Christianity and the Ottomans

The Ottoman state was born by the second half of the 14^th century. It was made up of the many Turkish tribes who embraced Islam and settled in Anatolia on the frontier between Islam and the Byzantine Empire.

The Ottomans’ military skills and their expertise in organizing administration as well as the many brilliant Sultans that they had, helped them to achieve many successes and to reach a high position among the other countries, especially the Byzantine Empire. The Ottomans conquered many countries desiring Constantinople. On May 29, 1453, Murad II succeeded by the help of the leader Muhammad II, the Conqueror in conquering Constantinople.

After the fall of Constantinople, the Ottoman Sultan controlled the entire empire through the administrative system. One important development in administration was the milet (nation) system, which was a division of the empire into a communal system based upon religious affiliation. The patriarch, for instance, would be the head of the Orthodox Christian milet. Nevertheless, the fall of Constantinople struck Christians in general and the Byzantines in particular.  Of course explanation for the situation had to take a religious dimension. Muslims explained their control over the Christians as an evidence of Islamic superiority over Christianity. The Greek Roman Christians explained this defeat as a punishment from God because of their sins. The Latin Christians also had their own explanation; they believed that the Islamic victory over Christians was because of Greek Roman Orthodox heresies and their separation from Rome. Finally, the Russians shared the reasons that others gave for Christians’ defeat, but had their own explanation too. The Russians believed that the submission of the Greek Roman Orthodox Christians to the Latin Church of Rome at the Council of Florence (1438-1432) brought God’s punishment upon them; therefore they had been defeated by Muslims and lost the honor of the Church’s leadership. Consequently, the Church of Russia received the honor of the Church’s leadership, and Moscow became the new Constantinople or the third Rome.[1]

Whatever the explanation of the defeat Christians suffered, they realized that the political leadership was the responsible for what occurred. Therefore the defeat they suffered must not affect their faith and unity. On the contrary, they believed that they were in need more than ever to defend their faith and identity in the face of the strong Islamic Ottoman challenge. In an attempt to face these challenges, what could be called the Eastern Christian consciousness (awareness) grew up within Christians society. With such awareness, the Eastern Christians tended to come back to their Eastern origins and bring to life again the Christian Eastern tradition and identity. They harbored enmity against the West and concentrated on their Eastern identity as an essential element of coexistence within the Muslim state. “Turbans of Imams[2] but not the tiaras of Cardinals”, was the popular cry of those who harbored enmity against the West and preferred coexistence with Islam to dealing with the West[3].

In this direction, the Eastern Christians attempted to create a kind of accommodation with Islam and looked for bringing out the common background and beliefs between Eastern Christianity and Islam. Consequently, as a result of the Eastern Christian reaction against the West and drawing on the common historical and cultural background between them and Muslims, they have made many attempts in the direction of conciliation in relations between Eastern Christians and Muslims. In reality, Eastern Christians were convinced that it would be more dangerous for Eastern Christian culture and identity to have union with Rome than to face the political and military threat posed by Muslims. Therefore the Eastern Christians and the Muslims who were in a state of war with the West found themselves united against the Western expansion that threatened Eastern culture and both Christian and Muslim identities.

It is worth mentioning that the Eastern Orthodox Christians within the Ottoman state enjoyed many privileges they would not have with the West. That reality become more evident if we recall the record of the Fourth Crusade, in which Crusader armies occupied Constantinople despite Pope Innocent III’s overt prohibition against attacking Christian countries. After having occupied the city they devastated and damaged it. They insulted even symbols of Christianity there, including the patriarch’s throne, on which they seated a prostitute who entertained them by singing bawdy French songs.[4]  On the opposite side, Eastern Christians enjoyed the Ottomans’ respect and privileges. During his reign, Mehmet II accepted Gennadios as the Orthodox Christians’ Patriarch and put together a concordat in 1453 by which they arranged the Christians affairs and their relations with the Ottoman state. Out of respect Mehmet II provided Gennadios with a beautiful horse from the imperial stable. The Sultan Mehmet received the Patriarch and his suite standing, and for the Sultan at that time to receive someone standing was an extraordinary thing and considered an act of respect. Mehmet II gave the Patriarch the scepter as a symbol of authority and power and told him “ you should implement the patriarch’s authority and laws in absolute safety and freedom as well as new rules [laws]. You may solicit my assistance by appealing directly to me… be Patriarch with good fortune and be assured of our friendship keeping all the privileges the Patriarchs before you enjoyed”.[5]        

