Phyletism

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Phyletism or ethnophyletism ( Greek ἔθνος éthnos "people" and φυλή phylē "tribe") denotes a movement in the Orthodox churches . In the 19th century, starting from Southeastern Europe, Orthodox national churches emerged, which transferred the principle of nationalism to the church and became “bearers of national identity ”. Although the Synod of Constantinople in 1872 condemned phyleticism as heresy , phyletic tendencies continued. They led to the fact that, mainly in the diaspora , orthodox jurisdictions that were independent from one another and separated by ethnic group exist side by side on the same territory.

Historical background

A historical basis for phyletism was the ideal of the symphonia , the harmonious harmony between church and state, which had determined church politics in the Byzantine Empire for centuries. The empire was, however, a multiethnic state , not a nation-state on an ethnic basis; the concept of nation was understood geographically and territorially.

The liberation struggle of predominantly Orthodox Southeast European peoples from Ottoman rule in the 19th century led to the emergence of national jurisdictions of the local Orthodox churches, which previously mostly belonged to or were subordinate to the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople . This is how the Church of Greece came into being after the Greek Revolution . As part of the Bulgarian Revival , Sultan Abdülaziz established the Bulgarian Exarchate as an autonomous church through a Ferman proclaimed in 1870, but its head had to be confirmed by the Ecumenical Patriarch and the Ottoman government. The Sultan designated the church of St. Stephen in Constantinople as the official residence of the exarch , which had been the church of the Bulgarian community in the city for some time. The Exarchate proclaimed in May 1872 under the Exarch Anthim I. unilaterally its autocephalous .

A synod convened in Constantinople in the late summer of 1872, in which the Patriarchs of Constantinople, Alexandria , Jerusalem and Antioch and the Archbishop of Cyprus took part, declared that the ethnic-national principle could be useful for the formation of new states, but not for the Church is acceptable because the ethnic origin of the believers does not matter. While the formation of national churches in sovereign states - such as the Church of Greece in the independent state of Greece - was legitimate, the idea was rejected that within one state - here the Ottoman Empire - different Orthodox churches could emerge according to ethnic criteria. Since the head of the Bulgarian Orthodox had his official seat in Constantinople, the synod also saw the old church territorial principle violated, according to which only a single bishop could reside in a city or territory.

In September 1872 the Synod decided:

“We reject, condemn and condemn phyletism, that is, racial distinction, ethnic strife, discord and division in the Church of Christ as contradicting the teaching of the Gospel and the holy canons of our godly Fathers, the holy Support the church, order all Christianity and guide it to worship. "

The Bulgarian Church was declared schismatic and it was not until 1945 that reconciliation took place.

The synod's condemnation of phyletism in 1872 was not a resounding success in the further course of history. Emigration movements of Orthodox Christians to Western Europe and overseas led to the creation of foreign jurisdictions of the respective national home churches, whose areas of responsibility still overlap in violation of the old territorial principle.

Consequences of phyletism

The consequences of phyletism are less noticeable in the orthodox home countries than in the diaspora. Philip Saliba, the Metropolitan of the Antiochene Orthodox Archdiocese of North America , pointed out in 2007 that six Orthodox bishops from different national churches reside in Paris and more than ten in New York City with congruent or overlapping jurisdictions, and complained:

“In my opinion and in the opinion of Orthodox canonists, this is phyletism. This is heretical. How can we condemn phyletism as a heresy in 1872 and still practice the same kind of phyletism in the twenty-first century here in North America? "

“In my opinion, and in the opinion of orthodox canonists, this is phyletism. It's heretical. How can we condemn phyletism as heresy in 1872 and still practice the same kind of phyletism here in North America in the 21st century? "

- Archbishop Philip Saliba

In the USA and Canada , which are typical immigration countries, the problems of fragmentation are particularly evident. In the United States, the Orthodox, who make up about 0.6% of the total population, are distributed among about 20 co-existing churches. Orthodox Christians often live far away from a parish in their home country, while other parishes are closer. With varying degrees of success, the Orthodox churches in the USA are opening up more or less to religious siblings of other ethnic origins, and English is used more or less intensively as the liturgical language . The self-image that all Orthodox churches are in complete religious and church fellowship with one another is counteracted, especially in North America, by different and sometimes conflicting rules in the field of pastoral care. Some jurisdictions recognize baptism, marriage and, in some cases, the ordination of non-Orthodox churches, such as the Roman Catholic Church and Protestant churches , in whole or in part; others do not recognize any sacrament given outside of Orthodoxy as valid. There are several degrees of difference in terms of divorce and remarriage, admission to church burial and other practical regulations. Some churches allow people to receive the Eucharist who have been expressly excluded from it by another Orthodox church; some churches accept priests into their service who have been suspended or permanently removed from office by a sister church.

