the following: (1) Diaconia is transformed into assistance to every vulnerable human being, regardless of his/ her social, economic and political status, elements that lay the foundations for solidarity on an ecumenical level. (2) Diaconia and assistance free from any feelings of alms42 or induction of guilt and impregnated with love, care and dignity to the needy, such as patients, the disabled, etc. (3) Avoidance of a sense of superiority towards the needy and consequent consolidation of

39 Cf. A rather interesting viewpoint on part of social sciences and Emil Durkheim about decoding of human behavior in the phenomenon of solidarity is the following: for Durkheim society is above all a moral unity of people. Moral unity is inherent in the terms sociality, social bond and social solidarity. Within such unity, the collective consciousness prevails, i.e. the attachment of all people to common perceptions, feelings, beliefs determining the people’s behavior and function in a coherent way. [Emil Durkheim (1858-1917), is considered to be the father of sociology]. See Antonopoulou, 2008, p. 190, 197. 40 Cf. “Our times distinguish for privatization and individualism. (...). People’s problems are sharpened and loneliness and isolation are gaining ground.” See Protop. Kalliakmanis, 2002, p. 25. 41 Cf. “Diaconia in the sense of social care in Christianity has been anticipated as a basic element of Christ’s teachings on love, the values, reference and practice of which has created a model of care in the world throughout history.” See Tsironis, 2013, p. 71. 42 It is worth mentioning at this point that philanthropy, as a concept synonymous to charity, is rather controversial content for many people. More specifically, it is believed that philanthropy as an action entails the economic superiority of philanthropists who offer, versus the weak people who receive and thus, the concept of economic and social inequality. See Vantsos, 2013, p. 103.

the feelings of love, justice43, solidarity44, and respect for the human dignity. (4) Diaconia aspires to offer help, with the immediate aim of reintegrating man as a free, equal, integral member of society. (5) Philanthropic action must be free from any individual, institutional, economic or political aspirations45 (Tsironis, 2007, p. 157, 167, 176-184, 203, 205).

Conclusion

Philanthropy as a notion and content is not unknown in the Orthodox tradition as it is considered the embodiment of its spiritual role and at the same time one of the highest virtues. Therefore during Early Christianity, philanthropy in the healthcare sector found a niche for development, mainly through the foundations, with the contribution of priests, deacons, deaconesses and the faithful. The philanthropic work continued in the Byzantine era, with Vasileiada among the best known examples along with the Monastery of the Christ Pantokrator, which comprised, among others, infirmaries for patients staffed with a variety of medical and auxiliary staff. Amid difficulties and adversities, during the Ottoman domination, diaconia was maintained with the help of the philanthropic foundations and, eventually, the same work was preserved in the newly established Greek state.

The modern era finds philanthropic work in continuity and consistency with its long tradition, although modified in comparison with the previous centuries. Health, as an individual and social right, is currently protected by the Greek Constitution, thus philanthropic foundations no longer undertake the citizens’ health and medical care, but rather this burdens the Greek state and public hospitals. However, the social multi-specialty clinic as a case report has shown that a large number of patients are seeking its benefits, making the philanthropic work of the Church a necessary condition of support for the

43 However, church tradition emphasizes that philanthropy, apart from offering, extends to the defense of the weak, condemnation of social injustice and ensuing attempt to bring social justice. See, Petrou, 1992, p.109. Of course, such justice can be achieved by tracking at the same time the causes of social and economic injustice. See Tzombanidis, 2012, p. 77. 44 “Solidarity actions are not altruistic altogether. They may be motivated by reciprocity and social responsibility; they may reflect the simple fact of social interdependence and religious principles, which are primarily a task for God rather than people”. See Spicker, 2004, p. 81. 45 Cf. “The so-called philanthropic work has become a consumer product advertised and used as a way for promoting institutions to compete with each other. Often, we in the Church tend to enter into a self-righteous competition with the state and other institutions, where everyone tries to prove that he has the best social face (....). Such competition has its roots in vanity.” See Protop. Kofinas, p. 2.

deprived. In addition, the above mentioned work supports the social right to care, acting as the guardian of the constitutionally protected human dignity. In addition to the above, it should be mentioned that currently ecclesiastical healthcare is shifting from the foundations and patient’s home to the modern social structures of the parish. As far as patients’ care is concerned, it is now assisted by medical and nursing staff, while deacons, priests and the faithful take care of the needs and the organization of the social clinic.

