§ 2. Sights at the power and the right of patriarch Nikona

the Future leader of one of Split camps - patriarch Nikon (its ­ civil name Nikita Minin) was born on May, 7th, 1605 in the Mordovian country ­ family in village Veldemanovo near to Nizhni Novgorod.

Nikita was trained in the reading and writing at the parish priest. In twelve years ­ the monastery has left in ­ Makarev Zheltovodsky, was in it the novice till 1624. At the desire of parents has come back home, married and has accepted a curacy. ­ Served at first in the next village Lyskove, and about 1626 has been appointed ­ by the priest of one of the Moscow churches, under the petition of the Moscow merchants who have learnt about it nachitannosti. The death of children in 1635 has pushed Nikita to the decision to leave in a monastery, and at the age of 30 years it has accepted postthreshing barns with ­ name Nikon in the Solovetsky monastery. In 1646 has gone to Moscow where was with bow to young tsar Alexey Mihajlovichu, has made on ­ it good impression. The tsar ordered Nikonu to remain in Moscow, and to Patriarch Joseph - to devote it in archimandrites of the Novospassky monastery. Nikon was a part of an informal circle of the spiritual and secular persons, which professor N.F.Kapterev names a circle «adherents of piety». The main ideologists of this group - confessor Alexey Mihajlovicha the protopriest of Blagoveshchensk cathedral Stefan Vonifatev, the boyar F. M.Rtishchev and the protopriest ­ of the Kazan cathedral John Neronov - put before themselves and the associates a problem of revival of a religious-church life in the Moscow ­ state, morals improvements as parishioners, and clergy,­ education plantings. Nikon has started to go to the tsar in a palace ­ every Friday for conversations and council not only about spiritual affairs, but also about ­ the state. Alexey Mihajlovich has very much become friends with Nikonom. On March, 11th

1649 Nikon has been erected in a dignity of the metropolitan Novgorod and Velikolutsky ­ by the Patriarch Jerusalem Paisiem, were then in Moscow, and after death of patriarch Joseph in 1652 became the sixth Russian patriarch. Only Nikon and the father of the first tsar of a dynasty of Romanovs - Michael, - patriarch Philaret ­ carried along with the tsar a title «the Great sovereign» that shows special respect for it even from the monarch [151] .

About features of political and legal sights of patriarch Nikona it is possible to judge under its messages to the tsar, letters to east patriarchs.

the Important source of legal sights Nikona is Kormchaja the book [152] : as Alexey Mihajlovich has embodied the views in Cathedral ulozhenii so the patriarch has expressed them in Kormchej. It has been published by summer of 1653, in it the idea about the superiority of the spiritual power over ­ secular was propagandised,­ besides Kormchaja has acted in a role of the tool for ideological struggle with ­ Cathedral ulozheniem 1649 g [153] . Nikon even convinced the tsar at all to abolish Ulozhenie and to replace it Kormchej [154] .

it is curious, that idea of creation of the new collection of church and secular laws - Kormchej, or the Nomocanon - for a management in court and the church authority belonged to Alexey Mihajlovichu. The edition have started in

1650 (in a year after an exit Cathedral ulozhenija) in Joseph's patriarchate.

Kormchaja it was reviewed, checked and printed about four years so patriarch Joseph who has started the edition, has deceased, ­ not having waited its terminations, and the book has been published already at patriarch Nikone in 1653 Nikon has reversed in work of the predecessor ­ the foreword («has included instead of this the prostrannejshee a statement»), and also has reprinted last sheet on which new date of the edition has been specified and
two patriarchs - Joseph and Nikon [155] are mentioned already. It was the first in ­ domestic history printing Kormchaja.

In Kormchuju the book (Nomocanon) those norms (rules ­ of sacred fathers and tserkovno-civil laws) which were in the Greek Helmsmen have entered only­. Articles from Russian hand-written Helmsmen in the printing have not entered, in it was not mentioned at all neither about Stoglavom a cathedral of 1551, nor other cathedral ­ decisions as though them at all never was, and ostensibly Russian church constantly was guided only by rules of the Greek Helmsmen. By means of such course Alexey Mihajlovicha's political order was carried out­: the eternal unity of all orthodox church was underlined, and ­ claims on a universal throne of the Russian tsar, as unique ­ successor and keeper of Christian traditions according to the concept «Moscow - the Third Rome» were proved­.

In Kormchej have as much as possible kept and even have expanded the block of articles including the Byzantian legislation. In one collection have appeared are consolidated prohiron (Chapter 49) [156] and the Eclogue (Chapter 50) [157] (in Kormchej they are named accordingly «the Law of the town head» and «Leon the tsar wise and Konstantin glavizny about meeting of a betrothal both about bratseh and about other various ­ wines») in spite of the fact that the maintenance of their heads was often crossed, and texts included rules of law not coinciding among themselves. Any work on comparison of these norms by the legislator it has not been done: ­ secular jurists considered as the basic regulatory legal act Cathedral Ulozhenie, and Kormchuju - as a tradition tribute, some kind of ­ a monument where uniform, it is far not a harmonous stream "have merged" norms of the Roman Law. Clerics did not have not enough legal literacy for
the coordination and streamlining of instructions Kormchej of the book [158] . ­ Texts of short stories of Alex Komnina (Chapter 43) [159] which sense could be understood only in comparison to the Greek text [160] have been completely kept in structure Kormchej. In Kormchej this chapter has received the name «New precept ­ of pious tsar Alex Komnina». Its maintenance duplicated the fiftieth chapter as it has been devoted a marriage order. Composers Kormchej at all have not cleaned article, obviously inapplicable for Russia. For example, where it was a question of marriages of slaves not the Greek origin: bolgarov, ­ Serbs, other concepts "slavery", "slaves" followed adapt under time and spatial conditions: at all to exclude or replace ­ with concepts "serfs", "lackeys", "servants". Clerics, not owning legal technics, have almost literally copied the certificates ­ as which authors ­ authoritative persons for orthodox church or cathedrals acted.

So, the tendency to preservation of the Byzantian texts and refusal of use of Russian sources was available.

Nikon has included in earlier mentioned by us "prostrannejshee" ­ the foreword to Kormchej to the book article «About Roman otpadenii» which was ­­ the book » [161] (the collection of articles against Catholics and the Lutherans, constituted Stefanom Zizaniem where he aspired to prove, that the Pope antihrist or its forerunner) is taken from« Kazanja sacred Cyril about antihriste and its signs, with expansion ­ of a science against heresies roznyh », more known under the name« Kirillov­. In Russia Kirillov the book has been printed for the first time at tsar Michael Fedoroviche concerning refusal of Danish prince Voldemar,
the groom of the imperial daughter, to accept Orthodoxy.

