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.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
