Because of its historical location as the capital of the formerEastern Roman Empire and its role as themother church of most modern Eastern Orthodox churches,Constantinople holds a special place of honor withinEastern Orthodox Christianity and serves as the seat for the Ecumenical Patriarch, who enjoys the status ofprimus inter pares (first among equals) among the world's Eastern Orthodox prelates and is regarded as the representative and spiritual leader of Eastern Orthodox Christians.[13][14][15][16][17][18]Phanar (Turkish:Fener), the name of the neighbourhood where ecumenical patriarch resides, is often used as ametaphor orshorthand for the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople.[19]
The Church ofHagia Irene was the cathedral church of the Patriarchate before Hagia Sophia was completed in 360.
In 330 AD, theRoman EmperorConstantine the Great moved his residence to the town renaming itNova Roma (Νέα Ῥώμη), or "New Rome". Thenceforth, the importance of the church there grew, along with the influence of its bishop. Prior to the moving of the imperial capital, the bishop of Byzantium had been under the authority of themetropolitan ofHeraclea, but from the 4th century on, he grew to become independent in his own right and even to exercise authority throughout what is nowGreece,Asia Minor,Pontus, andThrace. With the development of the hierarchical structure of the Church, the bishop of Constantinople came to be styled asexarch (a position superior to metropolitan). Constantinople was recognized as the fourthpatriarchate at theFirst Council of Constantinople in 381, afterAntioch,Alexandria, andRome. The patriarch was usually appointed by Antioch.
Because of the importance of the position of Constantinople's church at the center of the Roman Empire, affairs involving the various churches outside Constantinople's direct authority came to be discussed in the capital, particularly where the intervention of the emperor was desired. The patriarch naturally became a liaison between the emperor and bishops traveling to the capital, thus establishing the position of the patriarch as one involving the unity of the whole Church, particularly in the East.
In turn, the affairs of the Constantinopolitan church were overseen not just by the patriarch, but also bysynods held including visiting bishops. This pan-Orthodox synod came to be referred to as theἐνδημοῦσα σύνοδος (endemousa synodos, "resident synod"). The resident synod not only governed the business of the patriarchate but also examined questions pertinent to the whole Church as well as the eastern half of the old empire.[23] The patriarch thus came to have the title ofEcumenical, which referenced not a universal episcopacy over other bishops but rather the position of the patriarch as at the center of theoikoumeni, the "household" of the empire.
As the Roman Empire stabilized and grew, so did the influence of the patriarchate at its capital. This influence came to be enshrined in Orthodoxcanon law, to such an extent that it was elevated even beyond more ancient patriarchates: Canon 3 of theFirst Council of Constantinople (381) stated that the bishop of that city "shall have primacy of honor after the Bishop of Rome because Constantinople is the New Rome."
Hagia Sophia was the patriarchal cathedral until 1453.
In its disputed 28th Canon, theCouncil of Chalcedon in 451 recognized an expansion of the boundaries of the Patriarchate of Constantinople and of its authority over bishops of dioceses "among the barbarians", which has been variously interpreted as referring either to areas outside the Byzantine Empire or to non-Greeks. The council resulted in a schism with the Patriarchate of Alexandria.
In any case, for almost a thousand years the Patriarch of Constantinople presided over the church in theEastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire and its missionary activity that brought the Christian faith in its Byzantine form to many peoples north of the imperial borders. The cathedral church of Constantinople,Hagia Sophia (Holy Wisdom), was the center of religious life in the eastern Christian world.[24][25]
The Ecumenical Patriarchate came to be called the "Great Church of Christ" and it was the touchstone and reference point for ecclesiastical affairs in the East, whether in terms of church government, relations with the state, or liturgical matters.
In history and in canonical literature (i.e. the Church's canons and traditional commentaries on them), the Ecumenical Patriarchate has been granted certain prerogatives (πρεσβεία,presveía) that other autocephalous Orthodox churches do not have. Not all of these prerogatives are today universally acknowledged, though all do have precedents in history and canonical references. The following is a (non-exhaustive) list of these prerogatives and their reference points:
In the eighth and ninth centuries theiconoclast movement caused serious political unrest throughout the Empire. The emperorLeo III issued a decree in 726 against images and ordered the destruction of an image of Christ over one of the doors of the Chalke, an act which was fiercely resisted by the citizens.[26]Constantine V convoked achurch council in 754, which condemned the worship of images, after which many treasures were broken, burned, or painted over with depictions of trees, birds or animals: one source refers to thechurch of the Holy Virgin at Blachernae as having been transformed into a "fruit store and aviary".[27] Following the death of his son Leo IV in 780, the empress Irene restored the veneration of images through the agency of theSecond Council of Nicaea in 787.