Nikon fills foreword Kormchej with articles, not paying attention ­ on their origin and mission. Therefore in the book have appeared ­ nearby and compositions of Catholics, and orthodox authors. Moreover, Nikon should know that Zizany on the ideas was closer to protestantizmu, rather than to Orthodoxy. It has not prevented the patriarch to include in Kormchuju fragments of work Stefana Zizanija. However, inconsistency of the patriarch in material selection is appreciable only as a result of the detailed analysis of the text of foreword Kormchej. On sense all articles brought by it were perfectly mounted ­ and in a lump served one purpose: to the idea justification about ­ the superiority of the spiritual power over the secular. Thus, patriarch Nikon gave bolshee attention to the foreword, instead of the maintenance of rules of law Kormchej of the book.

the Essence of politiko-legal views of patriarch Nikona reveals ­ by consideration of a world outlook basis of its sights which ­ was constituted by Fomy Akvinsky's philosophy and the theory of "two swords». Positions of last Nikon gift »and« the Word short, or about freedom of Sacred Church »scooped from such sources, as« Konstantins.

the False reading and writing of emperor Konstantin Velikogo Patriarh Nikon ­ also has published in foreword Kormchej of the book «for a protection and strengthening of the ancient rights and advantages of the ecclesiastical authority from the attacks which have arisen on it» [162] .

For the first time this reading and writing - «Konstantins gift» - has appeared in the middle of VIII century in Rome. Its purpose consisted in a substantiation of claims of the Pope on spiritual and temporal power. The reading and writing ostensibly has been dictated ­ by emperor Konstantin on the deathbed, and in it it transfers to the daddy - «to the lawful successor tsezarej in the West» - signs on the imperial power and the right korono ­
vat secular sovereigns [163] . In the end of the document threats towards those who will refuse to accept the reading and writing sound.

That fact, that the reading and writing counterfeit, was quickly found out, but, despite it, it has received a wide circulation in Europe and testified to registration of claims of papacy on leadership over temporal power.

From patriarch Nikona it was extremely precipitate to include so doubtful document in Kormchuju. First, authenticity of the reading and writing completely has been confuted in XV century when Italian ­ humanist Lorentso Valla in the well-known treatise «­» has proved the Statement for ­ Konstantin's false and ­ invented donation podlozhnost «Konstantinova gift». Secondly, fathers of the Roman Catholic church used this reading and writing only. It is no wonder, that the edition of the given document in Kormchej ­ has allowed an occasion to dismiss about Nikone hearings as if the Moscow patriarch has indulged in a bosom of Catholic church later,­ disagreed on war with Poland, appealed to the Holy See, took secretly money from the Polish king and Austrian ambassador Allegretti [164] .

Nikon should expect a birth of similar gossips, and, possibly, realised imprudence of the step. However has made it as desire any by to ennoble the spiritual power over secular and to prove the theocratic claims has exceeded even a self-preservation instinct.

In the interpretation of the ecclesiastical authority and its superiority over the power of tsar Nikon has absolutely departed from the Byzantian and Russian tradition of the symphony ­ of the authorities and entirely became on the point of view of Catholic church as it in XI-XIII centuries, during struggle against emperors for investiture, stated a pas - py [165] . He almost literally repeated arguments of the papal power when wrote,
that as tsars receive pomazanie from bishops, receiving thus ­ from church the power they on the advantage and on the spiritual ­ force are more low and more poorly, than bishops.

According to N.F.Kaptereva, Nikon hardly read Catholic works about the papal power and about relations between Church and the state in the West,­ but, probably, in his hands there was a treatise in protection of the rights of the church, written in 1490 Dominican Veniamin, the employee of archbishop Gennady Novgorodskogo. In this treatise which was called «the Word short, or about freedom of Sacred Church», the theory of two swords also was stated and all basic arguments of Catholic church about the church superiority over gosu - darstvom [166] were given.

However we believe, that patriarch Nikon, being very formed,­ owning foreign languages, quite could read ­ original texts itself­. On available sources it is impossible to establish precisely how Nikon has got acquainted with ideas of Catholic church about ­ a parity of the authorities. But the fact of is important that it completely divided them.

the Reference to «the hostile West» could incite against ­ the patriarch of all orthodox. But he first of all counted on low ­ level of erudition of the Russian person, ignorance of foreign languages, ­ the foreign literature and publicism, foreign policy conditions as a whole­. Far not XVII century much in Russia heard about existence «­ Konstantinova gift» in general, especially about the works exposing it. Therefore this document could get strong authoritative action on those who has faced it for the first time.

Concerning ignorance of foreign languages it is necessary to notice, that not so much absence of possibility of studying, how many ­ unwillingness basically was its reason ­ to accept something overseas. The majority of educational institutions ­ existed at churches and monasteries, and the clergy (especially
provincial) negatively concerned the idea of studying of languages: and ­ Latin, and even the Greek. It is characteristic, that protopriest Avvakum, in the ­ accusatory writing placing in Alexey Mihajlovicha's hell, Nikona and all enemies, there sent also all Greek philosophers and scientists: ­ Aristotle, Diogena, Platon, Socrat; to study Greek and Latin it strictly forbade any attempts to all spiritual children [167] . It is interesting,­ that originally Avvakum should participate in «book sprave» together with Nikonom and its people, but has been very quickly discharged of this ­ work for the prosaic reason: did not know the Greek language [168] . Probably, the solution of hatred Avvakuma consists in it to that he does not wish ­ to understand: it becomes the enemy of Latin because does not know Latin language.

At such relation to a foreign language and corresponding ­ ignorance of a considerable part of Russian people, patriarch Nikon could publish «Konstantins gift», hoping, that nobody will notice in it ­ of a religious-political incident, and, on the contrary, will see conclusive evidences ­ of the superiority of church over the state.

the Publication «Konstantinova gift» was not unique reference Nikona to ideas of the Roman Catholic church. The sights about the superiority ­ of the spiritual power over secular it in many respects scooped ­ Fomy Akvinsky (­ the philosopher has received such nickname for fidelity to the church doctrine [169] ) whom in 1323 the Catholic church has canonised from works of the largest ­ representative of scholasticism, «the angelic doctor»­.

Of a parity of church and the state Foma adhered to the representations which have become traditional for papacy - leadership ­ of the ecclesiastical authority. The papacy considered all Christian world as the huge state operated the deputy Divine - the daddy. The papacy was allocated with temporal power. Foma aspired to prove spiritual character vmesha ­
telstva papacy in affairs of emperors and kings. In its understanding two power corresponds as a soul and a body [170] . Patriarch Nikon borrowed Fomy Akvinsky ­ this comparison, not speaking already about the general orientation of political ideas.

