Issues of International and Interchurch Relations in the Work of Holy Council 1917–1918 of the Orthodox Russian Church

The convocation of the Local Council in 1917, the first Council in over two centuries, had a great significance for the internal life of the Orthodox Church of Russia. But in a period when the World War was still ongoing and there were pressing issues to resolve in the sphere of cooperation of Russi...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: A. I. Mramornov
Formato: article
Lenguaje:EN
RU
Publicado: MGIMO University Press 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://doaj.org/article/0a2823bfb53a458ead062423d5771990
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
id oai:doaj.org-article:0a2823bfb53a458ead062423d5771990
record_format dspace
spelling oai:doaj.org-article:0a2823bfb53a458ead062423d57719902021-11-23T14:50:41ZIssues of International and Interchurch Relations in the Work of Holy Council 1917–1918 of the Orthodox Russian Church2071-81602541-909910.24833/2071-8160-2019-3-66-176-201https://doaj.org/article/0a2823bfb53a458ead062423d57719902019-07-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.vestnik.mgimo.ru/jour/article/view/968https://doaj.org/toc/2071-8160https://doaj.org/toc/2541-9099The convocation of the Local Council in 1917, the first Council in over two centuries, had a great significance for the internal life of the Orthodox Church of Russia. But in a period when the World War was still ongoing and there were pressing issues to resolve in the sphere of cooperation of Russian Orthodoxy with other orthodox and non-orthodox churches, the Local Council could not but touch upon the international and inter-church issues. For the first time in the history of Russian Church the official ecclesiastical forum was attended by official elected delegates who served abroad and who could bring the opinion of the foreign part of the Russian Church to its «maternal» part and to provide the mutually beneficial exchange of practices and opinions. Moreover, in a situation when the church was liberated from the tutelage of the state, it became possible to engage with foreign religious organizations not through social organizations or the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, but directly. This opened a way for creating the Church’s own structures which would be responsible for contacts with other confessions, including Old-Catholics and Anglicans, with whom there had already been lengthy unofficial dialogue. The efforts of some historians and publicists shaping contemporary discourse in Russia depict the restoration of the Patriarchate in the Russian Church as the only important act of the Council are challenged by the material presented in this article, which shows how the Council constructed the future position of Russian Orthodoxy in dialogue with the non-Orthodox churches, in its presence abroad and its missions in non-Christian countries. The word of the Council in this sphere was completely new and never before told. The Council was ahead of its time in the issues of international connections (like in many other spheres of its work). Many issues at the Council were expressed for the first time or in a completely new way. How to manage the missions abroad (in Japan, China, Korea, Urmia, and Palestine)? The Council, occupied with the internal problems in the situation of the beginning of persecution against it, could not abandon these missions. How was it possible to unite Russian emigrants abroad? The idea of Paris as a centre of their unification was expressed for the first time at the Council. The scholars who touched upon these issues before analyzed them through the concept of ecumenism (following the participation of the Russian Church in the ecumenical movement). But it seems more appropriate to research them in the context of the time of the Council itself, since it was a time that preceded the emergence of the Ecumenical Movement proper. The author of the article draws a conclusion that during the year of the Council (August 1917 – September 1918) the issues of international and inter-church relationships transformed in its agenda from being of secondary to primary importance. This conclusion allows us to challenge the dismissive perspective that the Moscow Council 1917-1918 was ineffective. Although it did not have time to complete its agenda, the Council was ahead of its time and contributed much for the future mission of the Russian Church in the modern world.A. I. MramornovMGIMO University Pressarticlerussian orthodox churchlocal councilanglicansold-catholic movementtikhon (bellavin)evdokim (mescherskiy)a.v. kartashevi. p. sokolovi. i. sokolovecumenismchristian unityInternational relationsJZ2-6530ENRUVestnik MGIMO-Universiteta, Vol 0, Iss 3(66), Pp 176-201 (2019)
institution DOAJ
collection DOAJ
language EN
RU
topic russian orthodox church
local council
anglicans
