spirituality (Figure 12.2). Nil argued that too easily such cenobitic communities
slip into worldly vices, such as living off the labor of others and indulging in
luxurious clothing, treasures, and architectural ensembles. Joseph of Volokolamsk,
on the other hand, felt that only the discipline of a large communal monastery
governed by a strictRulewould provide the setting for prayerful contemplation.
The idea that these two men had a spirited debate about whether monasteries
should own land has been dismissed; such debates emerged later, at mid-sixteenth
century. Both Joseph and Nil were committed to the same goal—contemplative
monastic life—and supported different environments to achieve it. Robert Roman-
chuk has detailed how assiduously the monks of the St. Cyril-Beloozero Monastery
practiced contemplative spirituality in two forms—one based on pietistic reading
modeled on the“desert fathers”(spiritual ancestors of hesychasm) and the other a
more scholastic emphasis on study, learning, and analysis. The monastery’s wealth
made possible its rich library and educational program. To navigate this tension,
Russian spiritual leaders developed codes of spiritual discipline, such as Volotskii’s
Rule, and persistently campaigned against the most egregious of sins of public
morality.
Figure 12.2Outside of Moscow, the Trinity-St. Sergii Monastery was patronized by the
royal family and great boyars, and grew wealthy with extensive landholdings. Its thick walls
withstood siege in the Time of Troubles and protected the ruling family during disturbances
of 1682 and 1689. Photo: Jack Kollmann.Varieties of Orthodoxy 251