ДИАЛОГ КАК СПОСОБ ПРЕОДОЛЕНИЯ РАЗДЕЛЕНИЙВ ПРАВОСЛАВИИ (РЕЛИГИОВЕДЧЕСКИЙ АСПЕКТ ИЗУЧЕНИЯ)

Abstract

Introduction. The article examines topical issues of the attitude of the churches of the Ecumenical Orthodoxy to the jurisdictions that have departed from them and without their permission (tomos). In theology, theology, they are called schisms, and in religious studies, they are called associations of alternative Orthodoxy. A large number of such associations have appeared in the world in the last thirty years in connection with the disintegration of a number of states on the European continent. The purpose of the study is to study the relationship of the title churches to the structures leaving them without sanction. The task of the study is the study of ways to overcome splits, and among them — the dialogue. Methods. The features of church divisions are investigated mainly on the factual materials of the Russian Orthodox Church. Her attitude towards them is analyzed, starting with the reformational and modern autocephalist movements in Ukraine. However, the ways of overcoming splits based on materials from the early and medieval history of Ecumenical Orthodoxy are also being investigated. The study was conducted on the basis of the methods of historicism, structural and functional, and the method of historical retrospection in combination with the theory of social transformation and social phenomena, which include the church. Research results. The author comes to the conclusion that the relations between the Local Churches and the schisms were always tense and conflicting. Although conflicts occur in the religious sphere, their negative consequences are also expressed in the social sphere – society and the state. Conclusion. The analysis of the gradual transition of the local churches from anathema to a dialogue with representatives of the jurisdictions departed from them has theoretical significance, i.e. contributing to the study of the evolutionary processes taking place in religion and the church. The author believes that in modern society, in its religious sphere, it is necessary to develop a dialogue as a positive form of communication in the spirit of peace and patience. Such a conclusion undoubtedly has practical significance.