Autocephaly As a Function of Institutional Stability and Organizational Change in the Eastern Orthodox Church
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ABSTRACT Title of Dissertation: AUTOCEPHALY AS A FUNCTION OF INSTITUTIONAL STABILITY AND ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE IN THE EASTERN ORTHODOX CHURCH Charles Wegener Sanderson, Doctor of Philosophy, 2005 Dissertation Professor Margaret Pearson Directed by: Department of Government and Politics The ecclesiastical organization uniquely characteristic of the Christian East is the autocephalous (“self-headed,” or self-governing) church, which in the modern states of Eastern Europe, Russia, and the Balkans are truly national churches, whose boundaries, administrative structures, and identities closely mirror those of the state. Conventional wisdom attributes autocephaly to nationalism: Christianity inevitably becomes closely associated with national identity in those states whose churches are of Byzantine political patrimony, and autocephaly is the organizational manifestation of that association. This study argues that a better explanation for the prevalence of autocephaly lies with the church’s institutional framework. Formal and informal institutions, or “rules of the game,” structure the relationships between groups of local churches and provide incentives to observe constraints upon actions that restructure those relationships. A restructuring of ecclesiastical relationships implies that an alteration in incentives changed the equilibrium. In the Christian East, enforcement of the equilibrium historically has been carried out by the state. This study explores the institutional framework of the Orthodox Church, outlining the formal (canon law) and informal (conventions and tradition) rules governing organizational change. These rules are then examined in light of historical evidence of how autocephalous churches have come into being throughout the two millennia of the church’s existence. The study concludes that the institutional framework of the Orthodox Church, formed within the political context of the Roman and later East Roman (Byzantine) Empire, became increasingly incongruent both with the changing political geography of Eastern Europe and with the enforcing role afforded to secular political authority as imperial structures gave way to modern nation-states. Since the formal institutional rules have proved resistant to change and unable to keep pace with the changing political geography, the Orthodox Church has relied increasingly upon flexible informal rules which has resulted in a proliferation of autocephalous churches. In addition to locating a more compelling explanation for autocephaly within institutional theory, this study argues that the Orthodox Church provides a compelling area for exploration of some of the more vexing analytical problems in institutional theory, such as why institutions change slowly or even appear not to change at all. AUTOCEPHALY AS A FUNCTION OF INSTITUTIONAL STABILITY AND ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE IN THE EASTERN ORTHODOX CHURCH by Charles Wegener Sanderson Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Maryland, College Park in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2005 Advisory Committee: Professor Margaret Pearson, Chair Professor Douglas Grob Professor George Majeska Professor George Quester Professor Miranda Schreurs ©Copyright by Charles Wegener Sanderson 2005 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1: Introduction and Summary.......................................................................... 1 1.1 Objectives and Justification ................................................................................ 3 1.2 The Object of Study Defined .............................................................................. 5 1.3 The Prevailing Theory and its Alternative.......................................................... 7 1.4 Structure of Study ............................................................................................... 9 1.5 Sources................................................................................................................ 9 Chapter 2: Autocephaly as a Function of Nationalism – The Existing Theory.......... 11 2.1 Autocephaly as a Function of National Identity ............................................... 12 2.2 Existing Typologies of Church-State Relations in the Christian East .............. 14 2.3 Limitations of the Nationalism Theory............................................................. 18 2.4 Summary and Assessment ................................................................................ 26 Chapter 3: Autocephaly as Organizational Change Under Institutional Constraints – The Alternative Theory............................................................................................... 28 3.1 Autocephaly as Accommodation to the Political Geography........................... 29 3.2 The Institutional Framework: Contractual Relationships and Transaction Costs ................................................................................................................................. 33 3.3 The Institutional Framework: Councils, Ecclesiastical Legislation, and the State ................................................................................................................................. 39 3.4 Institutional Change: Evolution of the Framework .......................................... 43 3.5 Summary........................................................................................................... 47 Chapter 4: The Institutional Framework..................................................................... 49 4.1 Territorial Accommodation and the Institutions of the Church........................ 49 4.2 Sources of Institutional Content........................................................................ 54 4.3 Conciliar Sources: The Institutionalization of Territorial Accommodation..... 57 4.4 Conciliar Sources: Pentarchy and the Prerogatives of the Major Sees............. 59 4.5 Conciliar Sources: Prerogatives of Local and Metropolitan Bishops............... 62 4.6 Conciliar Sources: Prerogatives of the Major Metropolitan Sees..................... 65 4.7 Other Conciliar Sources Governing Church Organization ............................... 69 4.8 Later Application of Institutional Rules: Four Examples................................. 70 4.7 Summary........................................................................................................... 73 Chapter 5: Organizational Change, Institutional Enforcement, and the State: Evidence and Trends................................................................................................................... 75 5.1 The Imperial Period .......................................................................................... 77 5.1.1 Territorial Accommodation ....................................................................... 78 5.1.2 The Pentarchic Arrangement of Sees......................................................... 79 5.1.3 Structural Pluralism ................................................................................... 81 5.1.4 Example: The Church of Bulgaria ............................................................. 85 5.1.5 Example: The Church of Serbia................................................................. 88 5.1.6 Example: The Church in the Wallachian and Moldovian Principalities.... 91 5.1.6 Example: The Church of Georgia.............................................................. 91 5.1.7 Example: The Church of Russia ................................................................ 92 5.1.8 The Imperial Period: Preliminary Conclusions.......................................... 96 iii 5.2 The Post-Imperial Period .................................................................................. 97 5.2.1 Transition to Ottoman Rule and the Changing Role of Constantinople .... 98 5.2.2 The Significance of the “New” Autocephalous Churches....................... 100 5.3 The National Period ........................................................................................ 103 5.3.1 Example: The Church of Serbia, Continued............................................ 104 5.3.2 Example: The Church of Greece, Continued........................................... 106 5.3.3 Example: The Church of Bulgaria, Continued ........................................ 107 5.3.4 Example: The Church in Ukraine ............................................................ 111 5.4 Post-National Period ....................................................................................... 114 5.4.1 Trends: Émigré Populations, Jurisdictional Competition, and the Role of the State............................................................................................................. 115 5.4.2 Example: The Church in the Czech Lands and Slovakia......................... 118 5.4.3 Example: The Church in Estonia ............................................................. 120 5.4.4 Example: The Church in Finland............................................................. 122 5.4.5: Example: The Church of Greece ............................................................ 122 5.4.6 Other Examples........................................................................................ 125 5.5 Conclusions..................................................................................................... 126 Chapter 6: Organizational Change and Institutional Enforcement: A Case Study... 129 6.1 Case Study: The Autocephaly of the Russian Metropolia in North America.