The iconoclast controversy returned in the early 9th century, only to be resolved once more in 843 during the regency of Empress Theodora, who restored the icons.
The relations between the papacy and the Byzantine court were good in the years leading up to 1054. The emperorConstantine IX and thePope Leo IX were allied through the mediation of the Lombardcatepan of Italy,Argyrus, who had spent years in Constantinople, originally as a political prisoner.
PatriarchMichael I Cerularius ordered a letter to be written to John, theBishop of Trani in which he attacked the "Judaistic" practices of the West, namely the use of unleavened bread. The letter was to be sent by John to all the bishops of the West, including the Pope. John promptly complied and the letter was passed toHumbert of Mourmoutiers, thecardinal-bishop of Silva Candida, who translated the letter into Latin and brought it to the Pope, who ordered a reply to be made to each charge and a defence of papal supremacy to be laid out in a response.
Although he was hot-headed, Michael was convinced to cool the debate and thus attempt to prevent the impending breach. However, Humbert and the pope made no concessions and the former was sent with legatine powers to the imperial capital to solve the questions raised once and for all. Humbert,Frederick of Lorraine, and Peter,Archbishop of Amalfi, arrived in April 1054 and were met with a hostile reception; they stormed out of the palace, leaving the papal response with Michael, who in turn was even more angered by their actions. The patriarch refused to recognise their authority or, practically, their existence.[28] When Pope Leo died on April 19, 1054, the legates' authority legally ceased, but they effectively ignored this technicality.[29]
In response to Michael's refusal to address the issues at hand, the legatine mission took the extreme measure of entering the church of theHagia Sophia during the Divine Liturgy and placing a bull of excommunication on the altar.
The events of the East-West Schism are generally dated from the acts of 1054. However, these events only triggered the beginning of the schism. The full schism was not actually consummated by the seemingly mutual excommunications. The New Catholic Encyclopedia reports that the legates had been careful not to intimate that the bull of excommunication implied a general excommunication of the Byzantine Church. The bull excommunicated only Cerularius, Leo of Achrida, and their adherents. Thus, the New Catholic Encyclopedia argues that the dispute need not have produced a permanent schism any more than excommunication of any "contumacious bishop". The schism began to develop when all the other Eastern patriarchs supported Cerularius. According to the New Catholic Encyclopedia, it was the support of EmperorMichael VI Stratiotikos that impelled them to support Cerularius.[30] Some have questioned the validity of the bull on the grounds that Pope Leo IX had died at that time and so the authority of the legates to issue such a bull is unclear.[29]
The legates left for Rome two days after issuing the bull of excommunication, leaving behind a city near riot. The patriarch had the immense support of the people against the emperor, who had supported the legates to his own detriment. To assuage popular anger, the bull was burnt, and the legates wereanathematised. Only the legates were anathematised and, in this case too, there was no explicit indication that the entire Western church was being anathematised.
In the bull of excommunication issued against Patriarch Michael I Cerularius by the papal legates, one of the reasons cited was the alleged deletion by the Eastern Church of the "Filioque" from the original Nicene Creed. In fact, it was precisely the opposite: the Eastern Church had not deleted anything; it was the Western Church that had added this phrase to the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed.[29]
As BishopKallistos Ware writes, "Even after 1054 friendly relations between East and West continued. The two parts of Christendom were not yet conscious of a great gulf of separation between them. […] The dispute remained something of which ordinary Christians in East and West were largely unaware".[31] In fact, efforts were made in subsequent centuries by Popes and Patriarchs to heal the rift between the churches. However, a number of factors and historical events worked to widen the separation over time.[32]
Fall of Constantinople in 1204 and the exile in Nicaea
TheFourth Crusade in exchange for promised funds attempted to help the deposed emperorAlexius IV regain his throne. After taking Constantinople, returning Alexius IV to the throne, the revolt against and murder of Alexius IV left the Crusaders without payment. On 12 April 1204, the crusaders inflicted a severe sacking on Constantinople for three days, during which many ancient and medieval Roman and Greek works were either stolen or destroyed. Despite their oaths and the threat of excommunication, the Crusaders ruthlessly and systematically violated the city's holy sanctuaries, destroying, defiling, or stealing all they could lay hands on; nothing was spared. It was said that the total amount looted from Constantinople was about 900,000 silver marks. The Venetians received 150,000 silver marks that was their due, while the Crusaders received 50,000 silver marks. A further 100,000 silver marks were divided evenly up between the Crusaders and Venetians. The remaining 500,000 silver marks were secretly kept back by many Crusader knights.
