The Black Book of 1821 is published almost simultaneously with a historical anniversary which is an issue - "taboo" for many.
The new study of the "Lux Orbis" series includes patriarchal texts from the period 1798-1828, which outline the negative attitude of the highest hierarchy of the Church towards the Revolution and comes to "meet" the 200th anniversary of the excommunication of the Greeks Revolutionaries and the Friendly Society, by the Patriarch of Constantinople, Gregory V.
Along with the official celebrations for the 200th anniversary of the official start of the Greek Revolution, one of the issues that have "fallen" on the table of public dialogue is the role played by the Church in the pre-revolutionary years and until the establishment of the first , of an independent Greek State.
On the occasion of the publication of the study, from the book series Lux Orbis by iWrite publications, the journalist and director of the series, Minas Papageorgiou, speaks to NEWS 24/7 for the book, but also for the dark aspects of the processes before the start of the Race and during its duration. The foreword of the work is signed by the academic Thanos Veremis .
Below we analyze, among other things, whether the excommunication of Gregory V was finally reinstated, because we do not learn the story of the extermination of the Kleftos by the Kojabasis of the Peloponnese, but also how the autocephaly of the Greek church was created under the "shadow" of Agathangelos.
Today (March 23rd) marks 200 years since the excommunication of the Revolution by Patriarch Gregory V. Do you think that the Greeks have known a lot about this case?
Indeed, this is an anniversary that will be shown little in the public sphere of our country, and this fact is even more honored by NEWS 24/7, which tries to highlight it, in the context of the multifaceted information of our fellow citizens. Unfortunately, the majority of our fellow citizens are unaware of the clear negative role played by the highest leadership of the Church in the preparation of the Revolution, as well as during its duration. I don't think that something like that is related to the fact that most Greeks are Christian Orthodox. Our society has progressed a lot in the last decades and is now able to separate its "beliefs" from the role of ecclesiastical actors (a clear example is the positions in favor of Church-State Separation, which the majority of Greeks currently embrace, the lead that political marriages have taken over religious ones, etc.).
I believe that the non-existent or distorted image that the Greeks have of the role of the leadership of the Church in the 21st century is due to the establishment of many related myths over time, to the wrong information in school textbooks (and several related studies have been published in the last decade), in the audacity of several academics to present the specific subject in the public sphere, but also in the difficulty of locating and highlighting the original texts of that time, many of which, to this day, are buried in rare or out-of-print editions. The last one we've been trying to fix in recent years through the Lux Orbis publishing series.
If in the end the excommunication was the result of pressure, the Patriarchal Teaching (1798) and the patriarchal encyclical of the excommunication of the Revolution (1821), what purpose did they serve and how Philhellenic texts can they be characterized?
Let's start with the basics. Both are clearly anti-national and anti-revolutionary texts. And they are not the only ones of this category issued by the patriarchate during that period.
But there is something else that is worth commenting on. The Patristic Teaching and the excommunication of the '21 Revolution are separated by 23 whole years. Therefore, whether the concepts of freedom and independence are foreign bodies for the positions of the highest leadership of the Church at that time, or whether its counter-revolutionary action is a product of pressures received by the patriarchate from the Ottomans, the result is the same. . These texts, which are actually written over a long period of time (this is the key point after all – to ascertain the timeless attitude of the patriarchate towards the Revolution, avoiding to interpret the events through the narrow prism of what took place in March 1821), are the irrefutable witness that leaves no room for misinterpretation. It is not bad for there to be an acknowledgment of this attitude, even if in retrospect, on the part of the Church.
Why has the history we are learning kept silent about the excommunication of the Thieves and their extermination with the assistance of the Greek Church?
Because it is a story that the collective unconscious chooses to place in the shadow of history. After all, how can anyone digest how, along with the Ottomans, hundreds of Thieves were hunted down and killed with the help of peasants and ordinary people of the Peloponnese? The latter, of course, acted under the fear and terror caused by the excommunication of the Thieves - but also of those who helped them - by the patriarch Kallinikos V.
After all, excommunication was a very widespread practice of the time, on behalf of the Church, in order to observe the legal order of the Ottomans in the populations of the Greek area.
The attitude of Agathangelos and the attempt to provoke a Civil War, in turn caused a civil war within the ranks of the Greek Clergy of the time?
We are in 1828. The modern Greek state has been formed (not yet officially recognized), with Ioannis Kapodistrias as its governor. Patriarch Agathangelos sends a circular to the Greeks, asking them to return to the Ottoman Empire. In fact, he includes in his letter the terms of the Sultan himself for this purpose, while at the same time he sends three metropolitans to the Peloponnese to influence the flock in this direction. The previous causes the strong reaction of Kapodistrias himself who makes it clear to Agathangelos how enough blood was spilled for the Greeks to return to their previous state.
Events like these contributed to a large extent to the creation of the autocephaly of the Greek church, possibly the only enlightening project that took shape in the post-revolutionary years. It was impossible for the Turkish-speaking patriarchate of Kon/poles to constantly mix in the internal affairs of the new Greek - now - state.
What would be the historical significance of lifting the excommunication, 200 years after its formulation? How valid is the argument of the Greek Church that excommunication no longer exists?