old-catholic movement
tikhon (bellavin)
evdokim (mescherskiy)
a.v. kartashev
i. p. sokolov
i. i. sokolov
ecumenism
christian unity
International relations
JZ2-6530
spellingShingle russian orthodox church
local council
anglicans
old-catholic movement
tikhon (bellavin)
evdokim (mescherskiy)
a.v. kartashev
i. p. sokolov
i. i. sokolov
ecumenism
christian unity
International relations
JZ2-6530
A. I. Mramornov
Issues of International and Interchurch Relations in the Work of Holy Council 1917–1918 of the Orthodox Russian Church
description The convocation of the Local Council in 1917, the first Council in over two centuries, had a great significance for the internal life of the Orthodox Church of Russia. But in a period when the World War was still ongoing and there were pressing issues to resolve in the sphere of cooperation of Russian Orthodoxy with other orthodox and non-orthodox churches, the Local Council could not but touch upon the international and inter-church issues. For the first time in the history of Russian Church the official ecclesiastical forum was attended by official elected delegates who served abroad and who could bring the opinion of the foreign part of the Russian Church to its «maternal» part and to provide the mutually beneficial exchange of practices and opinions. Moreover, in a situation when the church was liberated from the tutelage of the state, it became possible to engage with foreign religious organizations not through social organizations or the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, but directly. This opened a way for creating the Church’s own structures which would be responsible for contacts with other confessions, including Old-Catholics and Anglicans, with whom there had already been lengthy unofficial dialogue. The efforts of some historians and publicists shaping contemporary discourse in Russia depict the restoration of the Patriarchate in the Russian Church as the only important act of the Council are challenged by the material presented in this article, which shows how the Council constructed the future position of Russian Orthodoxy in dialogue with the non-Orthodox churches, in its presence abroad and its missions in non-Christian countries. The word of the Council in this sphere was completely new and never before told. The Council was ahead of its time in the issues of international connections (like in many other spheres of its work). Many issues at the Council were expressed for the first time or in a completely new way. How to manage the missions abroad (in Japan, China, Korea, Urmia, and Palestine)? The Council, occupied with the internal problems in the situation of the beginning of persecution against it, could not abandon these missions. How was it possible to unite Russian emigrants abroad? The idea of Paris as a centre of their unification was expressed for the first time at the Council. The scholars who touched upon these issues before analyzed them through the concept of ecumenism (following the participation of the Russian Church in the ecumenical movement). But it seems more appropriate to research them in the context of the time of the Council itself, since it was a time that preceded the emergence of the Ecumenical Movement proper. The author of the article draws a conclusion that during the year of the Council (August 1917 – September 1918) the issues of international and inter-church relationships transformed in its agenda from being of secondary to primary importance. This conclusion allows us to challenge the dismissive perspective that the Moscow Council 1917-1918 was ineffective. Although it did not have time to complete its agenda, the Council was ahead of its time and contributed much for the future mission of the Russian Church in the modern world.
format article
author A. I. Mramornov
author_facet A. I. Mramornov
author_sort A. I. Mramornov
title Issues of International and Interchurch Relations in the Work of Holy Council 1917–1918 of the Orthodox Russian Church
title_short Issues of International and Interchurch Relations in the Work of Holy Council 1917–1918 of the Orthodox Russian Church
title_full Issues of International and Interchurch Relations in the Work of Holy Council 1917–1918 of the Orthodox Russian Church
title_fullStr Issues of International and Interchurch Relations in the Work of Holy Council 1917–1918 of the Orthodox Russian Church
title_full_unstemmed Issues of International and Interchurch Relations in the Work of Holy Council 1917–1918 of the Orthodox Russian Church
title_sort issues of international and interchurch relations in the work of holy council 1917–1918 of the orthodox russian church
publisher MGIMO University Press
publishDate 2019
url https://doaj.org/article/0a2823bfb53a458ead062423d5771990
work_keys_str_mv AT aimramornov issuesofinternationalandinterchurchrelationsintheworkofholycouncil19171918oftheorthodoxrussianchurch
_version_ 1718416626196414464