At the same time, we trace points of convergence of the modern form of philanthropy with that of previous centuries laying in fundamental Christian values such as love, unity, freedom as well as in basic diaconia criteria such as support of the dignity of vulnerable groups, attempt to reintegrate them into society, and, of course, unselfish motivation of volunteers. Clearly, the unselfish and long lasting diaconia pass optimistic messages for the continuation of philanthropic work to the benefit of the needy.

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank the Holy Metropolis of Neapoli and Stavroupoli, in Thessaloniki, Protop. Father Vasileios Kalliakmani, Ms. Maria Charalambidou, as well as all the volunteers of the social multi-specialty clinic.

Anastassopoulos, A. (2010). Forms of social assistance and welfare in Islam with reference to the Ottoman Empire. In K. Dikaios (Edit.), History of Social Policy, p. (126-155). Athens: Gutenberg. Antonopoulou, N. M. (2008). The Classics of Sociology: Social Theory and Modern Society. Athens: Savvalas. Avgoustidis, A. (2015). By associating the person who suffers: Introduction to the pastoral health. Athens: Armos. Christodoulos, Archbishop of Athens and All Greece, (2004). The Church and its social work. In Theology and the World in Dialogue: Honorary Volume to Professor George I. Mantzaridis. Thessaloniki: Pournaras. Ecumenical Patriarchate (2011). Treatment Advocates: Introduction to pastoral diakonia in Health. Network of the Ecumenical Patriarchate for pastoral diakonia in health. Ferngren, B. G. (2009). Medicine & Health care in early Christianity. U.S.A: The Johns Hopkins University press. F. Florosifsky, G. (1989). Topics of Orthodox Theology. Athens: Artos Zois. Greek Parliament. The Greek Constitution. Part II: Individual and social rights. Retrieved on May 7, 2017 from: http://www.hellenicparliament.gr/ Vouli-ton-Ellinon/To Politevma/Syntagma/article-21/. Ioannidis, Ι. Α. (1992). Medicine in the New Testament and Fathers of the Church: Contribution to History and Ethics - Ethics of Medicine. Thessaloniki: (n.e.). Kokosalakis, N. (2011). Orthodoxy and Church & State Relations in Modern Greece. In L. Maratou-Alipranti & M. Thanopoulou & A. Teperoglou & E. Fronimou (Ed.). Aspects of Sociology in modern Greece: Honorary volume in memory of Ioanna Lampiri-Dimaki (p. 329-341). Sakkoula: Athens-Komotini. Kostantelos, I.D., (2008). The Greek Saga and Greek-Christian Philanthropy: From antiquity to Byzantine Middle Ages. Thessaloniki: Vanias. Kostantelos, I. D., (1994). Poverty, society and philanthropy: In the later medieval Greek world. Thessaloniki: Vanias. Miller, S.T. (1998). The Birth of the Hospital in the Byzantine Empire. (translated by N. Kellermanos). Athens: Beta.

Mitrosyli, M. (2009). Health Law, Health Units, Health Professionals, Patients. Athens: Papazisis. Oikonomou, Ch. (2012). Reports/ 7. “The Institutional Framework of Illness Benefits in Greece: The Role and function of the National Health System”. Athens: Labor Institute of the Greek General Confederation of Labour (GSSE). Observatory on Economic and Social Developments. Retrieved from: http:// ineobservatory.gr/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/report7.pdf. Paparigopoulou-Pechlivani, P. (2009). Health law: Fundamental concepts. Organization of public health services. Rights of the healthcare user. Athens: Nomiki Vivliothiki. Petrou, S. I. (2004). Christianity and Society: Sociological Analysis of the Relationship of Christianity with Society and Culture. Thessaloniki: Vanias. Petrou, S. I. (1992). Social justice: The problem of social justice in the tradition of Orthodoxy. Thessaloniki: Paratiritis. Philanthropy. (2009). In: Dictionary of the common Modern Greek Language (p. 1424). Thessaloniki: Aristotle University of Thessaloniki. Institute of Modern Greek Studies. Manolis Triantafyllidis Foundation. Polizoidis, P. (2006). Volunteering in social protection. Athens: Ellinika Grammata. Pollak, K. (2007). Medicine in antiquity: Greece-Rome-Byzantium. Medicine in the Bible and the Talmud. (Translated by A. Delikari). Athens: Papadimas. Poulopoulos, Ch. (2011). Social Work and Addictions: Communities of Change. Athens: Topos. Protopresbyter Kalliakmanis, I. B. (2002). Volunteering and social responsibility. Thessaloniki: Mygdonia. Protopresbyter Kofinas, S. (n.d.), Approaching ourselves and our fellow man through charity. Special Synodal Committee on Special Pastoral Issues and Situations, The Church of Greece. Retrieved from: http://www.ecclesia.gr/ greek/holysynod/commitees/pastoral/pastoral-0006.htm Spicker, P. (2004). Welfare State: A General Theory. (translated by Ch. Economou). Athens: Dionikos. Stathopoulos, P. A. & Bourikos, D. H. (2007). Critical Approaches to Orthodox Culture: Views of the Greek Example. D. Magriplis (Ed.). Thessaloniki: Stamoulis.

