MOGHILA, PIETRO. — Metropolitan of Kiev from 1633 to 1646. Famous as the author of an Orthodox Confession. Born on 21 December 1596 (according to the old style) in Moldavia, into a noble Romanian family (Movilă). He studied in Moldavia and then at the school of the confraternity of Lviv (hostile to the Union of Brest, 1595), perhaps also abroad. In 1627 he entered the celebrated Monastery of the Caves in Kiev, of which he became archimandrite that same year; there, in 1631, he founded a school raised to the status of an academy in 1633, the cradle of the later (1701) Ecclesiastical Academy of Kiev. He died on 22 December 1646.
M. carried out an indefatigable pastoral activity—he was not a speculative theologian—in Poland during the first half of the seventeenth century, to strengthen the Greek-Russian Church in its struggle against the Protestants and against both Latin and Byzantine Catholics. Negotiations concerning the Union with Pope Urban VIII (between 1636 and 1643) were unsuccessful. As means of pastoral activity he employed the influential confraternities, schools, printing presses—especially that of the Monastery of the Caves—
CHART OF THE EIGHT MODES ACCORDING TO THE TRADITIONAL THEORY:
| PRIMITIVE TERMINOLOGY | LATE MEDIEVAL AND MODERN TERMINOLOGY | FINAL |
|---|---|---|
| PROTUS AUTENTICO | 1°MODO | |
| PROTUS PLAGALE | 2°MODO | |
| DEUTERUS AUTENTICO | 3°MODO | |
| DEUTERUS PLAGALE | 4°MODO | |
| TRITUS AUTENTICO | 5°MODO | |
| TRITUS PLAGALE | 6°MODO | |
| TETRAROUS AUTENTICO | 7°MODO | |
| TETRAROUS PLAGALE | 8°MODO |
ASSIMILATED MODES:
| PROTUS AUTENTICO | 1°MODO OPPURE 9°M | |
|---|---|---|
| PROTUS PLAGALE | 2°MODO OPPURE 10°M | |
| DEUTERUS AUTENTICO | 3°MODO OPPURE 11°M | |
| DEUTERUS PLAGALE | 4°MODO OPPURE 12°M | |
| TRITUS AUTENTICO | 5°MODO OPPURE 13°M | |
| TRITUS PLAGALE | 6°MODO OPPURE 14°M |
(phot. Enc. Catt.)
Mode — Diagram of the modes
hospitals, and churches. He fought against abuses and published a large number of liturgical and religious writings.
His principal writings are: Il grande catechismo (the so-called «Confessione di fede di P. M.»). It was conceived to neutralize the Protestant influence of the Confession of the Patriarch of Constantinople Cyril Lukaris. Initially composed in the vernacular and in Latin (a copy of the Latin autograph is found in cod. Parisius 1265, published by Malvy and Viller), it was submitted to a Synod of Kiev, convened by M. in 1640. Since there were divergences on certain points (for example, concerning the state of souls after death and the form of the Eucharist), in order to obtain the approval of the Patriarch of Constantinople the work was examined at a meeting of five theologians (three from Kiev and two Greeks, among the latter Melczio Syrigos), held in 1642 at Iassy. After making several corrections to the Latin text, Syrigos translated it into vernacular Greek and submitted it for approval to the Patriarch of Constantinople; approval was granted by his Synod (1643) and confirmed by the signatures of the other three Eastern patriarchs. The work was printed, only in Greek, for the first time in Amsterdam in 1667. Numerous editions and translations into several languages followed later. However, the Confessione thus disseminated did not correspond in many respects to the author’s doctrine. Consequently, M. published (Monastery of the Caves, Kiev 1645) his short catechism as a summary of the longer one, under the very lengthy title: Piccola raccolta della dottrina, etc. It had editions in Polish, Ukrainian, and Slavonic. The divergences between the two catechisms are discussed by Malvy and Viller (pp. cxiv-cxxix). Trebnik, or Euchologio (ritual), by which he exerted considerable influence on the Russian Church, which adopted it in 1757. M. introduced several new rubrics into the Missal and Ritual, in opposition to the theses of the anti-Catholic Greek polemicists. In response to the polemical work of the Uniate theologian Cassian Sakowicz, Επανόρθωσις ουγενό, etc. (Cracow 1642), he published, or had published, under the name Εὐαφῆς ποιμήν («Pious shepherd»), the Λίθος, or Pietra lanciata, etc. (Monastery of the Caves, Kiev 1644). M. acknowledges the existence of abuses, but attributes them to the persecutions to which his Church is subjected, and vigorously defends the Byzantine Ritual, also discussing the controversial questions between Catholics and dissident Eastern Christians.
M.’s theological school became a center of Greek-Russian theology and was attended by Russians, Greeks, Romans, Serbs, and Bulgarians. Teaching was conducted in Latin, according to St. Thomas and the scholastic method. Apart from the primacy of the pope, the doctrines taught there were Latinizing (they agreed with Catholic doctrine on purgatory, the Immaculate Conception of Mary, the words of Christ as the form of the Eucharist, etc.). Malvy and Viller believe (op. cit. in the bibliography, p. xvii) that even the doctrine of M.’s Confessione (part 1, question 71) concerning the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father alone («sicut a fonte et principio Divinitatis») is susceptible of a Catholic interpretation. This seems true of the wording, though not so much of the context. In the Trebnik, among other things, M. recognizes the validity of baptism by infusion, rejects the rebaptism of the Apostles, and teaches, like the Catholics, concerning penance, satisfaction, and the temporal punishment due to forgiven sin.