Discurs și realitate religioasă în Bucovina anilor 1873-1902
Religious Discourse and Reality in Bukovina During the Years 1873-1902

Summary/Abstract: The study presents the essential content of the religious discourse specific to the metropolitans of Bukovina and Dalmatia - Eugenie Hacman, Teofil Bendella, Teodor Blajevici, Silvestru Morariu-Andrievici, in relation to the issues of the Orthodox Church in Bukovina, between 1873-1902. Each metropolitan built a discourse that reflects both his attitude towards the imperial power and the degree of assumption of the problems specific to the diocese. Due to the importance of the metropolitan's position in the province of Bukovina, the discourse of each of them participated in the dynamic content of the cultural and religious identity of the Bukovinian society. The internal problems of the Bukovina diocese in the period 1873-1910 stem from all the events between 1774-1873. The main inherited problems were: the lack of autonomy of the Orthodox Church; the authoritarianism of the Imperial Court which holds the decision-making power; the bureaucratization and attempt at (partial) secularization of the hierarchical structure of the Orthodox Church, by transforming priests, abbots, archimandrites, vicars general and bishops into imperial officials; the use of the income produced by the Religious Fund for purposes other than those stipulated in the regulations after the secularization of the monastery properties and which indicated that the money would be directed only to covering the needs of the Orthodox Church, the Germanization of education and culture; the favoring of Orthodox Ruthenians by the local and central administration, by promoting them to positions and by the Ruthenian community's access to the income and properties of the Religious Fund. In itself, the Metropolitanate of Bukovina and Dalmatia functioned as a state structure, with a church character, and depended in all major decisions on the will of the emperor, which the metropolitan in office had the responsibility to assume and put into practice. Therefore, the metropolitan, beyond his canonical-dogmatic anchoring, was perceived and treated in the Austrian state system as a high official in the direct service of the emperor, with the fundamental mission of concretizing his policy.

• Details
• Contents