.png "English"){kind=small}
Autocephalia (from
the Greek. Αυτός
+ κεφαλή-
"itself" + "head" = "self-caption") is
the most complete self-government (as opposed to more
limited autonomous self-government),
the administrative independence of the local
Churches
From the point
of view of canon law, the category of autocephaly has an applied
character. It is designed to help organize hierarchically
structured communities in the local
Church . Autocephalous are those local churches which,
being parts of the Universal Church ,
enjoy the greatest degree of self-government. The autocephalous
Church is completely independent with respect to other autocephalous
Churches, although all of them, being parts of the Church of the
Universal, are interdependent. (For more on the combination of
unity and multiplicity of the Church, see Art. Local
Church ).
The essence of
autocephaly is that the head
of the autocephalous Church is elected and supplied by its
own bishops ,
without obtaining permission or approval of other autocephalous
Churches. At the same time, the masters of other autocephalous
Churches can take part in the delivery, as guests.
In addition to
independence in the election and staging of the first hierarch, the
independence of autocephalous churches is usually expressed in:
- the right to issue their own laws and regulations (such as the Statutes (Regulations) of the local Churches)
- self-determination of their device and control
- self-sanctification for themselves holy world
- compilation and introduction of new rites and chants (subject to preservation of the dogmatic teachings contained in the liturgical texts)
- independence in administrative decision making
- independence in the field of ecclesiastical court
- the right to convene their Local Councils
- the right to initiate the convocation of the Ecumenical Council
Autocephaly as
an autonomy for internal management in the Church has natural
limitations associated with church-wide unity. All autocephalous
churches are identical to each other, being separated not religiously
and spiritually, but only territorially and administratively, within
the framework of the One Universal Church. Each local
Orthodox Church , headed by its primate ,
is the entire fullness of the One,
Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Orthodox Church , to which all
other local churches equally belong.
The autonomy
of autocephalous churches is limited by the conciliar unity in the
areas of:
- dogmas - only the Universal Church has the right to faithfully preserve, express and interpret the revealed truth of God, in no way altering the essence of faith and truth
- canons — applying holy canons to local conditions, they are observed by all local churches; the most important canonical questions are subject to the joint jurisdiction of the entire Universal Church
- Divine services — the liturgical life of each local church must be consistent with a single dogmatic teaching and strive for uniformity in basic standards; the most important canonical questions are subject to the joint jurisdiction of the entire Universal Church
The unity of
the autocephalous Churches is also expressed in the joint liturgical
ministry and in the inclusion of the names of their primates
in diptychs ,
read out during the liturgy (as
a rule, if performed by the primate of this or that autocephalous
Church). This unity is based on the fact that in each of the
local Churches, as in every Orthodox church, the true Eucharist
is celebrated , to which Christians are joined through
the Sacrament
of Holy Communion . Only in the unity of all Orthodox
communities among themselves is it possible to achieve the fullness
of the church life and to be in unity with God .
The well-known
canonist Bishop Nicodemus
of Dalmatia (Milash) writes:
"The unity
of the Ecumenical
Church consists ... in the unity of faith between
the Local
Churches , in the unity of spirit between
them, in their mutual communion in
the manner established by law and church practice, in their
coordinated operation in canonically a
certain direction " [1] .
Concept
development
Administrative
autonomy was inherent in each individual local
church . The churches founded by the apostles were
independent in their own right, by virtue of their emergence in a
separate area. The focus of the preaching and church life of
such Churches were usually the most important cities - primarily the
provincial capitals — the metropolis
of the Roman
Empire.. The Christian communities of the neighboring lands,
owing their birth to preachers from the Apostolic Churches, honored
these Churches as their mothers and recognized their authority for
themselves. Thus, the first local churches were formed, headed
by the capital BGs. As a result, most of the ancient
metropolises - usually corresponding to the Roman provinces - were
essentially autocephalous. According to Theodore
Balsamon : " in
ancient times, all the metropolitan eparchies
were independent (autocephalous) and were ordained by their
own Councils ." At
the same time in several of the most important departments, such as
the Roman , Alexandria and AntiochThere
was a definite advantage.