As to property questions, Foma defends the rights of church to possession movable and real estate. It is forced ­ to adapt to new conditions when the church became the proprietress of huge riches, and to depart from representations according to which church and ­ clergy should not care of earthly blessings. The property was considered ­ by it as the charisma, it followed use with feeling of responsibility ­ before the donator [171] . For the justification of riches of church which so ­ did not match the neglect sermon to the wordly blessings, thesis Avgustina was used: «only the just can mete the general property» [172] . Differently, the church property - the general property, clergy only metes it. It uses it not in the interests. The property is responsibility and guardianship. From the legal point of view it - private, but should be used for general welfare.

Nikon not only borrowed Fomy Akvinsky's ideas for a formulation ­ of the politiko-legal sights, it, that not wishing, has made the ideas as a matter of fact backward from time. Foma Akvinsky scooped the facts in ­ reasonings of ancient thinkers and fathers of church, only adapting their ideas to requirements of church; he is a classic of scholasticism - studied not ­ the validity, and the ancient literature. Therefore it also has passed by such ­ major phenomena of time (XIII century), as burghers and ­ municipal government formation,­ the union of cities with a Crown in struggle against papacy and feudal seigneurs, occurrence of the representative institutions (parliaments) absolutely unknown to the ancient.

the Same fate of "backwardness" from time requirements has comprehended also sights of patriarch Nikona. Too late was to create illusions concerning ­ formation of the theocratic state even for Russia which let ­ more slowly many western states of XVII century, but nevertheless moved by New time with its new system of priorities and values. Nikon could not or has not wanted it to understand, has refused to make a compromise with temporal power.

the Major source of politiko-legal sights Nikona is its volume work (900 hand-written sheets) under the name: « Objection, or Ruin smirennago Nikona, Bozhieju milostiju the Patriarch, protivo questions of boyar Simeona Streshneva, a hedgehog napisa to Gazsky metropolitan Paisee Likaridiusu, and on answers Paiseovy » [173] . This composition has been written ­ them after overthrow from the patriarchal throne, it is subjective enough,­ shows an emotionality of the patriarch (at times, obscene ­ lexicon) at the mention of the persons who were not dividing its sights (first of all, ­ on boyar Streshneva and Paisija Ligarida, on whose correspondence Nikon and makes comments in the work, and also prince Nikita Odoevsky as one of authors ­ Cathedral ulozhenija). The former patriarch as truly orthodox person, has forgiven"offenders" [174] . On a course of the text he constantly quotes ­ the Scriptus with which supports the sights at the power, the right, ­ the person of the monarch, a special role of the patriarch in the orthodox state, focusing ­ thus attention to initial correctness of the belief ­ unlike Alexey Mihajlovicha Romanov's "deformed" representations­.

On the basis of available sources of politiko-legal sights ­ of patriarch Nikona, considering their world outlook base, it is possible to allocate ­ the debatable problems which exciting Nikona and have pushed to dispute with the tsar:
a parity of the secular and spiritual power and aspiration to theocracy ideals, the church right to remain the largest land owner in the state and to act as the proprietor considerable on volume movable and ­ real estate, the right of church to collection of some taxes, delivering justice ­ on a certain circle of affairs in the relation of the "" subjects (­ clerics and the population of the church earths), administrative questions (namely an order of appointment of clerics on a post).

Nikon was «sobinnym the friend» Alexey Mihajlovicha [175] . So, when last was in departures in connection with military actions in Speech pospolitoj,­ the patriarch fulfilled duties of a sovereign in Russia. Therefore in the first years of patriarchate Nikona there was an illusion of absolute coincidence of sights of the tsar and the patriarch. This visibility of unity intentionally created itself Nikon for a lulling to slip of vigilance of the young tsar: ­ support of a sovereign in business of strengthening of the personal power of the patriarch and as a whole ­ church positions was necessary to it­­. The elite in 1652 on a post of patriarch Nikon should become a conductor of the church reform which were conceived at an imperial court yard and ­ were inherently political reform. And it is valid, hardly having entered on the patriarchal throne, Nikon the beginnings the given reform. The sense of the action started by the tsar to it was quite clear. In first speech Nikon has stated a wish that «the God has collected together its pious kingdom» and that the Russian tsar became «the tsar universal and the autocrat of Christians - skim» [176] .

However itself Nikon gave unifications of church ceremonies of Russian and Greek church also the sense concealed from the tsar. Nikon has seen in rapprochement of Russian church with Universal orthodox church possibility ­ to become stronger the ecclesiastical authority in Russia and to occupy finally ­ independent, independent of the power imperial position. He has understood, that until limits of the power of church coincide with state borders, tser ­
kov it will be inevitable to be in government submission ­ as two independent power cannot exist in same


territorial frameworks [177] .

Patriarch Nikonom at carrying out of church reform pursued ­ purely political ends (no less than by Alexey Mihajlovichem). However, the purposes in many respects opposite to the imperial.

the Basic problem for Nikona was sharp, in its opinion, ­ the problem of a parity of the secular and spiritual authorities. He insisted, that ­"priesthood" and "kingdom" are represented by two independent power in a society, each of which carries out the functions. Moreover, the spiritual power by the nature has leadership over the secular. This idea ­ penetrates all politiko-legal sights of the patriarch. We will remind, that Alexey Mihajlovich had accurate idea on the given question: necessities to argue on a parity of the authorities were not, as monk Filofej has proved, that the tsar - the main person in the state, and the church submits to it.

Nikon has put forward the theocratic thesis: «the kingdom priesthood prebole is» [178] . Priesthood above a kingdom, on Nikonu, owing to the superiority of its ­ problems and competences, at comparison of two sizes. It is entrusted to a kingdom terrestrial - the lowest, to priesthood - heavenly, the higher. From the most bible origin ­ of a kingdom and priesthood Nikon deduced their inequality: «Priesthood not from the person, the person, but from the God, both ancient, and present, instead of from tsars. But it is more from priesthood a kingdom proizyde and nowadays is... The Priesthood everywhere prechestnejshee is kingdoms, jakozhe above naznamenah from the divine ­ writing. And nowadays paki rechem: a kingdom ashche and from the God dadesja in the world, but in anger Bozhii. And through priesthood pomazuetsja sensual eleom. ­ Priesthoods pomazanie - the Holy Spirit directly. JAkozhe a drop of a rain from velekaja clouds, that is the earth from nebesi will be measured, tako a kingdom menshitsja from


priesthoods » [179] .