Sulek, M. (2010). On the Modern Meaning of Philanthropy. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 39 (2), p. 193-212. Doi: 10.1177/0899764009333052. Tegopoulos, Fitrakis, (1993). Philanthropy. In Greek Dictionary (p. 818). Athens: Armonia. The Church of Greece (2001). The testimony of love. The philanthropic and social work of the Church of Greece. Athens: Communication and Educational Service of the Church of Greece.

Tsironis, N. Ch. (2013). Diaconia, society, testimony: A sociological and theological approach. In: Holy Metropolis of Neapoli and Stavroupoli. Scientific conference: From the Diaconia of Divine Logos to the Diaconia of the fellow man. Thessaloniki: Holy Metropolis of Neapoli and Stavroupoli. Tsironis, N. Ch. (2007). Globalization and local communities: Social ethics and community work. Thessaloniki: Vanias. Tzompanidis, Ch. S. (2012). From charity to fighting its causes: The duty of the Church to the challenges of economic globalization. Theologia, 83, (4), 71-80. Retrieved from: http://www.ecclesia.gr/greek/press/theologia/index.asp. Vantsos, M. (2013). Philanthropy according to Saint Gregory Palamas. World: Electronic Journal of Orthodox Theology and Christian Culture, (2), 103-112. Retrieved from: http://blogs.auth.gr/mvantsos/ files/2017/02/%CE%9C%CE%B9%CE%BB%CF%. Vantsos, M., Kiroudi, M. (2007). An Orthodox View of Philanthropy and Church Diaconia, Christian Bioethics, 13:3, pp: 251-268. Doi: 10.1080/13803600701732082. Vlassopoulos, K. (2006). Soul of Body Healing: Religion and Medicine seek the causes and cure of diseases, from antiquity to present time. Athens: Grigoris. World Health Organization (WHO). (2012). ¨HEALTH 2020: A European policy framework and strategy for the 21st century¨. Retrieved from: http:// www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/169803/RC62wd09-Eng.pdf.

2 The historical geopolitics of Religion in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Balkans: Aspects of coexistence between Orthodox Christianity and Islam

Efstathios C. Lianos Liantis MPhil, MTheol, PhD, PDRF Head of the Greek Delegation to the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA)

Special Envoy on Combating Antisemitism and Preserving Holocaust Remembrance Corespondence: e-mail: liantis.efstathios@mfa.gr

Abstract

The paper tries to tract the histor- today’s interfaith dialogues and comical points of coexistence between munications between religious comOrthodox Christianity and Islam to munities of the modern world. the lands of the Eastern Mediterra- Keywords:nean and the Balkan Peninsula, an Christianity, Islam, coexistence, area that was a common adminis- Mount Athos trative place for both Byzantine and Ottoman Empire. The paper gives the example of the acceptance of Orthodox Christians by Muhammad and his successors and provides with the necessary historical data about the security of the small Christian communities on Muslim territories. Also, a historical review on the understanding of Islam by Christian auCitation: Lianos Liantis E. The historical geopolitics of Religion in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Balkans: Aspects of coexistence between Orthodox Christianity and Islam. Theology & Culture. 2020; 1(2): 2940. Doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.23987.66087 thors and theologians helps the discussion on the realization of the path of mutual understanding between the two religions. Finally, the acceptance of the monastic state of Mount Athos inside a Muslim theocracy is a great historical example of acceptance and coexistence that can show the way for

Introduction

The lands of the Eastern Mediterranean and the Balkan Peninsula were for centuries a single administrative space, which Western Europeans, starting in the 19th century, referred to as the Near East. Naturally, it never occurred to any Byzantine, Arab or Ottoman to describe their geographical space in relation to its proximity to the West, as they perceived their state as the center from which all others drew their relative position. The theocentric perception of society, for both Byzantines and Arabs, rendered their states the kingdom of God on earth; the Emperor and the Caliph existed as the image of God (Laos, 2015, 30-31) and the successor to the Messenger of God respectively (Madelung, 1997, 1-27), and the main purpose of the state was the defence and dissemination of the one true faith as a prospect for salvation.

