The issue of belonging of metropolitan Joasaph (Skripitsyn) to the circle of “non-possessors”

Vladislav Petrushko
{"title":"The issue of belonging of metropolitan Joasaph (Skripitsyn) to the circle of “non-possessors”","authors":"Vladislav Petrushko","doi":"10.15382/sturii2023114.26-34","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article contains a critical analysis of the opinion prevailing in russian historiography that the metropolitan of All Russia Joasaph (Skripitsyn), unlike his predecessor Daniil, was a supporter of the so-called «non-possessors» - representatives of russian monasticism who called for renouncement of monasteries from land estates. Based on the sources cited in the article, the author comes to the conclusion that the opinion that metropolitan Joasaph (Skripitsyn) belongs to the «non-possessors» should be recognized as unfounded. It seems that in the context of modern ideas about the controversy between \"Josephites\" and \"non-possessors\" it would be generally incorrect to raise the question of the \"non-possessiveness\" of Ioasaph (Skripitsyn). Russian monasticism in the second quarter of the 16th century. was not totally divided on the issue of attitude to the monastic lands into two irreconcilable camps. The presence in his midst of groups of \"Josephites\" and \"nonpossessors\" who occupied extreme positions on the issue of church land ownership does not mean that all the rest certainly had to decide on such a \"party\" affiliation. Joasaph (Skripitsyn), unlike Metropolitan Daniel and Vassian (Patrikeev), most likely was alien to such a biased view of both the problem of monastic lands and monasticism in general.","PeriodicalId":407912,"journal":{"name":"St. Tikhons' University Review","volume":"39 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"St. Tikhons' University Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15382/sturii2023114.26-34","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The article contains a critical analysis of the opinion prevailing in russian historiography that the metropolitan of All Russia Joasaph (Skripitsyn), unlike his predecessor Daniil, was a supporter of the so-called «non-possessors» - representatives of russian monasticism who called for renouncement of monasteries from land estates. Based on the sources cited in the article, the author comes to the conclusion that the opinion that metropolitan Joasaph (Skripitsyn) belongs to the «non-possessors» should be recognized as unfounded. It seems that in the context of modern ideas about the controversy between "Josephites" and "non-possessors" it would be generally incorrect to raise the question of the "non-possessiveness" of Ioasaph (Skripitsyn). Russian monasticism in the second quarter of the 16th century. was not totally divided on the issue of attitude to the monastic lands into two irreconcilable camps. The presence in his midst of groups of "Josephites" and "nonpossessors" who occupied extreme positions on the issue of church land ownership does not mean that all the rest certainly had to decide on such a "party" affiliation. Joasaph (Skripitsyn), unlike Metropolitan Daniel and Vassian (Patrikeev), most likely was alien to such a biased view of both the problem of monastic lands and monasticism in general.
约阿萨夫(斯克里皮钦)大都会属于 "非占有者 "圈子的问题
文章对俄罗斯史学界流行的观点进行了批判性分析,即全俄罗斯都主教若阿萨夫(斯克里皮钦)与其前任达尼尔不同,是所谓 "非占有者"--要求放弃修道院土地财产的俄罗斯修道院主义代表--的支持者。根据文章中引用的资料,作者得出结论,认为约瑟夫(斯克里皮钦)都主教属于 "非占有者 "的观点应被认为是毫无根据的。从现代关于 "约瑟夫派 "和 "非占有者 "之争的观点来看,提出约阿萨夫(斯克里皮钦)"非占有者 "的问题似乎总体上是不正确的。16 世纪下半叶的俄罗斯修道院在对待修道院土地的态度问题上并非完全分裂为两个不可调和的阵营。约瑟夫派 "和 "不占有派 "在教会土地所有权问题上持极端立场,但这并不意味着其他所有僧侣都必须选择这样的 "党派"。若阿萨夫(斯克里皮钦)与丹尼尔都主教和瓦西安(帕特里凯耶夫)不同,他很可能对寺院土地问题和整个寺院主义都不持这种偏颇的观点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信