The first autocephalous church was the church of Cyprus. This was granted by Council.
The mother church would be the one to grant autocephaly to it’s own extended missions. It is addressed as a practical matter. Thus, the OCA (North America) is autocephalic, because it’s mother church (Russian) granted this, It is in the Russian tradition and in communion with but not under the Patriarch of Moscow.
The Orthodox church of Japan (much smaller and younger), on the other hand, is autonomous under the Patriarch of Moscow.
When these newer smaller churches become self governing, some like to regard their own leading Metropolitan (Archbishop) as a Patriarch, this is usually because the synod has several Archbishops already. Smaller countries like Cyprus and the Czech Republic simply don’t have such a large synod.
We have seen this process reflected in church history. The Maronite church got it’s start in this way, gathering as a separate synod, declaring autocephaly and naming a Patriarch of it’s own. This was a renegade action (not approved by the See of Antioch), driven by parochial concerns.
The Church of the East as well (Seleucia-Ctesiphon). This action was probably more than anything because they were across the Roman border in Sassanid territory. (Later they were accused of Nestorianism, because some adherents to Nestorius fled across the border to them, but that accusation is far from certain.)
Some Eastern Catholics seem to think, or act like, their Sui Iuris churches are autocephalic (which is why some will say things like “we are in communion with Rome, not under Rome”) but in fact those churches are autonomous, not autocephalic. They effectively declared their autocephaly in the process of breaking with their parent churches (asserting their own right to do so), but then lost it again subsequent to submitting to the bishops of Rome.
Thanks for the info.
I can fully understand the rights granted Cyprus regarding ordaining their own bishops by the Council of Ephesus. But I didn’t see that council elevating that province to the same dignity as Antioch, nor do I see that this see was ever elevated to the status of a patriarch in any ecumenical council thereafter.
The exact words were:
Our fellow Bishop Reginus, most beloved by God, and with him the most God-beloved Bishops of the province of the Cypriotes Zeno and Evagrius, has announced an innovation, a thing which is contrary to the ecclesiastical laws and the Canons of the Holy Apostles, and one which touches the freedom of all. Hence, since common ailments require more drastic treatment, on the ground that they do greater damage, and especially in view of the fact that the Bishop of Antioch, far from following the ancient custom, has been performing the ordinations in Cyprus, according to information given in libelli and by oral statements made by most pious gentlemen who have approached the Holy Council; therefore those who preside over the churches in Cyprus shall retain their privilege unaffected and inviolate, according to the Canons of the Holy Fathers and ancient custom, whereby they shall themselves perform the ordinations of the most reverent Bishops.
The same rule shall hold good also with regard to the other diocese and churches everywhere, so that none of the Bishops most beloved by God shall take hold of any other province that was not formerly and from the beginning in his jurisdiction, or was not, that is to say, held by his predecessors. But if anyone has taken possession of any and has forcibly subjected it to his authority, he shall regive it back to its rightful possessor, in order that the Canons of the Fathers be not transgressed, nor the secular fastus be introduced, under the pretext of divine services; lest imperceptibly and little by little we lose the freedom which our Lord Jesus Christ, the Liberator of all men, has given us as a free gift by His own blood. It has therefore seemed best to the holy and Ecumenical Council that the rights of every province, formerly and from the beginning belonging to it, be preserved clear and inviolable, in accordance with the custom which prevailed of yore; each Metropolitan having permission to take copies of the proceedings for his own security. If, on the other hand, anyone introduce any form conflicting with the decrees which have now been sanctioned, it has seemed best to the entire holy and Ecumenical Council that it be invalid and of no effect.
That does not say anything about granting complete independence. It was something done because the Patriarch of Antioch was forcing Cypriot bishops to come to Antioch to be ordained rather than traveling to Cyprus to do the ordinations as he should have done.
The thing is that a precedent was set…but the precedent was that an ecumenical council could grant this.
But I don’t pretend to be much of an expert on the subject, though.
