Informacja

Drogi użytkowniku, aplikacja do prawidłowego działania wymaga obsługi JavaScript. Proszę włącz obsługę JavaScript w Twojej przeglądarce.

Wyszukujesz frazę "Church Union" wg kryterium: Temat


Wyświetlanie 1-2 z 2
Tytuł:
Unia w eparchii przemysko-samborskiej w latach 1664–1670
The Union in the eparchy of Przemyśl-Sambor in the years 1664–1670
Autorzy:
Krochmal, Jacek
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/1065191.pdf
Data publikacji:
2016
Wydawca:
Archiwum Główne Akt Dawnych
Tematy:
Antoni Terlecki
Jakub Susza
unia kościelna
greckokatolicka diecezja przemyska
church union
Greek Catholic Diocese of Przemyśl
Opis:
The article shows the state of the Uniate Church in the diocese of Przemyśl-Sambor during the transitional period between the death of Bishop Prokop Chmielewski (1664), and taking the diocese by Bishop Jan Małachowski (1670). At that time, Bishop Antoni Terlecki (1664–1669) ruled this diocese, and after his removal from the office – Jakub Susza, bishop of the neighboring Uniate diocese of Chełm, who was the administrator of the diocese of Przemyśl-Sambor until the appointment of the next Bishop Ordinary. The rule by the Bishop Terlecki fell in the most difficult period in relations between the Uniate and the Orthodox churches. In the diocese of Przemysl advantage gained Orthodox under the strong leadership of bishop Antoni Winnicki, later Metropolitan of Kiev. The cathedral and most of the parishes in Przemyśl were in their hands. Orthodox took over another Uniate churches, and tried to expel the Uniate bishop from a residence in Walawa in next to Przemyśl, what they finally succeeded in 1669. An account of the bishop Terlecki’s governance is not clear, and in fact it has to be divided into two parts. The positive assessment gains the first one, launched in the final period of the rule of his predecessor – the bishop Prokop Chmielewski. Antoni Terlecki, first as coadjutor (1662), then Bishop Ordinary (1664) ably led the Uniate part of the Diocese of Przemyśl. He became involved in the efforts to strengthen the Uniate Church in Poland, in cooperation with the Uniate bishop of Chełm Jakub Susza. Antoni Terlecki was well prepared to deal with the high ecclesiastical functions. He was a basilian and a doctor of theology. However, over the time his negative traits as rowdiness and drunkenness prevailed. He neglected the duties of the bishop and voluntarily left the diocese of Przemyśl. As a result, the Uniate Metropolitan of Kiev, first imposed on Terlecki church curse, and then took his episcopal functions. Jakub Susza was entrusted with the administration of the Uniate eparchy of Przemyśl-Sambor. At the time of the Bishop Terlecki falls regression in the development of the church union in the diocese of Przemyśl-Sambor. Compact complexes of the Uniate churches were operated on the outskirts of the vast Eparchy, in its western and northern parts. There were 65 established churches confirmed by sources as Uniate and consecutive three more likely to be Uniate. A total of 45 identified with the name Uniate priest served (they cumulated several functions simultaneously).
Źródło:
Miscellanea Historico-Archivistica; 2016, 23; 179-205
0860-1054
Pojawia się w:
Miscellanea Historico-Archivistica
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Kościół prawosławny w dobie Unii Lubelskiej. Kryzys czy początek odrodzenia?
The Orthodox Church in the era of the Union of Lublin. A crisis or the beginning of a revival?
Autorzy:
Gil, Andrzej
Rachuba, Andrzej
Choińska-Mika, Jolanta
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/chapters/16539284.pdf
Data publikacji:
2020-12-23
Wydawca:
Archiwum Główne Akt Dawnych
Tematy:
Kościół prawosławny
Unia Lubelska
Kryzys Kościoła
reforma Kościoła
Union of Lublin 1569
Orthodox Church
Kiev Metropolis
crisis
Opis:
The Orthodox Church in the Polish-Lithuanian state of the 16th century was organized under a unified and hierarchical structure of the Kiev Metropolis. Theoretically, it was subordinated to its Mother Church in Constantinople, in practice, however, it was almost fully autonomous with regard to its internal operation; in terms of organization and property, it was embedded in the social and economic system of the state of its time. Historiography to date has generally accepted the thesis about the multi-faceted crisis that the Orthodox in the Kiev Metropolis were supposed to be experiencing. This crisis was to intensify especially after the Union of Lublin in 1569, when fundamental structural changes were effected within the monarchy ruled by Sigismund Augustus. Transfer of four voivodeships from the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, in which the Orthodox Ruthenian population was an important (and sometimes dominant) constituent part, into the borders of the Crown (the Kingdom of Poland), was to be the foundation on which Polish state administration and great landowners intended to build a new religious reality, primarily through the expulsion of the local Orthodox Church. An analysis of the situation of the Kiev Metropolis in the second half of the 16th century shows that its condition did not differ significantly from what was happening in the Polish Catholic Church at the time. As far as the economic foundations are concerned, the Orthodox Church in the Commonwealth after 1569 owned assets sufficient to perform its function in every extent required by church law and custom, especially since it had institutional support, namely the ktetor system. The period following the Union of Lublin was also characterized by an expansion of Orthodox Church structures, especially at the level or parishes, whose number increased significantly. Artistic and spiritual culture flourished, as is clearly evident in the extant examples of icons, sacral architecture, liturgical books and theological literature. New forms of activity of the faithful (laymen) have emerged, such as Orthodox brotherhoods. Therefore, in my opinion, the Kiev Metropolis in the second half of the 16th century did not differ from other religious communities, both in the Commonwealth and in other countries of Central and Eastern Europe. The only crisis that really affected it at the time was a crisis of growth.
Źródło:
Unia Lubelska 1569 roku i unie w Europie Środkowo-Wschodniej; 185-195
9788395630255
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
    Wyświetlanie 1-2 z 2

    Ta witryna wykorzystuje pliki cookies do przechowywania informacji na Twoim komputerze. Pliki cookies stosujemy w celu świadczenia usług na najwyższym poziomie, w tym w sposób dostosowany do indywidualnych potrzeb. Korzystanie z witryny bez zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies oznacza, że będą one zamieszczane w Twoim komputerze. W każdym momencie możesz dokonać zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies