Bulgarian Orthodox Church As A
CEU eTD Collection B ULGARIAN N ATION In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of forof degree fulfillmentrequirements the the of partial In . A R Second Reader: Second Reader: Assistant Professor Naumescu Vlad O RTHODOX ECONSTRUCTION Advisor: Professor Advisor: Professor Andras Kovacs Nationalism Studies Program Nationalism Central European University European Central Budapest, Hungary Budapest, Boryana Velcheva Master of of Master Arts Submitted to C HURCH 2012 By
FROM
AS
A S “H OCIALIST OLDER ” T OF IMES
THE
CEU eTD Collection the national narrative, thereby creating an even stronger, “civil” image of the Christian the of institution. image “civil” stronger, even an creating thereby narrative, national the in state and Church of unification the in resulted discourse nationalist the in place its find to Bulgarian the of party Communist the of attempts the how shows research current the 1970's, the newspaper from Church official the of analysis thematic a on based and secularism of perspective post-colonial a from Starting its history. national of Bulgaria's in because role “traditional” status privileged a has Church, Orthodox the - Christianity of institution manifested the case a Bulgarian the as in context, this but In together. believer, life communal the holds which collectivity and God between connection the create that and values symbols of system a as not Christianity Orthodox see should researcher the context, local the understand to order in – exception an not is Bulgaria of case identity.The national Abstract n Cnrl ad Esen Erp, rlgo s otn a motn atr o collective of factor important an often is religion Europe, Eastern and Central In
CEU eTD Collection Appendix B.Sample Coded Material ofthe Appendix Appendix CodingA. Scheme Remarks Concluding 3. Chapter Three. Data ofthe Analysis Study 2. Chapter Two. Method of and Period ofthe of Data and Justification Description Analysis. Bishops Files and Secret Metropolitan One. 1. Chapter Review Literature Introduction Tableof Contents Bibliography 3.3. Preliminary Conclusion (1975-1979) period 3.2. Late period3.1. Early (1970-1973) Period ofStudy2.3. Justification ofthe and Data Data Collection 2.1. Between Analysis 2.1. Data Collection andNationalism Relations Communist State-Church Process The Research Problem The Research ...... 1 ...... 41 34 33 32 31 21 58 56 55 53 50 47 42 9 7 6 5 2 CEU eTD Collection identity. ofnational main Churchthe as pillar questioned authorityofthe party the the action, religious the “civilizing” of policies introducing By nationalism. stronger toward Party Communist Bulgarian the of course political the in shift significant of period a – 1970's the in state the and Church Orthodox Bulgarian the between relations the of development the and Bulgaria of case the presents it purpose, specific this For Europe. Eastern and Central in nationalism of possibility the from can development describing regard with understood nationalism, Introduction 3 1 belongings religious various of and ethnicities of both variety a authors 2 of Press.; Question Brubaker, I.g.
Ethnicity, Modernity" and and Nationalism on Reflections Nation: the Patriotism" of Name the "In 2004. Rogers. Brubaker, Groups" Without "Ethnicity betwee connection the For Nationalism Brubaker, and Donatella Pacelli. Soveria Mannelli,Italy:Rubbettino. Soveria and DonatellaPacelli. be
Chicago The relationship between religion and national identity has been studied by various by studied been has identity national and religion between relationship The In
2
convenient, . In this respect, the post-communist region is particularly appropriate, as it as represents regionappropriate, isparticularly the. Inthis post-communist respect, order
Casanova, religion
it in
of Rogers.
Press. is
, iiesi tde Studies Citizenship the
nationalism to
18: important
Rogers.
study
New as for 2
José. – 2012.
20.
a example,
a
Europe sphere “ to
productively doi: to 1994. “
1996. middle in
Religion the Dalla modernità alle modernità multiplemodernità modernità alle Dalla take
the 10.1111/j.1469-8129.2011.00486.x tnct n ainls, se see nationalism, and ethnicity n
.
of rhvs Erpens d oilge Sociologie, de Européennes Archives
Public specific
for Cambridge into European
Nationalism
way the .: 1517; Buae, Rgr. 21. "Nationalism, 2011. Rogers. Brubaker, 115-127.; 8.2:
studying and
account
” which could be useful for the understanding of understanding the for useful be could which ” the private religions
nationalism: subject
West,
relationship 2 [England];
the
Islamic life, Reframed
in while varieties of
the
might
study.
four countries
modern
the New
between :
o approaches”.
be total Nationhood f ways in which these terms are terms these which in ways f A
York:
appropriate
3 1
world. classical . Moreover, the nationalist the Moreover, . . denial This thesis is influenced is thesis This
rbkr oes 2002. Rogers. Brubaker, religion,
. Ed. Consuelo Corradi Ed. . Cambridge
Chicago: of
Nations LI.: 163-189.; XLIII.2:
and
secularist such
for h the
the
an the
and University University
state approach
National
specific
theory,
and
CEU eTD Collection from the other aspects of life. of aspects other the from sphere religious differentiationthe of the of perception well-know the develops line secularist ofnationalism. cultural aspect and institutional the both the study emphasizing a – Romania communist of elite intellectual the among thought nationalist of development Verdery Katherine is region the to career her dedicated has who scholar “ understanding Wars compares Union, example, Rogers region. this exactly examine studies Nationalism of discipline the in works important most the of Some field. academic the of development the for significantly contributed have Balkans the on and space post-Soviet the in conflicts 6 5 of understanding the help not does life of spheres other and religion between division at aiming perspective clear the and modernities, various are there as just new secularism, of types various understanding a view post-colonial of basis the on build followers, his and b developed well perspective, post-colonial a contrary, the On modernization. Western the of core the as differentiation this emphasizing still while religion, of a decline as secularism of understanding the questioning by field the to significantly contributes 7 4 imagined Asad, Casanova, Brubaker, Calif.: politics Verdery,
The concept of religion, on the other hand, has developed in two main branches. The branches. main two in developed has hand, other the on religion, of concept The in
Yugoslavia, “O
focuses Talal. Stanford the
in communities
ld
Katherine.
Ceausescu
Public
nationalism Nationalism Europe of
2003.
on
the University
and the religions
” Formations term
” ” in
’ rebirth 1995. s Czechoslovakia.
offered
of Romania Reframed. order
and New
Press. in
Casanova
of National
the
to its by
nationalism Europe
of .
introduce
modern Berkeley, internalization
Benedict the
6
, the mo the , Secular ideology with Drawing
world
3
a Anderson. Another emblematic example of a of example emblematic Another Anderson. in Calif.:
the new,
the
: st famous name in this group of scholars, of group this in name famous st .
–
one Christianity, under
on context
University more much
that Bourdieu's Brubaker's
socialism:
precise, emerged
of more
the
of Islam,
falling California best-known
methodology, complex more
between identity
Modernity 5 , who examines the examines who , “
apart institutionalized
than
Press.
the research y Talal Asad y
and of
. two the
the the
Stanford, cultural
Soviet author World broad 4 , for , ” 7
CEU eTD Collection example, the state introduced series of cultural policies in order to compete with the Catholic the with compete to order in policies cultural of series introduced state the example, of possibility the reduce to order in it isolate organizedinstitutionally opposition. to tried often and Church the of role the realized elites Totalitarian narrative. nationalist the and ideology Marxist internationalist the between contradiction inevitable the reducing thereby ideology, national the in place own their for time, same the at seeking, affiliations, national the strengthen to tried often and paradigm nationalist the of power legitimizing the understood well parties Communist The nationalism. of development the for blamed be to actor institutional only the Church the in – process nation-building crucial as perceived the least at time or – same crucial been the often has at church and the of region, institution the in identities national defining in role significant different onsecularism. perspectives possible 11 society,from communist the of development the with pass should which trend temporal a as nationalism perceived initially who others the unlike party, Communist Bulgarian the that is similar is Romania unsuccessfully although – identity national over dominance the for Church 10 9 8 “Transition”. the and Anthropology European East on Reflections Communism: “After 1994. C. Hann, University Soviet Gilberg, culture Kitromilides, Sugar, ed. Todorova, Nationalism”. of Bulgarian and Course Discourse Maria. 1995.“The American University Press, 55-102. UniversityAmerican Press, In this sense the case of Bulgaria is both representative and exceptional. and representative both is Bulgaria of case the sense this In the is nor attitudes, national the influencing factor only the is religion However,neither a play to proven been has Religion well. quite fits Europe “New” again, debate, this In
and and
Trond.
East EuropeanEast Twentieth in the Nationalism Century Press,
East political Social Social Anthropology Paschalis. “ 10
. What differentiates the case of Bulgaria, according to Maria Maria to Todorova according Bulgaria, of case . differentiatesWhat the European 1989. Religion 8
thought .
1994.
and politics,
of
South-eastern Nationalism nihemn,Enlightenment, 2 (3),229-249.
edited 4
by in
Europe
Ramet, Romania nationalism, . Aldershot,
Sabrina, ” in
Religion orthodoxy . Lanham Md: . Lanham The
328-352. Hampshire:
and
:
Durham: 9 In Poland, for Poland, In nationalism studies . The case of case The .
Variorum. in P.in
in Duke
the
11 in ,
CEU eTD Collection ih te authorities. the with symbiosis a in space public the in co-exists it Constitution, the by of guaranteed independence part inseparable an being hence and its having although and, institutions, state Consequently,the to position in close is Church the system, symbolic its around it unifying intrude former the consequently, and state, the and Church the between made be should in life, of sphere separate a not is Religion paradigm. colonial case be rival consistent Problem Research The foritsand rule. ideology mechanism legitimizing a as rhetoric nationalist the occupy to tried and realized 1944 in rule its of beginning very the 12 process case. Bulgarian the in state and Church between and religion and nation Ghodsee Kristen anthropologist American legitimately has ' relationship sanctity'
appropriated
Religious Ghodsee, (2) been goes hand in hand with a specific specific a with hand in hand goes
of pcfclyi h ugra aebtpsil nohr - others in possibly but case Bulgarian the in Specifically
(December
can can the into
transformed of
relationship between the Church and the state, the and Church the between relationship
Communist
the be between
reproduces state Kristen. Freedoms
traced nation if
the 5): affairs,
back in history, in the years of the nation-building process in the late the in process nation-building the of years the in history, in back into 2009. God 227-252. Party
In as
party,
in
this
such
a this Contemporary but and
“
national wanted
Symphonic
symbol.
but
rather and respect, the
rather
the people,
to symbol,
h tr term The
a dominate
collective marker, holding the nation together and together nation the holding marker, collective
individuals perception act as a as act
the
Secularism: Bulgaria.
12 but
and Church el rfet oh te rltosi between relationship the both reflects well , 5
with convenient
the the ypoi sclrs, secularism, symphonic perception of religion which fits the post- the fits which religion of perception ”
that
Anthropology
national
Church Eastern regard is
constitute
important in
national
which
is to ideology. Orthodoxy,
the which the
of this
institutionalized the
one
relationship not
symbol East
case
Church
same This
can
with Ethnic
The Europe a clear distinction clear a nrdcd y the by introduced
specificity specificity
notice which nation.
roots is regard
Identity between not
Review one quite one should
agent needed
of
Religion an
to such
of arch-
and
that 27 not the the the
to
a
.
CEU eTD Collection The Research Process Research The secularism.” “symphonic to managed it contemporary the nation, to contribute to the and state and of Church between relationship “pillar” the strengthen the as Church the replacing of instead way, this In Church. the of role the to meaning) civil a the (implement “civilize” strengthen to and to feeling national simultaneously thus and nation, the of image unified the emphasizing Marxism by and religion between tension the release to managed party Communist the 1970's the in introduced policies nationalist of series through the that claim together I community. held Bulgarian sanctity, its was with Church, however, The image, claims. religious This strong centuries. with supported the through people Bulgarian survive the to able with been had together which, one the – nation the of “face” the as seen was Church Bulgaria. in narrative religious-national the narrative. ofthis reproduction 19 n,hne tbcmsantrlpr ftevr mg fteisiuin htII What institution. the of image very the of part natural a becomes it hence, and, – clergy the of existence the to legitimacy public gives what is officials, party and Church institutions the by presented as two nation, the of image The Church. the the of discourse official the in between reflected interaction the see can one “media”, this In life. civic and religion of unification the and state the and institution religious the between relationship the official in the in points common change their tracing Church,the Iemphasize discourseofthe and visible is discourse national the which in themes several Identifying 1979. to 1970 from th etr, i hc h hrh pae rca oe n ae, i h historical the in later, and role, crucial a played Church the which in century, For this purpose, I am conducting a thematic content analysis of the Church newspaper Church the of analysis content thematic a conducting am I purpose, this For explaining at aims research current the context, this In 6 In the beginning of the communist rule, the rule, communist the of beginning the In how the Communist party fits in fits party Communist the how cannot
CEU eTD Collection 13 oppression, “ freedom, second, mid-1950's, regard State-Church the 1970's.from Party, starting the of policies nationalist the of strengthening the by second, and, Bulgaria, in Revival the namely, possible relations Church-state the of chronology the 1980's, by first, justified, is study of period The process. a the in is follow exclusion that ones an the as Such repressions nation. of legitimization the from religions “other” of exclusion the for potential great a contains nationhood and Orthodoxy “merger”of this – study further a for hypothesis a as developed be can that something is constraints, resource to due here, research see the problematic role of the Church in a socialist society; a transformation in which the which in transformation a society; socialist a in Church the of role problematic the see to possible is it which through transformation symbolic the also but – identity national the of part a as religion of study the of part important an relations doubtlessly – institutions two political the between the of most difficulties the the only is not shows period which period third a the is it of – interesting beginning the view, of point symbolic a from Hence, 14 scientific Ibid., Orthodox komunisticheskata Mochil. 1953 Kalkandzhieva, In
to
from contemporary
. the
” ” although
p. (Bulgarian
when world
is
638
policy
2010. Stalin's
the Church
Relations andCommunist Nationalism Relations
the view period
the of
Mezhdu Daniela.
Party
Orthodox
death
and
Bulgarian 14 the
.
Church durzhava
of The
the Communist extensively
heavy and
vyarata Communist last 1997.
Church
the historiography had
period, repressions (1944-1989).
destalinization Bulgarskata
to
i forced Party
and
kompromisa. give from State
the
toward 7
civic toward
up the 13 State in
three
Pravoslavna Bulgaria (
1970's Between its rituals
to
the
1944-1953) “
the
the periods Bulgarskata
religious Church.
intellectual
on, that
early (1944-1989))
faith
is
substituted are
tsurkva
one
1970's The Sofi propaganda
easily
and
of pravoslavna
elite a: a: A first, “
i is . soft
lbatros.;
compromise. S differentiated
durzhavata the
of a ofia: from
” ”
period
the religious ” administrative
Siela
for 1944 clergy.
