BULGARIA

BULGARIA. – Balkan state bordered by Yugoslavia, Greece, Romania, and the Black Sea.

SUMMARY:

I. Geography

II. Historical profile of Christianity from its origins to the present day

III. The Bulgarian rite

IV. Christian archaeology

V. Art

VI. Literature

VII. Educational system.

I. GEOGRAPHY

Autonomous from Turkey since 1878, independent as a kingdom (tsar) from 1908, it became a republic on 15 September 1946. The territory (110,842 sq. km.), which has undergone several changes in the last thirty years (after the Second World War it was enlarged by the reacquisition of Dobruja, ceded by Romania), is divided in two by the Balkan mountain range, which crosses it from west to east, ending at the Black Sea. To the north stretches a broad plateau separated from the neighboring Wallachian plain by the Danube; to the south a series of intermontane depressions, the largest of which is that of Plovdiv (Philippopolis); beyond these, to the west and south, rise other mountain masses (Rila, Pirin, Rhodopes, Strandzha). The country’s vocation is agricultural-pastoral, with a predominance (in economic value) of industrial crops (tobacco, sunflower, roses, strawberries) over cereals and of sheep farming over all other livestock. Poultry farming is of great importance; notable progress has been made in modern industry (textiles, milling, rubber), which tends increasingly to utilize national products.

The population (7 million in 1947; density 63 per sq. km., the highest among Balkan states) is made up of over four-fifths Bulgarians, mostly Orthodox (more than 100,000 are Pomaks or Islamized Bulgarians, living in the mountainous regions of the south); after them the most notable ethnic group is the Turks (today less than 10% of the total), concentrated especially in the northeastern regions. They are followed by Gypsies (2%), Romanians, Jews (less than 1%), Armenians, etc. Urban centers (in our sense) are few and small. The capital, Sofia (400,000 inhabitants with suburbs), occupies a position eccentric to the state. Varna (70,000 inhabitants) and Burgas (36,000 inhabitants) are the main ports, Plovdiv (100,000 inhabitants) the largest center in southern Bulgaria.

Before the proclamation of the republic, the state, while recognizing as national the Greek-Orthodox Church of Slav rite to which 85% of the population belonged, tolerated all other cults. Muslims numbered less than one million, Catholics over 50,000, settled especially in southern Bulgaria.

| Districts | Area in sq. km. | Population in thousands |
|-----------------|-----------------|-------------------------|
| Bulgaria | 13,621 | 554 |
| Plovdiv | 15,380 | 906 |
| Shumen | 14,689 | 1,020 |
| Stara Zagora | 15,552 | 812 |
| Dobrich | 11,143 | 739 |
| Kyustendil | 11,843 | 1,096 |
| TOTAL | 110,842 | 6,397 |

II. HISTORICAL PROFILE OF CHRISTIANITY FROM ITS ORIGINS TO THE PRESENT DAY

1. From the origins to the Turkish conquest (864–1393)

Like all autocephalous national Churches, the Bulgarian Church has followed the same vicissitudes as the nation. Its geographical extent has varied with the borders of the Bulgarian state; its independence and its more or less pronounced subjection to the patriarchate of Constantinople were tied to political events.

He had condemned the iconoclasts and decreed the annexation to the patriarchate of Constantinople of the part of eastern Illyricum remaining under Byzantine rule (732).

Rome did not cease to protest against this violation and to duly request from the Byzantine emperors the restoration of its rights over these regions. Its claims became particularly insistent in the second half of the 9th century when the Bulgars, a tribe of Turkish or Finnic origin, after securing an independent kingdom in that region, converted to Christianity.

**Bulgaria – Ancient and Modern Ecclesiastical Circumscriptions:**
1. State borders;
2. Borders of modern ecclesiastical circumscriptions;
3. Railways.

It was King Boris or Bogoris (852–89) who took the initiative in this conversion. As far as can be ascertained, he would at first have liked to request baptism from the Franks, with whom he had concluded a political alliance in 862 against Rastislav, king of Moravia. But on the point of opening hostilities against the latter, the Byzantines—victorious over the Saracens in Asia Minor and allies of Rastislav, who had asked them for missionaries (SS. Cyril and Methodius)—made hostile demonstrations against the Bulgarian coast. To extricate himself, Boris sought peace from Emperor Michael III and promised to have himself and his people baptized by Byzantine missionaries, whose dispatch he requested. Thus, toward the end of 864 or at the beginning of 865, Boris received baptism, having Emperor Michael III himself as his sponsor, from whom he took his name. Christianity was imposed upon the Bulgarian subjects, and those who refused were mercilessly massacred (F. Dvornik, *Les Slaves, Byzance et Rome, au IXe siècle*, Paris 1926, pp. 184 ff., 226 ff.).

