Council of Constantinople (1872)

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search
First page of the signatories of the Council in Greek and French.

The Council of Constantinople was a pan-Eastern Orthodox council held in Constantinople between August 29, 1872, and September 16, 1872, in response to the schism within a part of the Bulgarian ecclesiastical hierarchy. All the Eastern Orthodox patriarchs of the time participated in it. The council pronounced anathema on phyletism, which means the idea that ecclesiastical jurisdictions should be delineated not on territorial but national lines. The council also condemned racism.

The council is recognized as authoritative within the entire Eastern Orthodox Church.

History

Background

General aspects and early troubles

Part of a series on the
Eastern Orthodox Church
Christ Pantocrator (Deesis mosaic detail)
Mosaic of Christ Pantocrator, Hagia Sophia
Overview
Background
Organization
Autocephalous jurisdictions
Autocephalous Churches who are officially part of the communion:

Autocephaly recognized by some autocephalous Churches de jure:

Autocephaly and canonicity recognized by Constantinople and 3 other autocephalous Churches:

Spiritual independence recognized by Georgian Orthodox Church:


Autonomous jurisdictions

Semi-Autonomous:

Episcopal assemblies
Noncanonical jurisdictions
Ecumenical councils
  • Other possible ecumenical councils:
  • Other important councils:
History
Theology
Liturgy and worship
Liturgical calendar
  • The four fasting periods:
Major figures
Other topics

During the 19th century, the Ottoman Empire faced challenges, notably with the independence of Greece.[1] In 1856, the Ottoman Empire attempted reforms in its governance system. During the Tanzimat period, the Ottoman Sultan officially assigned the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople the role of representing the Rum Millet.[1] This sparked a crisis within the Ecumenical Patriarchate, as dissenters opposing the Ottoman Empire and the state of affairs within the Rum Millet could now consider the patriarch and the patriarchy directly responsible since he became their official representative.[1]

In particular, Bulgarian nationalists strongly opposed the situation within the patriarchy, where the vast majority of bishoprics were held by Greeks, especially in Bulgaria.[1] They were also in conflict with the Greeks over financial matters concerning the payment of debts to the Ottoman Sultan.[1] Between 1858 and 1860, the Greek National Assembly convened to address some of the contentious issues related to the Rum Millet, but these efforts did not yield results.[1]

Conflict and schism

After having his demands rejected, Metropolitan Hilarion of Makariopolis decided to enter into schism; he ceased commemorating the Patriarch of Constantinople during the Easter celebration in 1860.[1][2] Up until this point, he had been the bishop appointed by the patriarchate in one of its Bulgarian-language parishes in Constantinople.[1] He presented himself as the 'leader of a de facto-created Bulgarian church' and was swiftly deposed by Patriarch Joachim II.[1] Two of the Bulgarian bishops who followed him were also deposed, namely Paissy of Plovdiv and Auxentius of Durrës.[1]

Between 1860 and 1866, numerous negotiations were initiated between the two parties, but they led to no resolution. Furthermore, the arrival of the new Russian ambassador, Ignatiev, further complicated the matter.[1] This move toward independence was also supported by the Grand vizier of the Ottoman Empire, Ali Pasha Rizvanbegović.[1]

In reality, the intervention of external political actors displeased the Patriarchate of Constantinople, which would have preferred the issue to be resolved within an Orthodox framework.[1] The patriarch contemplated convening an ecumenical council to address the Bulgarian question. In 1868, Ali Pasha encouraged Bulgarian bishops to secede from the patriarchate; three of them joined the already deposed bishops, and other bishops who had joined the schismatic Bulgarian Church in the meantime.[1]

In 1872, the Holy Synod of the patriarchate decided to make one final attempt to resolve the crisis by proposing the creation of a Bulgarian exarchate.[1] However, the proposal included political autonomy for the Bulgarians, which displeased the Ottoman Empire, leading to the prohibition of the proposition.[1] The rebellious Bulgarian bishops then decided to elect their own exarch, Anthim I.[1][3]