After the
establishment of Christianity as the dominant faith in the Roman
Empire, the streamlining of church government began. At
the Second
Ecumenical Council, the second
rule prohibited "regional bishops" from extending
their authority " to
the Church, outside their own area ... as the cause of each area
would be the Council of the same area ." At
that time, according to Professor S.
V. Troitsky , such independent church areas " were
churches in all Roman provinces (if
there were about 100), then in all 14 dioceses
of the Roman Empire " [1] . However,
contrary to this rule, in fact, in an eraThe
Ecumenical Councils consolidated almost all the local
Churches around the most important cities, whose bishops received the
title of patriarchs . Under
the righteous king Justinian
the Great in the 6th century,
the formula for the Universal Church as the pentarchy -
the "five power" of the patriarchs - was expressed ,
although in fact the number of independent local Churches was never
reduced to five Patriarchs.
The term
"autocephaly" was also introduced into church life in the
era of the Ecumenical Councils. In the canons it
was not used [2] , and in general Eastern
Romanusage had at least three different meanings, both
ecclesiastical and secular. From the 6th century,
the use of this word to designate an administratively independent
local church — around the year 540 —
in his “Church History” by Theodore
Reader, is so called the Cyprus
Church [3] . The oldest known
lists of dioceses of the
Church of Constantinople , probably belonging to
the 7th century,
contain another use. Here "autocephalous archbishops "are
those bishops who were directly subordinate to the patriarch, as
opposed to the" addicted to
the bishops , "who were subordinate to
local metropolitans. [4] Finally,
lime and third, secular use of the term -. King Constantine
Porphyrogenitus in the X century
is so called autonomous city of
Dalmatia [5] .
By
the 12th century,
in the writings of the eminent canonist Theodore
Balsamon , the statement of the term “autocephaly” can
be seen in the sense of being close to the modern - as
determining the independence of the church area. Among those, he
pointed out both the Patriarchs of the “Pentarchy” and
the Bulgarian , Cyprus and Iberian local
Churches [6] . At the same time,
after the era of the Ecumenical
Councils the emphasis in the concept of “autocephaly” is
shifted from explaining the reasons for the existence of originally
separate church areas to clarifying the method of segregating
churches that were not originally autocephalous. The violation
of the ecclesiastical and secular order in the primordially orthodox
lands as a result of the short-term seizure of Constantinople
by the Roman Catholics in the 13th century
sharply spurred this process.
The category
of "autocephaly" acquired a new dimension as a result of
the imposition on new Western ideologies,
especially those that spread as a result of the French
Revolution at the end of the 18th century. With
the emergence of the concept of a nation-state, the autocephaly of
the local church area began to be understood as an attribute of
statehood and nationality . Without
acquiring their own autocephalous Church, the latter-day national
movements in the Balkans began
to think their projected nation-states were flawed, not completely
independent. They correlated independence from the Ottoman
Empire with the independence of their Orthodox Churches
from the
Patriarchate of Constantinople . In XIX
century, the independence of the national state has often become a
new qualitative dimension of autocephaly. The independence of
the nation-state has often been put forward as a reason for
autocephaly, and in some cases as its intended consequence. However,
as well as with the formula of the pentarchy ,
the conformity of the church structure to the secular division into
nation-states has never been fully realized.
In
the 19th and 20th centuries,
the issue of the delimitation of the concepts of church autocephaly
and autonomy became
more acute. In some cases, new autocephaly turned out to be not
completely sovereignty compared to the previous ones. Thus, the
Church of Constantinople in the new time often granted only
"limited" autocephaly. The restrictions were that the
Church – Daughter had to take from the Church – Mother holy
things, obey her court, turn to her for the resolution of the
most important issues of church life, communicate with other Churches
only through the Mother Church, etc. Another controversial point
was the need for three bishops for autocephaly. In particular,
the Montenegrin
Church during most of its history, it had only one Bishop, who
accepted the independence from the Russian
Church, but was considered autocephalous.
