278 



EASTERN CHURCHES. 



tion of which would be to curtail some of the 

 established rights of the Church. From the 

 foundation of the Ottoman Empire the Greek 

 Patriarch had enjoyed the right, subject to the 

 Sultan's acknowledged power of nominating 

 and deposing him, to exercise an exclusive ec- 

 clesiastical authority over the members of his 

 own communion. The proposed reforms pro- 

 vided for changes, which, as the Patriarch 

 showed in a remonstrance he addressed to the 

 Porte on the subject, were not only inconsist- 

 ent with the status quo as it had always exist- 

 ed, but would impair the ecclesiastical inde- 

 pendence hitherto guaranteed to the Orthodox 

 Greek Church. Besides a general argument 

 on the subject, the Patriarch, Joachim III, 

 specified six points in support of this view 

 of the question : First, he showed that, under 

 the provisions of the scheme, civil actions, in 

 which metropolitans, archbishops, and bishops 

 were concerned, which were formerly required 

 to be conducted in Constantinople alone, would 

 henceforth he submitted to the local authority 

 of the cadi, and criminal actions in like cases 

 would be withdrawn from the jurisdiction of 

 the ecclesiastical authority, which had hitherto 

 been paramount, and submitted to that of the 

 civil functionaries of the Ottoman Govern- 

 ment. A second ground of complaint was 

 that, whereas the Porte affected to recognize 

 the authority and jurisdiction of the heads of 

 the Orthodox Church in ecclesiastical cases, it 

 practically declined to lend the authority of 

 the civil power to the execution of their decis- 

 ions. The ecclesiastical law was thus denuded 

 of its civil sanction, and was by consequence 

 made of no practical effect. The third point 

 was that, in matrimonial cases and questions of 

 divorce and judicial separation and the regu- 

 lation of the amount which the husband should 

 pay for the wife's maintenance, the jurisdiction 

 of the Church, which had been exclusive, was 

 made subject to the right of appeal to the civil 

 courts. The subordination in a similar man- 

 ner of the ecclesiastical to the civil authority 

 in cases of testamentary disposition was made 

 the basis of the fourth point of the Patriarch's 

 protest. The two remaining grounds of com- 

 plaint were concerning the building of church- 

 es and the regulation of schools, in both of 

 which cases it was alleged that the Porte had 

 deliberately neglected the obligations formerly 

 recognized by it, and that the necessary author- 

 ity for the construction of new churches and 

 schools was now frequently withheld for frivo- 

 lous and vexatious reasons, and often for no 

 reason at all. At a meeting of the Holy Synod 

 and General Assembly of the Orthodox Greek 

 Community, held Dec. 21, 1883, the Patriarch, 

 after the subject of the difficulties had been 

 discussed, announced that he felt bound at 

 once to resign his post, since it was impossible 

 to carry out his duties any longer in such cir- 

 cumstances. The Synod asked him to recon- 

 sider his determination, but he declared that 

 his official position had become untenable, and 



he could not countenance any show of waver- 

 ing or weakness on such a question. The com- 

 munication of the Patriarch's resignation to 

 the Porte was accompanied by a petition of 

 the Synod and Assembly that it be not ac- 

 cepted, and that the Government would take 

 into consideration the difficulties which the 

 contemplated changes in the position of the 

 Greek Orthodox population would produce. 

 The attitude of the Patriarch and the repre- 

 sentations of the Synod and Assembly induced 

 the Porte to reflect upon the steps it was con- 

 templating, and to consider the expediency of 

 modifying its proposed scheme in favor of the 

 ancient privileges of the Church. It shortly 

 proposed a "compromise" measure, under 

 which it was provided that a priest might be 

 arrested by the ordinary authorities and im- 

 prisoned, but that notice of his arrest must be 

 given to his ecclesiastical superior, and the ac- 

 cused must be confined in a special apartment, 

 separated from that of ordinary prisoners; 

 with regard to the other points, the former 

 status quo would be respected, and the recent 

 circulars modifying the old order of things 

 would be countermanded. The Synod and 

 Mixed Council, on the invitation of the Min- 

 ister of Justice, in May, appointed delegates to 

 treat with his Excellency concerning the ques- 

 tions at issue. The negotiations were con- 

 ducted with apparent promise of an amicable 

 adjustment, but, without waiting for them to 

 be concluded, the Porte sent a communication 

 to the patriarchate in which it disclaimed all 

 intention of modifying the rights and privileges 

 enjoyed ab antique by the Church ; and, with- 

 out promising to allow the definitive criminal 

 procedure with regard to parish priests which 

 the patriarchate desired, requested the Elec- 

 toral Council to choose at once, in accordance 

 with ancient usage, four candidates for the va- 

 cant patriarchal throne. At the meeting of 

 the Electoral Council, October 4, some mem- 

 bers were of the opinion that the election should 

 be postponed until the criminal procedure with 

 regard to the parish priests should be expressly 

 defined according to the Greek view of the 

 question, but others considered that there was 

 no reasonable probability of obtaining any 

 further concessions from the Turkish Govern- 

 ment, and that, consequently, the election 

 should take place without further delay. The 

 latter opinion prevailed. The council named 

 as its candidates for the office of Patriarch, the 

 Archbishop of Smyrna, the Archbishop of 

 Nicomedia, the Archbishop of Derkos, and the 

 resigned ex-Patriarch, Joachim; the definite 

 choice to be made afterward from among the 

 names approved by the Porte as acceptable to 

 it. The candidacy of the ex-Patriarch exciting 

 opposition among some of the members of the 

 Synod, he withdrew from the contest. The 

 definitive election resulted in the choice of the 

 Archbishop of Derkos. The selection was ap- 

 proved by the Porte. The newly elected Pa- 

 triarch was granted an audience with the Sultan 



