Rome's Last Efforts Towards the Union of Orthodox Albanians (1929-1946)

Journal of Eastern Christian Studies 58(1-2), 41-83. doi: 10.2143/JECS.58.1.2017736 © 2006 by Journal of Eastern Christian Studies. All rights reserved. ROME’S LAST EFFORTS TOWARDS THE UNION OF ORTHODOX ALBANIANS (1929-1946) INES ANGJELI MURZAKU* INTRODUCTION It would probably be improper to study the history of the Albanian Greek Catholic Church in unity with Rome in isolation from a concurrent movement, that is, the struggle to establish an Albanian Autocephalous Church. The two movements have something in common: they were both animated by the desire of the Albanian people for national identity. Indeed, Albania is not an isolated case scenario in ecclesiastical history. Analogous developments have taken place in other Eastern European countries; the case of Bulgaria is the classical example. The move of the Bulgarian Orthodoxy toward Rome was largely inspired by the wish to restore their national identity after cen- turies of coercion, not only by the Turks but also from the Greeks.1 In nineteenth-century Bulgaria, when the struggle for autocephaly was gaining momentum, several influential Bulgarian Orthodox faithful in Constantino- ple began to contemplate union with Rome as a solution to their national problems. They thought that as Orthodox they would be able to revive their national ecclesiastical traditions, which they thought Constantinople had denied them.2 In fact, the Greeks were profoundly hated in Bulgaria, because * Ines Angjeli Murzaku is Associate Professor of Religious Studies at Seton Hall Univer- sity in South Orange, New Jersey, an Adjunct Associate Professor of Historical Theology at the Graduate School of Theology, Immaculate Conception Seminary, and Lecturer at the Centro per l’Europa Centro-Orientale e Balcanica of the University of Bologna. The author benefited immensely from the critical remarks of the editor, Prof. Dr. Joseph Ver- heyden, his staff, and the reviewers, and of the diligent reading and refining of the text by Kelly A. Shea Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Writing and Director of the Writing Center, Seton Hall University. Abbreviations: ABGG: Archive of the Greek Abbey of Grottaferrata. ACCO: Archive of the Congregation for Oriental Churches. APVSJ: Archivum Provinciae Venetae Societatis Jesu. Fasc.: Fascicle. Prot.: Protocol. 1 Christopher Walter, ‘Raphael Popov, Bulgarian Uniate Bishop: Problems of Uniatism and Autocephaly’, Sobornost, 6 (1984), 1, pp. 46-47. 2 Ronald Roberson, The Eastern Christian Churches. A Brief Survey, Orientalia Christiana Analecta (Rome, 1999), p. 180. 42 INES ANGJELI MURZAKU they insisted that the sole direction the Bulgarian Church could take was to eliminate the use of Slavonic in liturgy and to accept native Greek hierarchy, and, as a consequence, the complete submission of the Bulgarian Church to Constantinople.3 The autocephalous and union movements, indeed, had very much in common. In the case of Albania and Bulgaria, they developed during concurrent historical developments. The Albanian union movement began at the end of the nineteenth century, in 1886, and the movement for autocephaly started at the beginning of twentieth century, following the achievement of Alban- ian independence during 1912-1913. The same goes for Bulgaria. The Bul- garian union movement began in 1861, when a Bulgarian delegation headed by the elderly Archimandrite Joseph Sokolsky went to Rome to negotiate a union.4 The struggle for autocephaly began a few years later, in 1870, when the Ottoman government allowed the re-establishment of a national Bulgar- ian church as an autonomous exarchate, which caused a schism with the Ecu- menical Patriarchate. Autocephaly, an Intricate Matter in the Life of Eastern Churches The movement for autocephaly was a perplexing and puzzling process involv- ing intrigue and desecration. Local churches often had to wait for years in order to get recognition as an autocephalous church. After it had proclaimed its autocephaly, the Albanian Orthodox Church still needed to wait fifteen years before it was officially recognized by the Ecumenical Patriarchate. The Bulgarian Church was recognized as autocephalous only in 1945, 72 years after it had proclaimed itself autocephalous. It took the Romanian Church twenty years (1885) and the Church of Greece seventeen years (1850).5 And some orthodox churches are still waiting for recognition and in consequence are considered churches of an irregular status. In the case of Albania, the question of church autocephaly became the groundwork of national and political independence. However, since Albania was not an exclusively Christian nation, independence from outside influence 3 Guglielmo De Vries, Oriente Cristiano, Ieri e Oggi (Rome, Civiltà Cattolica, 1949), p. 194. 4 Roberson, Eastern Christian Churches, p. 180. 