Nikon specified in that circumstance, that tsars accept pomazanie by hand the priest, means, last - the big ruler, than ­ an imperial head. «And the most imperial chapter under svjashchennikovy hands bringing, ­ the God, nakazuet believes us, jako this it is vlastnik, smaller bo from bolshago, blagoslavljaetsja» [180] more.

In one fragment of work Nikon has rather poetically characterised ­ a parity of the spiritual and secular authorities: « The Lord the God omnipotent, egda has created the sky and the earth, then stars - the sun and month on it going, on the earth svetiti povele: the sun shows us the power arhierejskuju, month shows the power imperial for the sun vjashchi shines in days, jako the bishop to souls, shone in noshchi - only to a body » [181] less. The fact of that without the Sun are impossible a life on the Earth and existence to all solar system,­ is obvious, as the Sun is the centre, a kernel of last. The patriarch also specifies in it: without the companion of the Earth - the Moon, - it is possible to manage, but without the Sun - is not present. The situation with the power of the monarch is similar - it can ­ be present, can be absent, the monarch can be called differently, - all it not essentially. For the blessing of the state and a society as the most important ­ presence of the strong spiritual power concentrated in hands of the patriarch acts­. The more widely the sphere of influence of the patriarch, the on wider space ­ shines that"sun"about which spoke Nikon.

Nikon disagreed with understanding of the concept «Moscow - the Third Rome» as doctrines about «an orthodox Romejsky kingdom» according to which ­ the Moscow state became the carrier ­ of a true Christian ideal. The Russian tsar in the concept «Moscow - the Third Rome» appeared as the unique keeper of orthodox Christian church. Nikon ­ has fairly seen here an eminence of the imperial power over spiritual, and it ­ did not keep within in any way its own representation about the power. In idea «Tre ­
tego Rome» Nikon perceived first of all its church, spiritual ­ maintenance expressed also still in more ancient idea «Russian earth - New Jerusalem» [182] .

Calling for this great purpose, Patriarch Nikon consistently ­ creates a number of architectural complexes in which the idea of common to all mankind,­ universal value of sacred Russia is put in pawn­: the Iversky Valdai, Kijsky Godfather monasteries, and especially - the Voskresensky Novoierusalimsky ­ monastery, specially and in a pointed manner occupied orthodox the different nations (Russian, Ukrainians, Byelorussians, Lithuanians, Germans, Jews, Poles, gre - ki) [183] .

Thus, it turned out, that «Palestin situated near Moscow» with the centre in New Jerusalem became a spiritual concentration of all world ­ Orthodoxy. While the tsar only still dreamt to become the lord ­ of the East, patriarch Nikon as the prior of New Jerusalem already became the central figure of Universal church [184] .

Nikon spent in the compositions thought that kingdoms prosper ­ and firmly stand only until in them priests are esteemed. As soon as bishops cease to respect and listen to them, to the state ­ there are terrible accidents, and at last -  destruction. As an example it resulted experience of Byzantium and the fact from domestic history when have deposed patriarch Iova and at his life have illegally put new patriarch Germogena ­ then the hardest has come for Russia Vague time.

According to Nikona, the patriarch as the higher representative and ohranitel all sacred not only in church, but also in the state, is obligatory "controller" of all state life; any infringement of divine ­ laws or evasion from them will be directed against the tsar. Stating thought, that the patriarch defends not only church interests,
but also interests of the tsar and the state as a whole, Nikon not simply struggles for ­ a church autonomy, and for its leadership over temporal power.

uvlekshis this struggle, it involuntarily began to contradict to itself(himself). For example, it absolutely unfairly mixed an economic life ­ of Russian church with a being of canons, saw violence over church even in ­ the necessary state economic reforms touching a life of church,­ and has reached in it seeming to it initial conservatism (actually anything initial here it was not observed), full negation of economic citizenship of churches and monasteries to the state. The tsar, ­ from the point of view of Nikona, has illegally taken up «svjatitelsky a rank and the power church». Moreover, it has encroached on the church property - «has become impoverished and has plundered sacred church";" All imperial majesty, - reproaches Nikon Alexey Mihajlovicha, - through divine zakony.olihoimstvova. ­ The great church nikotorago also has ­ no participle in Moscow, jakozhe before at former tsars and grand dukes had. But is ­ the widow having been deserted » [185] is empty vsjakago pervago the condition,­ jako. In given statement Nikon contradicted own statements that is entrusted to a kingdom terrestrial, and church - heavenly. Encroaching on the church property, the tsar was not beyond­"terrestrial"problems under control to it. Obviously, in this logic error in reasonings on a parity of church and the state Nikona has resulted ­ aspiration as much as possible to isolate the ecclesiastical authority from state and ­ to ennoble the first.

Patriarch Nikona the church life as kanonicheski understood eternal norm and saw acknowledgement of this normativnosti in the letter of the Greek canons­. So, Nikon, having realised, that presence at church of huge conditions (­ the real estate, money) contradicts them often stated thought that the church cares exclusively of a shower and its rescue, ­ wrote later­: «the church riches are riches poor» [186] , «tsars should sohra -

njat manors of Divine places (monasteries, churches), their villages, vinogrady and all other, is integral and neothodna from them, ashche who will break this command, from prohibition Rules yes will be guilty » [187] ,«... And izhe who vladeti will begin sacred tserkvami or monasteries or church and monastic veshchmi, movable or immovable, and that for the sake of anger Divine happens on it and on its all kingdom » [188] ,« there is nothing to recalculate a church ancestral lands, ­ people, domovnyh potreb, breads, fishes, money, horses and other potreb »as« the Church should nothing to anybody, except a pray » [189] . At last, the patriarch ­ does a conclusion, that« the Sovereign has ruined Church and has forced it ­ to obey itself ­ in all »while« the head of Church - the Christ, and jakozhe obeys Church only to the Christ » [190] . According to Nikona, Alexey Mihajlovich even «at apostle Peter has taken away keys» and «affairs are resolved both on the earth, and in the sky instead of the Christ, not by reception Svjatago of Spirit of good fortune» [191] .

the Patriarch realised, that there come new times, and ­ sekuljarizatsija the church earths is inevitable. Not having possibility to challenge ­ the maintenance of norms especially unpleasant for church Cathedral Ulozhenija about ­ restriction of growth of the church earths as discussion (is more exact, not being able it to do), the patriarch has gone roundabout by: if the church loses the influence, the patriarch as «sobinnyj the friend» a sovereign, will multiply the personal.