At the end of January, KEPEK (Movement of Greek Citizens for the Secularization of the State) requested in an open letter to the Patriarchate of Kon/polis and also to the Church of Greece, the lifting of the excommunication of the Revolution since 1821.
I believe that this fact would have a huge symbolic as well as substantial significance, since it would reduce to a significant extent the relevant verbal disputes of our fellow citizens, which due to this year's anniversary have significantly intensified in recent months, on and off the internet.
The involvement of the Church of Greece in this process is absolutely necessary. 200 years ago, the high priests of its present structures were part of the body of the patriarchate, while today its representatives invoke patriarchs and other high priests outside its administrative jurisdictions to emphasize their supposed important role during the Struggle. The Church of Greece cannot have an a la carte history. The excommunication of the Revolution weighs on her just as much as the adoption of the -supposedly- saving (!) role of Gregory V during the preparation of the uprising.
After all, there is a precedent, since 16 years ago, in 2005, a representative of the Holy Synod of the Church of Greece, in consultation with Patriarch Bartholomew, mediated for the lifting of the excommunication that took place 200 years earlier. But more about this really interesting case, in the response of KEPEK to the Office on Sects of the Piraeus metropolis, which will come in a few days via NEWS 24/7.
In your opinion, what would have been the "leaven" of the Greek Struggle, if the positions of Evgenios Voulgaris had prevailed? Would we perhaps talk about a "different" modern Greek Church?
A modernization of the Orthodox Eastern Church would certainly have been observed, since the spirit of the Enlightenment would have touched its theological and political positions more. Nevertheless, we must not ignore the fact that the Church has always been a supranational organization. In other words, the war of ideas concerning the establishment of the term Nation as a substitute for Genus (a word with a clear religious connotation) is not accidental, even at the verbal level. Nor is it a coincidence that the cooperative nature of the leadership of the Church in relation to every conqueror or political administrator of this place throughout time. It is an organization that is largely interested above all in its own survival, standing above concepts such as ethnicity, homeland, etc.
What is the significance of the publication of the book "The Black Book of 1821", from the Lux Orbis series by iWrite publishers?
This is an anniversary and without a doubt collector's edition, in which most of the anti-revolutionary texts of the patriarchate are brought together for the first time and in fact over a period of 30 years (1798-1828). This fact helps the reader to understand the "big picture" of the attitude of the highest (I emphasize this) leadership of the Church towards the Greek Revolution. I think after reading these texts, misinterpretations on this specific issue are not justified.
The foreword of the book by the renowned academic, Mr. Thanos Veremi, adds additional value and prestige to the publication.
In addition to what we have already said, what else will readers encounter in the collection of texts in this new book?
They will have the opportunity to get a clear picture of the anti-revolutionary positions of Gregory V - supposedly an ethno-martyr! - over time:a) The circular he sends to the Iptanisians so that they ignore the revolutionary cries of the "atheist" French by returning to his embrace Sultanou (1798), b) The mission of bishop Trikkis Paisios to the Peloponnese in order to appease the revolutionary moods of the local population (1798), c) The letter to the Metropolitan of Smyrna, in which he is asked to gather all the pamphlets of Rigas Feraios with the intention of being sent to be burned in Constantinople (1798). They will also have the opportunity to read the aphoristic tribute to Bouboulina on the eve of the Revolution, as well as Gregory's attempt to impose a sacred examination in the City, controlling the book production of the Greek diaspora, attacking the advent of the teaching of Natural Sciences in Greek schools . In this last encyclical, in fact, the patriarch also attacks the ragiades of his time, who started massively giving their children (ancient) Greek names, instead of Christian ones...
The description of the book:
"The supposed positive contribution of the highest hierarchy of the Church to the Revolution of 1821, constitutes one of the greatest ideological swindles of recent Greek History.
Two hundred years later, the study of the original sources, the excommunication circulars and the counter-revolutionary action of the patriarchate, leaves no room for misinterpretation.
This book contains a useful collection of such texts, published during the period 1798-1828. The detection of these historical records is still an extremely difficult task, requiring in some cases the painstaking search for rare or out-of-print editions.
In "Black Book of 1821" you will read:
- the texts of the excommunication of the Revolution from the Patriarchate of Constantinople
- the reasons why the infamous lifting of excommunication is a church myth
- how Gregory E tried to appease the revolutionary moods of the Heptanesians and Peloponnesians at the end of the 18th century, ordering, at the same time, the burning of texts by Rigas Feraeus
- the reasons why the excommunication of the Thieves by Patriarch Kallinikos E negatively affected the Revolution of 21.
- the encyclicals through which Gregory V attempted to control Greek book production, launching an attack on the Natural Sciences
- the excommunication imposed on Bouboulina, a few months before the uprising of the Greeks
- the texts of the patriarch Eugene II, which aimed to intimidate the Greeks, immediately after the outbreak of the Revolution
- the way in which the patriarch Agathangelos tried to provoke a civil war in the Greece of John Kapodistrias".
Available in bookstores from the Lux Orbis series of iWrite Editions.
Follow News247.gr on Google News and learn all the first news