List of
Autocephalous Churches
Usually, the
enumeration of autocephalous churches is done in the order of
a diptych (see
details), which is somewhat different in different local churches. In
the modern everyday life of the Russian
Orthodox Church in the diptych of autocephaly there are
churches:
- Ruled by Patriarchs :
B. Ruled
by archbishops:
C. Governed
by metropolitans:
From
the 6th century,
when it was first known about the use of the concept "autocephaly"
in the sense of a completely independent local church, there were
also a number of other autocephalous local churches, among which (in
the order of the first hierarch and alphabet):
A Ruled
by patriarchs :
B. Ruled by
the archbishops:
C. Ruled
by metropolitans:
Conditions
and procedure for deciding on autocephaly
There is no
universally accepted canonical procedure for proclaiming, abolishing
and recognizing autocephaly in the Orthodox Church today. Defining
such an order, theologians usually refer not to specific canons,
but to the "canonical tradition."
Initially, no
special declaration of independence was required. In the era of
the Ecumenical
Councils, the status of autocephaly was consolidated or
established in three ways - by an Ecumenical Council, by the local
Council of the Kyriarchal
Church (Mother Church), or by the emperor’s deed. At
the same time, the criterion of the apostolic
foundation was sometimes advanced as supposedly necessary
for the autocephaly of the Church. So, Pope Saint Leo
the Great on this basis challenged the autocephaly of the
Church of Constantinople, and the
Patriarchate of Antioch refused autocephaly to the Church
of Georgia.. However, over time, this criterion was finally
rejected. On the one hand, many of the Churches are undoubtedly
of apostolic origin — as, for example, that of Corinth —
have not used autocephaly since antiquity, while other autocephalous
churches are universally recognized without having apostolic origin.
Taking into
account the historical experience, nowadays, the following criteria
for the legality of the administrative-territorial division of the
local Church ("Church-Daughter") from the Kyriarchal
Church ("Church-Mother") are usually
distinguished :
- political independence of the territory of the segregating local church
- geographical remoteness from the center of the Kyriarchal Church
- ethnic difference of the region from the main territory of the Kyriarchal Church
- Consent of the Kyriarchal Church
More
difficult, but perhaps even more important conditions are:
- the desire for autocephaly of the great majority of the flock and clergy of the segregating local church the ability of an isolated local church to independent existence (in particular, as the essence of autocephaly is considered to be the independent supply of hierarchs , which requires at least two other hierarchs (1st apostolic canon), autocephaly requires at least three hierarchs).
The principle
is considered legal and canonical axiom: no one can give another
person more rights than he has. Therefore, the autocephaly of
any local church can be granted only by those church-administrative
authorities that possess the highest authority. First of all, it
is the Ecumenical
Council . According to some interpretations, the IV
Ecumenical Council, by its 12th
canon, proclaimed that the secular authorities did not have
the right to proclaim church autocephaly, but in fact autocephaly was
often granted by the act of the emperor, as in the case of the First
Justinian Church . But the most common, and recently
the only available way to establish or abolish autocephaly, is the
decision of the episcopate of an already existing autocephalous local
church , whose competence extends only to the limits of its
church. The will of the local episcopate can be expressed both
by the Local
Council and, in exceptional cases, by the small Council of
Bishops - the Synod . Such
a Council may provide an autocephaly for a part of its Church or
abolish its own autocephaly. In two exceptional cases,
individual bishops have
the right to provide a temporary autocephaly for a part of any
existing autocephalous Church without the decision of the Kyriarchal
Church . First, it is possible if the central authority
of the Kyriarchal Church (that is, the Church from which a part of
the bishops separated) declined into heresy (the 15th
canon of the Twelfth Council). Secondly, this is possible if
this part of the Church for any reason turns out to be completely
divorced from the Mother Church, or when the central authority of the
Kyriarchal Church is idle ( 37th
canon of the VI Ecumenical Council ). At the same time,
in order for a temporary autocephaly to become permanent, it is
necessary to agree to this on the part of the Kyriarchal Church,
whose life and activity have returned to normal.
