Alphabetical syntagma» by Matthew Vlastar as a historical source on state-church relationship in the second halfof the XVII century

In the middle of the 17th century the state - church relationshipsunderwent certain changes. The beginning of Alexei Mikhailovich's monarchial authority's shift to absolutism ran contrary to PatriarchNikon's aspirations for the primacy of spiritual power over the secular. Nikon's withdrawal from the Patriarch's throne in 1658 put Romanovthe second in a rather difficult position. On the one hand, Nikon did not abdicate the Patriarch's position and remained the pontiff de jure.On the other hand, Alexei Mikhailovich became a de facto head of the Russian church. As the final solution of the "Nikon's case" was notreached despite the conclusions of the Church council of 1660, Alexei Mikhailovich decided to elect a new Russian Patriarch with theparticipation of Oriental Patriarchs. In 1662 letters with Alexei Mikhailovich's questions about the relationships between the secular and thespiritual powers were sent to the Orient. Relying on the Patriarchs' answers, Russian bishops had to make a decision about the PatriarchNikon. In their answers about the prerogatives of the Tsar and the Patriarch Oriental hierarchs relied on the "Alphabetical Syntagma" byMathew Vlastar, the most authoritative compendium of canonic rules and civil laws regulating the Church's activities after the fall ofConstantinople. Mathew Vlastar's compendium was in use in the Greek and other Christian churches. In Russia the "Syntagma" was knownsince the 15th century. The compendium included the clauses of the Epanagoge, the legislative source of the second half of the 9th centurydealing with the functions of the secular and spiritual powers. The analysis of the Oriental Patriarchs' answers to Alexei Mikhailovich'squestions and the comparison between their answers and the clauses of the "Syntagma" shows that the Patriarchs supported the Russian Tsarunequivocally. The Oriental pontiffs did not mention the "symphony of power" and gave the leading role, the primacy in the state and thefull authority to the Tsar. The Patriarchs developed the doctrine of the impossibility of two equal powers' coexistence within the state whichcontradicted the Epanagoge. As to the role Patriarch, the subject of the whole chapter of the Compendium reiterating the clauses of theEpanagoge, Oriental pontiffs interpreted it in their own way which benefited Alexei Mikhailovich and was unacceptable for Patriarch Nikon.From the point of view of Oriental Patriarchs, Russian tsar was the Tsar of Universe while the Russian Patriarch was a local pontiff. On thebasis of the clauses of the Epanagoge which became part of the "Syntagma" the Patriarch of Constantinople had the primacy while otherPatriarchs had the decisive role in their dioceses. Thus, Alexei Mikhailovich supported by Oriental Patriarchs managed to tilt the balance tohis favor and to strengthen the power of the monarch.

Keywords

Authors

References