It was precisely this perception of the uniqueness and sacredness of the kingdom that led to the two most important schisms in the Christian and Islamic worlds. The adoption of the title of Emperor by Charlemagne and his crowning in Rome, on Christmas day, 800 AD, by Pop Leo III marked both the questioning of the legitimate Roman power of Constantinople1 and the beginning of the schism between East and West, which was consolidated in 1054 as a religious split that has lasted until today.

The controversy over the hegemonic and spiritual successor to the prophet Muhammad brought about the major schism in early Islam. Succession by bloodline was supported by the Shiite Muslims, followers of Muhammad’s cousin Ali, while Sunni Islam wanted the prophet’s father in law, Abu Bakr, to succeed him (Hughes, 2013, 115-132). The title of caliph needed to be passed on to a single true successor who, as Governor of the Faithful, had all Muslims under his power. The parallel claims to the title meant a schism. This is why early Greek-language literature refers to the Shiites as “Schiites”, in the belief that they got their name from the Greek word “schism”2. However, the similarities are not limited to the causes of the schisms, but extend to the contact

1 Irene, the widow of Leo IV, seized the imperial throne from her son Constantine VI. Irene’s succession sanctioned the belief that no emperor remained in the East and that the throne was vacant. Fleener, M., The Significance of the Coronation of Charlemagne, Sr. Thesis Western Oregon University, Monmouth 2005, p. 9. Latowsky, A., Emperor of the World: Charlemagne and the Construction of Imperial Authority, 800–1229, Ithaca 2013, pp. 50-1. 2 «Οι σιίται, ήτοι σχισματικοί και αιρετικοί (οίοι οι Πέρσαι και οι Κούρδοι) απορρίπτουσι την παράδοσιν, δέχονται ως μόνον νόμιμον κληρονόμον του προφήτου τον Αλήν», Λεξικόν Εγκυκλοπαιδείας περιέχον τα κυριώτερα των επιστημών και τεχνών, Εν Σμύρνη 1864, p. 10.

between and coexistence of the two worlds, which brought about major borrowings, on both sides, in all areas of culture.

1. Muhammad as the guarantor of Christians’ security

The relationship of the teachings of Muhammad with the Judaic and Christian religions became an object of study early on by scholars and academics. However, beyond the Koranic sources there is a body of texts that indicate the Prophet’s intentions with regard to the peoples of the Book – as the Christians and Jews are called – and concern mainly promissory writings and peace agreements concluded with Christian abbots, bishops and rulers.

During the tenth year of Hegira, the prophet Muhammad received a delegation of sixty Christians from the city of Najran, of Arabia Felix. The audience of those Byzantine-style Arab Christians took place in the temple of the prophet, and Muhammad allowed them to pray therein, which they did, facing east.

The Christians of Najran talked to the prophet about theological issues, including the nature of God, and he recited to them Surah 112 of the Koran, which is called The Surah of Sincerity and Absolute Faith: “Say: He, Allah, is One, Allah, the Eternal, the Absolute (of whom all creatures have need). He begets not, nor is He begotten, And there is none like unto Him.” Further discussion regarding the nature of Jesus Christ led to certain disagreements, regarding which he recited to them three verses of the Koran from the third Surah. After three days, the Christian delegation decided to conclude its mission.

Despite dogmatic disagreements, Muhammad concluded a treaty with the Christians of Najran. The prophet dictated the terms of the treaty to Abdullah Abu Bakr, who served as his scribe, and it was ratified by five of his acolytes. This treaty provided religious and administrative autonomy to non-Muslim citizens of Islamic territories (Tibawi, 1961, 30-46; El-Wakil, 2016, 273-354).

A similar treaty was concluded the same year between Muhammad and Yuhanna or Ioannis, a Byzantine governor or, likely, bishop of the Biblical city of Elath3, in Arabia Petraea. The treaty marked the first Muslim conquest in the Anatolic Theme of the Byzantine Empire, and, in exchange for taxation, secured the right of the citizens of the city to religious freedom and guaran-

3 The name of the city survived into the Roman period as Aela, adopted into Byzantine Greek as Aila and into Arabic as Aylah, later becoming Aqabat Aylah, eventually shortened down to Aqaba.

teed their property and their personal security: “Thou hast to accept Islam, or pay the tax, and obey God and his Messenger and the messengers of His Messenger” (Peters, 1994, 240-242).