No
autocephalous Church has the right to grant an autocephalous to any
part of the Ecumenical Church located in the jurisdiction of another
autocephalous Church. The
canons forbid the hierarchs of one church region to extend
their authority to the Church, outside of their own region, "don't
mix Churches" (2nd
canon of the II Ecumenical Council). In recent history, it has
happened more than once that autocephaly was proclaimed by a state
authority or a local episcopate, voluntarily out of submission to the
catholic episcopate of the autocephalous Church, but such actions are
also recognized as illegal.
Ultimately,
the main, and sometimes the only, motive for the decision on
autocephaly is the good of the Church. The
conviction of the benefits of the Church should guide the general
opinion of the clergy and flock of both the sovereignty and the
isolated or adjoining local church.
History of
the formation and abolition of autocephalous churches
The
streamlining of church organization in the era of the Ecumenical
Councils led to the concentration of numerous relatively
independent church areas in clearly demarcated autocephalous local
churches. Already in 325 ,
the I
Ecumenical Council its 6th
canon fixed
"ancient customs" against the government benefits the
bishops of
Alexandria, Rome and Antioch over other metropolitans in their
respective fields. All these three sees were the most important
cities of the empire, and also led the succession of their bishops
from the Apostles. In 381,
the II
Ecumenical Council, by its 3rd
canon, established the autocephaly of the
Church of Constantinople, making the local bishop second in honor
after the Roman one, since Constantinople became
the second capital of the empire - the "New Rome," "the
city of the king and senate ." The
gradual expansion of the power of these four Churches over an
ever-increasing number of primordial metropolises evoked in 431 a
reaction from the Third
Ecumenical Council , which, by its 8th
canon, forbade hierarchs to extend power to an area that
"before
and at first was not under the hand of them or their
predecessors." Thus,
the initial autocephaly was fenced from the encroachments of Antioch
rulers: the Cypriot
Church. In 451,
the IV
Ecumenical Council also singled out from the Antiochian
Church a new autocephalous Church, Jerusalem,
in view of the rise in the pilgrimage of the Holy
Land, as well as the authority of the Palestinian monks and
archpastors. Finally, also in the 5th century,
the process of isolating from its distant and distinctive
northeastern region, the Georgian
(Iverian) Church, began to split from the Patriarchate of
Antioch. The latter process was possibly connected with the
corresponding decision of the local Council of the Antioch Church,
and was also accompanied by the recognition of the autocephaly of the
Georgian Church by the emperor Zinon.
Thus, by the
beginning of the 6th century,
with the accession of the Orthodox King Justinian
the Great , the process of “gathering” the ancient
church areas led to the division of almost the whole empire and its
neighboring lands between the five main local Churches. They
were
the Roman , Constantinople , Alexandria , Antioch and Jerusalem ,
whose priesthood received the high title of patriarchs . In
the course of the extensive works of King Justinian on the structure
of the empire, the formula of the church " pentarchy " was
expressed - i.e. The "five powers" of the
patriarchs over the Ecumenical Church. In 691,
the Trullan
Council in its 36
rule consolidated the sequence of honor of the five Patriarchs,
defining: "The
throne of Constantinople has equal advantages with the throne of
ancient Rome and, like this, it is exalted in church affairs, being
the second after it: Alexandria and Antioch, and after these is the
throne of the city of Jerusalem." Subsequently,
the concept of pentarchy was considered many times by Eastern Roman
authors and for centuries became the favorite formula of the ideal
church structure. The five patriarchs were likened to the five
senses of the one body of the Universal Church. The violation of
this formula was usually viewed negatively by theorists, and
autocephalous churches that were not part of the "pentarchy"
were often belittled.