Council

To address this situation, Anthimus VI of Constantinople decided to convene a council involving the other Orthodox patriarchates.[2] The council took place in the Saint George Cathedral of Constantinople between August 29, 1872, and September 16, 1872.[2] In addition to the patriarchs of Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem, the Archbishop of Cyprus attended, and the council was joined by twenty-five metropolitans and bishops, including two former patriarchs of Constantinople.[2][4] The position opposing the Bulgarian Church and phyletism quickly gained the majority of bishops and participants.[2][5] However, Patriarch Cyril II of Jerusalem fled at the end of the first session, as he did not wish to conflict with Russian interests, among other reasons, given his extensive lands in the Russian Empire.[2][6]

After deliberations, the council chose to condemn the Bulgarian schism completely.[2][7][8] According to the council, the rebellious bishops adhered to a new heresy within the Orthodox Church, phyletism, meaning nationalism applied within the Orthodox Church.[9] In particular, the council was greatly troubled by the fact that the schismatic bishops had attempted to create parallel ecclesiastical hierarchies exclusively for Bulgarians, while Orthodox bishops were already present in those areas, such as Constantinople. The council saw this as a violation of Orthodox canonical law[2][7][9][10] and an ecclesiological heresy.[9][11] The general idea of phyletism is that ecclesiastical jurisdictions should be based not on territorial but on national lines.[11][12][13] In its proclamation of faith (oros), the council declared:[14][15][16]

[So,] The ethnic egoism that will develop in each of the "national" Churches will stifle religious sentiments to such an extent that it will hardly be permitted for one of these Churches to watch over and cooperate with the other as Christian duty requires. [...] and the dogma of the Church being "one, holy, catholic, and apostolic" receives a mortal blow. [...]
We repress, blame, and condemn phyletism, i.e., distinctions of races, disputes, emulation, and national divisions within the Church of Jesus Christ, as opposed to the doctrine of the Gospel and the sacred canons of our blessed fathers who support the Holy Church and maintain in good order the Christian community they guide on the path of divine piety. II. We declare, in agreement with the sacred canons, those who admit this phyletism and dare to establish new phyletic assemblies based on this principle as real schismatics, alien to the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. Therefore, we declare schismatic and alien to the Orthodox Church of Christ all those who have separated themselves from the Orthodox Church, who have set up a separate altar, and who have formed a phyletic assembly; i.e., [the prelates whose names follow].

The council considered phyletism and racism as "racial aggregations", "new glories", and "modern corruptions".[17] Racism was thus also targeted and condemned by the council.[17][18][19][20][21]

Consequences

Although the schism persisted, after this council, the position of the rebellious bishops and their Church became complicated.[3] Despite achieving independence, they remained separated from the other Orthodox Churches for 70 years.[3] In 1945, an agreement was reached between the Patriarchate of Constantinople and the Bulgarian Exarchate to resolve the issue and reintegrate the Bulgarians into the Eastern Orthodox Church.[3][22]

Legacy

The council is recognized as authoritative within the entire Eastern Orthodox Church.[23][24][25]

However, despite this recognition many Eastern Orthodox Churches developed attitudes that could be characterized as phyletist in the 20th century,[26][27][28] particularly the Russian Orthodox Church[13][29] and the Georgian Orthodox Church,[30] but not exclusively.[28][31] The council was used within the Eastern Orthodox Church in the context of controversies related to the ideology of the Russian world, as seen in the Volos Declaration[32][33] or during the Pan-Orthodox Council.[14][34][35]

Phyletism is generally considered to have increased throughout the 20th century despite the condemnation by the council,[36][37][38] especially in the ecclesiastical management of Eastern Orthodox communities in the diaspora.[38][39]