Metodiev, tzurkva
of a
1944-
to
ones. more more
with The
The the
I
CEU eTD Collection research process. The third chapter will present the results of the research, and the extent to extent the and research, the of results the present will chapter third The process. research very the and frame methodological the present will I chapter, second the In role. specific nation- Bulgarian this for illustrative find of I which case contemporary case a presenting by this the do will I in formation. religion Orthodox the of role theoretical specific a as the present framework to try will I chapter, first the in Then, field. the overall of the in development fits research present the how better illustrate to is review this of aim main The Europe. Eastern and Central in relationship Church-state and secularism, and nationalism, religion on discussions present the of aspects various discuss will I which in review and ideology” “full-fledged movement a of state a reaches nationalism state-driven of development the when 1970's the is it rule, its of beginning very the from ideology legitimizing own its as nationalism uses party Communist iscrucial. nation ofthe image 15 ofthethesis. current achievements important most the conclude briefly will Finally,I results. these fitted framework theoretical the which Todorova, 74. Nationalism”, ofBulgarian Courseand Discourse “The This thesis will continue in the following way. First, I will introduce a brief literature brief a introduce will I First, way. following the in continue will thesis This Todorova Maria chronology, similar a Following 15 . 8 claims that, although the Bulgarian the although that, claims
CEU eTD Collection 16 It community led the claim rather in then and Literature Review California 18 17 introduction: the The manifestations communities, imagination. people
is Pitkin, the
nationalism Anderson,
most
Ibid., p.7.
politics national national to to to
In In
that
Bulgarian a
describe
a who the order
his constitutive
popular
certain
the Press.: pp.92-111 Hanna ”
already in ,
“
historical
one flag,
In
a imagination. very
to
the Benedict. “ . Bulgaria, imagine of
the
group order
understand
case
extent
is constructivist
its
Fenichel. the nation nation
that path
emblematic
element
collectivity:
is ” ” anthem, to ”
development
imagined of
not not it
that
Imagined it is protect needs
is official
We
a the even
1967.
so and
important one social of
coat
definition much
can specifics
work,
to the
needs its construct
an by
the authorities,
The
introduce
of communities: construct
say nation, its boundaries objective of
of common “
arms
to
Concept to
Imagined citizens
a
of that
nation-states,
of
place follow symbolic
the are I their the
9 with the shall collective
this
reality,
relationship
symbols,
each nothing nation as
of
and
within power
Communities reflections social its
imagination having start
Representation
system
of constitutive to
– –
but
these but
but this
of differentiate manifestations, with it heroes,
collectivity “
a
the is
boundaries between
of the context.
mental rather
not terms on the
state
understanding
” symbolic has
,
history, elements. a the Benedict basic, .
natural
in which
Berkeley: an concept
Church,
two
As itself
origin ” ” with a “
and broader
I
although or,
imagined
laws main representation claim
has
phenomenon Anderson
from “
respect more that
religion, and sovereignty
the
the University
and
channels that
context
unifies other
world, monopoly necessary, spread
precisely,
memory.
political religion 16 to
nation
gives such
18
that and this
but
the ”
of of of 17 of .
CEU eTD Collection 24 23 21 20 widely social the taken mechanisms mechanisms historical as cultural changes nationalism, which history over 22 basics symbolic 19
a
political
self-identification
the Cambridge Hobsbawm, Anthony What
Smith, Oxford Hutchinson, investigations Elias, Gellner, London: Halbwachs, Oxford
into interprets
for change
recognized.
textbooks,
homogeneity
in
legitimate
idea
process such account
the
is of elite
Ernest of Norbert. University Anthony University
23
Ernest. of University
Smith . the a the
self-control societal
“
The the these University
Maurice. that selection
of
the
John, modern Eric.
by
. objectivity
Gellner's historical
Ed. nation, 24
modernization
social 1983.
of
, official Eric with would official
D.
2000. who
Press. p.48. Press.: structure Eric modern
and 1990. of
1999.
” ” state,
1992. 21
Hobsbawm
the
Nations is Press. Chicago (in
. of 20 is,
Dunning.
serve
holidays; , This rather Anthony channels narrative
The
nation. the that sees on
opposition
Nations together
societies On Myths due
common the
understanding
as
and
in devoted civilizing the makes collective Press.
22 The a to
Oxford: contrary
which and
the , D Nationalism and
nation
power-legitimizing
and
in
with historical
and that
nation Smith.
incorporates to other
whose
a
characteristics 10 introduces to
“ memories
power the
nation creates
memory
Blackwell. Nationalism showing as process natural of
is
is,
of monopoly
rooted
Anderson's 1994.
view and the
.
therefore,
nationalism is Oxford:
possible? nations ” .
“
:
)
Ed. consolidated it
them of
the structural
nation collective character
in Nationalism
sociogenetic
through of
the
Lewis specific
mechanism modernity over since
as
Blackwell. a
and,
theory,
a
nation nation is
mechanisms
necessary Another
as
violence
an
A events. memory the respectively, of
1780 lines
“ a Coser.
and
.
. famous
invented
of
modernization the and
school Oxford; Oxford; in and
.
the
that
reproduced
classic nation and It consequence Cambridge
an ” Chicago, as
19
modern of
is
could psychogenetic for
era of a
program, the
tradition identity.
the nationalism New New result
the is his
theory of civilizing
serve need
already
period. Ill.;
radical people ethno- line in
York: York: from
UK:
” ” of
the the
as of of of
is a
CEU eTD Collection 26 25 construct interpretation actually represente 1970's, the in Church Orthodox Bulgarian just community constitutive category symbolic understand relying replacing like In 27 therefore, selecting constructed social Maurice will
Smith's
legitimize as religion, Halbwachs, The This
66. Bourdieu, Smith, 2003. Antony D. origin
on it
Halbwachs
trying
of
a sacred meaning, is
the the concept God
perception, ”
certain
subjective-objective religion element
. both selection. a of
Memory memory binding in
past matter the
and imagination;
to Pierre. with
which
objective Maurice.
role
memory
of understand
priest, one 27
in as of
secular
introduced
of
memory people
nationalism of of Remembering
is,
a 1990. imagination; a should the
“
personal
the
the manner the however,
brick
1992. of reality
state
memory
very symbols
collective; The Chosen new the
by
the take is ”
relation the
On
imposes giving nation, logic “ state in
interpretation. which predominant and is
sacred logic
a into and
– – term
collective the
the Peoples may in
matter
subjective in and of
the s is
accordance “
imagination account them
a “ high
the of ” ” is practice
new a
certain collective be
forgetting unifiers
shared
particular 11 socially the leading historical of .
wall Oxford: an memory. a
religion
for “
official
sense
B the
interpretation . image individual game
y
memory Stanford,
are of
the with
– – following is, memory importance d through its official newspaper official its through d
predefined. for
narrative. view the Oxford the
of
are, of ”
of French enforcement
of 26 h rsn present the the
belonging, the
state course,
national an
of in
of
modern of Calif.: act; ” ”
“
his people
University
power, a
in
imagined the religion and of
post-Durkheimian
group
of “
an works,
the this
however,
official Collective Stanford memory
the identity,
attempt secular
”
(as and 25 basis
a
which reality.
; patriotic thesis.
with
a nationalism
community game mentioned
Press.: pp.4-5. Press.:
at discourse of the of discourse matter
of
– –
state
to Univ. a it
the
the
defines
an
memory Memory memory brick point In is of
heroes).
“
same (instead of
attempt
an imagined Press.: p. Press.: tradition. language order
” ” socially
above),
out is, with , it act which
” I
time
as as
is just
the am
is,
of of
to
to a a a a
CEU eTD Collection 29 memory. underestimate However, of discourse of remembering historical Historical “ and national group. 31 30 28 presented the and interdisciplinary memory Bulgarian professional
this
the
Bulgarian its terms, Ibid. From Paris: Retz.: p.398. Retz.: Paris: Nora Ibid., p.399.
Todorova, Maria. University “
nation. mechanisms It historical
identity
With
of in in is , historian textbooks, memories to
opposes
Pierre. Pierre.
this
memory
the the historians
which the
underestimate regard the conversion This
.
perspective, edited
Bulgarian Press. memory Another memory
very Balkan
1978. Mémoire collective. In: Jacques Le Goffe, In: Le collective. Jacques 1978. Mémoire ed.,
collective
of is Maria .
constitutes
to When are
the
construction,
doubtlessly ” collection,
basis the 29 2003.
. ” implemented
“ influential to
. for
national Todorova
historiography, importance region.
Historical the
it the Islam
of
memory Balkan
collectively
is
authority the
power
power her important
transformed
nation during celebration In
museums
French
has aim identities
memories “
to
of relations
in
speaks implemented
historical Balkan
this written is
symbolically the literature the important
to 12 historian, to
point
explore
institutionalized Ottoman and :
understand and then
filter of
nation and and Identities:
the
memory memory in
diffusion.
the
and ,
in
their
the
accumulate, events edited nation, Pierre local
in
and
is the
period national
film
context
indeed the role
the
memory
28 and individual
Nora, several – – ntttoa institutional which Nation it The production.
in meaning in constitutes and pillars national
of
under
his symbols. the capitalize book
in . the
the in New volumes
words,
Halbwachs's creation and
La Nouvellehistoire.La act
of
Balkans,
fact
touches the way policies of
York: It
the
of the
Memory the social discourse
and also
The the constitutes
in
remembering.
very on
nation of
institutional
New
the
transmit which memory the of
deals
collective collective collective influence
tradition memory memory
issue ” famous
–
31 York
is , with
it
” the the
an of of 30 to is
.
CEU eTD Collection 34 33 32 an national discourse, economy. the in Katherine the reality how study constitutive practices the and secular, fact the of association
the religion
mechanism intellectuals, element pre-modern communist the
a the
This
ee,Weber, politics Verdery, York, Todorova,ed. Maria, Hackett collected
process intellectual of
differentiation
“ rational identity
everyday
living of
language, Verdery Important leads
is
with NY: narratives
of
one in
Pub, Max. collective
of
Katherine. of in
world.
reality ”
Ceausescu particular Social the me and,
that
(in
of disenchantment a transmission memory 33 practices
pp.
life volume ,
already a 2004. ideology logically
the
who accent attracts
on
universal of of
1-31
In Science and under
enlightened the
spheres and
the
a “ describes
’ 1995.
importance of of 2010. builds s
classic by
of discussed other,
Science is
nation Romania
my and the to
historical the socialist of the put
Research
system
,
the
attention 34
Remembering
National regime. national
religion culture.
same
the , the Weberian – –
regime on
the
in discussion understanding)
as
the .
importance theories opposition
which the
Berkeley,
for
of
Romania, process editor
a Council.
memorizing was reduced to to reduced was idea
The
identity
values the constitution collapse. ideology vocation my
13
understanding,
institutions
most: - of book
of
“
Communism: of of study
Remembering
Calif.:
an
that the
between emphasizing, of
by this institutionalization
”
discusses opposition religion way.
the
under . A
history nation,
was
of (and h The constitutive
of
similar University cultural
a
started
As
religion the
separate separate social the
socialism: vocation
the
textbooks. (and, the remembering)
Genres a various main
communist
to Communism result line
on
process
most policies operating
practices
the
respectively, of
the element in
regulative sphere
has
of
California Ottoman lectures
of explanatory popular of
the
one identity
Representation This
of
been the in nationalist
modernity socialist
ideology of in by hand, socialist of
” of study disenchantment the private private the 32
.
a mechanism
understanding
developed the the
rule. aims
Indianapolis:
and secularism Press. distinctively one
the
models shows Bulgarian dominant
thinking Another political era). to cultural
and
of role was .
show
New
life the the the
by of In of of – in
CEU eTD Collection 37 36 35 Protestantism), interest. and Asad One. Western religion basic modern sphere. monarch, this of would emphasizes introduction modernities multiple fit would In
the Asad's
regard, the
An principle who However,
Loosley, evolution Loosley Calif.: Asad, Avebury, Democracy Preuss, Routledge,
individual, differentiate
The – concepts in
idea
important
Such view, claims but a type
Talal. the the Church Stanford Balkan
to
U.K. that
Emma.
in
with
eds. pp.
and
of such social of need
Church
the
pp. a constitutional that
of one
2003.
this the
11-27 and
the 1996.
modernity. The insufficiency of this view will be illustrated in Chapter in illustrated be will view this of insufficiency The modernity. leads
criticism
atr Eastern state,
religious view and modernization 1-12
an
edited University
the
for which 2010.
Eastern
problems science belief
Formations approach Sovereignty:
“ is
the to
inevitable a but
The
by not the “
distinctively
is Christianity
state volume to
Peter, freedom rather is
.
and
needs
celebrated modernistic law Political This
the this
necessity of Press.: pp.206-207. then
does operate
35
Oriental alternative
connection
Paul, fundamental
becomes view serves . “ of
approach
to
a
American
and the Eastern
not
“ redefine matter Meaning
and in
comes freely
local separately.
Secular
independence a
really exclusion privileges
Churches
the
14 theory
James the types is
that theory makes makes theory that
” of
Christianity
but also Modern
from
both political
historical
satisfy and of
institution : the
that of Christianity,
is of
Constitutionalism
” shared of
This
“
. religion
Christianity. the not
Jerusalem: Western European
In: private other
describes
a
of Middle
agent
post-colonial a principle very O understanding
Church
matter by in ’
that religions, Mahony,
” and
Emma specific
the that Islam, sphere
between
East Christianity
a
the
regulates Perspectives
secularism of
particular and
stands modern stands
.
state doctrinal ”
Loosley
Anthony, , London; Modernity for
anthropologist serves study state in:
religion of
example, as responsibility.
R.
as this
– – religion
and Middle a
in 37
of
. basis basis (particularly, Bellamy, a equal and
distinctively
,
New and
who a the
Aldershot: . distinctive colonialist presents and
Stanford,
way
political
Islam
role
Emma
to which of in
belief York: East Talal
that her the the ed.
of 36 In
” a .
CEU eTD Collection 38 Judaism, (which according self-identification, According two term religion for relations anthropologist post-colonialist in explaining and approach, from Mufti, by new
the the the
the “
religions, institutions several Although As Ghodsee,
symphonic
terms and specifics respective
way and all
I between respectively
to it am
the a to
serve
secularism lacks present
which it weaknesses. of
Ghodsee,
interested
Organization or
“
Kristen
is
very call
the of Symphonic
new,
which
represented secularism than than official Eastern
it the as
the
French for trend, as I will try to show in the next chapter next the in show to try will I as trend, itself. significant
“ for
mechanisms Bulgarian
Ghodsee cannot state
non-traditional as religion
studying in
allows
ethnic
It religious
Orthodoxy,
a
Ghodsee's the
tradition of is
symbolic ” Secularism” allows
38
in
far the cover. understanding
with for
in Bulgarians,
Bulgarian Church-state is
for the
too Jews
Bulgaria
institutions the especially and
for
the
as Drawing specifics
an exculpating, view religious system ” ”
understanding in
described forms encourages , 228. self-identification: intention often
Bulgaria.
public
is
is Turks
15
of of
relationship built – – on important
of
important of rights
misunderstood religion values.
old the Asad,
various space.
to and, above,
and
on the
show
religions. Bulgarian
and of
the
“ although Jews)
she
She much more more much as my
This for
traditional
societies, and which secularism
popular
a a describes
mostly “ claims research, my
specific
and is
partly memory
This
Orthodox
idea
an it the study.
is
; calls
idea ” ”
important
the however, that consensus
Orthodoxy, classic quite
religions in as these symbiosis in
of Ghodsee's
of
view Ghodsee for of accordance a Bulgaria there
religious
factor the Church, intolerant
Bulgarian
relations a understanding
more
of I nation is
mechanism in am am is
between
the
a
for
the Islam, text shared studies and
consensus
searching the
historical
freedom.
with ”
with German national towards
country
, history suffers
argues
partly Chief
also
and the the the the
of of
CEU eTD Collection 41 40 human appropriate private exercised types ideology. result are categories category. develops is 1970's. in the created for 39 desacralization Ghodsee described diffusion regime, and,
well
some refocused
as
York, Herzfeld, The Bloomington: Secularism Volga Luehrmann, Ibid., pp.7-17. Ibid., is of
community described
sphere a
even quite
roots of public wanted Following He in an result, way by of
NY
social two the
republic
national
develops the important through
good
for
in of
of
was – Michael. [u.a.]:
Soviet
basically
the
which
Weberian to such in religion practices the Soviet Sonja. ” “ the
.