However, for the Orthodox Christianity the most important text ratified by Muhammad is the Ashtiname (Covenant or Testament) to the Monastery of Saint Catherine of Sinai, the importance of which lies in the duration of its effect, which extends to our day. The Prophet Muhammad’s agreement with the monks of Mount Sinai is certified by Muhammad’s biographer, Al-Waqidi (748-822), and his student Ibn Sa’d al-Baghdadi (784-845), in the Kitab Tabaqat Al-Kubra, where it is set out, albeit in a shorter form than in the existing copies of the charter of rights, but containing all of the main articles, almost word for word (Shah-Kazemi, 2017, 362-383).

The Covenant is a very early Muslim text, given that it was written in the sixth year of Hegira; that is, in 628 by the Christian calendar. With the increasing influence of Islam in Arabia, in 626 the Prophet Muhammad sent a number of epistles to various kings and rulers around the Arabian Peninsula, stating his desire for peace and cooperation. In 628, a delegation of monks from the Monastery of Saint Catherine came to Muhammad and asked for his protection. Responding to this request, Muhammad gave, on penalty of excommunication, an “obligation”, ratified by his palm print. Official copies of the Testament are today preserved in the Monastery’s Sacristy and at a number of its metochions beyond Sinai and on Mount Athos.

The account of Muhammad’s journeys to Sinai and the historical background of the writing of the Ashtiname are mentioned in the first volume of the “Journal des Voyages” of the French diplomat Balthasar de Monconys (1611-1665), in which Monconys maintains that he saw the content of the Testament engraved in stone (Monconys, 1665, 228-229).

Below are some excerpts from the Ashtiname: […]Whenever monks, devotees and pilgrims gather together, whether in a mountain or valley, or den, or frequented place, or plain, or church, or in houses of worship, verily we are [at the] back of them and shall protect them, and their properties and their morals, by Myself, by My Friends and by My Assistants, for they are of My Subjects and under My Protection. […] […] Their judges should not be changed or prevented

from accomplishing their offices, nor the monks disturbed in exercising their religious order, or the people of seclusion be stopped from dwelling in their cells. […] […]No one is allowed to plunder the pilgrims, or destroy or spoil any of their churches, or houses of worship, or take any of the things contained within these houses and bring it to the houses of Islam. And he who takes away anything therefrom, will be one who has corrupted the oath of God, and, in truth, disobeyed His Messenger. […] (Haddad , 1902, 4)

This selections show that the Muslim state must not damage Christian churches in any way; nor may any Muslim official involve himself in the election of Christian religious leaders. Provided the Christians are subjects of Muslim authorities and ask for those authorities’ protection, they should be given the assistance of Muslims in every legal manner.

The commitment to this rule of non-assimilation was institutionalized during the Ottoman Empire in the form of the “millet system” (Kursar, 2013, 97-108; Barkey & Gavrilis, 2016, 24-42). In accordance with this practice, each religious community was considered to be an autonomous social unit that enjoyed relative administrative and legal independence. The millets were headed by high-clerics, who were made responsible for family law, judicial matters, church assets, education, philanthropy and tax collection. This system tried to allow for peaceful coexistence within the Empire, though placing non-Muslims in a lower social position within its sovereign boundaries.

2. The Christian perception of Islam

The appearance and spread of Islam among Christian populations of the East favored mutual understanding and dialogue between the two monotheistic religions. Familiarity among the populations did not come about all at once, but was a dynamic process with multifaceted dimensions and chronological phases. It is characteristic that in the period of the 8th century the Christian world had vague image of the emerging religion, and that is why, initially, no serious reaction was expressed on the level of religious perceptions and theological premises. To the lack of information must be added the

archaic form of expression of the theological truths of the new religion, a fact that did not favor a rational classification of the similarities and differences between Christianity and Islam. The two civilizations, Byzantine and Arab, were still seeking the common framework for dialogue and debate, which for the time being were unattainable due to language and ethnic disparities.

These initial obstacles were overcome when Christian scholars served in the courts of the caliphates as political officials and made the first assessments of the content of the Arabs’ religious convictions. The first preeminent Christian theologian to set out the principles of the new religion in a systematic manner was John of Damascus, who had a profound knowledge of Arabic. This advantage helped him to penetrate the religious writings of the Arabs and ascertain, in an initial phase, the differences between the two religions.

In fact, what he assessed as the common points between the two religions led him to believe that Islam was another version or heretical perversion of the True Faith. For this reason, on the level of history as well, he linked the Prophet Muhammad genealogically with Ishmael (of the tribe of Ishmael)4, while on the theological level he identified Islam with dynamic Monarchianism and Docetism (Bell, 1922, 37-38). His polemic turns critical when it deals with the moral life and eschatological convictions of the Muslim Arabs, a tendency repeated in subsequent Christian writings.

