Ulteriori informazioni
Klappentext This 1871 book is the first of six volumes documenting the controversial life of Nicon (1605 1681)! Patriarch of Moscow. Zusammenfassung The theologian William Palmer (1811–1879), a member of the Oxford Movement, made several controversial visits to Russia to study the Orthodox Church. This book, first published in 1871, is Volume 1 of Palmer's six-volume translation of documents relating to the life of Nicon (1605–1681), Patriarch of Moscow. Inhaltsverzeichnis Preface; 1. Nicon, when already a bishop, was reordained. What is to be said of this?; 2. Nicon forbade that condemned felons should be confessed and communicated. What of this?; 3. Nicon, in robing, used a comb and a looking-glass. Is this right?; 4. Nicon, after abdicating the patriarchate, still ordains. What of this?; 5. Is a verbal abdication enough?; 6. Are the bishops culpable for not having disallowed Nicon's evil device?; 7. Would it be well that a synod should be held to settle this matter of the patriarch, that so there be no scandals and disturbances in the empire?; 8. Can the Tsar convoke that synod; or must it be convoked by patriarchal authority?; 9. Nicon contemned the synod held here at Moscow by command of the Tsar, and called it 'a Judaical synagogue'. What is to be said of this?; 10. What is to be said to the assertion that the patriarch is the head?; 11. Can the members judge the head, and their own ruler?; 12. Nicon would never call the bishops his brethren, but regarded them all as vastly beneath him, because they had been consecrated by him. What of this?; 13. Nicon styled himself 'Great Hossoudar', because the Tsar always so called him. Did he do wrong?; 14. Nicon is now building a monastery, and he has named it 'The New Jerusalem'. Is it well so to transfer, and to dishonour, the name of the Holy City?; 15. Does not St. Germanus say that the prothesis figures Bethlehem, and the holy throne Christ's sepulchre?; 16. Nicon plundered the episcopal see of Kolomna, not liking to have another bishop so close to the patriarch. What is to be said of this?; 17. Nicon organises baggage-trains, and builds fortified precincts, and loves to dwell in waste and unpeopled places; and he has filled those places with his hired men and retainers. Should a bishop do thus?; 18. Nicon says that he is not out of his diocese, but has withdrawn from Moscow only for temporary reasons; 19. Was it right in Nicon to fly through fear?; 20. Has the Tsar sinned in that he has let the Church remain in widowhood?; 21. And if there are any bishops and boyars who do not petition the Tsar, and move him to make a complete end, and to set all to rights in this business, do they sin; 22. Nicon anathematises and interdicts. But is his curse now of any force?; 23. Is it proper for a bishop to scourge, and to strike, and to exile?; 24. Our most prosperous Tsar committed to Nicon the supervision of all ecclesiastical causes. What is to be said of this?; 25. Has the Tsar power to take away those privileges from the man to whom he may have granted them?; 26. Nicon inveighs against the Tsar, because he established the Monastery Court, and placed in it lay judges; and because he appoints to monasteries archimandrites and hegoumens. What of this?; 27. What of one who calls our Tsar a tyrant, and dares to revile him as an unrighteous invader and plundered; what out to be done to him, according to the canons?; 28. Nicon justifies himself by this, that they never summoned him to a synod to clear himself by giving reasons for his departure. What are we to say?; 29. Nicon blames his bishops because they have not kept their oaths, but have cast him off, and gone off from their obedience to him. What of this?; 30. Nicon cursed the Boyar Simeon Lucian Streshneff for teaching his dog to bless like the patriarch. Is it right to curse for such a cause?....