Indiana “
this not Michael achieve . understanding This
methods identity, Routledge. “
purpose the society, an Bloomington:
the
the
liberal approach,
argument really 1997.
2011. in image
separate style: prism approach
term to University people
term – the
Herzfeld's
”
substitute
” introduced
was of Cultural a to
“ Secularism
socialist were
of of and elective
teaching particularly
cultural
religious be ” ”
another are phenomena for
not relationship Church-state the in them find I and religion, the led
of
the
successfully
taken Indiana
Press. able
about “ these the skepticism
to for Intimacy era. “
Cultural affinity by
intimacy
anthropologist didactic the
to
Soviet atheism understanding religion
socialization.
16 into
the categories,
restricting
local, interpret – – disattachment University
41 state,
the
: account
. Intimacy
style: ”
of ” reproduced Social
This
,
though and,
in sacred and in everyday
“ such
order religion wr work higher which teaching order – –
therefore,
Poetics The at religion ” Press. of
Sonja and as 39
historical
of . all),
to
” ”
nationalism
after national His to actually
process language
is categories to the its describe
Luehrmann,
Luehrmann atheism show
in
but a “
the anthropological
creating
profane the
in methods good the
private understanding
rather
tradition legitimizes illustrates
end a
that
Nation and
how
and example of Volga as
– –
an
of
” 40
secularism, the practices. about sphere
which Sonja. “
an from religion the opposes the
exclusively
or State
nationality
“
everyday a
republic
religion, the research socialist
of higher
finding
its unique (as is . of
2011.
what
New state
in best The aim
two
the the
as a ” .
CEU eTD Collection done understanding, way from reproduction which with national gives widely generalization Brubaker's 43 42 during avoiding relationship control “ showing Religion, Riis, modern Brubaker, New
of
it. by the A The
four
is
spread self-identification. the over
According
good
taking
Carsten. ideology, York: possibility the any
both
relationship Politics, theoretical world.
approaches Ottoman
of
attempt Bulgarian “
of contradiction
and understanding
on East
Religion into which
the that the
2002.
the
which
important
to
account European
and to etatization old
time
of
period
Brubaker, ways is
article understand
Religion, historiography between
and to the Historiography secular
valid serves
Yet, and
the with
state all of nationalism:
“ of of
study
Monographs
for
Religion Brubaker studying adequate
linked
problem.
nationalism
and
to the understanding Bulgarian
in to Politics,
religion
the religion
specify
the
of control socialist the
development
the Bulgarian from
Christian
in and
this
criticisms searches four
The construction
and
and and Church-state Bulgaria ; the
history,
each
as
Distributed Nationalism: ideology. the relationship.
17
approaches”;
Historiography third a local nationalism of nationalism
distinctively
socialist aspect
context
national for
nationalism
towards ”
of the nationalism 43 approach
what
.
the Referring
The
of
by ideological of relationship
religion
period Four By
modern
memory, identity can
the as
Columbia this Casanova study is
secular
one,
bringing
in
which church treats
be well Approaches approach
and to Bulgaria legitimated
is
discusses preserved
and state,
the
and
merger
often
reconsidered
in sometimes phenomenon, , is religion University
deprives
Public affairs.
religion history into
the
Carsten religious 42 and
. .
seen
Boulder,
”
case consideration how
from of .
the
how
religions The
This as
of
the as
religious as
to
Press.
church-state of the
Riis's
Christianity
part
“ this a
can
affiliations
article in researcher
intertwine the
is
etatized dominant Bulgaria, Colo.;
political
again Rogers secular
this
of in author book
the and is
the the
be
” a a
,
CEU eTD Collection 47 46 45 44 which source, theoretical police secret communist mean of developed politics, political volumes context. especially discusses national as suitable the communist by
the the
Yannis local
Several Sygkelos, Metodiev, Kalkandjieva, European 1989. P. Ramet, UniversityPress.; Eastern Europe Ramet, during
hegemon relations barely
as
for
oppression
identity
Church were
context. recent
it Sygkelos on by
depth discourse the
is
the
researched
Sabrina Daniela other
the
and
based written
establishment between
Christianity of
politics
Between Between
Yannis.
Second
theories
needed and framed
connection the The
the
47 over Bulgarian authors
,
on
in
nation. whose Kalkandzhieva
the P.
or .
USSR author the World Bulgaria
Rev.
before. a
2011. for
faith the
1987. conceptualizing the edited huge particular
Bulgarian
have
the
Church
study and of . and
between
religious
and Orthodox War
explains Nationalism
46
Bloomington:
archival A the
Cross good
.
by
after expanded
discussed much compromise. Although
and discusses politics
new
Sabrina institution, 45 form
Orthodox understanding
the and
religion, and
the and
more order the work Church
the
Second
Religion early
of ed. by commissar
from the minority
reasons 18 Metodiev's in
P. the “
nation
and from
Indiana Momchil religious
Durham: understanding
Ramet and Church
history Bulgarian and
post-war entering the
the World how
several
not the
of and and for left
policies 44 twentieth
:
trough
University
.
religion,
and and on
People's
Duke Metodiev
practice. the book the War However, focuses :
of
years nationalism
case. the the
rich
the nationalist national ” ” politics nationalist
and them University
approach of does communist secret police secret communist specific
Bulgarian .
archive
Leiden; it
Some
Democracy
century
in
the
describes The in
is rs. ae, P 1988. P. Ramet, Press.;
the she
their their a not
an of myth
socialist
good
ideology in party relationship same of
collections,
concentrates has motives religion important
Boston: concentrate . Press.
Communist
the Soviet
historical in
Durham, its been
and
presented (1944-1953).
line
the most adaptation regime.
in
useful Brill. in to
introduced
Bulgarian and
has historical
the
between some
become Eastern
popular
review on on
Party Duke
main itself been you East
way
Riis the the
of to
CEU eTD Collection 48 approach which itself is already rarely reflected upon. Then, I gave an overview of the of overview an gave I Then, upon. reflected rarely already is itself which approach an – construct historical and social a as nation the of understanding the presented briefly I happens. this how reflection illustrating at aims conducting am I analysis thematic The field. social a in actors various the between relationship the recreates and reflects speech public the – appropriate is documents official described religion language, can the political local find crucial for understanding the relations between the Church and the Communist party, Communist the and Church the between relations the understanding for crucial find present the in used method research. the justify to tried and state, the and Church the on focus a with relations the institutional Bulgarian the on studies of some presented Finally, I case. Bulgarian specifics the a to regard in with research important is current which the approaches, various “local” place of discussed framework to I order in nation. secularism the and to religion bounded” of “historically understandings as Church the of role the implement to possibility the describes well which remembering, and memory of framework
national be
In the following chapter, I will try to develop Christen Ghodsee's approach, which I which approach, Ghodsee's Christen develop to try will I chapter, following the In fits. possibly thesis present the which in frameworks important some describe to tried I Going Bourdieu, P.Bourdieu, 2001. interpretation
constituted
and language
however, main
identity. nation back
agent
to towards
by
in for of
This where
a
it; of
religion the way
Langage my national
local
religion social
I
that
research started
understanding happens
possibly
construction et identity. From this perspective, analyzing the language of language the analyzing perspective, this From identity.
as
pouvoir
from, a will
source
extensively
allows
show the
symbolique 19
of
can
of understanding
the
the any
power be
nation communist
through a of
basis .
48
these [Paris]: – –
is the
for
what language
of two power
party
Seuil. the the
cases. connects
political
role
to to .
I create
become
The of a m
(or
politics discourse,
importance analyzing and re-connects)
the
re-create
already for
or
the the
of it
CEU eTD Collection approach which I have chosen. which Ihave approach theoretical the of – justification hence, and – illustration good a as opinion, my to serves, it However, research. present the of subject the to related directly not is case this sight, first At Bulgaria. officialsin Church the of files secret the of opening the – case contemporary a over 20
CEU eTD Collection 50 49 the Although was Maxim metropolitan this information, provoked Communist Bulgaria Commission 1. Chapter Secret One. Church According unconstitutional communities legal
motive,
act obliged not procedure focus The mitropolit Bulgarian In Several 14 norm,
and
– that th
December
using
who very 2012. very
the to
of several
politicians, expressed ”
Party revived many
bishops )
to Natanail, according
are this months
Synod files high the
had opened
is http://bg-patriarshia.bg/news.php?id=57232 Natanail. and Patriarchate. provide
complicated paper;
subject
information
before
public young 2011,
are
public worked
is
its
(shortly initially
ago,
originally
a probably
there
the
journalists, statehood
second, rude to
o to
a the [Reservation figures metropolitans
1989
interest month
secret a
which
for
is
metropolitans) specialized investigation violation
private agreed,
2011a. and,
from 49
no
Files an .
although the by
reacted
”
– – before files Especially
other .
above interesting
the the Metropolitan In Church
in
State Official only data
of
of
the the and files of
were
state members
with
the state all, the
public, the
high a period of Security following with
in 21
had
few official the time-consuming. members. Nevrocopian
Metropolitan principle the that
document
various the website. this Commission
members
rare collaborated
these
regard hours
files Natanail right would
metropolitans paper. of –
decision
exceptions.
month,
arguments
files
of governing of the before
later
sbn Osobeno It to to
make
separation
of
bishop the analyze.
and turned
are secret
revealing
(popularly
the
the
based to
this For
and
Bulgarian relatively the
often
the
decision Bishops
religious Natanail]. for
supporting
mnenie
these decision bodies right police
mistake out
First,
on State of
recited the
their the Church
known that two after
hard
this was security. Orthodox of research
na
of files,
organizations
to changed
reasons
Accessed secret
11 later, and
is
publishing the to discredit Nevrokopskia changed the
and
as not
reach
the
out
contesting “ Bulgarian
Patriarch
that religious
the State
process. the files,
I Church Church several
of am
–
April “ “
with
File the ”
the the
the 15 50 in is .
CEU eTD Collection 52 53 51 were of the is for together Bulgaria Church is around the Finally, metropolitans, times Most many of
applicable based a
the
the Church
Synod new
immediately 2012, bishops Ganeva, of patriarshia.bg/news.php?id=57234 requested Synod BP 2011c. Patriarchate. Bulgarian 14 Synod Bulgarskata 2011b. Patriarchate. Bulgarian The
possible
according Church most
the
under is th them, ” with
on
Patriarch 52
otnosno
2012.
case
not
.
decided Church as
http://www.168chasa.bg/Article.asp?ArticleId=1215394
the
striking This of
of
to
the acceptable
an
the
however,
and a Galina and
explanations has
the “ the claim http://bg-patriarshia.bg/news.php?id=56995 from the
institution
secularist
religious notion threat to
poiskana
interpreted
an Pravoslavna (although are
Bulgarian its various Church to
Bulgarian part
legal
the
attempt of
provide vain 2012. an
are
of
for the of is
File attempt
paying
institution argument separated dimensions:
is
consultations not the also attempt
informatsiia
new
for Synod
future
"Samo
of as a
Orthodox
comission
“ the
official
of Orthodox
the Tzurkva the expressed an constitutional Patriarch].
to a any
necessary
is
that, fine internal
to Holly conflict
Official
transform ” for trima from
uncertain, ,
interest
prevent statement
Official
but
political,
of – Church
the according ot
information].
that
Church Synod
the
30
in
vladici
the 168 168 Komisiqta Bulgarska
conflict division
between 22 website.
information,
000
state. to
the
it problem the the – – representative
hours
Maxim
website.
the - into
to legal, –
Constitution
that leva
Bulgarian File
to priemlivi
find Church
historical with
of
Bulgarian a the , , Stanovishte
the
“ the po
February ” (15 Accessed Patriarshia
and, Church
Commission , is the secular
i.e., regard Church
Denominations
dosietata. zalneIziavlenie extent
however 97
000
high
received, undoubtedly,
Patriarchate] za that years analysis
of
(Article ” ” euro), and
3, Patriarchate to
to protection nov institution the April
and na
the
2012,
the which
[Statement state, old) claiming
“ [Statement
Svetiia from
na the
patriarh" law the traditional
of
various forthcoming 14 53 13,
accessed .
religious
governing serves Act,
Svetiia
moral. th state the does There opening . .
51
of
section 2012. Accessed Sinod
.
that
law The
concerning the
the
in of not
opinions [Only of
as are, The
religion
President. in Sinod
the that Orthodox April
argument concepts. http://bg-
the
na
the the
apply the
3), election body general
“
hence,
denial
BPC-
April
basis three Holy case. Holy lies files
and,
15
na of of to in a ” th
CEU eTD Collection 54 arguments example for position? this of origin political and historical the is What together built the case. Doubtlessly, interpretations weapon in for It facts the as understanding 55
is an
all
the Church arguments
the
possible
themselves on But Critique [Lineaments Ochertaniia (svidetelstvo) Deyanova, intended. is issues In What implications institutional southeastern
past
specifics
in
hence fact, with the
for I
this
”
am of
is
54 of
is
perception these
to
I . a
the represented
&
the of of
am
The battle. much transitional slightly of
to complex interpret This
Humanism.
in
religion the
of secular
Liliana.
pillar the very of Bulgarian
of
are Na redefinition my transitions;
shaping [The
the
55 more the Bulgarian
is Silence:
conflict
important
much
peripheral
Mulchanieto neet i hs chapter, this in interest
of of
why
Bulgarian described
the
division
relationship.
as
in
Mausoleum interested justice, the Orthodoxy
2009.
the
a problem
the Orthodox interested
I
part Historical
nation-building or
of and Orthodox am
social
historiographic
“
elements
the of the
to and case
of case. narrowing Bitkite the
: Church
in
the with
communist
the
heritage understanding
the as
In Battles: Istoricheska undeveloped. the in Church symbolic
logic Its Sociology
Bulgarian Church. the
this this
social
the ideological with
za 23 and “ paradox,
particular secret process.
traditional
of sense, the of
from 1989 discourse
mavzoleite: regard and
state?
history
meaning the
this How however,
topic
of
national
files
political
of Sotsiologiia
the
transition this however, (testimony)
paper ground
Collective
The How
can to nation
aspect played
in
hpe chapter from
religion perspective plays
The understanding
of
ways
we
a identity, does
and are
context 1989
that the
way and
of
the
particular
interpret a just
can in
” significant in the the – Memory] not
such
secret Na serves
perspective religion. the aims
in
which which as
(svidetelstvo)
serve
case.
and
of course 2006 of
Bulgaria, the
important Kolektivnata a state-Church ”
an
files at division public a
case as the the
“ It , the as
various leaves
argument
(testimony).
