Open AccessTHE SPECIFIC FEATURES OF DEVELOPMENT OF THE ORTHODOX MOVEMENT IN SUBCARPATHIAN RUS IN THE SECOND HALF OF THE 1920S (BASED ON THE EXAMPLE OF BILKY AND VELYKI LUCHKY VILLAGES)
Author(s) -
Yurij Danilets
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
naukovij vìsnik užgorodsʹkogo unìversitetu. serìâ ìstorìâ/naukovij vìsnik užgorodsʹkogo unìversitetu. serìâ: ìstorìâ
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 2786-6513
pISSN - 2523-4498
DOI - 10.24144/2523-4498.1(44).2021.233172
Subject(s) - orthodoxy , population , jurisdiction , prayer , law , government (linguistics) , legislation , position (finance) , political science , sociology , history , religious studies , philosophy , linguistics , demography , archaeology , finance , economics
This paper analyzes the newly discovered archival documents and materials of periodicals focusing on the development of the Orthodox movement in the second half of the 1920s. As an example, the author singled out two localities where Orthodoxy manifested itself yet in the early 20th century. Emphasis is placed on the fact that over this period in Subcarpathian Rus no Orthodox jurisdiction was established and there was neither bishop nor administration. All these facts used to lead to chaos and disorder within the Orthodox movement. The author argues that the population who decided to leave the Greek Catholic Church did not wish to comply with the outdated Austro-Hungarian legislation. It was indeed discriminatory and needed immediate reform. Based on the archival documents, the paper suggests that local and central authorities did not pay sufficient attention to the religious issue in the region. Due to the study of the sources it can be asserted that the government officials and the President of the Republic did not have a well-elaborated position on resolving a possible religious conflict in Subcarpathian Rus. Ignoring the population’s legitimate demands for the allocation of premises for prayer meetings, led to the forcible seizure of churches and church property. The paper analyzes the content of the appeals and memoranda to the President and government officials in Prague, in which the Orthodox Christian population offered their vision of resolving the difficult situation. The Greek Catholic clergy’s position as well as the bishop’s position on the Orthodox movement are studied separately. The author traces the behavior of Orthodox priests in the mentioned localities. It has been concluded that the radicalization of the relations was caused by ordinary believers who did not want to follow the clergy’s instructions. This issue is insufficiently explored and requires further research.