Nicetas Choniates gives a vivid account of the sack of Constantinople by the Frankish and Venetian Crusaders of the Fourth Crusade:
The Latin soldiery subjected the greatest city in Europe to an indescribable sack. For three days they murdered, raped, looted and destroyed on a scale which even the ancientVandals andGoths would have found unbelievable. Constantinople had become a veritable museum of ancient and Byzantine art, an emporium of such incredible wealth that the Latins were astounded at the riches they found. Though the Venetians had an appreciation for the art which they discovered (they were themselves semi-Byzantines) and saved much of it, the French and others destroyed indiscriminately, halting to refresh themselves with wine, violation of nuns, and murder of Orthodox clerics. The Crusaders vented their hatred for the Greeks most spectacularly in the desecration of the greatest Church in Christendom. They smashed the silver iconostasis, the icons and the holy books of Hagia Sophia, and seated upon the patriarchal throne a whore who sang coarse songs as they drank wine from the Church's holy vessels. The estrangement of East and West, which had proceeded over the centuries, culminated in the horrible massacre that accompanied the conquest of Constantinople. The Greeks were convinced that even the Turks, had they taken the city, would not have been as cruel as the Latin Christians. The defeat of Byzantium, already in a state of decline, accelerated political degeneration so that the Byzantines eventually became an easy prey to the Turks. The Crusading movement thus resulted, ultimately, in the victory of Islam, a result which was of course the exact opposite of its original intention.[33]
The new seat of the Patriarchate was established in the city ofNicaea until in 1261, when Constantinople was reconquered by the Byzantine EmperorMichael VIII Palaiologos.
In accordance with the traditional custom at the time, SultanMehmed II allowed his troops and his entourage three full days of unbridled pillage and looting in the city shortly after it was captured. Once the three days passed, he would then claim its remaining contents for himself.[34][35] However, by the end of the first day, he proclaimed that the looting should cease as he felt profound sadness when he toured the looted and enslaved city.[36][34] Hagia Sophia was not exempted from the pillage and looting and specifically became its focal point as the invaders believed it to contain the greatest treasures and valuables of the city.[37] Shortly after the defence of theWalls of Constantinople collapsed and the Ottoman troops entered the city victoriously, the pillagers and looters made their way to the Hagia Sophia and battered down its doors before storming in.[38][25]
Throughout the period of thesiege of Constantinople, the trapped worshippers of the city participated in theDivine Liturgy and the Prayer of the Hours at theHagia Sophia and the church formed a safe-haven and a refuge for many of those who were unable to contribute to the city's defence, which comprised women, children, elderly, the sick and the wounded.[39][40] Being trapped in the church, the many congregants and yet more refugees inside became spoils-of-war to be divided amongst the triumphant invaders. The building was desecrated and looted, with the helpless occupants who sought shelter within the church being enslaved.[37][25] While most of the elderly and the infirm/wounded and sick were killed, and the remainder (mainly teenage males and young boys) were chained up and sold into slavery.[41]
The women of Constantinople also suffered from rape at the hands of Ottoman forces.[42] According to Barbaro, "all through the day the Turks made a great slaughter of Christians through the city". According to historianPhilip Mansel, widespread persecution of the city's civilian inhabitants took place, resulting in thousands of murders and rapes, and 30,000 civilians being enslaved or forcibly deported.[43][44][45][46]George Sphrantzes says that people of both genders were raped insideHagia Sophia.