Hence, a interpreting 113-128. ideological
is local
for
very context
possibility an
is
is actual of related
moral
which
which not a
illustrative role ” the
– look
important , Church
powerful
I political
specific
“
a
affairs.
role cannot Pamet
that of
” as Sofia: to
battle
proof
2006 , like?
goes
it
role
and the the the the for
In:
of – is is
CEU eTD Collection which Synod. the of assume deny adequate between between would described moments prove actual Republic Orthodox Article 56
religion
Bulgarian
Article could denomination Act garian.htm http://www.cilevics.eu/minelres/NationalLegislation/Bulgaria/Bulgaria_Denominat_Bul glish.htm http://www.cilevics.eu/minelres/NationalLegislation/Bulgaria/Bulgaria_Denominat_En text State it; The continuing, Before
a is
significance
be, First, 13,
particular that
this
otherwise
the religion
of
institutional of from available above argument
Church
in
Gazette.
Section be doubtlessly,
its
there
Bulgaria 3) is according the Church
legal
people's
, development 1949:
rather
accessed ,
seems
perception
accessed – form and are
a
online
in 1949. 3). of framework for
“ but
secular
and specifics
is Bulgaria, a representative The
nation the
democratic that
of to Second,
tangential its
a the a April
Denominations the
Church-state at: at: I
metropolitan the April
Bulgarian
huge privilege
I
of
state would and
East state
use
Constitution, which
state. the
13, of
deepl and
the 13,
later
the mistake.
Orthodox. life ( the
nation.
church 2012. “ point
like
Religious
2012.; 2012.; very are
In terms in
is, of Orthodox 56 y activation. Bulgarian
.
connected
relationship;
bishops a this the
hence indeed,
Although to with Bulgarian
law
Act. very in
However, Similar Orthodoxy Church
make
Bulgarian form, sense, 24 It
on institutions State regard
correctly Church particular has
assumes secular
well
religions with
content an
definition and
text: the
historic Gazette I this
to do
I
reflected important
is
the Orthodox is
religion
law
advocate
model
my some is the
cited
not the shall sense:
history and why gives
“ Issue role main
specifically traditional is traditional assume
things
in spirit.
that
be used as I “
in
for
a clarification.
will
religion
the No.
of
Traditional for
separate claim). interchangeable
the symbolic can
” ”
in the the
which
official rather 48/March that
(State a
the institutional
be
religious
religion country. Bulgarian specific
Nevertheless expresses
(but
Denominations related the from
are
trace Gazette
privilege position
religion
Church From I predefined
” ”
01.
the As also
in some connection – – to
state
English that Bulgaria relations such,
State.
1949, and
the
what
do
of in to ,
is
basic
I
role and this
this
not the the the
” ” it
do an
in
- I
CEU eTD Collection hidden framework Western(ist) argument situation Constitution understanding interfere religion is argument particular position paradoxically founding does the it is,moreover,and rights. idea with the ofconstitutional it combine possible to – anymore strange that not is religion” “traditional of perception the - review literature the in 57
a
reaction
pillar not From described as - secularism” “symphonic of description Ghodsee's account into take we If On while to battle In Deyanova,
behind
and
cannot
in him, fact,
look of the
that relationship in element
of
the
of this
for state of
the opening of opposite
understanding line
legitimizes the the Andrey most
these so religious
organizational
the
of
the the perspective be battle
2009.
is strange. nation
with Bulgarian
Bulgarian the
past used already newly Bulgarians of artificially
the
end
Raichev between for
Church-state the the
in affairs,
as itself a
secret
of It
democratic
a the
claim
a significance
a (and
Bulgarian
situation is
way is
the Orthodox privilege life
ground
past constructed and,
belong
a (2004, the possibly
but files
line
having for combination of to
state
is
religious
consequently, it
European church
is
relationship
of in
for
actually Bulgarian itself.
to
13-14) will Church
the
nation,
which
in of
the and Orthodoxy. appropriate privileges,
institutional typical mind
be Orthodoxy independence.
25 State institutions.
its
claims of integration there dysfunctional a with
and
religion. state the battle
the
which of secular Security,
regard
“
is
it political The
an the that for
in
local
a norms. constitutes for for
consensus
1991 This
adapted statehood. This presupposition logically argument
understanding the
was
If ”
to the ideological
it
we understanding
in motives
57 the
battle is,
is is an
. nation.
an
come However,
indeed, not
only – opening easily
secularist
on
attempt that became This
of or
even
of
the
back perceived legitimacy. Hence, the rather
the is the the negotiated
the
intimacy
future.
of
the
that
expressed
transition
to of state to
typical
various a the
model
broader
describes the demographic
religion see a this part
secret should According as
traditional
Weberian
See
relations
between Western
religion agenda, a agents)
of
which was in
valid legal
– files as also
not the the
a a a
CEU eTD Collection recognition “ the Paschalis schism pillars demonstrate expression formation for opposite the perspective, 58 the nation Patriarchate attempts 59 identification
the private result Balkans, Kitromilides, nAn Now, “ patriotic as Diary]. 1992. Temelski,Hristo. 1995. [ bulgarski. Toncho. Zhechev, Sciences.; of Academy [ 1976 Zina. Markova,
h ugra hrhntoa oeetutlteCienwr.war]. Crimean the until movement church-national Bulgarian The from of succeeded already from
process.
so
important the Kitromilides for
of of sphere.
of
“
I
of secularization important is how
1860
foreign
a the nation, Sofia: Kama.; Kama.; Sofia:
will
independence religion we
ideologically seen movement of the long
the In
abroad
Church-state Bulgarian Easter, or the Bulgarian Passions] Bulgarian the or Easter, Bulgarian
Orthodoxy plays The try Enlightenment, Enlightenment,
need Orthodox
in
fact,
starting
” ” two and and
influence Bulgarian to Synod that claims as
a ”
levels the
to the
focus complicated for crucial in was a
. Bulgarskoto tsurkovno-nationalno dvijenie do Krimskata voina. Krimskata do dvijenie tsurkovno-nationalno Bulgarskoto .
its The
privileged
point
secularist factor 200 see consulting
Church reacted Church of Iosif, exarkh bulgarski. Dnevnik. [ Dnevnik. bulgarski. exarkh Iosif, with
that,
actually
relationship informal overlap 59
on E
0. . role. culture
the
how aster
As nationalism,
is nationality, The in for several
by the
as
the
as
In Bulgarian order
position claim,
– political Action
the
national the
the movement
itrcllgtmzto legitimization historical defending the name and
his the a secession
process
vanguard
EU and,
important
post-independence book to institutional 26
institutional historiography if
from
of - while orthodoxy understand fulfilled,
accession
process,
“ identity. at
“ the Orthodox
the
itself
of Enlightenment,
aimed the of 1860
Orthodox
of limiting an Bulgarian moments the
same
from
nationalism in
it and expression . unstated ugrkit vlke l strastite ili velikden Bulgarskiiat that
process
This
Bulgarian at
the
this is
as
clergy
the gathering
the started time,
the
typically
nation-building a Church. way, case
Iosif, the Bulgarian Exarch. Bulgarian the Iosif,
state . Sofia: Zaharii Stoyanov.; Zaharii Sofia: .
in ideological. –
liberation Easter state
influence
of implication
Nationalism,
a
history the
”
would
of from the Exarchate I new 58 religion –
narrative .
will
” Bulgarians this
perceived public which In schism
- National
have Sofia: Bulgarian Sofia: of the this was of that pillar. also
as
the the
points is processes
and
in
is
Orthodoxy respect, Ecumenical
taken present contributed creates exactly be one
Church
Bulgarian perceived 1870 Here, as
Revival. who
political
able
a of to
by
first was
had
the the the the the the
on
an to to a ”
CEU eTD Collection 63 61 60 62 members took important actors, rule which and Bulgarian borders Russo-Turkish perception ethnos Church successful and the our possible pointed
independence ” national a Bulgarian
62
Riis, 1053), Kalkandjieva, York: Hopkins, Our over This Metodiev, caretaker .
and
saved 61 starting,
movement out affiliation . 63
Nowadays,
Orthodox
moment . national
Religion,
the stage
is mythological the
In East
26. feeling
the
the reinforced
a Orthodox
establishment
James War
of
power,
Between Between famous European
national as in of
national
the
with celebration had in
and Politics, our Church, (1877-1878) the Kitromilides
Bulgarskata
March Lindsay. which national
achieved
religion:
when people speech
self-consciousness... Christianity struggle
faith by relationship
importance Monographs and
3 the unlike of it and
rd
and
spirit day.
the – 2009. is from religious
in cultural
fact
its
Historiography the
for reinterpreted accepted
pravoslavna 1946, compromise,
describes,
state Built
some
of ultimate
foreign as date The
that independent
of is
the
synonymous ;
the and
Distributed identity in
started Bulgarian other on then the
the
Bulgarians
the
this
leader
yoke
which 27 cultural
aim In with
Church
San
is Churches,
constantly borders
p. 638.
curkva way, the
– – in
heavy the
from the
nation-state. Stefano
of
the
Bulgaria, the the
centuries Orthodox
by “ with
self-determination
late Bulgarian the (
The by
“ …
San
Columbia destruction recognition of i repressive “
) post-independence
Communist national 1940's, has
at
re-activated I the national Stefano treaty narodnata
do
3. the
of a
Church
Exarchate
not historical
Church As
hardship,
same
right University which self-consciousness,
forget, treaty myth of under Hopkins actions
.
Party
Boulder Bulgaria
after demokraciia' time for had by
put merit
depicts
was
as
in of
Ottoman
her
various
Georgi
been
60
the on Press.: p.128. the Bulgarian course, neglecting narrative the
signed
puts people
(Colo.); in
as communists
the
struggle a the
end preserving
custodian
a Dimitrov
it:
political – Muslim that Church distinct Church
(1944- ” as ” of “ .
is .
New state
This
The that
any the the An the for
CEU eTD Collection 66 65 64 for the Synodal until with with that the ideology. Church history interests Church state final, national contemporary role Maxim rather
accent possibility
the
of was soft the and finally
341-342. Kalkandjieva, Metodiev, This Here, Metodiev, albeit
a
64 the
with Communist
as
has .
change governing
belonging) new of
planned measures Moreover,
the
is Church is
a
the
the important had
a moved
nation-builder, a in
Constitution
other
decision to
crucial diffusion
Bulgarian
1948 national Between Between Between of
also control already
for
body political such
forms from party Bulgarian is in
priests
the a moment
remark to of this
budget-cut as it. was
myth
between faith faith
religion people. national in
a
the to from
of
This replacing
way
high
roles.
as 1944
subordinate replaced traitors, Central
Christianity
and and
on for is Orthodox this
1947,
the was
extent
But,
to disattached
the
unity but the The compromise, compromise, Church, “
reform Party
Church,
a secularity
the
Committee
villains, Communist
was understanding by in
significant preamble
subordination
was a
general, compulsory
people
the Church gave
product (other
formally
led state
never
the
28 clergy
from ” ”
Judas
263-278. 18. Translation a
to
division close “ to was
of religions, it
limitations
and
and chance period
denied of
the great
has – religion the introduced
of from completely
religious the
continued
to the hence, official
religion played Party the
the of
tension ”
communist concerns by
People's
the to
contemporary
such Church
Party and
the
were
in the
it
separation
a
education point
mine,
in
1971
(especially
with was communists. very
is as in-line Church among
65
1948.
introduced
.
the Democracy and bound
Muslims,
66
of not institutional big B.V. the .
relations At
State
view
with – –
This
with a the of patriotic choice situation.
the
to and real
Church in
served clerics
In
the of on process the
optional; same are
the (1944-1953), also
division, this
between
the of
the
role communist politics. role by
Although
Patriarch
sense and time,
reserved as way, national Church,
and
default started
of in
a
then,
state
tool
our but the the the the the
of A
CEU eTD Collection 69 70 68 67 Batak describing context, attention “ there mythology. famous Church, nation one this 1980's, unacceptable the canonization Batak
Communism, way, which
are Ausstellung Baleva, etci_za_pruv_put_ot_47_godini/ 15 canon Dnevnik.
новоселските-мъченици http://www.pravoslavie.bg/Документи/Канонизацията-на-баташките-и- of Batashkite Maksim A who priest In
is
citizens
the Slaughter
th
canonization state, town final
1962 canonizing
reinforced 2012, different of the
made here
State is
izes During who the
since Orthodox
as Martina, easy moment and religion 2011.
http://www.dnevnik.bg/bulgaria/2011/04/03/1069426_curkvata_kanonizira_sv in – –
purely 2011 Wetsern
saints
the a i Security wrote ” .
South the on Novoselskite ,
1964,
Sofia: versions part
1964
to
the at and
first Patriarshesko the .
the
of Church
the control
Curkvata and
for
and in the
as April
Church of
70
it
the
two victims Verl. copy media
Bulgaria
one
expense widely the is
is the the
first one nation Ulf
for
Batak
the
other widely – –
hand, Uprising,
historical does Iztok-Zapad.
first of
national
the Brunnbauer. complete
muchenici. is in
to one and
of kanonizira the accepts
is
preserved
of
and i historical the
way which the
time
not
Sinodalno
Patriarch the the
of accepted same at the
Balkans
Novosel
“
name the
the have model, a in canonizing
description in
concept
slaughter Bulgarian the big
book
has
which
the national [Patriarchal
same
2007.
figures as
svetci
term to 29
Maxim's part
of
that
poslanie
a last
and the especially martyrs]. present
in
of this Christianity. significant “ time
”
of Batak 1765. (Dnevnik
its
main
sects
of 47 history za religion provoked heroes. were is of
its
happened
role the
years]
an pruv the speech
the po and
nationalist ” ”
population
religious -
canonized for
Batak
illustration
in
povod Ein in relationship
in problematic
Synod In
as
put
, role the all
1762, the
69 the
2011, April a Bulgarischer On 68
describes
Martyrs system , protestant
ot
1980's). kanonizaciiata
April Russo-Turkish
this
in agent Message 2011).
the arguments – and
was
47
3 22
the Paisii to rd
event
between other godini.
Uprising
2011, years of Sofronii relationship
within
murdered. the in
Bulgarian
the
beliefs.
In denominations.
