The dissertation is one of the first in Ukraine of special comprehensive research, devoted to the legal regime of property of the Orthodox Church during the synodal period (1700-1917).
Based on the analysis of the state–church relations from the period of the break-up of theappanage system and the establishment of a unified state in Moscow Principality, it was concluded that it was during this period that the foundations of the dominant role of the state were laid. This model hasadopted the name of cesarepapism in historical academic literature.
The dominant role of the state was increased due to Peter I reforms, which resulted in the establishment of the state control over the church property, as well as the replacement of the patriarchal administration by theHoly Synod. A new state body Holy Synod was created. This state body served as an intermediary through which the monarchy administered the church’s external and internal affairs. Simultaneously, the office of Ober-procurator was establishedwithin the Holy Synod, . The role and importance of this body remained significant throughout the synodal period. The secularization reform of 1764 resulted in the deprivation of bishops’ houses and monasteries of land holdings with the simultaneous introduction of staff lists, which provided grounds for regular payments from the state treasury.
In the present research, the correlation between the terms “Canon law” and “Church law” is analysed. The Church law is considered as a system of norms originating from the supreme power, with the partial implementation of the rules of the Canon law. The Church law regulated the internal structure of the Church, the legal status of its individual institutions, relations with other churches of different faiths, spiritual centres and the State, the issues of church property, as well as specific issues attributed to the jurisdiction of the Orthodox monotheistic church: marriage, family, spiritual wills, guardianship and care.
Based on the analysis of imperial legislation and practice of the Civil Cassation Department of the Governing Senate, it was concluded that the status of legal entities has been acquired by certain church institutions – by virtue of their recognition of property rights, as well as the right to be plaintiffs and defendants in court.
Based on the analysis of the hierarchical structure of the Orthodox Church, based on the canonical rules of submission to the bishopric authority, as well as the norms of law that were in force at that time, it was concluded that the Holy Synod, as well as the ruling bishops and spiritual consistories in the process of implementation of the powers of the owners by certain church institutions, was made. Such a role was supported by legislative initiatives, measures to unify law enforcement, as well as power-administrative and managerial functions.
The ways of acquiring church property rights to real estate objects were found out – through donations, offerings, spiritual testament, purchase and sale and as a result of the application of the rule of “zemstvo” prescription.
The analysis has provided grounds to conclude that the movable property of the church, depending on its affiliation with the things of the sacred or sanctified, was also subject to strict regulation. A separate type of church property was made up of cash – the means of wards, as well as circle and board fees for missionary needs.
Protection of church property was carried out by a court order on general grounds, since the property of the church, in contrast to parochial lands and the property of the sacred and clergy, was considered public. In 1902, Senate practice has changed the prior understanding of the church land as a sacred, and, therefore, inalienable because of the non-application of the general rule on limitation. Protection of church property was also carried out by granting the church preferences in the form of exemption from taxation, for example, a municipal (“city”) collection.
An academically grounded conclusion was made about the inexpediency of merging State and church institutions, as well as state control over the internal and external life of the church as a social union on the basis of the analysis of state-church relations in the Russian Empire. The role of the State at the present stage should be reduced to the establishment of rules for the creation, registration and activities of church structures, legal regulation of church property, as well as, if necessary, the provision and justification of preferences for its taxation and protection.