It is not only the common historical and cultural backgrounds between Eastern Orthodox Christians and Muslims that created condition conducive to cooperation between them, but also the common danger that they faced from the West, which threatened their culture and identity as well as their religious convictions. As a matter of fact this cooperation between Eastern Christians and Muslims would be notable in the religious and political as well as the cultural domains. Despite the fact that religious cooperation between them was limited to freedom of faith and belief as well as to religious tolerance, there were some supporters of a religious union between Muslims and Eastern Christians. In 1453, George Trapezountes[6] wrote the Sultan Mehmet II suggesting that he call for a Christian-Islamic council that would include all Eastern Christians and Muslims, to achieve unity between them under one faith. George’s suggestion was based on his conviction that God set up the Sultan as absolute ruler over Constantinople to accomplish a noble mission of achieving the unity among people. Furthermore, Trapezountes believed that the only way to achieve such a unity would be by establishing a great Eastern empire, in which the power of Turkish state and the civilization of Christian Byzantine culture would be united to form new great Eastern empire.[7] When George came to religious differences between Christianity and Islam, he treated the subject from two different perspectives. First, he tried to prove that Christians and Muslims agree with each other on basic principles and beliefs, and that most of the differences between them might be overcome with humility and real desire of understanding the other. Second, Trapezountes believed that overcoming the religious differences between Christians and Muslims would be achieved by deriving explanations of Islamic beliefs correspond to the Christian beliefs. To do so, he gave two suggestions. First he suggested using the rational methodology of interpretation of the Holy Scriptures and Qur’an. Second he suggested to avoid being restricted by the dogmatic teachings that might stand in front of the Christian-Muslim unity. In reality, in spite of the impracticability of Trapezountes’ notion, it reflected the Eastern Christian tendency of cooperating with Islam and of resisting western interference in eastern affairs.

Despite the fact that there were not many projects similar to that of Trapezountes, there were many Eastern figures who called for Christian-Islamic cooperation. These figures did not reach the limits that the Trapezountes reached in calling for complete unity between Christians and Muslims, and their approaches to that cooperation were more rational and realistic too. The most distinguished exponents of Eastern Christian-Muslim cooperation were the Patriarchs of Jerusalem, Nectarius and Dositheus; the Patriarch of Constantinople Maletius, and the teachers Cosma the Aetolian and Athanasius Parios.[8] These Eastern Christians figures and many more realized that the danger of Western interference in Eastern Church affairs would be worse than living with Muslims. Moreover, they believed that the religious freedom that they got from the Ottomans, by which they could practice and keep the Orthodox faith, would not be achieved under Western administration.

Finally, it is noteworthy that the Arab Orthodox Christians’ cooperation with the Ottomans in the Middle East appeared in many shapes and reached certain limits. As a matter of fact, they not only cooperated with Muslims in political affairs but also asked Ottomans help against the Catholic and Protestant missions, and of course they had to show their allegiance to the Ottoman state. Still, this Orthodox Christian allegiance in most cases was not optional but out of necessity and the product of a particular political situation. It continued until the late 18^th century, when the Ottoman Empire was weakening and suffering defeats from the Europeans. Then the Eastern Orthodox Christian turned to get Russian help to strengthen their position in the Ottoman Empire and to support them against the Western missions.