2011
on Hilendarski, is Erinnerungsort
specificity
after hand, sacrifice the accessed for
popular
the the
[The
na 67
religion Vrachanski
War.
brought . 1970's
its
occasion
Batak the
country Although
the between national actions; Church
In fall as of
April I
the
first
and and this is the am the the
In – of
a :
CEU eTD Collection 71 Bulgarian disappoint establish Metodiev important sight) religion post-colonialist Bulgarian religion, particular however, cdmc wr, I wl lbrt n te rsac rcs, satn rm dsrbn the describing from starting process, material. researched ofthe the and ending specifics with methodology research the on elaborate will I work, academic Bulgarian
the Meto an in expected transparency research of level the chapter,achieve next to the order In in I Various Starting
http://www.kultura.bg/bg/print_article/view/19339 would would
could
that 71
its a points
society. Orthodox Church form
the , diev,2012. Momchil.
more
Church for diffusive
such
could interpretations from broad rather be
example, perspecti in of
incorporated intimate
is
the a
a
relationship Church possibly
public
argue not
combination situation role
development and
new,
ve,
the presupposes
relationship for but
against
of
I serve
Church its
and
which
the into will wanted the
“ between
Za
produce. it allowance
situation
be as a the dual of
is
can curkvara Westernist
should
well
the
this that opening for to with
be
basis Church
show perception the
now accepted
historical
will I analyzed
30
its distance of
pointed
Bulgarian I
of
the neinata for Christian different follow. secular how
the and
most the by
in of files out from a
the
state According
otherwise various eoy,memory], model, dvoistvena religion. saints very
“
– forms
congregation. innocent of orthodox
the
although
the and,
non-Westernist should
“
and ways, of
national State
illogical
to religion. ” ” respectively,
istoricheska
what believers.
form utr 5 Kultura
the
be
very I Security.
tried
This national
Historian paradoxes
ideals
of
argument roughly This
to
nationalism perception will
” focus pamet. Following
nation
role heroes. and
Momchil probably –
(at (2012),
on of of try ” some
[On first
and
the the the
in to of
a
CEU eTD Collection the study of narratives. In essence, a thematic analysis allows subjective interpretation in the in interpretation subjective allows analysis thematic a essence, In narratives. of study the period the in weekly, 1970and 1979. between issued newspaper”), (“Church vestnik” “Tsurkoven - church the of understanding present the constitutes it analysis thematic a conducted have I secularism, which in way the and state the and church chooseit. the to ofstudyandreasons isthewhat are period what data; the of systematization the for used scheme coding particular the of description a collected; were they how and of consist data the do what data; the toward taken approach the clarifies It 2. Chapter Two. Method of Analysis. DescriptionandJustification 72 social data initial the views ofthe subject creator) the the way (the represent and to typologies and/or descriptions offer to expected is analysis, content qualitative of type other any initial of as the with accordance in narrative a questions research the and theory the from given expectations reconstruct to used then and collected are text, the in appear which topics particular systematically identifying codes, The a scheme. coding developed on based patterns, and themes of identification trough text a of content 73 Sage. London: Sciences. Human the for Methods Narrative 2008. Kohler. Catherine Riessman, Ibid., 53-54. Ibid., of the DataandPeriodofof Study A thematic analysis is a form of qualitative content analysis developed especially for especially developed analysis content qualitative of form a is analysis thematic A the between relationship complicated this of origins historical the trace to order In research. the of sources data selected the analyzing of method the explains chapter This 31 72 of the archives of the official of newspaper the of archives the of 73 . . The outcome of the analysis, the of outcome The
CEU eTD Collection 74 the legitimate agents through whom the national ideology isconstructed. agentsnational through whomthe legitimate the institutional as perceived be and to order in strategies various used state historical the and church the which in relations the reflecting as seen is itself paper The newspaper. Church the in reflected processes the of context the give can that topic the on literature additional purposes” what “for and whom”, to “how”, than rather said, is “what” “on put is accent the i.e., - itself” for “speak to left is data the approach this in diverse that otherwise mention to important is It it. the of sense make to and newspaper, systematize church the in information to me allowed it as thesis, this in presented the for research appropriate particularly it makes This archives. historical to content, media print butand onlymodified. enriched tested, not initial or be can expectations the where process, coding and scheme coding flexible hypotheses a and expectations theory-inspired (usually) the between balance a offering in 'speak' order 75 the in data diverse The volume. in big quite was collected information initial the weekly, is it As authorities. communist the of decisions political the interpreted institution the church which in patterns various the represents it church, Orthodox the of media official the 2.1. DataCollection Riessman, May,17 (On-line 2012]. Research Social access: of Qualitative [Date http://qualitative-research.net/fqs/fqs-e/2-00inhalte.htm Journal),1(2), Forum: Analysis. Content Qualitative 2000. Science Library and Wildemuth.ed., Yan., Zhang, 74 The very newspaper was chosen among various sources from this period, because, as because, period, this from sources various among chosen was newspaper very The through interviews, from starting texts, of types various to applied be can method The . Instead of being too strictly theory-driven, this type of analysis allows the data to data the allows analysis of type this theory-driven, strictly too being of Instead Narrative Methods for the Human Methods Sciences forthe Narrative idmt, Braa 09 Qaiaie aayi f cnet n B. in content” of analysis “Qualitative 2009. Barbara. Wildemuth, Applications of Social Research Methods to Questions in Information in Questions to Research Methods Social of Applications . Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited, 308-319.; 308-319.; Unlimited, Libraries CT:Westport, . 32 , 54. 75 . In this manner, it is only the only is it manner, this In . Mayring, Philipp. Mayring,
CEU eTD Collection analytical procedure analytical the it connect theory. to and better to it understand to manage to the cycles coding several which through and data in her know to analysis, gets researcher very the of part a as perceived is it sense, this In easier. analysis and Data DataCollection 2.1. Between Analysis Church topicsnewspaper, ofthe the diversity. but less with much repeated generally articles the lengthy, Although audience. limited very to dedicated articles academic-style more much of consists it In general, rejected. but examined, also was Culture” served theofmy study. purposes best that information the theory,of the parts and these scheme coding the with accordance in find, to and articles of types and topics various among select to possibility the me gave archive 77 on data, the upon and hand, one the on expectations, and theory the upon both based scheme, coding the created I Then material. pre-sampling of pages 400 the collected I basis whose on expectation this is it and nationalistic, be to discourse this expected I institution; church pages. 400 approximately constituting entries, article 150 about collect to managed basis this on and act” interpretative an primarily 76 adñ, Jhn. 20. Oaks, Sage., 3. Calif., Thousand 2009. Johnny. Saldaña, Ibid., 4. Ibid., In accordance with my theory, I wanted to reconstruct the specific discourse of the of discourse specific the reconstruct to wanted I theory, my with accordance In the of cycle first the fact in is scheme coding the of fulfilling and developing very The of process the make to and data the order and systematize to serves scheme coding The “Spiritual magazine monthly the – church the of periodical official another The 76 . In the words of Johnny Saldana, “coding is not a precise science, it's a it's science, precise a not is “coding Saldana, Johnny of words the In . h oig Mna o ulttv Researchers Qualitative for Manual Coding The 77 . During this process, I identified some significant quotes significant some identified I process, this During . 33 London. .
CEU eTD Collection “History”, “Heroes and Public Figures”, and “Festivities and Commemorations”. The coding The Commemorations”. and “Festivities and Figures”, Public and “Heroes “History”, Holidays”, and “Customs - scheme coding the of categories basic into data selected the of discourse “nationalist term the operationalized Taking have I account, into this nationalism” of views competing of interplay the is discourse national exist; not does such as nationalism homogeneous, or monolithic is nation no as just all, After sufficient. not is discourse” with “nationalism” “national term ofthe replacement a cautious course,even - “Of goal ambitious an always is This words”. code its style, its goals, its ideas, main its – century of Study of 2.3. Justification Period the narrativecategories. themes. the units collected and collect coded the Ianalyzed Then material the from are directly taken (they codes, it “in-vivo” the from unlike themes, quotations particular representing direct codes descriptive not are but material, the upon based are codes The strategy” coding “descriptive a as Saldana Johnny by described is approach other. This the 83 the Commemorations”), and (“Festivities 79 remembering of practices Holidays”, and in sub-codes. in codesand operationalized paragraph” a or sentence, word, (“a unit text physical the not is analysis content qualitative a in which unit, 82 81 78 80 Todorova, Nationalism” ofBulgarian and Course Discourse “The discourse is not important, following following discourse isnot important, Todorova's problem. ofthe articulation differentiation the taken account, and “nationalist” being into While “national” between Ibid., 74. Ibid. 70. Ibid., Wildemuth. ed., Z and Library Science and Library hang, Yan., hang, The four main categories include, respectively, the practices of memorizing (“Customs memorizing of practices respectively,the include, categories main four The Todorova Maria 83 u eed n te vr et ad te ter, i hs cs s a theme, a is case this in theory, the and text very the on depends but , Wil 79 . In the second cycle – the very thematic analysis – I looked over all the all over looked I – analysis thematic very the – cycle second the In . Applications of Social Research Methods to Questions in Information in ResearchQuestions Social to Methodsof Applications euh abr. 20. “ulttv nlss o otn” i B. in content” of analysis “Qualitative 2009. Barbara. demuth, 80 . Westport, CT: 308-319. Unlimited, Libraries rcs “h riuain o ugra ainls uig te 20 the during nationalism Bulgarian of articulation “the traces 34 , 70. 82 ” on the basis the on ”
81 78 th . .
CEU eTD Collection ideology” and movement “full-fledged a as nationalism of development the and nation-building the when period the as 1970's the defines She nationalism. Bulgarian emergenceof the of periods Bulgaria of history communist the in point turning a as 1970's the identify authors Several literature. Appendix in A. A in isincluded coded material given ofthe sample Appendix B. is scheme coding The appears. unit coded the which in context the define codes sub- the and church”, the of “History example, (for unit coded two particular a the of dimensions represent codes the themes; general the and represent “religion”, categories (“nation”, The “party/state”). sub-codes three includes code (“church”, Every codes “party”). three and includes “nation”, which “History”, for except “religious”), and (“civic” codes two includes category Each analysis. the analytical of skeleton the very the in constitute and chapter, expressed well are categories these of functions The Figures”). Public and (“Heroes discourse nationalist the of actors the and (“History”), narratives legitimizing 86 85 84 nationalism” “communist of as 1989) – (1944 rule Todorova, “ P. Press, 352-377. Durham: 1989. University Duke ed., Ramet, in Church” Orthodox Bulgarian the and “Nationalism T. Spas. Raikin, 1969. Press, Washington of University traektoriya. vlastova in Nationalism” V.“Bulgarian I cherti trajectory]. Power and Traits Socio-cultural Communism. Sociokulturni Komunizum. Bulgarskiyat Press.; Century Twentieth the in Nationalism European 1,300 Bulgaria's of 1981)]. Context the in Culture Official of Historicisation of Age" Golden "Second ["The (1976-1981). deistvitelnost yubileinata v kultura oficialnata na istorizirane i durjava na Bulgarskata osnovavaneto ot godishninata faith T Ibid., 88. The choice of the investigated time period – the 1970's - was determined by the existingthe by determined was 1970'sthe - – period time investigated the of choice The odorova, “The Course and Discourse of Bulgarian Nationalism” Bulgarian of Discourse and Course “The odorova,
84 and 85 . What I find especially important for my research is Maria Maria is Todorova's research my for important especially find . into division I What Riis, begins. On the one hand, Todorova talks about the whole period of communist of period whole the about talks Todorova hand, one the On begins. Critique and Humanism and Critique
compromise The Course and Discourse of Bulgarian Nationalism” ofBulgarian and Course Discourse The
Religion,
Religion and nationalism in Soviet and East EuropeanEast and Soviet politics in nationalism and Religion Politics, ; lno, Ia. "uan-lsvyt voi Zae e" 1300 vek". Zlaten vtori "Humanno-klasoviyat Ivan. Elenkov,
and Nationalism in Eastern Europe Europe Eastern in Nationalism 23/1 (2007): 33-62, 2007.; 2007.; 33-62, (2007): 23/1
Historiography 35 86 , emphasizing on the specificity of the of specificity the on emphasizing , . Lanham, Md.: Ameri Md.: Lanham, .
in
th Bulgaria niesr eerto (1976- Celebration Anniversary Sofia: Ciela Sofia: Su ; ; in P. Sugar, ed., 93-165. ed., P. Sugar, in gar, Peter. 1995. 1995. Peter. gar, , 74. Znepolski, Ivaylo. 2008. Ivaylo. Znepolski, ; eoiv Metodiev, .; .; Pundeff, Marin, Pundeff, can University can [ Bulgarian Between Eastern , in S. in ,
CEU eTD Collection 91 of the massive commemoration was supposed to be contemporaneity, the historian Ivan historian the contemporaneity, be to supposed was commemoration massive the of party, the of Committee Central the of Todor Secretary Jivkov First the of daughter and time, that at culture” and arts for “Committee the of chairwoman Jivkova, Ludmila by led was campaign The party. Communist the of Committee Central the from 1976 June from decision the accepted is campaign the of beginning official For preparations of purpose the for especially 1972 in culture” and art for “Committee the from separated was culture” for “Institute An level. highest the from given were decisions and Bulgaria” consecutive by characterized com massive are the for 1970's preparations Namely, developed. were nation Bulgarian the of importance and uniqueness the emphasizing politics of series and salient more became party ruling the of discourse nationalist the when period the as 1970's the out points explicitly elite and leadership party the for legitimacy gaining of purpose the for converse Marxist the adopted discourse internationalist into itself transforming of instead period, the of beginning the ideology, in nationalist adopted the where case Bulgarian 92 90 89 88 87 the transforming and it, “mythicizing” discourse, historical the mobilizing in succeeded party past” Bulgarian the toward discourse public the in turn “new messages, idealogical new and language official new introducing time same the at systematic and salient a culture” official the of be “historizing to out turned campaign preparation the that states Elenkov
Ibid., 33. Elenkov, "Second Golden “The Age" statehood.Bulgarian In the official historiographic discourse Ibid., 92 Ibid., 38. Ibid. 88 . Special institutes and commissions were created to work on the preparations, the on work to created were commissions and institutes Special . 91 memoration events devoted to celebrating “1300 years “1300 celebrating to devoted events memoration , i.e. legitimizing the present by recollecting the past and past the recollecting by present the legitimizing i.e. , , 35. , 681 is accepted as a year of the beginning of the ofthe ofthe beginning a as year 681 isaccepted 36 92 . Elenkov concludes that this way the way this that concludes Elenkov . 90 . center thematic the Although 87 . On the other hand, she hand, other the On . 89 .