Theodore Abū Qurrah (Avoukaras) is considered his successor in the late 8th and early 9th centuries. This scholarly polyglot monk and, later, bishop debates the teaching and other aspects of Muhammad, refuting the accusations against Christians to be found in early Islamic writings and tradition. His writing is characterized by a defensive tone and, at the same time, a polemic inclination against the new religion, as he accuses it of perversion of the Christian message and the life ideals of the Christians (Beaumont, 2005, 28-43; Awad, 2015).

Bartholomew of Edessa is regarded as the last apologist against Islam in the first millennium. Living at the end of the 9th century, he reacts to the Koran’s accusations against Christians and endeavors to belittle and debunk the historical role and prophetic calling of Muhammad (Meyendorff, 1964, 123). In

4 «Ἔστι δὲ καὶ ἡ μέχρι τοῦ νῦν κρατοῦσα λαοπλανὴς θρησκεία τῶν Ἰσμαηλιτῶν πρόδρομος οὖσα τοῦ ἀντιχρίστου. Κατάγεται δὲ ἀπὸ τοῦ Ἰσμαὴλ τοῦ ἐκ τῆς Ἄγαρ τεχθέντος τῷ Ἀβραάμ• διόπερ Ἀγαρηνοὶ καὶ Ἰσμαηλῖται προσαγορεύονται. Σαρακηνοὺς δὲ αὐτοὺς καλοῦσιν ὡς ἐκ τῆς Σάρρας κενοὺς διὰ τὸ εἰρῆσθαι ὑπὸ τῆς Ἄγαρ τῷ ἀγγέλῳ• Σάρρα κενήν με ἀπέλυσεν». John of Damascus, De haeresibus, 100, Kotter, B. (ed.), Die Schriften des Johannes von Damaskos, Vol. IV, Berlin 1981, p. 60.

employing this tactic, he emulates and borrows elements from the polemics of the Jews against the beliefs of Christians and the identity of Christ. He approaches the moral teachings of the Koran and Muslim perceptions regarding predestination and paradise in a particularly mordant and sarcastic manner, showing in this way the difficulties Christianity was facing from the rapid spread and consolidation of Islam and the Arabs in the wider Middle East region. Nicetas of Byzantium, a contemporary of Photius, was the first Christian writer to call on the imperial administration (Michael III and Basil I) to draw up apologist writings on Christianity’s superiority to Islam, responding to analogous outlooks that were gestating in the Arab world (Demetriades, 1972). His example was to be followed by numerous scholarly Byzantine writers who would serve the political and religious exigencies of Byzantine Emperors, writing epistolary texts and dialogues. But from the 10th century on, the source and departure point of the dissertations would be the capital, Constantinople.

Over the next two centuries, the development of Arab culture and its connection with the Greek philosophical categories of thought and expression created fertile ground for dialogue, which contributed to Islamic theological thought’s being built on the foundation of the Christian theological model and the logic of Aristotelean philosophy. To this must be added the certifiable interactions between the various forms of art and culture, proving that propinquity and coexistence within a broader political and social framework did not deter interaction and mutual understanding.

Only from this perspective is it possible to understand and appreciate the effort of Manuel Comnenus (1143-1180) to eradicate the anathemas and aphorisms against Muhammad that were included in ecclesiastical practice and worship, believing that such a move could favor of the interests of Christians in regions under Islamic rule (Hanson, 1996, 55-83).

However, a more systematic rapprochement between the two religions took place during the Palaiologean era, when a great Saint of the Orthodox Church, Gregory Palamas, and two emperors, (John VI Kantakouzenos and Manuel II Palaeologus) attempted a comparison and theological juxtaposition of Christianity and Islam. All three writers spent time in the courts of Turkish sultans and debated with Muslim theologians on all levels (Trinitarian theology-monotheism, Christology, worship, moral life, etc.). Their extant texts, mainly apologetic in nature, bear witness to the dynamic movement of the leaders of Islam to break the morale of Christians by pointing up the superi-

ority of their own religion.

3. A Christian monastic state in a Muslim theocracy

Eight hundred years after the writing of the Prophet Muhammad’s Ashtiname, the Ottoman caliphate had become consolidated on the Balkan Peninsula and the few free pockets of the old Christian Empire of the East maintained their independence as tributary or vassal states to the sultans. The monastic state of Athos, which succeeded the great Lavras of the East, had developed -with the favor of the Byzantine Emperors- into an autonomous and self-administered area of the kingdom, with special rights and exemptions.