References

  1. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q Pnevmatikakis, Vassilis (2015-04-01). "Les causes du Concile de Constantinople (1872) sur le phylétisme : le contentieux ecclésial gréco-bulgare au XIX siècle". Contacts – Revue française de l'Orthodoxie. Archived from the original on 2024-02-11. Retrieved 2024-02-11.
  2. ^ a b c d e f g h Melloni, Alberto; Danaise, Davide (2016). The great councils of the Orthodox Churches: decisions and synodika. Conciliorum oecumenicorum generaliumque decreta. Turnhout: Brepols publishers. ISBN 978-2-503-52529-7.
  3. ^ a b c d Lory, Bernard (2021), "L'exarchat bulgare en compétition avec le patriarcat de Constantinople (1870–1945)", Autocéphalies : l'exercice de l'indépendance dans les égliss slaves orientales : IXe-XXe siècle / sous la direction de Marie-Hélène Blanchet, Frédéric Gabriel et Laurent Tatarenko, École Française de Rome, doi:10.1400/284328, ISBN 978-2-7283-1453-9, archived from the original on 2024-02-11, retrieved 2024-02-11
  4. ^ Vovchenko, Denis (2023-08-26). "A Russian stooge or a Greek puppet? Joachim III's struggle for autonomy of the Patriarchate of Constantinople (1864–1912)". Middle Eastern Studies: 1–26. doi:10.1080/00263206.2023.2247993. ISSN 0026-3206. S2CID 261217813. Archived from the original on 2024-02-11. Retrieved 2024-02-11.
  5. ^ Boyko, Natalka; Rousselet, Kathy (2004-10-01). "Les Eglises ukrainiennes: Entre Rome, Moscou et Constantinople". Le Courrier des Pays de l'Est. n° 1045 (5): 39–50. doi:10.3917/cpe.045.0039. ISSN 0590-0239. Archived from the original on 2024-02-11. Retrieved 2024-02-11. {{cite journal}}: |volume= has extra text (help)
  6. ^ Roussos, Sotiris (2005). "Eastern Orthodox Perspectives on Church–State Relations and Religion and Politics in Modern Jerusalem". International Journal for the Study of the Christian Church. 5 (2): 103–122. doi:10.1080/14742250500219642. ISSN 1474-225X. S2CID 144039699. Archived from the original on 2022-06-16. Retrieved 2024-02-11.
  7. ^ a b Gabriel, Frédéric (2021), "Difficiles autocéphalies : entre politique et ecclésiologie", Autocéphalies : l'exercice de l'indépendance dans les égliss slaves orientales : IXe-XXe siècle / sous la direction de Marie-Hélène Blanchet, Frédéric Gabriel et Laurent Tatarenko, École Française de Rome, doi:10.1400/284307, ISBN 978-2-7283-1453-9, archived from the original on 2024-02-11, retrieved 2024-02-11
  8. ^ Aguilon, Claire (2017). "Gouvernance de la religion et liberté de conscience". Studia z Prawa Wyznaniowego (in French) (20): 135–166. doi:10.31743/spw.262. ISSN 2081-8882. Archived from the original on 2024-02-11. Retrieved 2024-02-11.
  9. ^ a b c Papathomas, Grigorios. "63. Ethno-phyletism and the [so-called] Ecclesial "Diaspora" (A one-way relationship of the cause and the effect) (in English)-PDF". Theological Quarterly 57:3–4. Archived from the original on 2024-02-11. Retrieved 2024-02-11.
  10. ^ Groen, Basilius J. (1998). "Nationalism and reconciliation: Orthodoxy in the Balkans∗". Religion, State and Society. 26 (2): 111–128. doi:10.1080/09637499808431814. ISSN 0963-7494. Archived from the original on 2024-02-11. Retrieved 2024-02-11.
  11. ^ a b Walters, Philip (2002). "Notes on Autocephaly and Phyletism". Religion, State and Society. 30 (4): 357–364. doi:10.1080/09637490120103320. ISSN 0963-7494. S2CID 143754836. Archived from the original on 2023-02-12. Retrieved 2024-02-11.