CEU eTD Collection attitude appropriated by the professional historians and writers was perceived as a kind of kind a as perceived was writers and historians professional the by appropriated attitude present” the to times ancient from Bulgaria of history “multi- scientific a volume write to mission the with state the in historians professional the assigns which 1966, in Party Communist Bulgarian the of Congress Ninth the on accepted decision, a is discourse. official nationalist the of part politics became Astate of kind this for example good interests” “national the popularizing and were defending they past, medieval Bulgarian the from figures historical of meaning the and glory the restoring By historians. professional the and writers the among 1970s, the in especially is scene socio-cultural and and intelligentsia, the among political feelings national of enforcement the Bulgarian - Todorova by mentioned the in change“ “climate the of aspect Moreover,an contributions. cultural Church and historical its on accent explicit the with institution, contradiction without and logic same the with include can tradition, cultural Bulgarian old” “thousand-years the from elements dignified and glorified the all include to as enough open as designed discourse, official new this cult, national this that is here work cult national into myths and symbols of system communist 96 95 94 93 state, the and church the between symbiosis similar of process a reconstruct to expect I media intelligentsia the and party-state that – sides two the party. from ruling agreement the mutual the emerged with symbiosis This of front in legitimacy gain to way a be to appeared it intelligentsia the For follow. to model a as officialdiscourse its into nation” and state centralized strong past, “glory the of narrative new this incorporated party party. The communist the by accepted well fact in was the it nation, on emphasis its with history Marxist socioeconomic official the to reaction dissident Todorova, Maria. 1992.“ Elenkov, "Second Golden “The Age" Todorova, Ibid., 41. American Historical Review American Historical The Course and Discourse of Bulgarian Nationalism DiscourseThe and ofBulgarian Course Historiography of the Countries ofEastern Bulgaria”. Europe: Countries Historiography ofthe (October): 1113.(October): 96 . By investigating Bulgarian Orthodox Church's official Church's Orthodox Bulgarian investigating By , 39. 37 94 n hs wy netoal r not, or intentionally way, this and 93 . What I find important for my for important find I What . , 95. 95 . Although the Although . other
CEU eTD Collection ugra eia a rvn ecuiey b ainl mtvs ws dmntn and dominating was motives national by exclusively driven the was during struggle Revival church Bulgarian the that assertion accepted widely The society. communist background theoretical Marxist the the on presupposing 1960's the during data its collected population the of religiosity survey, the The Church. examining the toward interest renewed the explains 1968 in published and Sciences of Academy Bulgarian the in Philosophy of Institute the by conducted state. Asurvey the of spotlight the in again is Church the period, the of beginning Metodiev Momchil by identified Church, Orthodox the toward state the of politics rule. end ofthe till the communist and thelasted followed 1980's andthat rhetoric in politics nationalist encompassing and open the space public the in legitimize and prepare to aimed which period transitional this in other, on symbols, national the and hand one on symbols, institution. Orthodox Christian contradicting otherwise the appropriate and accept to 1970's, the in nationalistic saliently ideology,more communist and official the more of becoming legitimization the allows which 98 97 voluntarily The population the of 35,5% of period. total a - data statistical interesting same reviled comparison the for baptisms) and funerals (marriages, rituals the religious regarding of Church, number the of records official the from given data the with from data the of juxtaposition interesting an was survey the of conclusion the influenced extent. What hight a to influence public Church's the marginalized and education trough mainly people religious of number the reduced successfully party communist the years 20 last the in that conclusion goals political achieving for tool a as only religion the of acceptance the and tradition atheistic the of roots deep the confirmed Metodiev, Ibid. Another important fact which directed my attention to the 1970's is the change in the in change the is 1970's the to attention my directed which fact important Another , 29-30. Between natural historical natural faith
and I seek to find how the Church talks about the the religious the the about talks Church the how find to seek I
compromise. 98 overcoming of the religion in the process of developing a developing of process the in religion the of overcoming . The results were considered sufficient for deriving the deriving for sufficient considered were results The . 38 97 . In the In .
CEU eTD Collection politics of the state toward the Church during 1970's developed mainly in two directions – a – directions two in mainly developed 1970's during Church the toward state the of politics decree governmental a with released officially were rituals civic of incorporation the for procedures 1969 April from and recommended strongly was commemorations and routine. social festivitiesthe rituals, kindsofpopular emphasizingonall traditions, Therefore, and habit the in but population, the among concept valid a longer no was which religion the in even not marginalized; successfully was which institution church the in not problem the recognized it because precisely follow to decade the in developed were politics new which introduced was custom” “popular and affiliation” “religious between distinction new A rituals. non-religious and civic new with replaced be should they that taken was decision a affiliation, religious a than more much habit of matter a as seen were practices these Because life. of way people's the in rituals religious the of persistence the be to appeared problem identified the conclusion the In children. newborn all from 52,42% are baptisms the and 80% are funerals religious the period, the for marriages all 36,11%of are marriages religious The people. more significantly by (especially practiced were funerals) rituals religious the time, same the at while religious, as themselves declared 101 100 99 issues Church for Committee by 1977 in prepared denominations” religious and issues concerning religious acts regulatory the of application for “Instruction an and Church; attitude the new toward the framed Lilov Alexander secretary the which on 1974 February in party Communist the of Committee Central the of session plenary a regime: the of collapse the till moment this from relations church-state the of direction the predetermined events important two essence, In equivalents. socialist with replacement and adaptation their and festivities religious and ceremonies, civic with replacement their and rituals religious for campaign Ibid. Ibid., 33. Ibid., 34-36. 101 . 39 99 . This distinction became a basis upon basis a became distinction This . 100 . The .
CEU eTD Collection of these decisions and their decisions effects. and of these The next chapter – the analysis of the collected data – will present the implementation the present will – data collected the of analysis the – chapter next The 40
CEU eTD Collection “domestication” of the church institution, namely the justification of the position of the of position the of justification the namely institution, church the of “domestication” Raikin Spas occupied. already is “mythologize” to regime the of will the indicates state the of mobilization nationalist the of context the in period second the enemy, ideological an dismiss to party the of wish the by explained be can oppressions strong to of key period first the While state. the and church between relations is the of change the understanding competition This 1878. in created was state new the after abroad symbols function twofold 19 the in Revival national Bulgarian the the of of basis holder community, the Bulgarian as accepted been, since long has and is, Bulgarian church the The church. – Orthodox field nationalist the on competitor particular one had party Communist 3. Chapter Three. DataAnalysis of the to dominate all topics, and the introduction of the Communist party as the “saver” of the of “saver” 102 the as party Communist the of introduction the and topics, all dominate to starts which talk nationalist the of “civilizing” and widening enormous – the newspaper the in traced be can which processes dominant two of development the with happens This Church. the by presented as discourse nationalist the in place its finds party Communist the which various in peace world articles religious purely of including contexts, ideas the implement to manages which newspaper, Church the of rhetoric the from visible very is this – relations international of field the in authorities 105 103 104 Secularism” Raikin, “Nationalism and the Bulgarian Orthodox Church”; also Ghodsee, also Church”; Orthodox Bulgarian the and “Nationalism Raikin, Church [Tsurkoven Newspaper Vestnik] See Elenkov. "Second Golden “The Age" Raikin, Nationalism and the Bulgarian OrthodoxChurch, Bulgarian 370. and the Nationalism Raikin, With the broad introduction of various nationalist policies in the 1970's, the Bulgarian the 1970's, the in policies nationalist various of introduction broad the With . 102 – communal and cultural, and as a protector of the Bulgarian cultural Bulgarian the of protector a as and cultural, and communal – 103 its historical presence by finding place in a narrative which narrative a in place finding by presence historical its 104 mhszs aohr oe patcl apc f this of aspect practical more another, emphasizes 105 . 1970. 71/6, 4. . 1970.71/6, 41 . . Below, I will present the mechanism through mechanism the present will I Below, . th century with its with century “ Symphonic
CEU eTD Collection dominant actor who holds the nation. In years of heavy repression, the newspaper – as the as – newspaper the repression, heavy of years In nation. the holds who actor dominant (1970-1973) period 3.1. Early limitation. it its as accept to order I and analysis this of weakness significant this recognize I discourse. in the in agency the follow needed information the fairly give can context the of investigation historical rarely, However, very believers”. and deeper much “the party”, of a perspective only the from talking”. “the “who's of perspective the as understand paper the analyze to to appropriate more probably possibility is it the Sometimes, the helped without which discourse conflicts the internal of smaller, development various of constituted state and church between relationship the believe I actions, own its of perspective the from understood be hence can and institution church the of positions “official” the represents newspaper church ofthe nation. holder long-standing the party is completely legitimate, but not sufficient. legitimate, but party iscompletely the official of discourse the fit to order in especially written just or “censored”, “manipulated”, as tribune. real a as acted newspaper the itself, promote to which through channels official other no had Church the when context, this In readers. “regular” of number limited a by also but police), secret forget, the to not officials(and, party by and clergy the by mostly read being (weekly), copies thousand five of circulation a has newspaper The Church. the to legitimacy public give to order in emphasized constantly be can role this which through channels possible the of one is - institution the of media official 106 A claim that the Church newspaper has been any kind of free media in these years would years these in media free of kind any been has newspaper Church the Athat claim In the beginning of the 1970's, the Orthodox church has the self-confidence of the of self-confidence the has church Orthodox the 1970's, the of beginning the In recognized. the is While action the of agent particular a rarely analysis, following the In 42 106 Hence, understanding the publications the understanding Hence,
CEU eTD Collection a 9 pbiain, srcue n a mr cdmc sye h hr eto, “Ambon” section, sector “Official” third the and publications, 50 has The holidays), and values on style. discussions (religious academic more a in structured publications, 79 has character” church-historical and church-social, theological, with articles “Introductory topic parables. andsector. this The stories, in short issued poems, songs, religious mainly are These a 1970, were publications 132 – In theme “Arts” the to 1970's. devoted is newspaper the the of section significant in changes significant suffer which fields thematic into divided generally is newspaper the of content The ideology. nationalist the incorporate successfully the of role Bulgarian society. ofSciences in Academy the of reports regular in results world the of view “scientific” more a toward push political the labor; family,and the love, as such values, social to paid also is Attention figures. public other and heroes, national saints, – figures particular commemorating and events articles historical theology; history, holidays, and customs various about articles publishes paper The content. different with fulfilled are they 1970's the of course the within be developed on. developed be to field new whole a also but sections, traditional the in attention more only not received talk nationalist publications. The 29 and 28 with respectively Peace”, of protection “In and saints) and heroes historical civic both (including past” heroic our “Along - appear sections news Two publications. 102 has and theological) (no others” and celebrations, memories, persons, honorary jubilees, greetings, reports, speeches, statements, articles, social-political historical, “Church- to renamed is articles” “Introductory section The publications. 32 - “Arts” in is change biggest The articles. 22 to limited is section “Church Ambon” the while publications, 11. only has Six yearslater, israther thedifferent. situation “OfficialThe consists sector of28 h eea hne i h ois i togy twr ujcs wih wud more would which subjects toward strongly is topics the in change general The but same, the generally remain discusses newspaper Church the which topics The 43
CEU eTD Collection the articles, as expected, often refers to the Bulgarian nation as “democratic” and they never they and “democratic” as nation Bulgarian the to refers often expected, as articles, the mythologized monastery.a in youth his of years several spent who times these of symbol a Levski, Vassil of breeder” “spiritual the was Church the article, another to According times. Revival from figures public and heroes national various to church the unifier,keeper, people...” Bulgarian of the leader and a spiritually and territorially ethnically, became [which] church - state! not surely – national of one was role whose Church, the logical of a tradition as institutional seen the of is continuation Patriarchate the although mentioned, never is Party the it, In 1970. from Exarchate the of celebration centennial the to dedicated article an is example illustrative An institution. religious the with contrast in times, present the with reference insignificant short, a as mentioned usually is period communist The “ended”. already has fight the when even nation), and (church two the between connection the emphasizing explicitly thereby liberation”, church-national for “fight called always is process very The pride. and pathos 19 the of end the in process nation-building the of 109 107 God to “pleasing was it because continuum the fits Patriarchate the – party the of role the explicitly includes never however, narrative, This ending. natural a is Patriarchate Bulgarian the which to continuum long a of periods different the to as to referred always are Orthodoxy Bulgarian of history the in periods different the time, same the At ideology). Marxist the with accordance (in times” their of “product a were heroes national the that mention to forget 108 Bulgaria’s Hero National 2009. - Todorova Maria of book brilliant the see Levski, of mythologization Brunnbauer, in Myth” National a as Revival “The Roumen. Daskalov, see heroes, national Church Newspaper [Tsurkoven Vestnik] [Tsurkoven Newspaper Church Church [Tsurkoven Newspaper Vestnik] B.V. citations ismine, ofall The translation In the early years of the period, the of years early the In oe f Cneto. Te Lvn rhv f Vsl Lvk n h aig of Making the and Levski Vasil of Archive Living The Contention. of Bones
Batak
-
. Budapest; New. Budapest; York: University European Press. Central Ein
Bulgarischer the church constantly represents itself as the main agent main the as itself represents constantly church the . 1970.71/6, 3. . 1970. 71/5, 2.; On the “mythologization” of “mythologization” the On 2.; 71/5, 1970. . 44
Erinnerungsort: 108 th century. This role is expressed with expressed is role This century. . Other articles in the same tone relate tone same the articles in Other .
Ausstellung 109 Todorova, Maria. Todorova, The language of language The ; n the On Baleva and Baleva 107 “a real “a
CEU eTD Collection section constitutes of historical and teleological articles giving overview of religious feasts religious of overview giving articles teleological and historical of constitutes section “Ambon” The holidays. Christian popular and traditions, saints, of celebrations Christian broadest sense” and deepest its in act “renaissance” real Europe in time in “first the as alphabet Cyrillic the of creation the presents 1970 from article An narrative. historical Bulgarian the and Cyril in saints figures emblematic – Rila the of Ivan and to Sofronii, and Paisii Ohrid, refers of Kliment Methodius, always 1970's, early the in published articles academic to according church, the of history the continuum, mentioned already the Justifying nation. new-born the of “awakening” cultural and main educational the the included clergy when the of times, activities Revival the to association with often again, – institution cultural Kiril” Evtimii Patriarch of scepter the and Church Own Holly our of dignity patriarchal deprived the restore to (….) “everyday” understanding of Christian values. Christian of understanding “everyday” their in and religiousness their in both celebrations these praising thematic, religious on often “art” for responsible stories, short and newspaper poems, art, medieval of descriptions , the exhibitions, art presents publications of sector large The Bulgarians. the by celebrated 113 112 111 110 Newspaper [TsurkovenNewspaper Vestnik] (1393) fortresses last the of one of 1396. kingdom over the in Ottomansbefore took the defense his for famous history, Bulgarian in figure “To “To God”, ourMost Lady”, “To Holly -short poems from the Monastery” Church [Tsurkoven Newspaper Vestnik] Evtimii was the last Patriarch of the second Bulgarian kingdom, another mythologized another kingdom, Bulgarian second the of Patriarch last the was Evtimii Church [Tsurkoven Newspaper Vestnik] This “high” nationalist rhetoric goes hand in hand with various articles discussing articles various with hand in hand goes rhetoric nationalist “high” This a of one the is Church the of role expressed often most other the time, same the At 111 112 . . 110 to be entrusted in the deserving hands of His Hollowness Patriarch Hollowness His of hands deserving the in entrusted be to . 1972.73/20-21, 32. . 1970.71/10, 5. . 1970.71/20, 4. 45 113 These “more religious” sections, together sections, religious” “more These Church
CEU eTD Collection n oias A Herzfeld As holidays. and traditions “Christian” celebrating – practices everyday their in church same the by together held Christians Orthodox of one and tribes, Asian and Slavic in roots its had which nation a of tradition historical ancient high, of one – worlds parallel two in actor dominant the as collectivity religious significance” due to“civil their holidays three of celebration the continued state The calendar. Julian Revised the accepting 1968, youth. in the calendar its changed it when experienced Church the difficulty that the is example Another for event massive interesting most the become have Sunday Palm and Easter that fact the with dissatisfaction express which church) the with relations the for and religion of problems the for responsible organization party (the Affairs Religious for Committee the Metodiev Momchil illustration, an As celebration. collective of practices the through Orthodoxy of values the introducing Christian, “everyday” the to turns which seconddiscursive level publications, represents a ofthe ofa lot orientation the “cultural” with 114 can as it 1970's, the in Bulgarians entirely cannot of religiousness of thesis understandings the perceived particularly this illustrate While are affiliations. religious traditions than rather Christian collectivity which of manifestations in church” the and “people” the between relationship “everyday” more even an on lies Ghodsee, Kristen as by described secularism, Bulgarian contemporary of image the However, ideology. this represents which authority the legitimizes thereby and national the helps of ideology but high contradiction, the “absorbing” and confusion create not does only not group, social particular a for “typical” as described values of categories low with coexist “national” the of categories 116 115 Metodiev, Herzfeld, Church [Tsurkoven Newspaper Vestnik] oeitn n ti a, te to dsusv ees fr h ai f a everyday an of basis the form levels discursive two the way, this in Co-existing
Cultural Between , popularly perceived as having deep roots in history. in roots deep appearshaving as church The perceived popularly ,
Intimacy faith 116
and hw, sc w-od udrtnig n wih te high the which in understanding, two-fold a such shows, .