The first Ottoman domination of Mount Athos began in 1383 and ended in 1402, when Sultan Bayezid I was crushed in Ankara by Tamerlane. The following year, his son and successor, Süleyman, signed treaties with the Byzantines, to whom he returned the Theme of Thessaloniki, which included Mount Athos (Smyrlis,, 2008, 325-348). In 1424, the Ottoman forces reappeared in the region and the city of Thessaloniki was granted by the Byzantines to the Venetians, so that the latter could defend it. The same year, a delegation of monks, with the consent of despot Andronicus II Palaeologus, traveled to the court of Sultan Murat II, in Adrianople, where they declared their allegiance. From that moment on, until 1912, Mouth Athos survived as a Christian monastic island in an Islamic kingdom.

In 1430, when Murat captured Thessaloniki, the Athonite monks met him again and asked to confirm the sultanic orders of privileges which his predecessors, Bayezid I and Mehmed I, had issued. The order of Murad II confirmed the privileges of the monasteries of Mount Athos, referring in particular to the tax-allowances, which was necessary for their survival (Lavriotes, 1963, 113261; Papadatos, 1963, 469).

In brief, the effect of the orders guaranteed the assets of the monasteries and recognized their properties on the Mount Athos peninsula. Moreover, it prohibited the entry of laymen or state officials into Athos, it allowed the free movement of goods between monasteries and their dependencies, and it granted the privilege of exemption from emergency taxes. A second sultanic nişan, issued in 1485 by Bayezid II, reconfirmed the terms of the 1430 document (Demetriades, 1997, 50).

Although under Ottoman rule, Mount Athos continued to be the greatest spiritual center of the Orthodox world, which was now in large part under Ot-

toman control. However, significant developments took place in the internal organization of the monasteries. The reduction of the term of abbots to just one year tended to weaken the traditional system of communal living. This unusual system, which emerged early in the 15th century, had become nearly universal by the 17th century. The monasteries were now administered by a council of elder monks who were elected by the brotherhood for a term of one year. This unusual system brought major changes to the lives of the monks, allowing, as it did, for the monks to have personal estates, to organize their own meals, and to receive a wage for the work they did for the monastery. This relaxing of austerity was seen as modernization and degeneration of monastic traditions.

Nevertheless and despite the changes and the need to adapt, Mount Athos managed, in periods of prosperity and decline throughout Ottoman rule, to maintain its distinctive character and remain a place of monastic devotion and spiritual productivity. The founding of the Athonite Academy, in 1749, and the emergence through it of major figures of the Modern Greek Enlightenment, bears witness to the fact that Athos continued on its great course even in the midst of a theocratic regime of another faith, though this regime did in general terms show respect and tolerance for the unique Athonite system.

Conclusion

The intellectual encounter of Greeks and Arabs as a result of the transmission of the Greek culture after the expedition of Alexander the Great, was one of the most important events in the history of civilization, the consequences of which are enormous in the Islamic world, Europe and the ecumene.

In the centuries that followed, the spiritual affinity between the two peoples evolved. The Aristotelian philosophy dominated the late school of Alexandria and its influence inevitably passed in the Christian world and Islam. The Syrian study of Aristotle was formed in the school of Edessa in the fifth century, mainly regarding the works of Aristotle on logic. After all, logic became a science by Aristotle. With the Aristotelian logic was connected the Introduction (Isagoge) of Porphyry of Tyre, and with his broader philosophy, the epitome of the Greco-Syrian writer Damascius. The wider study of the Aristotelian corpus was achieved with the use of Scholia (comments) for the first time by the Greco-Syrian, Maruthas or Probus, and then by the Alexandrians, Ammonius and John Philoponus. It should be noted that the Arabic interpretative projects of Aristotelian philosophy were mainly Neo-Platonic, and it was the

Neo-Platonic tendency that dominated the Arab philosophy and influenced the Muslim theology. This influence increased further by accepting the epitome of the plotinian Enneads as the “Theology of Aristotle” and thus as an original work of him.

Almost the same mental path followed the Christian philosophy in Byzantium, which during the 4th and 5th AD centuries dominated by the influence of Neoplatonic thought. The apophatic terminology would be considered as a key element of similarity between Neoplatonism and Christianity. The relevance of theological faith with the philosophical problematic and scientific research developed systematically, and with proof manner, a trend validation of theological positions based on the philosophical dialectic, the mathematical principles and infinitesimal elements and concepts of space and time of natural science.

Thus, the two major religions using common philosophical bases developed their theological thought. This fact together with the description of the occurrences of the history of geopolitics of religion in the wider region of the Eastern Mediterranean demonstrate the positive foundations of the intercultural/interfaith dialogue (Anastasios Giannoulatos, 2004, 689-697), which must be a dialogue aimed to consolidate pluralism and peaceful coexistence.