Thus was born the Bulgarian Church, but in the midst of schism, since at that very time the Photian schism was in full swing, with Photius having been solemnly deposed by Pope St. Nicholas I in 863. Boris’s conversion to Christianity had been sincere but not disinterested.

The aim of the Bulgarian Khan was to render himself in all respects like the Byzantine *basileus*, granting Bulgaria both political and religious independence. He wanted for his new Church a patriarch who could confer imperial consecration upon him and thus make of himself a true *tsar*, a true *basileus*. But the Byzantines refused to grant this to him, and Photius sent him as missionaries only simple priests with a grand dogmatic letter. Dissatisfied with this, Boris then turned to Rome and as early as 866 asked Pope St. Nicholas I for an archbishop and bishops to establish a complete hierarchy in his kingdom; but his wishes were only partially fulfilled. The two bishops sent by the Pope to Bulgaria, Formosus of Porto and Paul of Populonia, could only be provisional, since they already held episcopal sees, and Rome still strictly observed the canon of the Council of Serdica prohibiting the translation of bishops from one see to another. Thus, despite Boris’s insistence on having Formosus—whom he felt a particular affection for—as archbishop and patriarch, Nicholas I always refused, just as he denied him the deacon Marino, whom he had designated after Formosus’s recall. The prince, much aggrieved, took advantage of the meeting of the Eighth Ecumenical Council in Constantinople (869–870) to have the question of the Bulgarian Church definitively settled. It was examined in an extra-conciliar session, carefully prepared in advance by the Byzantines, and attended only by Emperor Basil I, Patriarch Ignatius, the Pope’s legates, representatives of the Eastern patriarchs, and Bulgarian deputies. On the question of whether the Bulgarian Church should depend on Rome or Constantinople, the Byzantines very cleverly proposed as arbiters of the matter the representatives of the three Eastern patriarchs, already won over to their cause. In vain did the Roman legates attempt to assert the ancient rights of the Popes over eastern Illyricum. Their complaints were brushed aside, and it was recalled that Bulgarian territory had for a long time been part of the Byzantine Empire, and the Bulgarians were convinced. Boris expelled the Latin missionaries and replaced them with Archbishop Joseph and the ten bishops sent by Patriarch Ignatius (870). Pope John VIII displayed all his energy and diplomacy to induce both the Byzantines and the Bulgarians to change their decision (872–882). Though he prevailed with the Byzantines at the Photian Council of 879–880, he failed in his efforts with Boris, who refused to listen to reason.

The Bulgarian prince, however, was far from satisfied with the Byzantines, since they always refused him not only the patriarch he demanded but also the title of *tsar* for himself. In 886, the disciples of St. Methodius, expelled from Moravia by the German clergy, took refuge with him, and he seized the opportunity to rid himself of the Byzantine clergy and to introduce Slavic liturgy into his kingdom.

Era a further step toward complete autonomy, which eventually came to be recognized both by Rome and by Constantinople: by Rome, before 924, under the successor of Boris, Simeon (893–927), if credence is to be given to the Bulgarian king Kaloyan in his letter to Innocent III, dated 1202 (cf. A. Theiner, *Monumenta historiae Slavorum meridionalium*, I, Rome 1863, pp. 15–20); by the court of Byzantium in 945, under Tsar Peter (927–69).

Yet the days of the Bulgarian Empire were numbered, for against it the Byzantine emperor Basil II, surnamed the Bulgar-Slayer, raged. From 986 to 1018, in five successive campaigns, he annexed it piece by piece. With political independence, Bulgaria lost its religious autonomy. The first Bulgarian patriarch, who had been forced to change his residence seven times because of the vicissitudes of war, had finally settled at Ohrid. It was here that Basil II established the center of the new autonomous Greek-Bulgarian archbishopric, incorporated into the Byzantine Church, which endured under that name from 1020 until the Turkish conquest in 1203, though undergoing transformations. The most important occurred after the restoration of the Bulgarian kingdom (1186–1393) and the establishment of the second Bulgarian patriarchate at Tarnovo (1204–1393). As in the tenth century and for the same reasons, the Bulgarian princes turned to Rome to obtain for themselves the imperial crown and for their Church autonomy. After laborious negotiations and the formal union with the Church of Rome, Pope Innocent III granted both to Kaloyan in 1204. The union with Rome was already broken by 1232, and efforts to restore it failed miserably. The principal attempt was made at the Union Council of Lyons, under Michael Palaeologus, in 1274. In 1277, Patriarch Joachim of Tarnovo joined John Bekkos of Constantinople in recognizing the supreme authority of the Holy See.