So, Nikon «with special inspiration» [192] , in a pointed manner increased the areas of the patriarchal possession. At Nikone they have reached the unknown sizes­. And the tsar, ignoring instructions of norms Ulozhenija, endowed to the patriarch ­ of a manor, and Nikon, openly despising Ulozhenie, - got.

the Patriarchal earths were stretched from Moscow on hundreds versts. In the north (the Arkhangelsk, Vologda, Novgorod areas) huge territories have been got Nikonom: hardly not the whole districts of the Novgorod province -
Valdai, Krestetsky, Old Russian; in the Tver edge - Rzhev, Ostashkovsky ­ area; on Volga - fishings in the Kazan and Astrakhan edges; in the southwest, towards Kiev it is a lot of the spaces taken from Poland; in the south - the earths up to the Crimean steppes [193] . Under Paul Aleppskogo's certificate, to Nikona in the patriarchal possession was registered to 10000 house economy, and at Nikone their number has increased to 25000 [194] .

Among this internal church "empire" Nikon has constructed three ­ monasteries, belonging and directly submitting to the patriarch: the Iversky monastery, about Valdai (the Novgorod area), the God monastery on island in the White sea, near a mouth of the river of Onega, and the Voskresensky monastery named «New Jerusalem» (about the city of Voskresenska, near to Moscow).

Numerous ground acquisitions and open ­ neglect of current legislation Nikon showed the ­ relation to the government, trying once again to underline thought that «the kingdom priesthood prebole is» [195] . He expected to provide independence of church by strengthening of the personal power, at all not realising utopianism of the given idea. A number ­ of the rules of law which have sharply limited process of acquisition of the earth by church has been entered­. ­ To count that the given norms will not be realised, it was senseless­. So much efforts to introduction of these politically ­ and norms economically necessary for the state were not for this purpose undertaken ­ as a result ­ to leave their empty declaration. The patriarch also counted on it wrongly.

Cathedral Ulozhenie it is already possible to consider as the forerunner future ground sekuljarizatsii 1764 territories for the present ­ remained in the church property 1649,­ but the state has already put under the control process of acquisition the earths by it.

Through introduction in action Cathedral Ulozhenija the temporal power in the name of the tsar, besides the right of acquisition of the real estate, has taken away from the spiritual power the right of consideration and the decision of variety of affairs (first of all criminal) which throughout centuries constituted the competence of the spiritual courts with what patriarch Nikon categorically is not agreed, approving, that wordly court cannot be just [196] .

As it has already been noted, in Cathedral Ulozhenii radical reorganisation of criminal law of Russia - the legislator (in the name of the monarch was reflected and its machinery of government) deduces from the competence of church jurisdiction ­ practically all criminally-legal sphere and transfers its state ­ search and to courts of justice, providing, however, one ­ exception: Ulozhenie puts for limits of attention of the state criminal legislation, leaving in the competence of church jurisdiction, such ­ acts, as volhvovanie and charodejanie. The church forfeits the right to imputation and investigatory-judicial manufacture on the infringements, which else the first princes of the Christian period of Russia - Vladimir and Yaroslav owing to the indifferent relation to these infringements of the princely legislation based on a common law, its jurisdictions [197] have been transferred. The initial ­ criminally-legal base containing in written theological ­ sources of law, has been transferred in Cathedral Ulozhenie 1649, forming ­ chapter 1 maintenance. Also original classification of kinds of crimes from this has followed. It would Seem, in sequence of kinds of crimes political crimes should occupy the first place, but they appear on the second place, giving a priority to crimes against Church. Thus the reference Cathedral Ulozhenija to criminally-rules of law christian law is not limited only to mechanical ­ carrying over of these norms to chapter 1 Ulozhenija. Various elements kompilja ­
tsy the Byzantian christian law contain and in other heads to dock - of the cop [198] . So, article 228 of the chapter of X Cathedral Ulozhenija, speaking about arsons,­ according to M.F.Vladimirskogo-Budanova's opinion, «almost is taken ­ from Kormchej, and there from the Roman Law literally­; But the Roman Law and Kormchaja discriminated ­ an arson «in hailstones» (intra oppidum) and «out of hailstones, selishcha, villages or houses» (casum aut villam). Under the Roman Law for the last it is not necessary to a death penalty; on Kormchej - a death penalty, but simple. The arson of the first sort ­ was considered obshcheopasnym as a crime. Ulozhenie has not acquired this difference » [199] .

Professor V.P.Ponomareva fairly notices, that the right for ­ practical reasons can admit indifference of motive for the sake of the main thing ­ - law performance, the religion of it cannot allow - for it ­ the motive inducing to act or omission is important; the right, as a rule, is connected with an external act, and religion both with external, and with an internal spirit of the person [200] .

It is possible to conclude, that under the maintenance of norm Kormchej possessed higher quality and detail of study of some legal categories (in particular, the subjective party of a crime), in what a merit ­ of exclusively Roman lawyers. Giving reason for necessity to use Kormchuju ­ as the nation-wide code of laws, instead of Cathedral Ulozhenija to the patriarch followed specify to the tsar in that circumstance, that as of the middle of XVII century the christian law was more qualitatively and ­ more detailed secular. However inability to lead dispute within the limits of a legal field have led to emotional barrackings that Ulozhenie - «the devilish book­», «wordly court - court injust», etc.

the Policy of the state centralisation which is not supposing presence of competitors of the secular political power, demanded also centralisation ­ of the power judicial. But patriarch Nikon hoped, that Kormchaja will act as the same counterbalance Cathedral Ulozheniju to what was Stoglav in XVI ­ in relation to the Code of laws of 1550 However, from XVII century the secular right actively superseded ­ the initial. Though last decade existence ­ of Russian empire were undertaken attempts to transform the ecclesiastical law in ­ independent system, but the interrelation of church and the state have made it impossible. It would lead to change of main principles ­ of state law. Pre-revolutionary experience testifies, that existence ­ in the state of two parallel legal systems negatively ­ affects a legal order condition in the country as a whole [201] .

So, the government has appeared capable to subordinate to itself the power church and to translate in the jurisdiction court over earlier being ­ in the spiritual court competence punishable acts. ­ However even more centuries after acceptance Cathedral Ulozhenija the spiritual courts, breaking the law, will accept to manufacture incompetent it of business [202] .

Nikon has been revolted by that the temporal power has deprived church purely state by the nature of judicial functions over the population of church territories and partially administrative functions. Though what not the state, and ecclesiastical authorities judged the population on all civil and to criminal cases, there was something unnatural. A number especially ­ grave crimes (theft, robbery, murder), certainly, always ­ was in jurisdiction of secular judges. On all other affairs
bishops and monasteries «judged and rjadili» the people (both the monkhood, and the wordly population), amerced and put guilty of the prisons, ­ organised for prisoners compulsory labour duties [203] . This right to purely state function of court and administration was ­ an obvious vestige of an old specific epoch, when princedoms and the earths ­"sogosudarstvovali" with the central government [204] .

