Number DOI: http://doi.org/10.33209/2519-4348-2707-9627-2022-10-118

VB. – № 10, 2022. – P. 137-148

Summary

The declaration of the status of autocephaly of the Orthodox Church of Ukraine through the granting of a Tomos by the Mother Church of the Patriarchate of Constantinople on January 6, 2019 became the apogee of the centuries-old history of church identity within the ancient Kyiv Metropolitanate. Unfortunately, not all pages of the difficult and multifaceted church history of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church have been accurately and comprehensively revealed at the proper scientific level. In addition to the common difficulties of having original source documents, bias, tendency, and sometimes deliberate distortion in the research of existing monuments can be clearly observed. The explanation of this situation is a simple fact – the lack of full independence of the civil-administrative authorities of Ukrainian origin. Under such circumstances, representatives of the Eastern or Western centers of ownership of our lands tried to interpret the historical assets of the Ukrainian Church in the light of their own imperial hegemony. It is not for nothing that the president of the Russian Federation, before a full-scale military invasion on February 24, 2022, turned to historical narratives to justify his aggression. One of the most original, dynamic, bright and, sometimes, dramatic periods of our church history is the 14th century. This was facilitated by the rapidity of changes in the borders of the principalities and the appearance of new players on the geopolitical map of Central-Eastern Europe. The lack of political stability and the change in the center of focus of civil power was naturally reflected in the church life of the Orthodox Church of the Kyiv Metropolitanate, including in the institutional forms of canonical legal status. With the loss of Kyiv’s status as a political and military dominant, the residence of the Kyiv metropolitans moved first to the city of Volodymyr-on-Klyazma, and later to Moscow. Therefore, the First Hierarch of the Kyiv Metropolitanate was distant from his flock both locally and mentally. Under such circumstances, the local princes of the Kingdom of Rus fought for the ecclesiastical independence of the Galician metropolis, and the Lithuanian rulers – for the canonical status of a separate Lithuanian metropolis. In this study, based on existing sources and historical monuments, the attempts to gain the independence of the Lithuanian Metropolis as a separate ecclesiastical jurisdictional district were revealed, as well as a set of factors of geopolitical origin that motivated the stated aspirations of the leaders of the Grand Duchies of Lithuania, Russia, and Zhemaitia were considered. We propose to divide this study into two part. In the first part, we will consider the prerequisites of ecclesiastical and geopolitical origin for the opening of a separate ecclesiastical-administrative metropolitan district, as well as canonical conflicts of the second stage of the existence of the Lithuanian metropolis.

Key words: The Metropolitanate of Lithuania, the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, Russia and Zhemaitia, the Patriarch of Constantinople, the legacy of the Metropolitanate of Kyiv, the church and administrative system.

References:

1. Balokh V.O. Vizantystyka: kurs lektsii. Chernivtsi: Knyhy –XXI, 2006. 606 s.

2.      Bybykov M.V. Byzantinorossica: Svod vyzantyiskykh svydetelstv o Rusy. M., 2004. 736 s.

3.      Bulhakov Makaryi, mytr. Ystoryia Russkoi Tserkvy: V 9 t. M.: Yzd. Spaso-Preobrazhenskoho Valaamskoho monastyria, 1995. T. 3. 702 s.

4.      Vakin Volodymyr, prot. Derzhavnyi komponent ta tsyvilni kordony u vyznacheni mezh ta ustroiu tserkovno-administratyvnoi yurysdyktsii na prykladi Halytskoi mytropolii XIV st. Volynskyi blahovisnyk: bohoslovsko-istorychnyi naukovyi zhurnal VPBA / red. kol.: prot. Volodymyr Vakin (holov. red) [ta in.]. Lutsk, 2020. № 8. S. 103-116.

5.      Veisman A. D. Hrechesko-russkii slovar. SPb: Yzdanie avtora, 1899. 1370 s.  

6.      Vlasovskyi I., prof. Narys istorii Ukrainskoi Pravoslavnoi Tserkvy: V 4 t. K.: Vyd. UPTs Kyivskoho Patriarkhatu, 1998. T. 1. 294 s.

