o:8618 Oд Никеје до Никеје. Канони Никејског сабора – основа за стицање аутокефалности српске цркве sr У односу на околности јубилеја – 1700 година од првог васељенског сабора и 850 година од рођења Светог Саве, кроз призму правоверности или православности тј. православља и светосавља, Никеја јеиздвојена као пресудни и свеповезујући топос у фокусу наше теме. У наведеном контексту, такође, овајмалоазијски град представља и извесни хришћанско-православно-догматски хронотоп у којем се сустичу бројни појмови и феномени црквеног живота и мисли, заснованих на догматима и канонима, устројаваних управо у Никеји. Разматрање отпочиње феноменима црквених сабора и саборности и развија се према установи васељенских сабора да би, потом, тема била усмерена на питање аутокефалности Српске цркве. У раду се, стога, настоји да се на основу установљеног канонског устројства протумачи црквено-правни основ за стицање црквене самосталности и то, примарно на основу одлука отаца на Првом Васељенском сабору у Никеји (325), заснованих на примерима тадашњих дијецезалних цркава,у јурисдикцијском смислу – ван граница Цариградске патријаршије. Симболика Никејских канонских одредница представљаће окосницу за стицање црквене самосталности Српске цркве у Никеју 1219. године. A reflection on the topic of church canons, established at major church councils starting with the First Ecumenical Council in Nicaea in 325, in the light of the autocephaly of the Serbian Church on the occasion of the 850th anniversary of the birth of its founder – Saint Sava, the Asia Minor city of Nicaea appears as a kind of chronotope in which the issue of canons in a broader sense and their fundamental role in the aforementioned acquisition of independence of the Serbian Church come together. Through a broader discourse on the topic of the catholicity of the Church, which includes considerations of catholicity as an ecclesiological basis but also the principle of establishing significant dogmas and canons, the role, significance and meaning of ecumenical and local councils are clarified. The harmonization of various canons and rules on the same issue also proves to be significant in relation to our topic. The institution of the council itself has its origins in the Last Supper of the Lord Jesus Christ with his disciples (Luke 22:16–20) as well as the event of Pentecost (Acts 2:1–7) and its formal model in the Apostolic Council of 52 AD in Jerusalem (Acts 15). The catholicity of the Church represents a model for the preservation of Holy Tradition, as pointed out by the fathers of the local Council of Gangra in 340 AD and the Council of Carthage in 419 AD. Some formal models of ecumenical councils can be seen in the activities of the Roman Senate as well as in church councils from the period of the rule of the first Christian emperors, and it has been suggested that the Council of Arles in 314 inspired Emperor Constantine to convene the First Ecumenical Council. The term ecumenical itself is of great importance for understanding the problems of both local churches and their mutual relations, and, as will later be shown, as an epithet from the title of the Patriarch of Constantinople, it will be decisive in the acquisition of autocephaly of the Serbian Church. The structure of the ecumenical church followed political-territorial divisions, which implied the emergence of local churches in the provinces of the empire, which reflects the symphony of views on the church and state oikonomia. However, the status and activities of local churches had to be harmonized with the mutual relationship of more or less independent dioceses within the one universal Church, regulated by the principle of the hierarchia honoris. The ethnic basis of local churches is mentioned in the 2nd canon of the Second Ecumenical Council in Constantinople in 381, which based its primacy on the position of the city and not on some divine principle reflecting the harmony of the church with the political and state oikonomia and akribeia, which is confirmed by the 28th canon as well as the 34th apostolic canon, the 6th and 7th canons of the First Ecumenical Council, the 9th canon of the Antioch local council of 341, and the 2nd and 3rd canons of the Second Ecumenical Council. The patriarchal system, according to Milošević’s interpretations, was completed at the Fourth Ecumenical Council and confirmed by the 36th rule of the Fifth–Sixth Ecumenical Council. When local churches appeared, the ethnic principle was respected, but only after its harmonization with the state-political one. Ethnic churches have their origin in the process of Christianization of barbarian archonties. At the level of independence, the concepts of complete independence – autocephaly and limited independence – autonomy of metropolitanates partially dependent on the throne of Constantinople, can be distinguished. When the Church of Cyprus acquired autocephaly at the Third Ecumenical Council, based on ancient practice and the rules of previous councils, the “sacred rule” of preserving jurisdictional borders was respected. This would be codified by the 17th canon of the Fourth Ecumenical Council, which would secure the right of the Church of Constantinople to spread throughout the Byzantine Empire, as well as, after its weakening, the autocephaly of some local ones, such as the Serbian Church. Although the Empire of Nicaea and the Despotate of Epirus equally expressed aspirations for the liberation of Constantinople and the restoration of the Byzantine Empire, which also represented the basis of mutual friction, the fact that the 28th canon established the primacy of the Constantinople church throne was crucial for Saint Sava in directing his attention to Nicaea. The epithet ecumenical in the title of the Patriarch of Constantinople in Nicaea also played a decisive role. Likewise, the fact of the imperial rights in the election of bishops, established by the 4th canon of the First Ecumenical Council and confirmed by the 12th and 17th canons of the Fourth Ecumenical Council, prompted him to address Emperor Theodore I Laskaris and ask him to mediate with the Ecumenical Patriarch in order to obtain autocephaly for the Serbian Church. Referring to the territorial-ethnic principle, expressed as early as the StudenicaTypikon, in which the Serbian ruler is called the Great King, Saint Sava fought for the autocephaly of the Serbian Church. The presence of the emperor at Sava’s ordination confirmed the legality of the patriarchal decision, and the act itself represents the application of the complete set of canonical (council) rules in church practice, as well as the confirmation of the Byzantine principle of the symphony of the state and the Church, both in relation to the Byzantine and the young Serbian state and Church. Никеја, аутокефалност, канони, Васељенски сабор, Црква Nicaea, autocephaly, canons, Ecumenical Council, Church 2025-12-05T12:22:48.845Z 44 no 46 Драгана Ј. Јањић Институт за српску културу Приштина - Лепосавић 0000-0002-8092-9738 application/pdf 3769014 https://unilib.phaidrabg.rs/o:8618 no yes 1 70 1552253 71A06 ОД РАСА ДО НИКЕЈЕ II 43 61 2025