compromise 115 . . 1977.78/2, 2. , 46 55. 114 quotes notes of notes quotes
CEU eTD Collection are considered unsuccessful considered are Poland, of case the as such time, communist from examples similar other While discourse. national-historical “mythicized” the in place its find and levels discursive both attack to order in steps took party communist ideology.The official the legitimize to instrument an as used be can it people, the of consciousness the in substituted be hardly can church the of image historicized the While life. communal the in role earlier its and Church the to paid society which respect the of problem a extent high a to was affiliations” “religious with problem the that realized 1968, from survey the on based which, party, the by understood well was 1979) period- (1975 3.2. Late understandings. in these state role ofthe the significantly strengthen to managed period this in party the by introduced policies The state. the and institution religious the between relations changed the through nation and religion of this connection official church about the talk in change significant the contextualize and show n vn bpiig (iig a nm f te child). the of name a (giving baptizing even and funerals, marriages, as such substitutes, civil their with ceremonies and holidays religious of identity. ofOrthodoxreligionand national close connection the reflects highly state the and church the between relationship the image, present constantly a not is party Communist the Ghodsee, by shown as secularism, of understanding Bulgarian contemporary 117 east Poland east Anthropology and the “Transition”.Anthropology Buzalka, Juraj. 2007. Juraj. Buzalka, provider cultural and nation-builder a as church the of authority “unquestionable” The As a result from the survey, a decision was taken for active policies on the replacement the on policies survey,active for the taken from was result decision a As a . Lit. ; Hann, C. 1994. “After Communism: Reflections on East European East on Reflections Communism: “After 1994. C. Hann, ; Lit. . Nation and Religion : the Politics of Commemorations in South- in Commemorations of Politics the : Religion and Nation 117 , Bulgaria was not such a case. Although, in the description of description the in Although, case. a such not was Bulgaria , Social Social Anthropology 47
rjcs ae dvlpd “o h very the “for developed are Projects 2 (3),229-249.
CEU eTD Collection preserving the Iranian state in the millenia. Poland's 1000th celebration served to “activate to served celebration 1000th Poland's helpedmillenia. the which in state institution Iranian the the preserving as monarchy the of image an build to was intention rulers' celebrated, were campaign Iranian the of founding the of years 2500 when first, the of case the In Poland. and Iran as such campaigns to similar tool, legitimizing strong a as party the by seen was campaign the explains, Elenkov As (1972). time same the at of started Bulgaria” years “1300 of celebration the to dedicated campaign massive the of organization the meaning. symbolic its from tradition the deprive would which pictures sticking with eggs or colorful more with eggs Easter red of substitution the encourage to purpose the with starts campaign anachronisms” religious the of influence the from “cultural, them divert naturally should which enterprises positive into other and physical, touristic, drawn be to had believers the time, same the At place. take should rituals these which in areas special differentiated and rituals civil the for instructions full introduced dramatical 122 121 Politburo. of decision a with proposed was who Maxim Metropolitan Maxim by taken events. and other similar toheroes; historic dedicated monuments new of dozens building Bulgaria; around all events cultural various and manifestations and United Polish Workers' Party” the of program the from goals the achieve to order in nation the of forces constructive the 119 120 118
Kalkandjieva, Politics, Elenkov, "Second Golden “The Age" Ibid. Ibid., 55; Ibid., Metodiev, In 2001, Patriarch Kiril deceased, and a new patriarch was chosen. The position was position The chosen. was patriarch new a and deceased, Kiril Patriarch 2001, In In the other field in which the Church was seen as having strong influence – culture – culture – influence strong having as seen was Church the which in field other the In , 120 35. part (emphasis mine – B.V.) of the customs and celebrations...) and customs the of B.V.) – mine (emphasis part
and Church [Tsurkoven Newspaper Vestnik] Between
Historiography
Bulgarian faith
Orthodox and 121
. The Bulgarian campaign included both massive celebrations massive both included . campaign Bulgarian The in
compromise
Bulgaria
Church , 37. ; Pundeff,; Nationalism”. “Bulgarian 119 48 , ocrig te itrs oad Ese, a Easter, toward interest the Concerning .
34. and
the . 1973. 74/6, 13. . 1973.74/6,
People's
Democracy; Democracy; Riis, 118 . The party The .
Religion, 122 This
CEU eTD Collection to religious holidays, is limited to the most popular civil holidays, such as Christmas such as civilholidays, most holidays,topopular the religious islimited to articlesdedicated and historical descriptions to the significant previouslyattention paid which the of section small the identity. section, national The of symbols “low” and “high” the from both in isolated “Ambon”, capsulized is Religion Bulgaria. of anniversary 1300th the for preparations the with accordance in especially – discourse party official the by dominated be obviously should sphere “cultural” The one. “civil” more new, a into context religious its from away moved is and norm, a becomes celebration The events. and individuals other and Michelangelo of names the see can one on) 1975 (from years later the in paper, the in place their had events political major only and articles, with “celebrated” be to figures main the were saints and heroes national and decade “celebration” the of of beginning the discourse in While newspaper. the the dominating time, starts “commemoration” same the At bigger. much becomes section historical-political the and smaller, considerably are section “Ambon” the and section “art” and the the party. church between closer inrelationship much resulted change 124 123 legitimate a as party-state the of image the of appearance the is change significant most the However,longer. and more are history Bulgarian the for significance with saints and figures historical present which articles the discourse, nationalist increasing of trend general the with but celebrations, these with only not accordance In state. new the of creation the – 1978 in the from years and 100 Uprising, April celebrates paper the 1976, In past”. heroic our “Along New Year's (St. Day Basil ofCaesarea) Vestnik]
Vestnik] Church [Tsurkoven Newspaper Vestnik] Church [Tsurkoven Newspaper Vestnik] h ainls icus nrae infcnl, a e eto s itoue - introduced is section new a as significantly, increases discourse nationalist The significantly. changing started The newspaper Church the of content the context, this In . 1976.77/4, 8 . 1975. 76/2, 1. . 1975.76/2, Mrkvička 124 . . 1975.76/4, 9.; . 1977. 78/32, 6.; . 1977.78/32, 49 123 ; jubilees of international organizations; and organizations; international of jubilees ; Church [Tsurkoven Newspaper Church [Tsurkoven Newspaper Eve and
CEU eTD Collection was undeservingly deprived from its statute for five centuries. At the same time, in this way this in time, same the At centuries. five for statute its from deprived undeservingly was institution of the which church continuity “savior” ofthe appearsthe theas party patriarchate, created newly the of significance the Accentuating church. national “ever-surviving” the the to both fairly and truly, competently, serve to church spiritual- people. wholeBulgarian socialist (…)toable the people'sstate and to the people's church the are of the goal who years, new staff thirty the prepare with last to accordance schools: the in conducted In being is Orthodoxy here (...) the deed propaganda preserving educational various for justice, from social attacks for the struggle existing against the of spirit the deed this in Revolution Socialist was the to Bulgaria of Liberation the From (…) spirit reviving a forits values: most appropriate the as ideology communist the implementing institution an of one as church the of role the identify communist the to is strategy first The narrative. national of the of evolution the for party-state the and ideology significance the identify which strategies two represent articles later an is the nation-building, rhetoric the of history glorious the nationalist in church the of legitimization the for instrument 1970-1971 in While history. national the of continuation 126 Conclusion 3.3. Preliminary Kiril.” Patriarch Elder power people's the isbelittled: struggle church-liberation role ofthe the 125 127 one word, “власт”one word, and “authorities”. both isused for “power” (“vlast”) Untranslatable: the party-state was often referred to as people'spower. to often the party-statewas referred the Untranslatable: InBulgarian, Church [Tsurkoven Newspaper Vestnik] Church [Tsurkoven Newspaper Vestnik] On May 10, 1953, in Sofia, the third church-people assembly, with the precious aid of aid precious the assembly,with church-people third the Sofia, in 1953, 10, May On of history the in party communist the of role the emphasize to is strategy second The Ottoman of time the Yoke,In in conducted was deed spiritual-educational Bulgarian the 126 , restored the ancient Bulgarian Patriarchate and chose for its leader the leader its for chose and Patriarchate Bulgarian ancient the restored , 127 . 1974. 75/30, 8. . 1974.75/30, . 1976.77/16, 2. 50 125
CEU eTD Collection the party applied strategies of “de-sacralization” and “civilization” of the everyday practices. everyday the of “civilization” and “de-sacralization” of strategies applied party the celebrations, and collective traditions,rituals, culturalas symbols,such through isbuilt nation possessed. already one they to the “sacredness” heroes additional these gives which heroes, national the by substituted slowly were saints follow. The to way” “new a as values its represented and party the of ideology the incorporated institution church very the time, same the At institution. church the of development historical the of line time the in itself positioning thereby Patriarchate, Bulgarian the of “restorer” the as appeared party the “enslavers”, the against struggles and victories glorious and education, and art culture, of community. unifier national ofthe a as seen agent dominant the was church the which at levels discursive both attacked It power”. “people's the and church the between relationship the of perception mythologized strong, the create to way this in and discourse national historical the of continuity the in itself implement official discourse of the institutions focuses on the mechanisms of influencing collective influencing of 128 mechanisms the on focuses institutions the identity of discourse official around struggles political The identity. this of the perception the of levels individual – the upon reflect indeed construction one collective the over memory the historical of violence symbolic a as two understood the be What should however, picture. illustrate, general levels discursive a constitute filter, to to order able in is events which rearrange group, and the capitalize, of memory collective the to opposed is - historians also “civilized”. which was church, the of talk official the in field limited closed, a to out pushed was religious the way, this In Nora In Pierre Nora's perspective Nora's Pierre In the and church the between connection the where level, discursive “lower” the At tradition historical long to related is nation the where level, discursive “higher” the At to managed party-state the decade, the during introduced policies various the Through , Mémoire collective. collective. , Mémoire 128 , the historical memory – the memory of the professional the of memory the – memory historical the , 51
CEU eTD Collection hog t utrl plce, i escaie h ybl f is lgtmc, teey de- thereby legitimacy, its ofnational identity. field to churchthe it and limiting veryofthe image the sacralizing of symbols the de-sacralized it policies, cultural its through However, it. to next place its found temporarily just it nation; the of holder legitimate the as church the substitute not did party The perspective. this of basis very the is nationalism, cultural communist of lines the along created state, the and specific church the The between symbiosis perspective. nationalist contemporary the of development the for narrative communist cultural-historical the of role the understand to important is However, it narrative. historical the of continuity the in party communist the include (always) not does nation the discourse. the party nationalist in ofthe inclusion this officialize to power overall the legitimate for appropriate particularly be to appears church the why is This mythologization. the The have life. church everyday the of and level intelligentsia, the historians, at identity of symbols the mythologizing by memory Nowadays, the Bulgarian perception of religion as a mechanism of self-identification of self-identification of mechanism a as religion of perception Bulgarian the Nowadays, 52
CEU eTD Collection institution, which introduced it by emphasizing its role for the historical preservation of the of preservation historical the for role its emphasizing by it introduced which institution, church the of monopoly a was image this 1970's, the of beginning the In whole. one always the creating thereby present, are statehood and glorious Church nation; which in continuum the historical mythologyzed untouchable, to related unquestionably is past glorious the which in talk, nationalist “high” the is level first The developed. is debate nationalist the way. “civic” more new, a in role its fixed Church, the of arguments religious the weakening although which, talk, nationalist the of strength the by unified Church, the and state the between built was symbiosis a result, a As life. communal religious of rituals Orthodox the substituting at aimed of which image the by policies communal and cultural various introduced party dominated the this, do to order Christianity.In altogether Bulgaria, in discourse nationalist RemarksConcluding strong legitimizing tool of various positions and policies. In this sense, it is reasonable to reasonable is it sense, this In policies. and positions various of tool legitimizing strong a as altogether serve can and patterns, various include can ideology nationalist the realized, Europe newspaper Eastern around all parties Communist the nationalistic. the As more significantly became of discourse the campaign, cultural massive a of context the In state. and Church between symbiosis institutional the for contributing debate, this in place “natural” its founds if Instead, narrative. mythologized discussed already the occupy to trying thereby Orthodoxcommunity. ofthe leader Bulgarian Churcha as cultural the of role the justifying saints, the with together appeared heroes national The people. Bulgarian In the latter period, the image of the party appeared as the “savior” of the Church, the of “savior” the as appeared party the of image the period, latter the In which on levels discursive two showed newspaper Church the of analysis thematic The overall the in fit to tried party Communist the how illustrated thesis current The 53
CEU eTD Collection nation, in which the “opening of the files” is a violation of the contract which excludes the excludes which contract the of violation a is files” the of “opening the which in nation, the of framework common the in coexist two the which in specific state and this Church is of It symbiosis agents. its of files secret the opening by them “discredit” to tried state by but regime, communist party-state. the includes discoursewhich already the national onitsin place insisting the to opposition being by not legitimacy its strengthen can it which in framework state-dominated identity, a national in of already backbone appears but the represent to continues it which in framework ideological new a in placed but nothing is Church the religious, be to continue holidays popular most the as However, communal celebrations. in role religious the its at from withdrawn and is life Church real the way, in This both level. discursive – ones civil by substituted were rituals religious the Here, holidays. and manifestations, celebrations, – nation the of life communal the together holding in society. “civic” role its more Church,to but rather the of marginalization the to led not has discourse nationalist the strengthening the that assume 129 Europe. in and Bulgaria in both populism, national rising of context the in problem major a be can narrative national the upon consensus achieved thus the of enemies as them Seeing tradition. “their” and “our” between differentiation through exclusion of mechanism a as it see to reasonable more is it level believe local the at pluralism religious to contribute can concept this that presupposes groups. “non-belonging” exclude to Ghodsee secularism symphonic of Although potential the secularism”. “symphonic so side from the achieved one Ghodsee, “Symphonic Secularism”, 240-241. Secularism”, “Symphonic Ghodsee, An important continuation of the present research would be an attempt to understand to attempt an be would research present the of continuation important An the that clergy high Bulgarian the of claims the understand to easier is it context, this In of mechanisms various includes which level, “low” second, the to us moves This 54 129 , I ,
CEU eTD Collection Appendix CodingSchemeA. 55 CEU eTD Collection Appendix B. Sample of Sample theMaterialAppendix B. Coded 56 CEU eTD Collection 57 CEU eTD Collection _____.______. Groups" Without Bulgarian "Ethnicity and Nationalism 2002. on Reflections Nation: ______. the of Name the "In 2004. ______. Modernity" and Ethnicity, "Nationalism, 2011. ______. Brubaker, ______. Bourdieu, Asad, Anderson, aklv omn Te Rvvl a ainl Mt” i in Myth” National a as Revival “The Roumen. Daskalov, Casanova, 2007. Juraj. Buzalka, Dnevnik. Deyanova, ______. Baleva, Bibliography
ruv_put_ot_47_godini/ http://www.dnevnik.bg/bulgaria/2011/04/03/1069426_curkvata_kanonizira_svetci_za_p saints Historical Mulchanieto [The Ausstellung Iztok-Zapad. 2007. Iztok-Zapad. eds. Brunnbauer. Press. Poland patriarshia.bg/news.php?id=57234 File Bulgarian poiskana http://bg-patriarshia.bg/news.php?id=56995 Bulgarian Pravoslavna http://bg-patriarshia.bg/news.php?id=57232 Natanail. Sociologie Patriotism" Rubbettino.Italy: multiple modernità 18: Calif.: nationalism Talal.
