THE CHURCH POLICY OF PRINCE MILOŠ AND THE STRUGGLE FOR AUTONOMY OF THE SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH

  • Dragan Novakovic

Abstract

Prince Miloš’s strivings to achieve the highest possible degree of state autonomy in relation to the Ottoman Empire and the autonomy of the Serbian Orthodox Church in relation to the Ecumenical Patriarchate are presented. Since those goals were of great importance and difficult to achieve, he used the establishment of peace for the purpose of consolidation of the Church organisation, defining the position of clergy and gaining control over the Greek Episcopate by setting regular payments provided from the state revenues. By the formation of the Consistory, the Episcopate was almost entirely bereft of jurisdiction over clergymen and monks and directly subordinated to the Prince and the authorities. Taking advantage of changed international circumstances and perpetual conflicts between Russia and the Ottoman Empire, Prince Miloš initiated complex political activities and started the negotiations which were closed in 1830 by issuing of the charter (hatisherif) on internal self-government in Serbia. Convinced that gaining political and religious freedom was a unique process, he requested from the Ecumenical Patriarchate the autonomy of the Church in Serbia and the right to establish the national hierarchy. By acting temperately and in accordance with the circumstances and paying the debts of Serbian dioceses, he gained sympathy of the current Patriarch and the Holy Synod and achieved issuing of the autonomy agreement in 1831. That document and the election of the first Serbian Metropolitan, re-established the continuity with the Peć Patriarchy, which had been abolished by the Sultan’s decree. Following his political vision, sticking to his way of ruling and committing himself to the people and the Church, Prince Miloš was achieving his goals often ignoring or openly breaking the established canons, which have served as the basis for Church hierarchy over centuries, but were not applicable to the affairs of the State.

References

/
Published
2009-08-10