AfterConstantinople was overrun by theOttoman Turks in 1453, the Patriarchate came to care more directly for all the Orthodox living in theOttoman Empire.Mehmed II appointedGennadius II of Constantinople as the Patriarch in 1454 and designated him as the spiritual leader as well as theethnarch or, in Turkish,millet of all the Orthodox Christians in the Empire, regardless of ethnic origin; not only Greeks but alsoBulgarians,Serbs,Albanians,Wallachians,Moldavians,Croatis,Syrians, orthodoxArabs,Georgians andLazs came under the spiritual, administrative,[47] fiscal, cultural and legal[47] jurisdiction of the Patriarchate.[48] Some of the other patriarchs came at various points to live permanently in Constantinople and function as part of the local church government. This situation, according to some of the Orientalists and historians, shows thePax Ottomana (orPax Ottomanica, literally "the Ottoman Peace").
TheRussian Orthodox Church, which for centuries had been a diocese of the Ecumenical Patriarchate,declared its independence in 1448 shortly before Constantinople fell owing to its protest over theCouncil of Florence, in which representatives of the patriarchate had signed onto union withRome, trading doctrinal concessions for military aid against the encroaching Ottomans.[49] The military aid never came and those concessions were subsequently repudiated by the patriarchate but, from 1448, the Russian church came to function independently as a council of Russian bishops elected their own metropolitan.[50] After the fall of Constantinople toMehmed II of theOttoman Empire on 29 May 1453, Moscow became the only independent Orthodox power and its leaders soon began to advance the claim that Moscow was the successor to the Byzantine Empire, calling it the "third Rome".[50] In 1589, 141 years later, Constantinople came to recognize Russia's independence and led theEastern Orthodox Church in declaringRussia also to be a patriarchate, numbering Moscow's bishop as fifth in rank behind the ancient patriarchates.[51] TheRussian Orthodox Church became the largest of theEastern Orthodox churches in the world.
As Ottoman rule weakened, various parts of the Orthodox Church that had been under the direct influence of the Ecumenical Patriarchate came to be independent. These churches at first usually declared their independence without universal approval, which came after Constantinople gave its blessing. The rate at which these newautocephalous ("self-headed") churches came into being increased in the 19th century, particularly with the independence of Greece.
In 1833, theChurch of Greece declared its autocephaly, which was subsequently recognized by the patriarchate in 1850. In 1865, theRomanian Orthodox Church, against the protests of Constantinople, declared its independence, which was acknowledged in 1885. A year before Greece's autocephaly was self-proclaimed, theSerbian Orthodox Church was named autocephalous by the local secular government but Constantinople refused recognition until 1879. In 1860 theBulgariansde facto seceded from the Ecumenical Patriarchate; in 1870 the Bulgarian church was politically recognized as autonomous under the nameBulgarian Exarchate by the Sultan's firman, but it was not until 1945 that it was recognized by the Ecumenical Patriarchate. In 1922, theAlbanian Orthodox Church declared its autocephaly, being granted recognition of it in 1937.
In addition to these churches, whose territory had been agreed upon by all as within Constantinople's jurisdiction, several other disputed areas' Eastern Orthodox churches have had recognition by the Ecumenical Patriarchate as eitherautocephalous orautonomous, including theFinnish Orthodox Church andEstonian Orthodox Church in 1923, thePolish Orthodox Church in 1924, and theCzech and Slovak Orthodox Church in 1998. The majority of these disputes are a result of the expansion of theRussian Empire, which often included a subjugation of the Orthodox churches in conquered lands to the Moscow Patriarchate. Due to this, the Moscow Patriarchate often disputes the Ecumenical Patriarch's role as prime representative and spiritual leader of the world's Orthodox Christians, citing that it represents the numerically largest Orthodox community.[52]
As a ruling institution, the Ottoman Empire brought regulations on how the cities would be built (quality reassurances) and how the architecture (structural integrity, social needs, etc.) should be shaped.[citation needed] Special restrictions were imposed concerning the construction, renovation, size and usage of bells in churches. For example, in a town a church should not be larger in size than the largest mosque. Many churches were converted into mosques (among them theHagia Sophia andChora Church inConstantinople, and theRotunda andHagios Demetrios inThessaloniki) or served for other uses (e.g.Hagia Irene in Constantinople, which became an armory for the Janissaries, and theGül Mosque [Hagia Theodosia or Christ Euergetes], also in Constantinople, which after the Conquest served for a while as a naval dockyard). Such rules, however, although very strict in the beginning, with time and the increasing importance in the Ottoman Empire of theRum millet were increasingly disregarded, so that in the 19th century in Istanbul there was a veritable building boom of Orthodox churches, many among them having high bell towers and brick domes, both of which had previously been strictly prohibited.[53]
Since 1586 the Ecumenical Patriarchate has had its headquarters in theChurch of St George in theFener (Phanar) district of Istanbul. The current territory of the Patriarchate is significantly reduced from what it was at its height.[when?] Its canonical territory currently includes most of modernTurkey, northern Greece andMount Athos, theDodecanese andCrete. By its interpretation of Canon 28 of Chalcedon, Constantinople also claims jurisdiction over all areas outside the canonically defined territories of other Orthodox churches, which includes the entireWestern Hemisphere,Oceania, theUnited Kingdom,Western Europe,Northeast Asia,Southeast Asia. This claim is disputed by other autocephalous churches with dioceses in those areas, as well as the Turkish government.