However, the
formula of the pentarchy was never fully embodied in
practice. In 535, King
Justinian himself, established by his decree a new autocephalous
Church with its center at the place of its birth, the First
Justinian Archdiocese. In 666,
the emperor Constant
II also established the privilege of the Ravenna
Archdiocese . Both of these local churches were fragile
- the latter did not exist even for two decades, and the first fell
into decay and was formally abolished in 732 by
the decree of Emperor Leo
Ivar. However, another autocephalous inheritance invariably
preserved in the orbit of the empire was the Cypriot
Archdiocese which provided an example of the preservation of the
ancient institution of independent church areas. On the
frontiers and outside the empire, the church structure was less
streamlined, and also less subject to influence from Constantinople,
as a result of which distant ecclesiastical fields often acted as
autocephalous. This was first of all the Georgian
Church, headed by the Catholicos-archbishop,
whose autocephaly was subsequently repeatedly challenged and
affirmed.
After the mass
settlement of the Slavs in
the Balkans and
their gradual conversion to Christianity,
the prerequisites for the formation of new autocephalous churches
appeared. The first powerful Slavic power here
was Bulgaria. Shortly
after their
baptism in the 860s, the Bulgarian
Church was formed as a local church with a large degree of
independence from Constantinople. In
the first decades of X
century, in view of the victories of the Bulgarians over the empire
and the proclamation of the Bulgarian ruler by the king, the Mother
Church of Constantinople recognized the Bulgarian Church as
autocephalous, and its primate received the title of patriarch. After
Vostochnorimsky Emperor Basil
Bulgaroctonus conquered Bulgaria, he confirmed the old
autocephalous local church three hrisovullami in 1018 - 1019,
dropping the title to its primate Archbishop of
Ohrid .
In 1054 there
was another gap between the Orthodox Patriarchs and the Roman
Church , which, unlike the previous ones, could not be
healed. Thus, the "Pentarchy" lost its preeminent
member, the Western Church fell away from Orthodoxy, and the design
of the new Roman
Catholic teaching went into it. The attack of the
Roman Catholic forces on the center of the Orthodox world at the
beginning of the XIII century
led to a new round of the formation of the Slavic autocephalous local
churches. At that time, Constantinople fell
into the hands of the Latins, the unifying role of the empire
weakened sharply, and the Patriarch
of Constantinople found himself in exile in Nicea. Then
the Patriarchs of Constantinople in Nicaea went to the recognition of
two new local Churches within the new Slavic states - Serbian
(Zhicha) in the 1219
and restored the
Bulgarian (Tarnovo) in 1234 -1235 . At
the same time, both new churches were separated from the Archdiocese
of Ohrid, the latter by means of temporary evasion of union with
Rome. In the same epoch, the land of the Cyprus
Church was under the secular authority of the Roman
Catholics and the highest hierarchy was involved in the union.
The increased
pressure of the Turkish conquerors from the East at the end of
the XIV century
led to a new shift in the structure of the autocephalous church areas
of the Ecumenical Church. In 1394,
shortly after the fall of Bulgaria to the Turks , the Patriarch
of Constantinople sent his metropolitan to the borders of
the Bulgarian
Church, and after several decades the Patriarchate of Tarnovo was
subordinate to Constantinople. In the meantime, the majority of
the elite of the East
Roman Empire, weakened by the blows of the Turks, were
inclined to Roman
Catholicism, hoping to get Western help through
the union
Signing The Union
of Florence in 1439 spurred
the isolation of the Russian
Church, which broke off communion with the Uniate Patriarchs who
had fallen away from Orthodoxy and since 1448 set
up their own metropolitanate
on their own. Although all other local churches also
soon rejected the unfortunate union, the independence of the Russian
Church was no longer interrupted. Another new local church of
this epoch was the Abkhaz
Catholicosate, which separated itself from the Georgian Church in
the second half of the 15th
century, after Patriarch Michael
of IV of Antioch gave him a new Catholicos.
