Abstract
The Orthodox concept of autocephaly, a formerly organizational and administrative measure, has been a powerful nation-building tool since the 19th century. While autocephaly could be granted—from the perspective of the Orthodox canon law—in an orderly fashion, it was often the case that a unilateral, non-canonical way towards autocephaly was sought. This usually took place when the state actors, often non-Orthodox, intervened during the nation-building process. We investigated the effects of unilateral declarations of autocephaly (through a schism) by comparing Bulgarian, Northern Macedonian, and Montenegrin examples. We contend that the best success chances are to be expected by the ecclesiastic body that is less willing to make major transgressions of the canon law, than to radicalize the situation after the initial move. This is mostly because autocephaly’s recognition requires a global acceptance within the circle of the already autocephalous churches. We also suggest that the strong political backing of the autocephaly movement can paradoxically have a negative impact on its ultimate success, as it can prolong the initial separation phase of the schism and prevent or postpone the healing phase, and with it, the fully fledged autocephaly.
Highlights
The Orthodox concept of autocephaly, a formerly organizational and administrative measure, has been a powerful nation-building tool since the 19th century
Without understanding what autocephaly really means and how it relates to different nationalisms, one can hardly understand many identity conflicts that have taken place in the Orthodox world during the previous few centuries
Without understanding the scope and limitations of the concept of autocephaly, one can hardly predict the possible outcomes of the ongoing frictions
Summary
The Orthodox believe that no single bishop can replace Jesus Christ as the Church’s Head. Any autocephalous church has the right to independently elect its own supreme and other bishops, without the necessity to obtain consent or ask for confirmation from any other jurisdiction The phases of growing particularism led to proliferation of the independent local hierarchies and reduction of the actual influence bishops of Constantinople had It was during one of the phases of a growing sense of universalism and affirmation of conciliarity that the Inter-Orthodox Pre-Conciliar Commission met in the Swiss town of Chambesy and agreed on the procedure for granting autocephaly in November of 1993. The obvious reluctance of other local Orthodox Churches to accept this move (so far it has been accepted by the Archbishopric of Greece) might indicate both fear of Moscow’s retaliation and contempt for Constantinople’s decision, considered politically unsavvy, if not outright illegitimate
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