Thus, for the patriarch as for the specific prince, have left its former ­«the house patrimonial right». Its diocese has been withdrawn from conducting ­ the Monastic Order. All seigniorial, domestic, mandative people and peasants of the patriarch had legal proceedings exclusively the patriarchal officials: «On ­ the patriarchal mandative, both on a domestics, and on children seigniorial, both on peasants, and on any ranks of people which live in the patriarchal in a house ancestral lands, in everyones deleh court davati bezsrochno on the patriarchal court yard because at former gosudareh.ni in which prikazeh on them vessels did not give, and judged them on the patriarchal court yard, that to judgement affairs listens and the patriarch» [205] specifies.

Doing a similar exception for the patriarchal earths, the temporal power reserved the right to itself to bypass it if there will be a necessity. In this plan the chapter of XII Cathedral ulozhenija «About court of the patriarchal mandative, and ­ domestic any people, and peasants» represents the big interest. It ­ included only three articles, from which two (item 2 and item 3) describe those cases when people of the patriarch can address in any order, «to a sovereign and to all bojarom» on lawsuits. For example, if it will appear, that «patriarshi judges of whom will convict not on business» about it «biti forehead sovereign» then ­ business is transferred from conducting the patriarchal administration «to a sovereign and to all bojarom», and «those patriarchal judges for their lie decree to repair, against the same as it is specified about gosudarevyh judges» [206] .

"Having presented" the patriarch the right of execution of judicial functions in the
the earths, the government has reserved the right to itself disposals of legal proceeding in the second instance, having underlined thus higher position ­ of court secular in relation to court church.

Even «patriarshi judges» could appear under jurisdiction ­ of the state bodies. In case of illiterate or unfair execution ­ of the duties they bore the same punishment, as judges secular: «And there will be kotoryi a boyar either okolnichej, or dumnoj the person, or dijak, or other what judge, istsa or the respondent on a promise, either on friendship, or on nedruzhbe right will convict, and guilty will put in order, and the ten vzjati on a sovereign on them will be found about that doprjama, and on those judges vzjati istsov the claim three times, and dati istsu, and duties and recourt and right. Yes for the same fault at the boyar, both at okolnichego, and at dumnogo the person otnjati honour. And there will be kotoryi a judge ­ such lie will make not from dumnyh people, and that uchiniti public whipping, and vpred it at business not byti» [207] .

At desire government officials could ­ interfere with work of the patriarchal judges that was promoted by feature ­ of the formulation of article 2 of the chapter XII rather often­­. Was to make the complaint to «the careless judge» enough, and business passed to consideration in secular authorities - ­ orders, the Seigniorial Duma or personally to a sovereign. Further the destiny has put also judges ­ depended on their decision which first of all corresponded to interests of the state in the name of the monarch, and then already to justice requirements. The convenient and latent tool of struggle against independence of the patriarchal administration has been found in realisation of judicial functions. So, at first sight the absolute power of the patriarch within the limits of the territories turned to the power relative.

Nikona could not arrange a similar state of affairs in any way, but, not having in hands of such levers of the power what tsar Alexey Mihajlovich possessed, the patriarch needed to lead only hot polemic in which frequently the emotionality blocked common sense.

Nikon repeatedly named Ulozhenie «the lawless book», «­ a damned statute», and the laws which have entered into it - «devilish, ­ put on council antihrista» [208] . He urged clergy not to recognise ­ wordly court, is opened «to spit and damn their commands and laws» [209] . «Mirskago vessels at the tsar prosjaj - not a bishop. Takozhde and proichii svjashchennago a rank, ostavisshe the spiritual courts, to wordly judges will resort, ashche and ­ will be justified - will be cast out. And elitsy nowadays metropolitans, archbishops and ­ bishops, archimandrites, abbots, svjashchennitsy and diakony and proichii prichetnitsy ­ tserkovnii, through bozhestvennyja rules under court imperial and other wordly people go - metropolitans already nest to that are worthy imenovatisja ­ metropolitans, takozh and archbishops, even to the last» [210] .

With the same hatred as to most Ulozheniju, concerned Nikon and its composers. About prince Odoevsky he wrote: «It, prince Nikita, the person very proud, to fear Bozhija in serdtsy has and bozhestvennago no writing and ­ rules svv. The apostle and svv. The father reads more low, understands and zhiti in them not hoshchet more low, and living in them hates, jako enemies real, itself byh the enemy to any true» [211] . Prince Odoevsky referred, that at drawing up Ulozhenija it ­ was guided Kormchej by the book. Nikon declared it direct lie: «Kako you, to the saviour injust, were not frightened of the Lord of God Svjata obezchestiti­. Who esi you, through divine laws and sjatyh apostles and sacred the father of a rule, dared derznuti new devilish laws napisati, jako new Luther?!» [212] .

From Odoevsky's comparison with Luther follows, that Nikon equated on the historical importance creation Cathedral Ulozhenija to Reformatsii. All legislative activity of the state, according to the patriarch, has been directed against Russian orthodox church, on infringement of its rights. ­ Nikon did not notice because of an excessive emotionality of the judgements, that
approach to the rights of church from the state was not end in itself, and a consequence of a nation-wide political policy on full ­ centralisation of the power.

Process of gradual folding absoljutizma was obvious and inevitable­. To struggle with it it was not meaningful, but at the competent approach it was quite possible to try to be arranged, accompany under it to the tsar and by that ­ to "manage to get" legally a number of privileges for church. The common sense and the cold calculation, inherent Nikonu in the first years of patriarchate, have given way to emotional fieriness, fervour. Because of it the patriarch could not refuse the utopian ideas about the theocratic state.

Besides a divergence of sights of church and the state on problems ­ of church landed property and judicial functions, serious collision was outlined ­ in an administrative question. The imperial power has incurred the control over appointment to church offices, that extremely revolted all clergy led by the patriarch.

Nikon considered, that the church ceases to be church if falls under the government: «Idezhe church under the wordly power snidet, nest church, but the house human and a den of robbers» [213] .

Convicting reigning in intervention in church affairs, Nikon wrote ­ to the Jerusalem patriarch: «All nowadays happens imperial hoteniem. If who wants - a deacon, or presviter, either the abbot, or the archimandrite - postavljatisja then writes the petition to Imperial Majesty and asks command that it have appointed. And imperial command on that petition will sign:« under the decree of the Sovereign of the tsar »- it postaviti the priest or a deacon or other to a rank who in what is delivered. And as oust their imperial ­ word, instead of on precepts Divine and not by rules of sacred apostles and sacred fathers. And when povelit the tsar to be to a cathedral then happens. And whom povelit ­ izbrati and postaviti the bishop, select and deliver. And whom orders suditi and
obsuzhdati, and they judge and discuss and separate. And people on service, both bread, and money on the commands orders to take and - take ungraciously. And


tributes are heavy » [214] .