The fall
of Constantinople in 1453 and
the subsequent unification of the Eastern Roman lands within
the Ottoman
Empire created a new church order there. The
Patriarch of Constantinople was officially recognized as the "head
of the Roman people,"
having received special worldly powers over all Orthodox in the
empire. Thus, the autocephalous Orthodox Churches found
themselves under Ottoman rule — that is, by the second half of
the 16th century,
all local churches except for the Russian and
partly the Georgian
— were in some matters made dependent on Constantinople. In
most churches, the leading positions were occupied by the loyal
empires and Constantinople, the Greeks ,
while the Serbian
(Pec) Church was long suppressed by the Ottoman authorities
and only from 1557
was it able to restore the regular supply of its first
hierarchs.
At the same
time, there was a consolidation and expansion of Russia,
which became the only free and powerful Orthodox
kingdom. In 1589, the Patriarch
of Constantinople, forced to rely more and more on the support of
Russia, finally recognized the autocephaly of the Russian
Church and made its primate Patriarch. The
local Councils of the Eastern hierarchs in 1590 and
in 1593 approved
the canonical independence of the new Moscow Patriarchate and
identified it fifth in honor after the ancient Patriarchates, thus
restoring the "pentarchy" of the superior local churches.
In
the 18th century ,
the importance of Western ideological
influences, secularism and nationalism in particular, significantly
increased in the Russian and Ottoman
empires, which aggravated the instrumental attitude towards the
Church. Both the authorities and a number of prominent church
leaders began to promote the unification of church life, both
administratively and identically. The homogeneous local churches
seemed more manageable and were also called to serve the assimilation
of foreign Orthodox subjects. In the Ottoman Empire, these
motifs were aggravated by the restoration moods of the Greek elite
" Phanar“,
fears of the authorities about the loyalty of the Slavs, and the
plight of several local churches. This led to the abolition of
the Serbian
(Pech) and Ohrid Churches,
which, under pressure from the authorities, were forced to“
dissolve ”and join the Constantinople
Church in 1766 and 1767 respectively
In Russia, in a similar way, by imperial order, the Catholicosates
of Mtskheta
(East Georgian) and Abkhaz
(West Georgian) in 1811 and 1814 ,
respectively , were attached to the Russian
Church .
The same
influences of secularism and nationalism began
to promote the emergence of anti-imperial national liberation
movements among Orthodox minorities. These movements often put
the attainment of church autocephaly on a par with the assertion of
national identity and state independence. The first new
autocephalous churches that formed in such conditions can be
considered the Karlovac and Montenegrin -
parts of the Serbian Church outside the Ottoman Empire, which refused
to go under the Omphorion
of Constantinople after
the abolition of their Kyriarchal Church in 1766 and
thus became independent. However, more characteristic of the new
era was The Greek
Church, which unilaterally declared its autocephaly in 1833 under
pressure from the authorities and secular activists soon after Greece
gained independence from the Ottoman Empire. Following this, the
gradual disintegration of the Ottoman Empire followed, accompanied by
the release of new autocephaly from the Patriarchate of
Constantinople. The
Romanian Church declared its autocephaly in 1865,
anticipating the achievement of the political independence
of Romania in 1877. The
Bulgarian Church, in the wake of popular unrest, achieved
the Sultan's firm about its de
facto
independence in 1870,
long before gaining Bulgaria full
independence in 1908. Only Serbia followed
the canonical way, first achieving recognition of full political
independence in 1878,
and then - the Tomos of autocephaly of the Serbian
Church by the Patriarch of Constantinople in 1879. In
other cases, Constantinople was also forced to recognize the new
autocephaly, but did so with a long delay — the Hellenic
autocephaly was recognized by the Patriarchate in 1850,
the Romanian - in 1885 ,
and the Bulgarian - only in 1946.
The process of
reproduction of autocephalous church areas in Austria-Hungary was
partly similar , with the main difference being that the empire
managed to keep Orthodox minorities within one state. In 1864 ,
the authorities met the long-standing demands of the Romanians and
allowed the separation of an independent Romanian Transylvanian
Metropolis from the Karlovac
Church . In 1873 ,
the Bukovinian
Metropolis was also singled out from the Karlovac Church ,
uniting the Orthodox in Austria . Thus,
in the century before 1914,
the number of autocephaly in the Orthodox Church grew from 8 to 14.
