І. IntroductIonNew macroeconomic phenomena and financial turbulence after the global crisis have long been calling for concentration of researchers' attention to the role of central banks in the "new" context. At the moment, the established "new normal" phenomenon following the rethinking macroeconomic policy leaves the question open on a desirable institutional functioning of monetary authorities. Implementation of nonconventional monetary policy programs has had an impact on changes in its operational design which resulted in further actualization of question how new features of central banks' operation and environment correlate with the central bank status. At the same time, post-crisis developments in central banking and emergence of new responsibilities only emphasize that traditional challenges do not go away but instead are reinforced with the new ones. In post-crisis reality discussions on central bank independence become more pronounced, with financial stability being their integral expression.The problem of defining a role of central bank independence in the area of financial stability is attributed, to a large extent, to the fact that achievements of price stability and financial stability are not always the same thing. Deficiency of the quantitative basis for the latter, lack of tool-kits for achievement of predictable results, discrepancies in the policies are only a few items on the long list of their differences. Despite huge differences between the substance of the two, however, they still have a wide range of issues in common. Among those common grounds are, in particular, the problems of political pressure, dynamic inconsistency, and quality of institutions.In light of the established views in the publications on the problem of independence and critical thinking on the subject in the context of the new reality of central banking after the crisis, the author offers a hypothesis on existence of two basic