‘The first real victory of Arab nationalism’

Patriarch Meletios II (Dûmâni) of Antioch

According to the Arab nationalist pædagogue Sâti‘ al-Husrî, the first true victory of the Arab nationalist movement, and the very impetus for the Arab Awakening that followed, was the election of Meletios II (Dûmâni) of blessed memory to the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Antioch in 1899 – the first Syrian Arab to be selected to the office in 175 years since the repose of Patriarch Athanasios III (Dabbas) in 1724. Many thanks to Dr Joseph Zeitoun’s blog for the biographical information that follows, which I’ve done my best to paraphrase here.

Patriarch Meletios was born in the eastern quarter of the old city of Damascus (aj-Jûrah, near the Roman gate at Bâb Tûmâ, where Saint Thomas lived and where Saint Paul had his conversion experience – and more recently Saint Joseph (Haddad) of Damascus, Saint Raphael (Hawaweeny) of Brooklyn and Ba‘athist philosopher Michel ‘Aflaq), on the eighth of November, 1837. Historically, the district was majority-Orthodox Christian, but the Christians lived in loving, harmonious relationship with their Shi’ite and Alawite neighbours. His family were apparently fairly pious – they prayed, fasted and regularly worshipped Christ at the churches in the neighbourhood. He was sent to the Patriarchal School in Damascus and learned under Saint Joseph of Damascus. He became learned in Arabic, Greek, Latin and Turkish as well as in both theology and the sæcular sciences; upon graduation, he sought after the higher wisdom of the love of God and entered the monastic life.

As a monk, Meletios studied theology and music, where he actively contributed to a great reawakening of the Antiochene hymnal tradition. His musical achievements brought him to the attention of Patriarch Hierotheos, who took Meletios under his wing and sent him as part of a delegation to Constantinople, where he took part in a council of the churches of Constantinople, Antioch, Alexandria and Jerusalem discussing issues of relevance to the Orthodox Christian millet in the Ottoman Empire. At this council, his deep spirituality and humility, his clear and beautiful singing voice and his well-rounded scientific knowledge were noted by Patriarch Cyril II of Jerusalem.

The Christian community in Damascus suffered a great catastrophe in 1860, when Druze and Sunnî warlords who had been fighting in Lebanon entered the city, burned down Bâb Tûmâ along with its several churches and Shi‘a mosques, and killed around 8,000 Christians in a massive pogrom, including the martyr Saint Joseph of Damascus. Meletios returned from Constantinople after this horrific event, and was trusted by Patriarch Hierotheos with bringing monetary aid and aid-in-kind from the church to help the victims, orphans and widows from the pogrom – both Christian and Muslim. He discharged this task faithfully, honestly and with love for the sorrowing; this earned him great goodwill among the residents of Bâb Tûmâ and a commendation to the rank of archimandrite from Patriarch Hierotheos. After the bishop of Latakia reposed in 1865, Meletios was appointed bishop by unanimous vote of the Antiochian synod and assigned to Latakia.

Latakia was then one of the neediest Orthodox diocæses in Syria. Meletios did much to improve and streamline the administration of the diocæse. In addition, he established a young boys’ school which provided instruction in Arabic, Greek and French, and repaired seven of the diocæsan churches. His service in Latakia was marked by personal austerity but great generosity to the poor, and he gave much of his own funds for the upkeep of the churches and to keep the school running in its early years. He sponsored several students to the Halki Seminary, including Saint Raphael (Hawaweeny) – these students for the most part returned to Syria and took up positions in the Antiochian Church, where they greatly enriched its intellectual and spiritual life.

Though Constantinople and Antioch were at this time coöperating to great effect on academics, when it came to cultural and administrative processes the two churches were in a state of contention. The synod of Antiochian bishops demanded the removal of Patriarch Spyridon (Euthymiou), a Greek Cypriot who had been appointed from Constantinople in 1891, and his replacement with a native bishop from among their own ranks. The Russian Empire and the Qudsi Brotherhood of the Holy Sepulchre (of which Patriarch Spyridon was a member) were both involved in the dispute over the Patriarchal office. Long story short: several purely administrative miscalculations which brought Patriarch Spyridon into conflict with both Moscow and Jerusalem ended with his resignation from the Patriarchate; however, the simmering issue which subsequently rose to the surface was one of restored ‘native’ Arabic autonomy versus a ‘Hellenist’ status quo.

This conflict did have some continuities with the earlier ‘Bulgarian question’ and Balkan conflicts more broadly, but with some interesting twists. Ecclesiologically, the question was merely that the bishops of one of the original five Patriarchates wished to restore to themselves the right to appoint their own primate. Ironically, this meant that the Arabic bishops used anti-nationalist language to make their case, appealing instead to the ecclesiological principle of local appointment of the local patriarch in the local church. (Sound familiar?)

Bishop Meletios was at this point one of several personalities involved in the question of the succession following Patriarch Spyridon’s resignation. Another was locum tenens Patriarch Gerasimos (later of Jerusalem), who represented the interests of Constantinople. Three bishops – those of Aleppo, Edessa and Kilikia – supported Gerasimos as the new Patriarch. When the rest of the Antiochian bishops elected Bishop Meletios as Patriarch instead, these three bishops sent complaints to Constantinople, which then attempted to get the walî of Damascus to decide for Gerasimos; however, the Ottoman government, under pressure from the Russian ambassador not to intervene, declined. In a massive popular ceremony at the Mariamite Cathedral, Meletios was enthroned as Patriarch on 27 April 1899. However, Constantinople continued for several years working against him, refusing to recognise him and attempting to get his enthronement overturned.

Patriarch Meletios committed his intense energies of spirit to improving the state of education in Syria and Lebanon, and advocated tirelessly for both public and churchly schooling. He reopened the Balamand Theological Seminary and invited professors from Greece and Russia to teach classes there. He also helped to reform and improve the administration of monasteries and cathedral churches, stamped out corruptions and abuses, built new churches and schools in Damascus, and supported a charitable Orthodox sorority in in al-Qusa‘a which worked primarily with poor women.

His reform work was much-appreciated and much-needed, and more would have been done if not for his death. Patriarch Meletios succumbed to a sudden, and somewhat suspicious, stroke in 1906. Grieved by all Damascenes, Christian and Muslim, he was buried at the Mariamite Cathedral. He was succeeded by Patriarch Gregorios IV (Haddad) – the second post-1724 Arabic Patriarch of Antioch, who would be recognised by the patriarchs of Constantinople, Alexandria and Jerusalem only in 1909.

Even though the ecclesiological argument for Meletios’s enthronement was fully ‘localist’ and Orthodox, the event had much broader implications. According to William Cleveland’s biography, Sâti‘ al-Husrî acclaimed both the enthronement (which happened 120 years ago today) and Patriarchal rule to be the ‘first real victory of Arab nationalism’. In al-Husrî’s view, Patriarch Meletios enabled Arabic Christians in Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Palestine to fully realise their linguistic and historical affinity with a pre-Islâmic Arab heritage, and to join the demands for reform of (and later revolt against) the Ottoman Empire. The prominence of Orthodox Christians like Shiblî Shumayyil and ‘Isa al-‘Isa in Arab movements for reform and independence in subsequent generations can be to some degree attributed to the witness and work of the Antiochian Orthodox hierarchy. On that note, may God make the memory of His Holiness Meletios to be æternal!