The Orthodox presence in Turkey itself is small; however the majority of Orthodox inNorth America (about two-thirds) are under the Ecumenical Patriarchate, primarily in theGreek Orthodox Archdiocese of America. The Patriarchate also enjoys an even greater majority in theUnited Kingdom. Furthermore, the Albanian,Rusyn and Ukrainian jurisdictions in America are also part of the Patriarchate.
Most of the Patriarchate's funding does not come directly from its member churches but rather from the government of Greece, due to an arrangement whereby the Patriarchate had transferred property it had owned to Greece. In exchange, the employees, including the clergy, of the Patriarchate are remunerated by the Greek government. The Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America provides substantial support through an annual contribution, known as thelogia, and its institutions, including the American-based Greek Orthodox Ladies Philoptochos Society and theArchons of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, usually important laymen who make large donations for the upkeep of the Patriarchate. In turn, they are granted honorary titles which once belonged to members of the Patriarchal staff in centuries past.
The Patriarchate acts in the capacity of being an intermediary and facilitator between the Orthodox churches and also in relations with other Christians and religions. This role sometimes brings the Patriarchate into conflict with other Orthodox churches, as its role in the church is debated. The question centers around whether the Ecumenical Patriarchate is simply the most honored among the Orthodox churches or whether it has any real authority or prerogatives (πρεσβεία,presveía) that differ from the other autocephalous churches. This dispute is often between Constantinople and Moscow, the largest Orthodox church in terms of population, especially as expressed inthe Third Rome theory which places Moscow in the place of Constantinople as the center of world Orthodoxy. Such disputes sometimes result in temporary breaks infull communion, though usually not for very long.
The relationship between Constantinople and theOttoman Empire was frequently bitter,[vague] due in no small part to the privilege given toIslam.[citation needed] requires by law that the Patriarch be a Turkish citizen by birth, which all Patriarchs have been since 1923 – allethnic Greeks from the decreasingGreek minority of Turkey, which is causing a shortage of priests and consequently potential candidates for the post of Ecumenical Patriarch.[54] The closing of the OrthodoxTheological School of Halki is also a difficulty faced by the Patriarchate.
In 2024, after the protests from Turkey, the signature of the Ecumenical Patriarchate has been removed from the statement of theJune 2024 Ukraine peace summit.[55]
The affairs of the patriarchate are conducted by theHoly Synod, presided over by the Ecumenical Patriarch. The synod has existed since some time prior to the fourth century and assists the patriarch in determining the affairs of the possessions under his jurisdiction. The synod first developed from what was referred to as theresident synod, composed of the patriarch, local bishops, and any Orthodox bishops who were visiting in the imperial capital of Constantinople. After thefall of Constantinople, the synod's membership became limited to bishops of the patriarchate.
The Holy and Sacred Synod, presided over by His All-Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I, is composed of twelve hierarchs, each serving a year-long term, with half of the synod's members changing every six months in March and September.
The current members of the Holy and Sacred Synod serving since March 5, 2025, are as follows:
Notable hierarchs of the Ecumenical Patriarchate are the popular writerKallistos (Timothy) Ware, an assistant-bishop in the Archdiocese of Thyateira and author ofThe Orthodox Church, the best-known introduction to the Orthodox Church in English, andJohn Zizioulas, Metropolitan ofPergamon, a well-known professor of systematic theology.