World
War I; the revolutionary disintegration of
the Russian, Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian empires
that followed; the implementation of the principle of
"national self-determination" in the political
reorganization of Eastern Europe — all this was expressed in
significant shifts in the autocephalous regions of the Orthodox
Church. The new conditions allowed the Serbs and Romanians
to unite in the wake of the united nations-states, in
connection with which the respective local Churches
merged. In 1919 - 1920 years
have passed merging Serbian
(Belgrade) , Karlovac , Montenegrin,
autonomous Bosnian (from
Constantinople) and parts of the Bukovina Churches
into a single Serbian
Patriarchate. Almost simultaneously,
the Romanian , Transylvanian ,
part of Bukovina ,
and part of the Russian (Bessarabia)
Churches constituted the Romanian
Patriarchate . After the massacre of Christians in the
crumbling Ottoman Empire and the Greco-Turkish
War in 1922 ,
there was an exchange of population between Greece and Turkey ,
as a result of which the Constantinople
Church was deprived of the lion’s share of its former
flock. In the same year, the Albanian
Church within independent Albania also
announced its autocephaly, which was recognized by the Mother Church
of Constantinople in 1937 . In
an effort to strengthen its position in other parts of the world, the
Patriarchate of Constantinople intervened in the affairs of the
Russian Church and subjugated a number of its western lands,
and in 1924 granted
autocephaly to the Polish
Church. The
Russian Church, in turn, was facing unprecedented anti-religious
persecution and could do little to protect its rights. Even
before the Polish Church , the Georgian Church also
emerged from the Russian Church in 1917 ,
proclaiming the restoration of its former autocephaly.
The
Second World War and the establishment of a bipolar world
during the Cold
War changed the situation of the Russian
Church, which was considered by the Soviet authorities in
particular as an important foreign policy tool. This shift led
the Russian Church to recognize a number of new autocephaly —
in 1943 it
recognized the autocephaly of the Georgian
Church, updated the autocephalous Polish
Church in 1948,
granted the autocephaly of the Czechoslovak
Church in 1951 ,
and in 1970
established the new autocephalous Orthodox
Church in America. The
Patriarchate of Constantinople refused to recognize these
acts, declaring that only they could canonically bestow autocephaly.
Accordingly, Constantinople made its own Tomos of autocephalous -
Georgian in 1990 and
Czechoslovak in 1998.
The collapse
of the USSR and
the socialist camps led to the founding of many new nation-states in
which autocephalist movements arose. However, in contrast to the
previous era, all these movements remained split,
enticing a minority of local believers. Only the arbitrary
autocephaly of the Macedonian
Church , supported at the time by the secular power of
Yugoslavia and
existing since 1967,
attracted the majority of the faithful of Macedonia.
The current
state of the issue
Nowadays, the
understanding of autocephaly remains strongly politicized and
includes many aspects not related to canonical law and
ecclesiology. Autocephaly continues to be widely regarded in
secularized circles as a manifestation and a mandatory attribute of
national independence and self-sufficiency. Such a perverse
understanding continues to give rise to disorder and splits ,
of which the most significant in the territory of the Russian
Church is the so-called "Kyiv
Patriarchate".
The question
of the right to provide autocephaly continues to be acute and
complex. The most intense in this respect is the opposition
around the Orthodox
Church in America . Soon after her autocephaly was
bestowed on her by the Russian Church in 1970 ,
all the other local churches were divided. Only the Czechoslovak
Polish
Georgian,
and Bulgarian,
Churches recognized the new autocephaly.
The
understanding of the essence of the institution of autocephaly, its
canonical content, and the significance of this institution for the
unity of the Orthodox Church are the same among all local
Churches. The main differences relate to the method of
proclaiming autocephalous, i.e. to the established procedure and
to the competent church authority beginning this procedure.