A.V.Kartashev fairly notices, that «practically, ­ realnopoliticheski Nikon was not the rights, but the scent truly prompted it boyars did not understand what: namely, that with new usages and ideology new sekuljarnogo the states, there comes new, at first only« laichesky », ­ sekuljarnyj, and then and directly antireligious and even godless spirit, which povejal over Russian church since Peter I time» [215] .

Nationalization of function of the church authority became result of mastering by the Moscow ruling class and its leader - the tsar, new ­ all-European state consciousness. For Russia there has come time ­ of a withdrawal from medieval theocratic outlook, it was ­ historically inevitable phenomenon. The unwillingness to understand and accept this fact ­ was a sign of political blindness. Aspiration Nikona to preservation of a theocratic ideal was "just", but and erroneous its internal installation not to go on any compromise with temporal power was absolutely hopeless.

the patriarch confirmed All sights with numerous citations from the Scriptus text, therefore they look vzveshenno and ­ is given reason from the religious point of view. Alexey Mihajlovich did not know, how to it to struggle with «the initial letter», and not in a condition was to interpret it to own advantage. The objective historical truth was on the state party. But wrong protection by the state of the interests, turned to violent pressure over sense of justice of church, did to some extent ­ right and the church party in its insult on the state. The problem ­ consisted in inability precisely to designate and defend the rights, and also pravil ­
but to differentiate in them basic and eternal from passing and casual­.

According to A.M.Burovsky, speech should be led more likely not about «legal underdevelopment» government in XVII century, and about the general features of dialogue of the power with a society and a manner of carrying out of reforms in Russia throughout ­ all its history (including in present time). As ­ an example it is possible to result «book spravu» in Southwest Russia, absolutely similar with romanovskoj (or nikonovskoj) reform. Shortly before ceremonial ­ reform of 1654 the Kiev metropolitan Peter Mogila has spent similar divine service changes, but has not caused it neither wild tearing away, nor civil war, epidemic of self-burnings [216] .

In the course of dispute with Alexey Mihajlovichem the patriarch has chosen erroneous ­ tactics: it combated by "accusation" of the imperial power, intimidation ­ by Terrible court and other verbally-emotional receptions. So, Nikon reproached the tsar, that that «has disgraced Church» [217] [218] though it for a sovereign - more than native mother and consequently demands the due relation to: «Mati you is, naijasnejshy to the tsar, Church Bozhija and as dolzhne you esi pochitati mater the which has given birth to you, also should eat vozljubiti and pochitati the spiritual Mater which you otrodila in a font svjatago

christenings and which has spread you on a kingdom with oil and harizmoju it is glad -

sti »


Alexey Mihajlovicha Nikon convicted that «the tsar judges ­ injustly and precepts does not remember» [219] . Moreover, the patriarch doubted fidelity

a sovereign to Orthodoxy, noticing, that the priesthood is true «orthodox tsars ­ preferred more kingdoms instead of as nowadays, a hedgehog in the person to us speak, ­ ponosja: the tsar de is uniform is great, and de it is a lot of you, not that de the patriarch, so other.» [220] .

In struggle for preservation and multiplication of land fund of church, and also
for jurisdiction of spiritual courts Nikon pursued one more important aim: not to lose the incomes received from levy from the population of the ­ territories and duties on departure of judicial functions. In this struggle the victory was gained also by the state.

Showing the superiority over the power of the tsar, patriarch Nikon at times passed all norms of decency. For example, on one of sessions of a church Cathedral in July, 1653 on which case ­ of Murom protopriest Loggina was considered,­ under the certificate of the Rostov metropolitan Ions and Yaroslavl protopriest Ermily, Nikon spoke: «the imperial help is unusable and useless For me-de, yes taki-de on it I spit and smorkaju» [221] . Having heard such words from the patriarch, the metropolitan of the Ion wished «to run from a place» [222] .

Occupying so a hard line, patriarch Nikon was unable keep long behind itself the patriarchal chair which ­ has voluntary in a pointed manner left in 1658 after small quarrel with the tsar, hoping, that that will beg him about returning. However Alexey Mihajlovich undertook at once the decision of a question on how it is definitive, with observance of all formalities to depose such hierarch - of the contender dangerous in political sense.

the Court over Nikonom has taken place in 1660 Then on a church cathedral in 1666 sights at power Nikona have been condemned, but its theocratic ideas revived time and again in performances of hierarches of church. So, the future patriarch the Novgorod metropolitan Ioakim in 1672 said in the message to flock, that «the spiritual chief is much more important secular», that the spiritual power so differs from secular, as the soul differs from a body, as the sky from the earth (practically literally quoted Nikona) [223] .

Since 1666, that is after a church cathedral in which all east hierarches participated, according to Nikona, in Russia there have come times anti ­
hrista as the cathedral has executed the order of tsar Alexey Mihajlovicha in the decisions,­ having condemned the patriarch: «to Java there is to everyone precisely mind imushchemu reason -


ti, jako time that Antichrist's is » [224] .

By consideration of politiko-legal sights Nikona there can ­ be an impression as if the patriarch has refused idea of "symphony" of the authorities ancient and popular in Russia. On the contrary, it supported that, but with certain overweight in favour of the spiritual power. To Russian grand dukes ­ and tsars "symphony" it was necessary only until the temporal power has not got stronger definitively. To the middle of XVII century this idea became in burden, though the tsar and its supporters continued (more likely, by inertia) to it ­ to address, quote the Scriptus, Epanagogu (where it has been full reflected for the first time). We Will pay attention that in collision of patriarch Nikona with tsar Alexey Mihajlovichem east patriarchs have obviously taken the part of the last. Thereupon professor Alexander Dvorkin fairly ­ notices: « The Greek hierarches in this case have led themselves inconsistently, having applied the double standard: under favorable political circumstances ­ the idea of "the double power» was recollected and quoted, and at neblago -

225 pleasant - it was imperceptibly removed on the second plan, and even at all disappeared » [225] . Thus, idea« symphonies of the authorities »has loosened, and then and ­ the temporal power has at all destroyed.

the Problem of a parity of the authorities excited Nikona much more, than church reform with which the name of the patriarch traditionally associates. For example, Nikon did not give great value to the in itself ceremonial party of reform, it supposed the use in church services both ­ corrected, and old books, believing, that to innovations ­ will get used in due course ­ both priests, and parishioners, and then innovations smoothly will enter into practice. Especially important that Nikon never named Old Believers
heretics: those they recognised the Greek priests who have arrived to Russia ­ on a church cathedral 1666-1667

the Patriarch, most likely, realised inevitability of Split between ­ the state and church, however it has taken all necessary measures to avoid Split in a society (among believers). In particular, under condition of obedience of church he allowed wishing to serve under old books and ceremonies, supposing thus a difference of opinions and practice in the church things which are not mentioning a being of belief [226] . It has given the basis to the historian of church to metropolitan Makariy Bulgakov fairly to approve, that «if Nikon has not left chairs and its board proceeded ­ further, split in Russian Church would not be» [227] .

the Present opponent of patriarch Nikona was, as shows ­ the analysis of its political and legal sights, the imperial power. Outwardly, however, all looked as if the main struggle of life Nikon led against Old Believers though last it did not interest at all.