The right of non-Turkish members of the synod (from Northern Greece, the Dodecanese, America and Western Europe) to convene appears to be threatened by a recent[when?] declaration from the Istanbul Governor reported in the Freiburg archdiocesan magazine.[56]
Metropolis of Kiev and all Rus' (988–1448), some territories of Upper Volga and Oka assumeda schism; Metropolis reorganized as Metropolis of Kiev, Galicia and all Rus'
Metropolis of Halych (1303–1347), succeeded and reintegrated back into Metropolis of Kiev
Metropolis of Lithuania (1317–1435), succeeded and reintegrated back into Metropolis of Kiev
Polish Autocephalous Orthodox Church; autocephaly recognised in 1924 by the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople and in 1948 by the Russian Orthodox Church.
Orthodox Church of the Czech Lands and Slovakia (Metropolis ofPrague, Czech Lands and Slovakia); autocephaly recognised in 1951 by the Russian Orthodox Church and in 1998 by the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople.
^Finding Global Balance. World Bank Publications. 2005. p. 119. Retrieved2 August 2015.His All Holiness is the spiritual leader of 300 million Orthodox Christians worldwide
^The officer given the task was killed by the crowd, and in the end the image was removed rather than destroyed: It was to be restored by Irene and removed again byLeo V: Finlay 1906, p. 111.
^Norwich, John J. (1967).The Normans in the South 1016–1130. p. 102.
^abcNorwich, John J. (1992).Byzantium, The Apogee. pp. 320–321.
^New Catholic Encyclopedia....in 1053 he [Michael Caerularius] sends off a declaration of war, then shuts up the Latin churches at Constantinople, hurls a string of wild accusations, and shows in every possible way that he wants a schism, apparently for the mere pleasure of not being in communion with the West. He got his wish. After a series of wanton aggressions, unparalleled in church history, after he had begun by striking the pope's name from his diptychs, the Roman legates excommunicated him (16 July 1054). But still there was no idea of a general excommunication of the Byzantine Church, still less of all the East. The legates carefully provided against that in their Bull. They acknowledged that the emperor (Constantine IX, who was excessively annoyed at the whole quarrel), the Senate, and the majority of the inhabitants of the city were "most pious and orthodox". They excommunicated Caerularius, Leo of Achrida, and their adherents. This quarrel, too, need no more have produced a permanent state of schism than the excommunication of any other contumacious bishop. The real tragedy is that gradually all the other Eastern patriarchs took sides with Caerularius, obeyed him by striking the pope's name from their diptychs, and chose of their own accord to share his schism. At first they do not seem to have wanted to do so. John III of Antioch certainly refused to go into schism at Caerularius's bidding. But, eventually, the habit they had acquired of looking to Constantinople for orders proved too strong. The emperor (not Constantine IX, but his successor) was on the side of his patriarch and they had learned too well to consider the emperor as their over-lord in spiritual matters too. Again, it was the usurped authority of Constantinople, the Erastianism of the East that turned a personal quarrel into a great schism.
^Smith, Cyril J. (1974)."History of Rape and Rape Laws".Women Law Journal. No. 60. p. 188.Archived from the original on 26 April 2020. Retrieved12 October 2020.
^Tomos ante portas: a short guide to Ukrainian church independence.Euromaidan Press. 14 October 2018. Retrieved16 October 2018.the Synod ... of the Ecumenical Patriarchate ... gave further confirmation that Ukraine is on the path to receiving church independence from Moscow. ... Although President Poroshenko triumphantly announced that in result of the meeting Ukraine had received the long-awaited Tomos, or decree of Church independence – a claim circulated in Ukraine with great enthusiasm, this is not true. ... Constantinople's decision will benefit other jurisdictions in Ukraine – theUOC KP andUAOC, which will have to effectively dismantle their own administrative structures and set up a new Church, which will receive the Tomos of autocephaly. ... Right now it's unclear which part of theUOC MP will join the new Church. 10 out of 90 UOC MP bishops signed the appeal for autocephaly to the Ecumenical Patriarch – only 11%. But separate priests could join even if their bishops don't, says Zuiev.
^The ROCsevered full communion with the Ecumenical Patriarchate in 2018, and later severed full communion with theprimates of the Church of Greece, the Patriarchate of Alexandria, and the Church of Cyprus in 2020.
^abcdefghiAutocephaly or autonomy is not universally recognized.
^UOC-MP was moved to formally cut ties with the ROC as of May 27th 2022.
^Semi-autonomous part of theRussian Orthodox Church whose autonomy is not universally recognized.
.svg)
_(cropped).jpg)
.jpeg)
.svg)