7.      Voitovych L.V., Domanovskyi A.M., Kozak N.B., Lylo I.M., Melnyk M.M., Sorochan S.B., Faida O.V. Istoriia Vizantii. Vstup do Vizantystyky. Lviv: Vydavnytstvo «Apriori», 2011. 880 s.

8.      Holubynskyi  E., prof. Ystoryia Russkoi Tserkvy. M.: Unyversytetskaia typohrafyia, 1900. T. 2.   919 s.

9.      Hramota ymperatora Ioanna Kantakuzyna k mytropolytu Feohnostu, ob otmene sostoiavshahosia pry patriarkhe Ioanne postanovleniia, koym chast russkykh eparkhii otdelialas dlia halytskoi mytropoliy (1347 h. v sentiabre, № 4). RYB. SPb.: Typohrafiia Ymperatorskoi Akademiy Nauk, 1880. T. 6. Ch. I.: Pamiatnyky drevne-russkaho kanonychnaho prava (XI-XV v.). S. 21–26 (2).

10.    Hrushevskyi M. S. Istoriia Ukrainy-Rusy. T. 3. Lviv, 1905. 588 s.

11.    Hrushevskyi M. S. Istoriia Ukrainy-Rusy. T. 5. Lviv, 1905. 688 s.

12.    Isaievych Ya. Mytropoliia ta yepyskopii. Istoriia ukrainskoi kultury: U 5 t. K., 2001. T.2. S. 227–230.

13.    Knyha Pravyl Sviatykh Apostoliv, Vselenskykh i Pomisnykh Soboriv, i Sviatykh Ottsiv. Per. Chokaliuka S. M. K.: Vyd. Presa Ukrainy, 2008. 367 s.

14.    Krychevskyi B. Mytropolychia vlast v srednevekovoi Rusy (IV vek). SPb.: Yskusstvo, 2003. 263 s. 

15.    Litopys ruskyi / za ipat. spyskom per. L. Makhnovets; [vidp. red. O. V. Myshanych]. Kyiv: Dnipro, 1989. KhIV, 590.

16.    Lototskyi O., prof. Ukrainski dzherela tserkovnoho prava. Varshava, 1931. 318 s. 

17.    Mahochii P.-R. Ukraina: istoriia yii zemel ta narodiv. Uzhhorod: Vydavnytstvo V. Padiaka, 2012. – 794 s.

18.    Matseliuk I. Dzherela tserkovnoho prava za doby ukrainskoho serednovichchia. K.: Talkomm, 2015. 291 s.

19.    Mytsyk Yu.A., Bazhan O.H., Vlasov. V.S. Istoriia Ukrainy. K.: Vyd. dim «Kyievo-Mohylianska akademiia», 2005. 576 s.

20.    Pavlov. A., prof. O nachale Halytskoi y Lytovskoi mytropolyi y o pervkh tamoshnykh mytropolytakh po vyzantyiskym dokumentalnm ystochnykam XIV veka. M. : Unyv. typ., 1894. 40 s.

21.    Postanovlenie patriarkha Ysydora y eho synoda, podtverzhdaiushchee tsarskii khrysovul o prysoedyneniy halytskoi mytropoliy k kievskoi (1347 h. v sentiabre, №7). RYB. SPb.: Typohrafiia Ymperatorskoi Akademiy Nauk, 1880. T. 6. Ch. I.: Pamiatnyky drevne-russkaho kanonychnaho prava (XI-XV v.). S. 34–40 (2).

22.    RYB. SPb.: Typohrafiia Ymperatorskoi Akademiy Naukъ, 1880. T. 6. Ch. I.: Pamiatnyky drevne-russkaho kanonychnaho prava (XI-XV v.). 930(1) + 315(2) + 70(3) s.