Anastasios Giannoulatos, Archbishop of Tirana, Durres and all Albania (2004). “Developing Shared Values and Common Citizenship in a Secular and Pluralist Society: How Religious Communities Can Contribute”, in Lindholm, T. et al. (ed.), Facilitating Freedom of Religion or Belief: A Deskbook, Dordrecht, 689-697. Awad, N.G. (2015). Orthodoxy in Arabic Terms: A Study of Theodore Abu Qurrah’s Theology in Its Islamic Context, Boston. Barkey, K., Gavrilis G. (2016). “The Ottoman Millet System: Non-Territorial Autonomy and its Contemporary Legacy”, Ethnopolitics 15, 24-42. Beaumont, I.M. (2005). Christology in Dialogue with Muslims: A Critical Analysis of Christian Presentations of Christ for Muslims from the Ninth and Twentieth Centuries, Carlisle. Bell, R. (1913-22) “John of Damascus and the controversy with Islam”, Transactions of the Glasgow University Oriental Society 4, 37-38. Demetriades, J.M.( 1972), Nicetas of Byzantium and His Encounter with Islam: A Study of the “Anatrope” and the Two “Epistles” to Islam, Ph.D Dissertation, Hartford Seminary Foundation. Demetriades, V. (1997). “Athonite documents and the Ottoman Occupation”, in Ο Άθως στους 14ο-16ο αιώνες, Αθήνα, 50. El-Wakil, A. (2016). “The Prophet’s Treaty with the Christians of Najran: An Analytical Study to Determine the Authenticity of the Covenants”, Journal of Islamic Studies 27, 273-354. Fleener, M. (2005). The Significance of the Coronation of Charlemagne, Sr. Thesis Western Oregon University, Monmouth. Haddad, A. (1902). (transl.), The Oath of the Prophet Mohammed to the Followers of the Nazarene, New York. Hanson, C.L. (1996), “Manuel I Comnenus and the ‘God of Muhammad’: A Study in Byzantine Ecclesiastical Politics,” in Tolan, J.V. (ed.), Medieval Christian Perceptions of Islam, New York, 55-83. Hughes, A.W. (2013). Muslim Identities: An Introduction to Islam, New York. Kotter, B. (ed.) (1981). John of Damascus, De haeresibus, 100, Die Schriften des Johannes von Damaskos, Vol. IV, Berlin.

Kursar, V. (2013), “Non-Muslim Communal Divisions and Identities in the Early Modern Ottoman Balkans and the Millet System Theory”, in Baramova, M. et al. (ed.), Power and Influence in South-Eastern Europe 16th-19th century, Zurich, 97-108. Laos, N. (2015). The Metaphysics of World Order: A Synthesis of Philosophy, Theology, and Politics, Eugene. Latowsky, A. (2013). Emperor of the World: Charlemagne and the Construction of Imperial Authority, 800–1229, Ithaca. Lavriotes, A. (1963). “Το Άγιον Όρος μετά την Οθωμανικήν κατάκτησιν”, Επετηρίς Εταιρείας Βυζαντινών Σπουδών 32, 113-261. Λεξικόν Εγκυκλοπαιδείας περιέχον τα κυριώτερα των επιστημών και τεχνών (1864). Εν Σμύρνη. Madelung, W. (1997). The Succession to Muhammad: A Study of the Early Caliphate, Cambridge. Meyendorff, J. (1964). “Byzantine Views of Islam”, Dumbarton Oaks 18, 123. Monconys, B. de(1665). Journal des voyages de Monsieur de Monconys, Vol. 1, Lyon. Papadatos, S. (1963). “Η διοικητική ανεξαρτησία του Αγίου Όρους επί Βυζαντινών”, Επετηρίς Εταιρείας Βυζαντινών Σπουδών 32, 469. Peters, F.E. (1994). Muhammad and the Origins of Islam, New York. Shah-Kazemi, R. (2017). “The Prophet of Islam, the Monks of Christendom, and the Remembrance of God”, in Morrow, J.A. (ed.), Islam and the People of the Book: Critical Studies on the Covenants of The Prophet, Vol. 1, 362-83. Smyrlis, K. (2008). “The First Ottoman Occupation Of Macedonia (Ca. 1383–Ca. 1403): Some Remarks On Land Ownership, Property Transactions And Justice”, in Beihammer, A.D. et al (ed.), Diplomatics in the Eastern Mediterranean 1000-1500, Leiden, 325-348. Tibawi, A.L. (1961). “Christians under Muhammad and his First Two Caliphs”, Islamic Quarterly 5, 30-46.