2. The Patriarchate of Ohrid (1393–1767)

The patriarchate of Tarnovo lasted until the Turkish conquest (1393). The Bulgarian Church fell again under the religious jurisdiction of the Greeks and was reattached to the autonomous archbishop of Ohrid (v. ACCIDIA), who was adorned with the pompous title of patriarch and subsequently underwent many transformations and reductions. From the second half of the seventeenth century onward, the “Ecumenical” patriarchate increasingly interfered in the affairs of the archbishop. The Greeks often supplanted national candidates for bishoprics, and the Hellenization of the region was pursued relentlessly. Prelates sent from Constantinople displayed a barbarous zeal in destroying every monument of ancient Bulgarian literature, and only the lower clergy, chosen from among the people, retained the Slavonic alphabet. Finally, in 1767, this phantom of Ohrid was officially incorporated into the “Ecumenical” patriarchate.

3. Emancipation (1767–1872)

The nationalist excesses of the Phanariot prelates provoked a violent reaction among the Bulgarians at the beginning of the nineteenth century, when the Balkan nations began to shake off the Turkish yoke. Through books and schools, Bulgarian patriots succeeded in a few years in awakening national sentiment. Their success was rapid, and by 1860 they felt strong enough to enter directly into conflict with the “Ecumenical” patriarchate and demand radical reforms in the administration of dioceses where the Bulgarian population was in the majority. The Turks, as arbiters between the two parties—since both Bulgarians and Greeks were their subjects—after ten years finally yielded to Bulgarian demands. An imperial firman of 11 March 1870 created an independent Bulgarian exarchate separate from the “Ecumenical” patriarchate, which, however, strenuously rejected the new arrangement.

For two years, attempts were made in vain to reach an understanding. Unable to wield spiritual weapons against the Bulgarians any longer, the Phanariotes endeavored to convene a council of the entire Eastern Orthodoxy to condemn the recalcitrants, but only the autocephalous Churches of Greek tongue responded to the call. The Synod met in Constantinople in September 1872 and decreed the separation of the Bulgarians from Orthodox communion, treating them as schismatics and *filetists*—that is, separatists (not nationalists, as this term is often translated). The Bulgarians had indeed committed a grave canonical innovation by creating Bulgarian bishops in places where Greek bishops already existed. Their exarch himself had taken up residence opposite the Phanariote. From the earliest days of the Church, the basis of ecclesiastical jurisdiction has been territorial, not racial or tribal (συλλή). One bishop only in the same diocese—this is the rule that the Bulgarians openly violated. Yet it must be said that the Greeks themselves had provoked this illegality by reserving for themselves most of the episcopal sees where the majority of the population was Bulgarian. Despite this illegality, the decree of the Synod of Constantinople was accepted only by the autocephalous Churches of Greek tongue.

The Slav Church, the Romanian Church, and the Arabic-speaking Churches of Syria took no notice of it and remained in communion with the Bulgarian Church. The result was that from 1872 onward, the unity of ecclesiastical communion among the various autocephalous Churches of the Byzantine rite disappeared, since the Bulgarian schism persisted until recent times. It is strange that ecclesiastical communion was maintained between the Greek Churches, which excommunicated the Bulgarian Church, and the autocephalous Churches that remained in communion with II.

4. The present situation

The organization of the Bulgarian Church did not immediately undergo substantial change after the establishment of the exarchate in 1870. The organic statute then promulgated was revised in 1895 and remained in force, though certain provisions were rendered obsolete by events. Since 1870, the Bulgarians have become a fully independent nation, almost all of them gathered within the territory of their kingdom, and they can no longer be accused of *filetism*, whereas in our own day various other autocephalous Churches have created ethnic bishoprics in different places. The city of New York alone has in recent times counted as many as seven dissident bishops of different races. The Bulgarian schism was therefore bound to disappear, since its foundation had vanished. Indeed, recent negotiations between the “Ecumenical” patriarchate and the Bulgarian Synod to restore union have met with happy results. On 22 February 1945, the Holy Synod of Constantinople lifted the excommunication of the Bulgarian Church and recognized its autocephaly.

The Synod is permanent, composed of five bishops and presided over by the most senior metropolitan, who governs the Church; the four bishops other than the president are renewed every four years. There are eleven eparchies or dioceses, whose holders are elected by the Synod from two candidates presented by a mixed diocesan assembly. A new organic statute fully in keeping with the present political situation is still awaited. The nominal number of faithful in 1937 was 5,128,298 out of a total population of 6,077,934.

