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

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...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Vladislav Petrushko
Format: Article
Language:Russian
Published: St. Tikhon's Orthodox University 2023-12-01
Series:Вестник Православного Свято-Тихоновского гуманитарного университета: Серия ИИ. История, история Русской Православной Церкви
Subjects:
Online Access:https://periodical.pstgu.ru/ru/pdf/article/8203
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849398507161518080
author Vladislav Petrushko
author_facet Vladislav Petrushko
author_sort Vladislav Petrushko
collection DOAJ
description 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.
format Article
id doaj-art-a19b422efe5a4bb8b6a25acd2bf2053d
institution Kabale University
issn 1991-6434
2409-4811
language Russian
publishDate 2023-12-01
publisher St. Tikhon's Orthodox University
record_format Article
series Вестник Православного Свято-Тихоновского гуманитарного университета: Серия ИИ. История, история Русской Православной Церкви
spelling doaj-art-a19b422efe5a4bb8b6a25acd2bf2053d2025-08-20T03:38:35ZrusSt. Tikhon's Orthodox UniversityВестник Православного Свято-Тихоновского гуманитарного университета: Серия ИИ. История, история Русской Православной Церкви1991-64342409-48112023-12-011141142634http://dx.doi.org/10.15382/sturII2023114.26-345The issue of belonging of metropolitan Joasaph (Skripitsyn) to the circle of “non-possessors”Vladislav PetrushkoThe 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.https://periodical.pstgu.ru/ru/pdf/article/8203orthodoxy russian church metropolitan monasticism «non-possessors» «josephites»православие русская церковь митрополит монашество «нестяжатели» «иосифляне»
spellingShingle Vladislav Petrushko
The issue of belonging of metropolitan Joasaph (Skripitsyn) to the circle of “non-possessors”
Вестник Православного Свято-Тихоновского гуманитарного университета: Серия ИИ. История, история Русской Православной Церкви
orthodoxy
russian church
metropolitan
monasticism
«non-possessors»
«josephites»
православие
русская церковь
митрополит
монашество
«нестяжатели»
«иосифляне»
title The issue of belonging of metropolitan Joasaph (Skripitsyn) to the circle of “non-possessors”
title_full The issue of belonging of metropolitan Joasaph (Skripitsyn) to the circle of “non-possessors”
title_fullStr The issue of belonging of metropolitan Joasaph (Skripitsyn) to the circle of “non-possessors”
title_full_unstemmed The issue of belonging of metropolitan Joasaph (Skripitsyn) to the circle of “non-possessors”
title_short The issue of belonging of metropolitan Joasaph (Skripitsyn) to the circle of “non-possessors”
title_sort issue of belonging of metropolitan joasaph skripitsyn to the circle of non possessors
topic orthodoxy
russian church
metropolitan
monasticism
«non-possessors»
«josephites»
православие
русская церковь
митрополит
монашество
«нестяжатели»
«иосифляне»
url https://periodical.pstgu.ru/ru/pdf/article/8203
work_keys_str_mv AT vladislavpetrushko theissueofbelongingofmetropolitanjoasaphskripitsyntothecircleofnonpossessors
AT vladislavpetrushko issueofbelongingofmetropolitanjoasaphskripitsyntothecircleofnonpossessors