- The Russian , Romanian , Bulgarian , Polish and other Churches insist on the independent right of each autocephalous Church to grant autocephaly to a specific part of its jurisdiction if all the necessary specific prerequisites are available.
- A number of Churches, primarily Constantinople , Alexandria , Jerusalem and Hellas, give the Constantinople Patriarch the process of giving autocephaly.
Within the
framework of the Pan-Orthodox pre-council meetings and the
inter-Orthodox preparatory commissions, proposals are being prepared
that establish a generally recognized Orthodox procedure for granting
autocephaly. It is supposed that they will be considered at the
future Great Council of the Orthodox Church and, if such a procedure
is adopted, many difficulties in the life of the Church should
disappear. [7] .
References
- Tsypin Vladislav, arch., "Autocephaly," Orthodox Encyclopedia , vol. 1, 199-202:
- Skurat K.E., History of Orthodox Local Churches , "Introduction":
- Zaev Vasily, arch., Synopsis on the history of the Local Orthodox Churches (4th year of KDS) , "Introduction":http://www.sedmica.orthodoxy.ru/kda-hist-pom-churches.php
- Tsypin Vladislav, arch., Church Law, sections: Church and Territory. Church Diaspora. Autocephalous and Autonomous Churches. Local Churches and higher government in them (canonical foundations; historical essay):
- Erickson, John H., "Autocephaly in Orthodox canonical literature to the thirteenth century," Autocephaly. The Orthodox Church in America, Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir's seminary press, 1971, 28-41.
- Blokhin V., History of Local Orthodox Churches (Study Guide) , section I, gl. 1 and 2:
- Damascene (Papandreou), Met. Swiss, "Autocephaly and Method of Its Proclamation," speech at the Meeting of the Inter-Orthodox Preparatory Commission, Chambesy, November 7-13, 1993 (ed.: Damaskene (Papandreou), Metropolitan of Switzerland, Orthodoxy and Peace, Holy Resident Research Center Kikku, Cyprus, ed. Livani-Nea Sinora, 1994), op. by: http://www.religare.ru/2_2593.html
- Cyril (Hovorun), archim., "Autocephaly: from canon to myth," report at the conference "Synod and Tomos: Landmarks of the Twentieth Century on the Church's Path in the XXI Century," New York, St. Vladimir Seminary, June 18-20, 2009 of the year:
- Schmemann, Alex., Church, Peace, Mission , Moscow: St. Tikhon’s Orthodox Theological Institute, 1996, Ch. "The momentous storm," op. by:
- P. Zuev, "Unity in Diversity. The System of Local Churches," Zerkalo Nedelya newspaper, No. 3, January 27, 2007:
- Venediktov V., "Local Orthodox Churches: unity in diversity. On the question of church autocephaly": http://www.mamif.org/avtokefalija.htm
- Chernyshov V., The Autocephalist Movement in Ukraine and the Emergence of Ukrainian Self-Sanctification. (1917-1921), ch. 1, section 1.1 "The concept of the local church, autocephaly, and the conditions for its receipt":
- Popov, "Unspeakable Word. Reflections after the 1020th anniversary of the Baptism of Rus," Newspaper 2000, No. 32 (424), August 8-14, 2008:
- "Local Churches," the site of the Fastovsky Intercession Temple:
Notes
[2] According
to prot. A. Schmemann, "The momentous storm".
[5] See
a series of examples in On
Empire Management ,
29
( http://www.vostlit.info/Texts/rus11/Konst_Bagr_2/frametext29.htm) and
30 ( http://www.vostlit.info/Texts/rus11
/Konst_Bagr_2/text30.phtml?id=6390)
[6] PG
137: 317-20.
[7] See:
“The participants in the Chambesi meeting prepared draft documents
on the procedure for granting autocephaly and autonomy to Orthodox
Churches,” http://obitel.kiev.ua/news/?id=979
Source:
https://drevo-info.ru/articles/23.html