5. The Catholic Bulgarian Church

The Catholic Church has in Bulgaria a few thousand faithful divided into two groups: one of Latin rite and the other of Byzantine-Slav rite.

The first, by far the more numerous, consists largely of the descendants of the Paulicians and Bog

Gornili (v.) were converted in the 17th century by Franciscans who came from Bosnia, whence their name Pavlicani. Persecuted for a long time by the Turks, they were able to reconstitute themselves during the 19th century and today form the diocese of Nicopoli (16,500 faithful in 1930) and the apostolic vicariate of Sofia and Philippopoli (24,500 faithful in 1930). Parochial service is ensured by the Capuchin Friars Minor, assisted by various Latin male and female congregations.

The Byzantine-Slav group originated in 1860 when the Bulgarians began to shake off the yoke of the “Ecumenical” patriarchate. At one point the number of adherents rose to as many as 60,000, but this movement was nipped in the bud by secret intrigues of the Russian government, which had the first head of the United Church, Joseph Sokolski, a venerable hegumen whom the Pope himself had consecrated (1861), removed. Those who remained steadfast in their adherence to the union were grouped in 1883 into two apostolic vicariates: that of Thrace and that of Macedonia, with Adrianople and Salonika as their respective sees. An apostolic administrator resided in Constantinople with the title of archbishop as the representative before the Turkish government. This organization disappeared after the Balkan War of 1912–13 and the World War of 1914–18. At present the Byzantine-rite Bulgarian Catholics, numbering about 6,000 and scattered throughout Bulgarian territory, are under an apostolic administrator residing in Sofia. Since 1948 the Bulgarian government, dominated by the Communists, has subjected Catholics to a severe regime of harassment.

III. THE BULGARIAN RITE

The rite in use among the Bulgarians is the Byzantine rite; only in certain liturgical observances proper to them or of Greek origin and in the celebration of some regional feasts does it differ from the Slavonic rite in use in Russia and Serbia. In its history the following periods may be distinguished. When Tsar Boris decided (870) in favor of the Church of Constantinople, the Byzantine rite, already introduced by Greek priests, became definitively established in the country; but with the arrival of the disciples of St. Methodius, expelled from Moravia (c. 886), the Slavonic language gradually took the place of Greek, and at the beginning of the reign of Tsar Simeon (893) St. Clement, the first Slavonic-speaking bishop, completed the Slavonic version of the liturgical books.

In the 14th century the important corrupting activity of Patriarch Euthymius of Tirnovo and his school, based on a profound knowledge of Greek, renewed the Slavonic text, preferring a language close to that in use in the Russian lands and thus widely diffused. In the following period the rite of the Bulgarian Church, governed by a Greek hierarchy, adopted some particular usages of the Greeks, but from the 17th century it came under the influence of the liturgical books printed in Russia. The most recent period, begun a few decades ago, shows a greater independence and a bold spirit of adaptation to modern needs: rubrics only in Bulgarian alongside the text of the prayers in Church Slavonic, the celebration of the Divine Liturgy without a deacon as normal, the shortened marriage and funeral rites, and the abbreviated and updated baptismal rite.

IV. Christian Archaeology

Because of its geographical position, Bulgaria marks a compulsory thoroughfare in relations between East and West. Hence Bulgaria has in the past been subject to the influences of the various artistic trends migrating from East to West and vice versa. This explains the simultaneous appearance and development in Bulgaria of the most varied architectural forms found in early Christian architecture.

The most fruitful period of Christian construction, before the arrival and settlement of the Bulgarians, is the 4th–7th centuries. From the vast and rich sample of early Christian churches and basilicas scattered about, it is clear that in Bulgaria all the styles and forms of ancient Christian architecture are represented, with their pure and mixed original elements, forming a more or less pleasing and harmonious whole.

Classified by type, the early Christian basilicas of Bulgaria display several characteristics with little local uniformity. A form of rare exception for the East is that of the basilica of Klissek-Koj (6th century) with a Latin-cross plan, with a narthex and a façade flanked by two rectangular buildings that respectively form the baptistery and the vestry, the latter provided with a spacious atrium.

The type of Roman basilica, with minor changes, is represented instead by the group of basilicas at Hissar Sindgirli (4th–6th centuries), some of which are three-aisled and others single-aisled. They differ from the Roman ones in having a narthex instead of an atrium, and some display a polygonal apse on the exterior rather than the circular one generally found in Roman basilicas. Types of cruciform basilicas, with a dome, three aisles, and three apses (the central one polygonal on the exterior), are those of the Deer at Pirdop, of Aboba, and of Pirinč Tepč. In that of the Deer at Pirdop, the façade is flanked by

The baptistery has its own small apse and a changing room, communicating with the narthex by means of special doors. Of the so-called Mozarabic type is the basilica of Ciobán-Déré, with a single nave, in which the apse stands out in the shape of a horse.