An ethnically determined division of the Orthodox Christians into two churches on the same territory took place after Estonia's independence from the Soviet Union . In 1993 the Estonian Autonomous Apostolic Orthodox Church was re-established under the suzerainty of the Patriarch of Constantinople, confirmed in 1996, which had already existed before 1945. Since 1993 its members have been mainly ethnic Estonians . Most of the Orthodox ethnic Russians living in Estonia, however, chose to stay with the Estonian metropolis of the Russian Orthodox Church , which had been the Orthodox jurisdiction responsible for all of Estonia since 1945. Up until the compromise reached in 2002, there had been considerable resentment between the Patriarchs of Moscow and Constantinople because of the ecclesiastical situation in Estonia. In the 1990s, the Moscow Patriarchate even temporarily suspended communion with Constantinople.

While some of the Orthodox theologians and officials are of the opinion that only a single bishop can be the head of all Orthodox believers in one place (strict territorial principle), others represent the model of the “metropolitan system”, according to which on one continent or in one Land different orthodox metropolises side by side as an expression of historically grown diversity within the diaspora are acceptable.

literature

  • Ernst Chr. Suttner: Bulgarian phyletism - a spiritual or a secular topic? In: Ostkirchliche Studien 48 (1999), ISSN  0030-6487 , pp. 299-305.

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Anne Jensen: The future of orthodoxy. Council plans and church structures. Benziger, Zurich 1986, ISBN 3-545-24218-8 , p. 134.
  2. ↑ Anne Jensen: The future of orthodoxy. Council plans and church structures. Benziger, Zurich 1986, ISBN 3-545-24218-8 , pp. 55-57.
  3. ↑ Anne Jensen: The future of orthodoxy. Council plans and church structures. Benziger, Zurich 1986, ISBN 3-545-24218-8 , p. 138.
  4. ↑ Anne Jensen: The future of orthodoxy. Council plans and church structures. Benziger, Zurich 1986, ISBN 3-545-24218-8 , pp. 78, 139.
  5. ↑ Anne Jensen: The future of orthodoxy. Council plans and church structures. Benziger, Zurich 1986, ISBN 3-545-24218-8 , pp. 74-79, 138f.
  6. ↑ Ernst Chr. Suttner: The Bulgarian Phyletism - a spiritual or secular topic? In: Ostkirchliche Studien 48 (1999), ISSN  0030-6487 , pp. 299-305, 299.
  7. ↑ Anne Jensen: The future of orthodoxy. Council plans and church structures. Benziger, Zurich 1986, ISBN 3-545-24218-8 , pp. 138f.
  8. ↑ German translation quoted from: Ernst Chr. Suttner: The Bulgarian Phyletism - a spiritual or secular topic? In: Ostkirchliche Studien 48 (1999), ISSN  0030-6487 , pp. 299-305, 299.
  9. ↑ Anne Jensen: The future of orthodoxy. Council plans and church structures. Benziger, Zurich 1986, ISBN 3-545-24218-8 , p. 139.
  10. ↑ Anne Jensen: The future of orthodoxy. Council plans and church structures. Benziger, Zurich 1986, ISBN 3-545-24218-8 , pp. 72, 75, 139.
  11. ↑ Philip Saliba: Metropolitan Philip's Address to the 48th Archdiocesan Convention General Assembly on the official website of the Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America, accessed May 16, 2013.
  12. ^ The Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life: US Religious Landscape Survey , accessed May 16, 2013.
  13. ↑ Anne Jensen: The future of orthodoxy. Council plans and church structures. Benziger, Zurich 1986, ISBN 3-545-24218-8 , p. 80.
  14. ↑ Saint Seraphim of Sarov Russian Orthodox Mission: Freedom from Phyletism ( Memento of the original from June 29, 2008 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.saint-seraphim.org archive link was automatically inserted and not yet checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , accessed May 16, 2013.
  15. ↑ Josiah Trenham Overcoming the Curse of Jurisdictionalism in America - Orthodox Reunion accessed May 16 on OrthodoxyToday.org (2006), 2013.
  16. ^ US Department of State: Estonia. International Religious Freedom Report 2003 , accessed May 16, 2013.
  17. ↑ Ernst Chr. Suttner: The Bulgarian Phyletism - a spiritual or secular topic? In: Ostkirchliche Studien 48 (1999), ISSN  0030-6487 , pp. 299-305, 300, footnote 5.
  18. ↑ Ernst Chr. Suttner: The Bulgarian Phyletism - a spiritual or secular topic? In: Ostkirchliche Studien 48 (1999), ISSN  0030-6487 , pp. 299-305, 300.