  12. ^ Sekulovski, Goran (2021), "Essais de rétablissement de l'ancien archevêché d'Ohrid (XIXe-XXe siècle)", Autocéphalies : l'exercice de l'indépendance dans les égliss slaves orientales : IXe-XXe siècle / sous la direction de Marie-Hélène Blanchet, Frédéric Gabriel et Laurent Tatarenko, École Française de Rome, doi:10.1400/284329, ISBN 978-2-7283-1453-9, archived from the original on 2024-02-11, retrieved 2024-02-11
  13. ^ a b Rousselet, Kathy (2004). "L'Église orthodoxe russe et le territoire". Revue d'études comparatives Est-Ouest. 35 (4): 149–171. doi:10.3406/receo.2004.1681. ISSN 0338-0599. JSTOR 45448041.
  14. ^ a b Keramidas, Dimitrios (2021). "The Holy and Great Council and the Orthodox Diaspora. National Temptations and Missionary Challenges". Studia Universitatis Babes-Bolyai – Theologia Orthodoxa. LXVI (2): 51–68. doi:10.24193/subbto.2021.2.04. ISSN 2065-9474. S2CID 247642948. Archived from the original on 2024-02-11. Retrieved 2024-02-11.
  15. ^ Tawil, Emmanuel (2009-01-01). "Les relations Église-État dans « La Russie et l'Église universelle » de Vladimir Soloviev". L'Année canonique. Tome LI (1): 307–332. doi:10.3917/cano.051.0307. ISSN 0570-1953. Archived from the original on 2024-02-11. Retrieved 2024-02-11.
  16. ^ Stavrou, Michel (2018-07-19). "Théologie et manifestations de la synodalité: Un défi permanent pour l'Église". Recherches de Science Religieuse. Tome 106 (3): 403–422. doi:10.3917/rsr.183.0403. ISSN 0034-1258. Archived from the original on 2024-02-11. Retrieved 2024-02-11.
  17. ^ a b "Ρατσισμός και Δημοκρατία". ΝΕΟΣ ΚΟΣΜΟΣ (in Greek). 2012-11-22. Archived from the original on 2024-02-11. Retrieved 2024-02-11.
  18. ^ "Strangers in a Foreign Land: Nationalism and the Orthodox Church". Православие.RU. Archived from the original on 2023-12-03. Retrieved 2024-02-11.
  19. ^ "Что такое ересь этнофилетизма?". Православная Жизнь (in Russian). Archived from the original on 2024-02-10. Retrieved 2024-02-11.
  20. ^ Николай, Казарян (2016). "Всеправославный собор: формирование новой православной геополитики". Государство, религия, церковь в России и за рубежом. 1 (34): 102–126. ISSN 2073-7203. Archived from the original on 2024-02-11. Retrieved 2024-02-11.
  21. ^ Хулап, Владимир; Gusev, Andrey; Алексей, Юдин; Kazarian, Nicolas; Ermilov, Pavel; Papanikolaou, Aristotle; Shishkov, Andrey. "Всеправославный собор: подготовка, повестка, контекст. Государство, религия, церковь в России и за рубежом №1 2016". России и за рубежом. Archived from the original on 2024-02-11. Retrieved 2024-02-11.
  22. ^ Peña, Pedro BÁDENAS DE LA (2017-10-27). "Chrétientés balkaniques après Byzance". Travaux et Jours (in French) (91): 13–26. ISSN 0041-1930. Archived from the original on 2024-02-11. Retrieved 2024-02-11.
  23. ^ Okulik, Luis (2005). "Le chiese sui iuris : criteri di individuazione e delimitazione : atti del convegno di studio svolto a Kosice (Slovacchia), 6–7 marzo 2004". Torrossa: 0. Archived from the original on 2024-02-11. Retrieved 2024-02-11.
  24. ^ Lossky, N. (2003). "L'Orthodoxie en France". Études (in French). 399 (11): 507–517. doi:10.3917/etu.995.0507 (inactive 2024-02-11). ISSN 0014-1941. Archived from the original on 2024-01-20. Retrieved 2024-02-11.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of February 2024 (link)
  25. ^ Meyendorff, John; Meyendorff, Jean; Lossky, Nicolas (1995). L' Église orthodoxe: hier et aujourd'hui (Nouvelle éd., revue et augm ed.). Paris: Éditions du Seuil. pp. 149–151. ISBN 978-2-02-023537-2.
