Usurpations of and designated successions to the throne in the Serbian Patriarchate the case of Patriarch Moses Rajovic (1712-24)

Nebojsa Suletic
{"title":"Usurpations of and designated successions to the throne in the Serbian Patriarchate the case of Patriarch Moses Rajovic (1712-24)","authors":"Nebojsa Suletic","doi":"10.2298/balc2152047s","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the medieval and early modern periods, the metropolitans and bishops of the Serbian Orthodox Church were elected according to the procedure described in the Archieratikon, the bishop?s liturgical book. The procedure prescribed that the archbishop should choose from among the three candidates nominated by the council of bishops of an autocephalous church. Then the elected bishop was confirmed by the ruler. The archiepiscopal (patriarchal) election procedure was not specifically described because the central role in the process in the middle ages was played by the ruler. In the Ottoman Empire, the central role in the election and confirmation of bishops was played by the sultan, but the ecclesiastical canons were not among his considerations. Sometimes persons unworthy of the office of patriarch, metropolitan or bishop were appointed, without the knowledge of or contrary to the will of the synod. In order to prevent the appointment of an unworthy person as head of the Serbian Church, some patriarchs sought to have their successor elected in their own lifetime and to ensure a smooth transfer of office in agreement with the synod. Based on known sources and unpublished Ottoman documents, this paper discusses the questions of the election of Serbian patriarchs, the usurpation of the patriarchal throne and the attitude of the Ottoman administration towards the clergy. It offers a number of fresh insights into events during the patriarchate of Moses Rajovic (1712-24).","PeriodicalId":80613,"journal":{"name":"Balcanica (Rome, Italy)","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Balcanica (Rome, Italy)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2298/balc2152047s","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

In the medieval and early modern periods, the metropolitans and bishops of the Serbian Orthodox Church were elected according to the procedure described in the Archieratikon, the bishop?s liturgical book. The procedure prescribed that the archbishop should choose from among the three candidates nominated by the council of bishops of an autocephalous church. Then the elected bishop was confirmed by the ruler. The archiepiscopal (patriarchal) election procedure was not specifically described because the central role in the process in the middle ages was played by the ruler. In the Ottoman Empire, the central role in the election and confirmation of bishops was played by the sultan, but the ecclesiastical canons were not among his considerations. Sometimes persons unworthy of the office of patriarch, metropolitan or bishop were appointed, without the knowledge of or contrary to the will of the synod. In order to prevent the appointment of an unworthy person as head of the Serbian Church, some patriarchs sought to have their successor elected in their own lifetime and to ensure a smooth transfer of office in agreement with the synod. Based on known sources and unpublished Ottoman documents, this paper discusses the questions of the election of Serbian patriarchs, the usurpation of the patriarchal throne and the attitude of the Ottoman administration towards the clergy. It offers a number of fresh insights into events during the patriarchate of Moses Rajovic (1712-24).
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
篡夺和指定塞尔维亚牧首的王位继承权:牧首摩西·拉约维奇的案例(1712- 1724)
在中世纪和近代早期,塞尔维亚东正教会的大主教和主教都是按照《主教档案》(Archieratikon)中所描述的程序选出的。S礼仪书。该程序规定大主教应从独立教会的主教会议提名的三名候选人中进行选择。然后选出的主教由统治者确认。总主教(宗法)选举程序没有具体描述,因为在中世纪,统治者在这一过程中起着核心作用。在奥斯曼帝国,苏丹在选举和确认主教方面发挥着核心作用,但教会教规不在他的考虑范围之内。有时,在不知情或违背主教会议意愿的情况下,任命了不配担任宗主教、总主教或主教的人。为了防止任命一个不值得的人担任塞尔维亚教会的领袖,一些宗主教设法在他们自己的有生之年选出他们的继任者,并确保在与主教会议达成协议的情况下顺利移交职务。根据已知资料和未发表的奥斯曼文献,本文讨论了塞尔维亚宗主教的选举、篡夺宗主教宝座以及奥斯曼政府对神职人员的态度等问题。它为摩西·拉约维奇(Moses Rajovic, 1712- 1724)当政期间的事件提供了许多新的见解。
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 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Italy in the writings of Slobodan Jovanovic The second eastern crisis (1875-1878): Echoes, volunteers and Italian interests Three votive plaques from Upper Moesia Experiencing disease and medical treatment in renaissance Italy: Cardinal Pietro Bembo and his circle The Yugoslav perspective on Italian Eurocommunism in the second half of the 1970s
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1