23.    Skochylias I. Ya. Halytska mytropoliia XIV – pershoi polovyny XV stolit: osoblyvosti eklezialnoho, pravovoho ta suspilnoho statusu. Kniazha doba: istoriia i kultura. 2011. Vyp. 4. S. 246–279.

24.    Khrystovul ymperatora Ioanna Kantakuzyna o prysoedyneniy halytskoi mytropoliy k kievskoi   (1347 h. v avhuste, № 3.). RYB. SPb.: Typohrafiia Ymperatorskoi Akademiy Nauk, 1880. T. 6. Ch. I.: Pamiatnyky drevne-russkaho kanonychnaho prava (XI–XV v.). S. 14–20 (2).

25.    Acta patriarchatus Constantinopoliensis. Ed. F. Miklosich et J. Müller. Vindobonae, 1860. T. 1. 607.

26.    Acta patriarchatus Constantinopoliensis. Ed. F. Miklosich et J. Müller. Vindobonae, 1862. T. 2. 608.

27.    Geizer H., Beiträge zur russischen Kirchengeschichte aus griechischen Quellen. Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte, XIII, 1892, Bd. 13.

28.    Geizer H., Ungedruckte und ungenügend veröffentlichte Texte der Notitiae episcopatum. München, Akademie der Wissenschaften, Hist., l, Abhandlungen, XXI, 1900, Bd. III, ABTH.

29.     Synodus archiepiscopo messenes confert metropolit Arcadiopoleos per audiunctionem. XXXIX. Acta patriarchatus Constantinopoliensis. Ed. F. Miklosich et J. Müller. Vindobonae, 1860. T. 1. P. 71–73.

30.    Synodus committit metropolitae Cassareensi curam variorum ecclesiarum orientis per adiunctionem. LXV. Acta patriarchatus Constantinopoliensis. Ed. F. Miklosich et J. Müller. Vindobonae, 1860. T. 1. P. 143–144.

31.    Synodus confirmat mandatum imperatoris, quo metropolitae Serrorum subiicitur episcopatus Nicopoleos. LXVII. Acta patriarchatus Constantinopoliensis. Ed. F. Miklosich et J. Müller. Vindobonae, 1860. T. 1. P. 146–148.

32.    Synodus statuit, ut Vladimiriae sit sedes metropolitas Kioviae et totius Russiae. CLVIII. Acta patriarchatus Constantinopoliensis. Ed. F. Miklosich et J. Müller. Vindobonae, 1860. T. 1. P. 351–353.

33.    Regel W. Analecta Byzantino-Russica. Petropoli; Lipsiae, 1891. 153.

34.    Patriarcha monet episcoput Novogradii, ut quendam Theodoritum excommunicatum habeat. CLVII. Acta patriarchatus Constantinopoliensis. Ed. F. Miklosich et J. Müller. Vindobonae, 1860. T. 1. P. 350–351.

35.    Σύνταγμα των Θείων και Ιερών Κανόνων των τε Αγίων και Πανευφήμων Αποστόλων και των Ιερών Οικουμενικών και Τοπικών Συνόδων, και των κατά μέρος Αγίων Πατέρων, εκδοθέν συν πλείσταις άλλαις την εκκλησιαστικήν κατάστασιν διεπούσαις διατάξεσι, μετά των Αρχαίων Εξηγητών και διαφόρων αναγνωσμάτων: Τόμος Πέμπτος / υπό Γ. A. Ράλλη και Μ. Ποτλή. Aθήνησιν, 1855. 638 σ

36.    Rusyna O.V. Velyke Kniazivstvo Lytovske. Entsyklopediia istorii Ukrainy: T. 1: A-V / Redkol.: V. A. Smolii (holova) ta in. NAN Ukrainy. Instytut istorii Ukrainy. K.: V-vo “Naukova dumka”, 2003. 688 s.: il.  URL: http://www.history.org.ua/?termin=Velyke_Kniazivstvo_Lytovske