  26. ^ Payne, Daniel P. (2007). "Nationalism and the Local Church: The Source of Ecclesiastical Conflict in the Orthodox Commonwealth". Nationalities Papers. 35 (5): 831–852. doi:10.1080/00905990701651828. ISSN 0090-5992. S2CID 153466254. Archived from the original on 2024-02-11. Retrieved 2024-02-11.
  27. ^ Kalaitzidis, Pantelis (2022-10-06), "Orthodox Theology Challenged by Balkan and East European Ethnotheologies", Politics, Society and Culture in Orthodox Theology in a Global Age, Brill Schöningh, pp. 108–159, ISBN 978-3-657-79379-2, archived from the original on 2023-12-03, retrieved 2024-02-11
  28. ^ a b Fernau, Friedrich-Wilhelm (1972). "L'ÉGLISE ORIENTALE ET SON PROCHAIN CONCILE: Problèmes constitutionnels de l'Orthodoxie contemporaine". Politique étrangère. 37 (1): 79–100. doi:10.3406/polit.1972.5876. ISSN 0032-342X. JSTOR 42669669.
  29. ^ Höhne, Florian; Meireis, Torsten, eds. (2020). Religion and neo-nationalism in Europe. ethik und gesellschaft (1st ed.). Baden-Baden: Nomos. ISBN 978-3-8487-6414-3.
  30. ^ Serrano, Silvia (2018). Orthodoxie et politique en Géorgie postsoviétique. Meydan. Paris: Éditions Karthala. ISBN 978-2-8111-2556-1.
  31. ^ Lemonnier, Jean-Michel (2017). "L'EGLISE ORTHODOXE ROUMAINE EN EUROPE OCCIDENTALE : TERRITOIRES ET « DIASPORA »". Annales Universitatis Apulensis. Series Philologica (in French). 18 (1): 365–390. ISSN 1582-5523. Archived from the original on 2023-03-26. Retrieved 2024-02-11.
  32. ^ Document (2022-03-13). "A Declaration on the "Russian World" (Russkii mir) Teaching". Public Orthodoxy. Archived from the original on 2022-12-04. Retrieved 2024-02-11.
  33. ^ "Is It 'Christian' to Welcome Refugees from Ukraine but Not Syria?". News & Reporting. 2022-03-25. Archived from the original on 2024-02-10. Retrieved 2024-02-11.
  34. ^ Hofmeisterová, Karin (2019-05-27). "Ecclesiastical nationalism and primacy in world Orthodoxy: the case of the Serbian Church at the pan-Orthodox Council in Crete". Religion, State and Society. 47 (3): 341–357. doi:10.1080/09637494.2019.1609226. ISSN 0963-7494. S2CID 202272828. Archived from the original on 2024-02-11. Retrieved 2024-02-11.
  35. ^ Parlato, Vittorio (2017-01-30). "Commento agli Atti del Santo Grande Concilio delle Chiese Ortodosse". Stato (in Italian). Chiese e pluralismo confessionale: 2017: 30 gennaio. doi:10.13130/1971-8543/8036. Archived from the original on 2024-02-11. Retrieved 2024-02-11.
  36. ^ De Halleux, André (1993). "La collégialité dans l'Église ancienne". Revue théologique de Louvain (in French). 24 (4): 433–454. doi:10.3406/thlou.1993.2656. ISSN 0080-2654. Archived from the original on 2023-12-22. Retrieved 2024-02-11.
  37. ^ Legrand, Hervé (2001-09-01). "Les évêques, les Églises locales et l'Église entière: Évolutions institutionnelles depuis Vatican II et chantiers actuels de recherche". Revue des sciences philosophiques et théologiques. Tome 85 (3): 461–509. doi:10.3917/rspt.853.0461. ISSN 0035-2209. Archived from the original on 2024-02-11. Retrieved 2024-02-11.
  38. ^ a b Pnevmatikakis, Vassilis (2013-09-01). "La territorialité de l'Église orthodoxe en France, entre exclusivisme juridictionnel et catholicité locale". Carnets de géographes (6). doi:10.4000/cdg.918. ISSN 2107-7266. Archived from the original on 2022-10-24. Retrieved 2024-02-11.
  39. ^ Grigorita, Georgica (2019). "La diaspora ortodossa : realtà attuali e prospettive per il futuro : un'analisi dal punto di vista canonico". Diritto Ecclesiastico (3/4). doi:10.19272/201930804011. Archived from the original on 2024-02-11. Retrieved 2024-02-11.
Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Council_of_Constantinople_(1872)"