Ideas of patriarch Nikona and Alexey Mihajlovicha about a parity ­ of the authorities were absolutely opposite. Both persistently defended them, being are sincerely assured of the correctness.

it is necessary to recognise, that on conformity to a spirit of the age, sights Nikona strongly conceded to the imperial. Russia long time was the country isolated from the world. The country which has dropped out of world space and time. To argue ­ on the theocratic state in the middle of XVII century was historically ­ late. On a threshold of New time to some extent even was late (or is more exact - it is old, is unfashionable) to speak about formation absoljutizma, but nevertheless these thoughts met internal political situation, features ­ of historical development of the country. That it is impossible to tell about obviously utopian ideas about the theocratic state. Patriarch Nikon persistently did not wish it to notice. At all wisdom, it showed deep istoriko ­
political short-sightedness, not wishing to accept spirit of the times to feel ­ spirit of an epoch, not trying to make a compromise with the government.

the Similar situation the Catholic church in XVI century when because of unwillingness to accept spirit of the times it had to face with Reformatsiej from which blow she could not recover has gone through.

Split has weakened church positions. Attempt Nikona to put pressure upon the tsar from patriarchate in 1658 has come to the end with pointed refusal ­ with deprivation of a dignity and the reference. The church starts to get to direct dependence on the state that is one of indicators of evolution of autocracy towards an absolute monarchy [228] .

Thus, in the political views patriarch Nikon stood on obviously utopian for XVII century to idea of transformation of Russia in the theocratic state. In the thesis «Moscow - the Third Rome» he saw an appeal to the Moscow patriarch to become the patriarch Universal. Throughout the patriarchate,­ after voluntary leaving from chair, even in days of the reference it defended ­ idea about the superiority of priesthood over a kingdom. Political views Nikona were divided by the majority of clerics, it was sympathised with a considerable part of laymen (when Nikonu have allowed to return from exile to Moscow in 1681, along the line the patriarch the unknown congestion of people was observed: the people wished to bow Nikonu; still bolshee the number ­ of people was present on its funeral that speaks about honouring of the patriarch in the people). Russian clergy has not dared to disfrock the patriarch and to arrest­. It was made by the Greek hierarches who have arrived to 1666 to Moscow at the desire of the tsar. Carrying out «the state order», they also declared ­ Old Believers heretics and authorised persecutions on the persons who have not accepted ­ new ceremonies [229] . Nikon and Russian clergy 1666-1667, fairly challenging their legitimacy are not agreed with decisions of the Cathedral. Specified
the cathedral "has rescued" reform, but has not rescued idea of the patriarch about church ­ and state relations ­ [230] .

From legal questions of the patriarch what concerned to judicial and to church administrative functions interested only, and also ­ concerned the church property (first of all, the real estate) and the rights of church ­ to levy and gathering. Russian church led by patriarch Nikonom ­ has made unsuccessful attempt to change Cathedral Ulozhenie ­ the christian law collection ­ - Kormchej (Nomocanon).

Patriarch Nikon was the brilliant religious figure, the great ­ prayer book (today in RPTS even there is a question on its canonization), but ­ the person who has been not tempted in questions politicians and the rights, therefore its ­ state-legal ideas have appeared weak though at due completion and correct giving would constitute a serious competition to sights of the tsar.

the Parity of politiko-legal views of Alexey Mihajlovicha and Nikona looks as follows: according to the tsar, temporal power ­ above church, on belief of the patriarch - on the contrary; Alexey Mihajlovich ­ assotsiiroval with the state as a whole also considered itself as a source of all rules of law in the country, Nikon insisted, that the power and laws - bogoustanovleny and always it is necessary to make a start from sacred texts, therefore especially to esteem clergy; Alexey Mihajlovich saw itself the tsar of all orthodox, ­ Nikon believed, that the Russian patriarch should head the orthodox world; for form's sake in the country, according to the tsar, the earth should belong to the state, is equal as all taxes and tax collections should go to the state treasury, the patriarch ­ insisted, that deprivation of church of the property right to the earth and reception ­ of a different sort of incomes threatens state existence as a whole and is infringement of canons; The judicial authority is a part ­ of machinery of state and is under control to the monarch, on Alexey Mihajlovicha's belief,­ unlike representations Nikona that on defined
to a circle of affairs manage justice the spiritual courts can exclusively; at last,­ Alexey Mihajlovich believed, that the monarch should supervise all spheres of a life of the state, including appointment to posts of clerics ­ with what categorically be not agreed Nikon. And ­ it is necessary to allocate one more ­ essentially important disagreement: the tsar considered necessary for the general order in the country severely to punish those who has not accepted new ceremonies,­ the patriarch was against such measures and did not see anything dangerous in application ­ in practice in parallel both old, and new ceremonies and books. As a result ­ there was a paradoxical situation: The third camp of Split - Old Believers, - considered as the originator of the occurrence, the main enemy and a source of all troubles of patriarch Nikona while it concerned them easy and with understanding, and the imperial power which they in the majority respected was engaged in persecutions and oppressions of conservatives and esteemed.

<< | >>
A source: Vodopjanova Marina Viktorovna. Political and legal sights of ideologists of Split in Russia XVII centuries. The dissertation on competition of a scientific degree of the master of laws. Moscow - 2017. 2017

More on topic § 2. Sights at the power and the right of patriarch Nikona:

  1. 3.1 state-legal ideas of patriarch Fotija.
  2. evolution of jurisdiction of Court of the European Union concerning power and the power policy
  3. § 3. Politiko-legal sights of protopriest Avvakuma and Old Believers
  4. the Chapter I. A role of Court of the European Union in pravotvorcheskoj activity of EU concerning power and the power policy
  5. Chapter 3. Practice of Court of the European Union concerning legal regulation of power safety, energoeffektivnosti and the international relations of EU and Russia in the field of power
  8. §2. Features of philosophical sights of I.A.Ilyin.
  10. Chapter 3. The characteristic of sights of G.F.Shershenevicha on the right