5 Alexander Bogolepov, Toward an American Orthodox Church (Crestwood, NY, St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 2001), p. 47. ROME’S LAST EFFORTS TOWARDS THE UNION OF ORTHODOX ALBANIANS 43 was requested by other religious communities as well. In 1923, the Alban- ian Sunni Muslims refused to accept any form of control from abroad.6 They became an autonomous religious body with King Zog’s assistance.7 Moved by their success, the Bektashi of middle and southern Albania also sought to gain recognition.8 In 1929, Bektashism was recognized as an autonomous entity within the Muslim community of Albania, with statutes drawn up at Korçë, and in 1930, the Albanian government approved the regulations under which Bektashi affairs were regulated.9 Methods of Achieving Church Union History proves clearly that the Roman Catholic Church never lost hope of bringing back all Christians to the one fold. However, it should be noted that many of the initiatives of Rome took shape under tragic circumstances of political threat and violence and most of them failed, in as much as they caused new conflicts and divisions within the communion of the Orthodox churches.10 Raymond Janin distinguishes three methods of conversion that were used by Catholic missionaries, either separately or simultaneously, to bring Eastern Christians back to the Catholic Church: Latinization; the cre- ation of churches united with Rome; and an approach that can be called one of personal adherence or adhesion.11 The first method, which was in use throughout the Middle Ages and beyond, was believed to have the advantage of keeping the converted more efficiently in the rightful Catholic faith. However, as Janin rightly points out, it was usually perceived as some sort of conquest rather than as an attempt 6 Bernd Fischer, Albania at War, 1939-1945 (Indianapolis, IN, Purdue University Press, 1999), p. 52. 7 Kristo Dako, Zogu the First King of the Albanians (Tirana, Luarasi Printing Press, 1937), p. 161. 8 Fulvio Cordignano, ‘Per un Concordato fra l’Albania e la Santa Sede’, to the Provincial, Tiranë, March 25, 1930. AVPSJ, Albania II, Corrispondenza Epistolare dei Nostri, 1914-1944, p. 1. 9 Celia Hawkesworth, Muriel Heppell, and Harry Norris, Religious Quest and National Identity in the Balkans (New York, Palgrave Macmillan, 2001), p. 192. 10 Anton Houtepen, ‘Uniatism and Models of Unity in the Ecumenical Movement’, Exchange, 25 (Leiden, Interuniversitair Instituut voor Missiologie en Oecumenica, Afdel- ing Missiologie, 1996), p. 202. 11 Raymond Janin, Les Églises Orientales et les Rites Orientaux (Paris, Letouzey & Ané, 1955), p. 512. 44 INES ANGJELI MURZAKU at conversion. Eastern Christians felt that Rome disregarded their own traditions and practices and was trying hard to make them disappear. It is fair to say that some popes were at least partially aware of the dangers this method presented. Clement XI, Clement XII, Benedict XIV and Leo XIII made efforts to protect the Eastern Christian communities from Latinizing missionaries.12 Pope Benedict XIV, in his Allatae Sunt, on the Observance of Oriental Rites (July 26, 1755), forbade the Melchite Catholics to replace the Greek with the Latin rite. Additionally, he admonished Catholic missionaries not to support Melchite Catholics. Only the Apostolic See could give per- mission for such procedures of replacing rites.13 Despite these and similar efforts, attempts at Latinization had become so widespread at the end of the 19th century that, after the International Eucharistic Congress of Jerusalem 1893, Cardinal Langémieux sounded the alarm bell in a confidential report to Pope Leo XIII. The pope shared the cardinal’s concerns in his encyclical Orientalium Dignitas of November 30, 1894.14 ‘Any Latin rite missionary, whether of the secular or religious clergy, who induces with his advice or assistance any Eastern rite faithful to transfer to the Latin rite, will be deposed and excluded from his benefice in addition to the ipso facto suspension a divinis and other punishments that he will incur as imposed in the afore said Constitution Demandatam. That this decree stand fixed and lasting we order a copy of it to be posted openly in the churches of the Latin rite.’15 Creating Catholic churches of oriental rite is more or less the only method that is presently employed and the one that was applied in the case of Alba- nia. This method has proven to be the most successful and the most practi- cal. However, it has its own problems as well. Janin mentions two: first, it results in creating a more complex hierarchical structure; and second, it often yields renewed animosity on the part of Orthodox religious leaders. In Alba- nia, the government considered Greek Catholicism as an illegitimate fourth religion, besides Islam, Orthodoxy, and Catholicism. It is obvious that this method can create divisions, hostility and conflicts of jurisdictions, but, according to Janin, it seems to be impossible to find other remedies than to 12 Jean-Claude Roberti, Les Uniates (Paris, Cerf, 1992), p. 47. 13 Vatican Documents on the Eastern Churches, Papal Encyclicals and Documents Concerning the Eastern Churches (Fairfax, VA, Eastern Christian Publications, 2002), Vol. 1, p. 17. 14 Roberti, Les Uniates, p. 50. 15 Vatican Documents on the Eastern Churches, Vol.

Load more