The prototype of the centrally-planned basilica is represented by the church of St George in Sofia (4th century), but more simply by the so-called Red Basilica of Perustiza (7th century), centrally planned with a dome, two semicircular apses facing each other and a double narthex.

The basilican type of the Mesembria group, with three naves and five apses, is particularly characteristic; the most striking example of these is the basilica of the Sea. Hellenistic in its overall design, this basilica, with its architectural forms and especially the particularity of its apses, exerted a great influence on later basilican constructions after the stabilization of the Bulgars in the Balkan peninsula.

At Tropeos is found the Syrian basilican form, with its characteristic two towers on the façade, which at Bélovo are transformed into two prominent domes. Both are of the 6th century.

The Ravenna type of basilica, with a circular apse inside and polygonal outside, with windows on the different sides of the polygon, is found at St Sophia in Sofia (6th century), where, however, the windows are in two superimposed orders.

Other characteristics of the paleochristian basilica in Bulgaria are the doors of the apse, as at Hissar and Mesembria, and also the projecting arcades on the façade and on the different sides, as at Pirinč Tepé and in many other places.

V. Arte

Recent discoveries have shown in the region a flourishing prehistoric civilization in relation with Asia Minor and the Aegean, evidenced by tumuli, often chambered under Hellenic influence, by Cycladic-type idols, by dolmens, by anthropomorphic rock drawings (Backo Rivo) and by pottery. The iconography of native deities shows traces that persist until the Roman age; even the type of the horseman was represented in the manner of Greek art. From the 6th century BC Greek influence became stronger (tumuli of the Thracian dynasts of Duvanlji) and continued into the Roman age with a predilection for the Praxitelean type, especially on the Black Sea coast. With the Roman penetration new cities arose such as Oescus and Nicopolis, whose remains still show signs of their former splendour, while the disturbance produced by the subsequent decline of Roman power is clearly revealed by the monuments of the 3rd and 4th centuries, especially the stelae, which increasingly depart from classical taste.

VI. LETTERATURA

The origin of Bulgarian literature dates back to the second half of the 9th century, to the years when the Bulgars, through the agency of Prince Boris, converted to Christianity (865).

Modern Bulgarian oscillates between the historical theme (the period of Turkish domination) and rustic realism (scenes of nature, genre scenes, idyllic descriptions of rural life). In recent years Bulgarian literature has sometimes expressed aspirations of a distinctly social character. During the Second World War some writers participated, in its final phase, in the resistance against the Germans. Recent poetic production sometimes reflects the influence of Mayakovsky and other Soviet poets. Increasingly rigid directives are being imposed on literature, which are meant to coincide with the ideological orientations of the new regime.

VII. ORDINAMENTO SCOLASTICO

Between 1945 and 1948 the Higher Council for Education established a series of school reforms, making Bulgarian schools the political centres of the Popular Patriotic Front, from which religious instruction has been banned; the nine Catholic institutes attended by over 5,000 students were closed, as were numerous foreign schools, except those belonging to diplomatic missions, which, however, may not be attended by the children of Bulgarian citizens.

Textbooks printed before 9 September 1944 are not permitted and have been replaced by new manuals prepared by the “Directorate of State Editions of the Ministry of the Popular Patriotic Front.” The school system of monarchical Bulgaria provided for the following types of school: elementary schools divided into progymnasia of three years and communal schools of four years; gymnasia divided into scientific, semi-classical and classical.

These three types of gymnasium were subsequently modified into scientific and classical. The regulations of 14 August 1941, abolished by the communist regime, stipulated that school instruction should be apolitical, free and national. Religious instruction was given in all types of school. There existed a six-year teacher-training gymnasium attended by students who intended to pursue a career in communal teaching; elementary school teachers, on the other hand, had to attend two-year teacher-training colleges. Today’s instruction is divided into pre-school and school education.

Pre-school education is provided in 738 kindergartens, 626 children’s homes and 2,300 summer children’s homes.

School education is divided into 6,433 communal schools, 2,866 progymnasia, 258 popular gymnasia corresponding to the old type of scientific gymnasium, where Latin and Greek are optional subjects while Russian is compulsory, in addition to one modern language of choice (Italian, English, French, German). There are very many vocational schools.

There are three universities: one in Sofia, founded in 1888, one in Plovdiv, founded in 1946, and one in Varna, founded in 1946.

Since 1946 there has been a regular chair of Italian philology in Sofia. — See Pl. XIV.