THE PATH TO AUTOCEPHALY OF THE UKRAINIAN ORTHODOX AUTOCEPHALIC SYNODAL CHURCH IN THE INTER-WAR PERIOD: HISTORICAL-CANONICAL CONTEXT

Abstract

The process of obtaining autocephaly by the Ukrainian Orthodox Autocephalous Synodal Church (UPASC) was accompanied by a number of contradictions and contradictions. It was influenced by external church centers, encountered internal Ukrainian opposition, and was closely connected with the political interests of various forces. At the same time, not only these factors are important, but also the internal contradictions that preceded the proclamation of autocephaly. Special attention is paid in the article to determining the decisive reasons that became the basis for the adoption of the final decision on autocephaly status. In general, all the indicated factors remain critically important for understanding the relations between the Church, the state, and society in Ukraine in the early 1920s. The study aims to identify the key factors and internal contradictions that influenced the proclamation of autocephaly, as well as to assess the canonical legitimacy of these decisions and their consequences for Ukrainian Orthodoxy in the context of international church law. Special attention is required to determine the decisive reasons that became the basis for the adoption of the final decision on autocephalous status. The main accents in this article are the dogmatic argumentation, references to historical foundations and canonical rules that became the basis for the proclamation of autocephaly of the UPASC at the I All-Ukrainian Congress of the “Living Church” on February 13–16, 1923 and the II All-Ukrainian Local Council on May 17–27, 1925. And the reaction of the III All-Russian Local Council in October 1925 to the report on the autocephaly of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church.

This issue acquires special significance in the context of modern challenges related to the autocephalous status of the Orthodox Church of Ukraine (OCU). In this context, the experience of the UPASC in the 1920s can be valuable for understanding both historical mistakes and potential strategies for asserting autocephalous status.