Martina,
2 2011
Rogers. Pierre. Patriarchate.
José. Benedict. – Liliana.
Mausoleum 20.
for Stanford . Lit. 2003. comission
2001. .
2011c.
informatsiia
[Reservation doi:
2011b. the Curkvata 1994. XLIII.2: 163-189. Sociology Orthodox
Orthodox 1990. . .
Citizenship StudiesCitizenship
2012.
and Sofia: : London,
Tzurkva
first 2009.
Istoricheska
Formations 10.1111/j.1469-8129.2011.00486.x Langage c2006.
Nation and Religion : the Politics of Commemorations in South-east in Commemorations of Politics the : Religion and Nation
University
Public
Official
Ulf 2011a. The
Batak - Ein Bulgarischer Erinnerungsort : Ausstellung : Erinnerungsort Bulgarischer Ein - Batak Battles:
Religion Official time Verl.
. Ed. Consuelo Corradi and Donatella Pacelli. Soveria Mannelli, Soveria Pacelli. Donatella and Corradi Consuelo Ed. . “ kanonizira
of Church
– information]. Bitkite Verso
logic
Church Brunnbauer. ot
Imagined
Collective of
in religions et
Iztok-Zapad.
Official Bulgarska
Komisiqta website.
the
pouvoir the
Press.
Sotsiologiia 1989 of of and – – website.
–
za
Nevrocopian practice the last
Bulgarian 8.2: 115-127.8.2: svetci
nationalism:
mavzoleite: Bulgarian communities: (testimony) website. in
Memory]
Secular symbolique
47 tnvst Stanovishte
2007.
the Patriarshia
po
za . years] zalneIziavlenie
Accessed
Stanford, 58 Na modern dosietata.
pruv
Patriarchate
Osobeno Osobeno Batak
:
bishop Kolektivnata ,
Patriarchate] , 113-128. – four Christianity,
1989
April . put
[Paris]:
reflections na
2006 world
[Statement Calif.:
- approaches.
na
ot
Natanail]. [Statement (svidetelstvo)
Svetiia Ein mnenie April 3
47
rd
. Sofia: (testimony).
Svetiia
concerning
Chicago: Seuil. 2011,
Stanford godini. Bulgarischer Pamet
rhvs Erpens de Européennes Archives
.
Islam, on
Sinod aea atn, ad Ulf and Martina, Baleva,
Accessed
na
Critique
of 14
Accessed accessed Nations the of
Sinod Nevrokopskia
[Lineaments th
the [The
al oent alle modernità Dalla
–
the University
Univ. Modernity origin na
a
In: 2006
Holy
2012.
requested
Holy
&
Church
BPC-BP
and
April Erinnerungsort na
April
Press. Ochertaniia April Humanism.
and
(svidetelstvo)
Synod . Sofia: Verl. Sofia: .
Nationalism, Synod Bulgarskata
of .
of
14
15 14 mitropolit canonizes spread http://bg- Stanford,
from Chicago Silence: th otnosno th th
of of 2012, 2012. 2012.
the the the
Na of
:
CEU eTD Collection Kalkandjieva, Hutchinson, Hopkins, Ghodsee, Gellner, Elias, asmMaksim Luehrmann, Loosley aea Ganeva, osnovavaneto ot godishninata 1300 vek". Zlaten wtori "Humanno-klasoviyat Ivan. Elenkov, Kitromilides, Kitromilides, Hobsbawm, Herzfeld, the and Anthropology European East on Reflections Communism: “After 1994. C. Hann, Halbwachs, arn, Piip 00 Qualita 2000. Philipp. Mayring,
and University NY “Transition”. University http://www.168chasa.bg/Article.asp?ArticleId=1215394 acceptable Humanism 1,300 Bulgaria's of the Context in Culture Oficial of Historicisation of Age" Golden "Second ["The (1976-1981). deistvitelnost yubileinata v kultura oficialnata na istorizirane i durjava Bulgarskata na новоселските-мъченици http://www.pravoslavie.bg/Документи/Канонизацията-на-баташките-и- canonization Novoselskite University Soviet republic 12, 2010. Eastern the Silistra: (1944-1053). University East 27 Religious Ed. Norbert. e.htm [Date of access: May,17 [Date e.htm 2012]. http://qualitative-research.net/fqs/fqs-e/2-00inhalt- Journal),1(2), (On-line Research
Ernest.
Emma.
2011.
(2) Galina
James
Eastern Eric [u.a.]: political Kristen. Michael. European
Maurice. (December Sonja. style: John, Eric.
Paschalis.
. Demos. Christianity
Dunning.
Daniela.
Patriarshesko 2000.
“ Bloomington:
1983.
Lindsay. Freedoms
Routledge. 23/1 (2007): 33-62,2007. 2012. Press. of Press. Press. for
Peter,
and
1990.
thought teaching 2009. and Social Social Anthropology Chicago [Bulgarian 1997. 2011.
muchenici. new Monographs
1992. The Nations Oriental
"Samo
Paul,
Anthony
5): 2002.
1994. Oxford: “
2009.
Nations
of Patriarch].
Secularism Cultural civilizing
in in
Symphonic of
227-252.
On atheism Press.
and the Contemporary i South-eastern
Indiana
and
Enlightenment, Enlightenment, Bulgarskata trima
Churches Sinodalno The Orthodox
collective
Blackwell.
Modern
[Patriarchal D James ;
and
Nationalism the
ie Cnet Aayi. Frm ulttv Social Qualitative Forum: Analysis. Content tive Distributed th Intimacy
Bulgarian
process niesr eerto 17-91] Critique (1976-1981)]. Celebration Anniversary Smith. and 168 168
vladici
Soviet
University Nationalism Secularism:
2 (3),229-249. ” of
religion hours . Church Middle memory
poslanie
In:
Jerusalem:
Europe
1994. pravoslavna : : Bulgaria. style: priemlivi Batak
59
sociogenetic Social
Orthodox O nationalism, . and by , ,
Oxford: ’ February
Mahony,
East
and
. Press. in Columbia
Nationalism
Ed.
teaching . po since
Eastern
Synod Aldershot, a Poetics
” ” . .
the
the Volga Lewis za povod London; Anthropology Luehrmann,
Blackwell. Church
curkva
People's and 1780 nov doctrinal
3, Anthony,
and
orthodoxy
University
atheism Message Orthodoxy,
2012,
republic in
A
kanonizaciiata
.
patriarh" .
Hampshire:
psychogenetic . Coser. New the
Oxford; Cambridge Boulder i “
Democracy
accessed
and Nation
and Sonja. Novosel narodnata
and
York: .
of
:
Chicago, Bloomington:
on
Press.
studies political
East [Only Emma
Ethnic
New
(Colo.); religion
the Variorum. State
2011. Routledge,
UK:
April
na
Europe
investigations
(1944-1953)].
York: three
in
Loosley, demokraciia'
occasion Ill.; . Identity Batashkite evolution
Cambridge New Secularism New
the in 15
martyrs].
London:
a
bishops th Indiana Review Oxford culture
pp. Volga York: 2012, York, and
eds.
and
of 1- of
i .
CEU eTD Collection ______. Ramet, in Nationalism” “Bulgarian V. Marin, Pundeff, Preuss, Pitkin, Nora ______. Metodiev, Stamatov, ______. Smith, 2009. Johnny. Saldaña, State Riis, in Church” Orthodox Bulgarian the and “Nationalism T. Spas. Raikin, Raichev, National Markova, Zina. 1976 Zina. Markova, Riessman, Catherine Kohler. 2008. Narrative Methods for the Human Sciences. London: Sciences. Human the for Methods Narrative 2008. Kohler. Catherine Riessman, ______.
, ,
Carsten. Gazette. http://www.cilevics.eu/minelres/NationalLegislation/Bulgaria/Bulgaria_Denominat_Bul glish.htm http://www.cilevics.eu/minelres/NationalLegislation/Bulgaria/Bulgaria_Denominat_En available York: 1989. UniversityDuke Press, andEastnationalism Soviet European in politics Sofia: 1989-2004 Bulgaria. war]. Crimean the until ofSciences. Academy movement church-national Bulgarian communist University Calif.:Sage. Oaks, Sage. and Duke the 93-165.University of ed., Washington 1969. Press, Avebury, Democracy California Retz. Church Orthodox komunisticheskata Pierre. Pierre.
http://www.kultura.bg/bg/print_article/view/19339
Anthony Sabrina Hanna U.K.
Andrey,
USSR Assembly expanded Momchil. Peter.
UniversityPress. East Raichev
1978. Mémoire collective. In: Jacques Le Goffe, ed., Le Jacques In: collective. Mémoire 1978.
2002. 1996.
1949.
,
.
pp. Fenichel.
P. Available
Church
“
Bloomington: Press. European
Press. D.
[What
Bulgaria and
1987. Kancho The 1988.
1989.
11-27 and
2003.
“
ed.
Religion, 1999. 2010. of and 2012. Denominations
. Bulgarskoto tsurkovno-nationalno dvijenie do Krimskata voina. [ voina. Krimskata do dvijenie tsurkovno-nationalno Bulgarskoto .
accessed The
making
Durham: The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers Qualitative for Manual Coding The and
Cross the happened?
Sovereignty: Religion Eastern
Stoychev.
its Chosen
at: durzhava
” 1967.
Stoichev. Monographs Mezhdu Mezhdu Myths .
“
Political the
Theory Republic http://www.parliament.bg/en/const Za
Politics,
and
Indiana
Communist of dual curkvara
The
Duke
Christianity Peoples and
and
commissar a
vyarata
and
A “
2004.
(1944-1989). Act.
Meaning
April
Concept
nationalism bad Story
memories University of American and University
; Society
historical
Distributed
. State ”
Bulgaria, I
Oxford:
Kakvo
Historiography i State neinata public:
about kompromisa.
60
and :
Gazette the of of 29 ainls nEsenErp Europe Eastern in Nationalism
in
online
of
13,
Press.
Press.
se and
politics in
the
Representation (2000): Constitutionalism Oxford
politics
[ Bulgaria Ethnonational
dvoistvena the
ewe Between 2007. by
Soviet sluchi?
, in S., in P. ed., Ramet, 352-377.Durham:
eoy,memory], Transition
Columbia European Issue nation
Bulgarskata
in University 549-572. of
in 2012. Constitution and
(1944-1989)]
Razkaz the religion No. Bulgaria . faith
,
istoricheska accessed East
Oxford;
twentieth
La Nouvelle histoire.Nouvelle La . in
University 48/March
mobilization
Perspectives
Berkeley: utr 5 Kultura
” Bulgaria
za and
European
, Press. in
. pravoslavna
in: Bulgarian Boulder,
prehoda
. London. Thousand London. . Eastern
of New April
. compromise.
century oi: Bulgarian Sofia: S
R.
the
pamet. 01. ofia: ofia: Press.
1989
University eiin and Religion York: 10,
Bellamy,
politics
.
in English Republic in P. Sugar,P. in Europe
Colo.; v
Siela Aldershot:
.
2012.
– – Balgariia
” the Durham, tzurkva
[On (2012), Oxford 2004]
. Paris:
post- New
Rev.
text:
The and The text
the ed. at: of of
I .
CEU eTD Collection Zhechev, Toncho. 1995. 2008. Ivaylo. Znepolski, Weber, Verdery, “ 1992. ______. Nationalism”. Bulgarian of Discourse and Course “The 1995. ______. ______.2009. Todorova,ed. Maria, Temelski, Sygkelos, Tsurkoven 1970-1979 [Church Newspaper]. vestnik Periodicals: ______. Z ag Yan., hang, online garian.htm Bulgarian Ciela. Sofia: traektoriya. Pub,. Ceausescu Historical Review American Press,University 55-102. ed. University Hero National Press.University Bulgaria’s of Making NY: Diary]. the Information andLibraryInformation Science ed., Wildemuth. Max.
Katherine.
Second East European Nationalism in the Twentieth Century Twentieth the in Nationalism European East
Yannis. Social Hristo.
1-31.
at
2002. idmt, Braa 09 Qaiaie aayi f cnet n B. in content” of analysis “Qualitative 2009. Barbara. Wildemuth, Sofia: 2004.
http://lex.bg/laws/ldoc/2135462355
, ’ Passions
Press.
. s World Science
accessed
2011. Romania [ 1992.
2003.
“ Denominations ugra omns. Scoclua ris ad Pwr trajectory]. Power and Traits Socio-cultural Communism. Bulgarian 1995. Kama
2010. Science
War
Bulgarskiiat velikden ili strastite bulgarski. [ bulgarski. strastite ili velikden Bulgarskiiat oe f otnin te Lvn Acie o ai esi ad the and Levski Vasil of Archive Living the Contention of Bones
plctos o oil Rsac ehd o Qetos in Questions to Methods Research Social of Applications Nationalism
]
Research Iosif, Balkan National
. Sofia: Zaharii Stoyanov.. Sofia: Zaharii
itrorpy o h onre f Esen Erp: Bulgaria”. Europe: Eastern of Countries the of Historiography April Remembering .
and ugrkyt Kmnzm oiklun hri I vlastova I cherti Sociokulturni Komunizum. Bulgarskiyat Berkeley,
as
exarkh
13, the
a identities (October)., 1113.
Council. ideology Act,
vocation 2012. early
from
. Westport, CT: Unlimited, Libraries 308-319. Calif.:
Issue bulgarski.
Communism: post-war
the
: ” under
61 . No. University
nation uaet e ok eta European Central York: New Budapest; . h The left
120, ,
socialism: : accessed years nvi. [ Dnevnik.
vocation
the and
State
Genres
Bulgarian . of
Leiden;
memory California
Gazette.
April
lectures identity
oi,Iosif, . Lanham Md: The American The Md: Lanham . of
Representation Boston: 13,
.
Communist
Bulgarian Easter, Bulgarian the or New Bulgarian
the .
and 2012. Press. Indianapolis:
Bulgarian
cultural Brill. York:
text Party
. in P. Sugar, in
New New
politics
available
Hackett Exarch.
during
York, York
in