Google tag

28 May 2023

“There are many seductive things in our day” (from a letter to a person who had long avoided visiting temples)

 

Non-commemorating

While sorting through the letters received by Leonid Ivanovich from Bishop Athanasius, I found a message in which Vladyka, addressing “one person”, calls on his spiritual children to start visiting churches. Here Bishop Athanasius tells about his disagreements with Metropolitan Sergius (Stragorodsky) . But in order to understand what is at stake, we will have to go back to 1922, to the beginning of Vladyka's torment.

* * *

It was then, in the 22nd, shortly after ow. Athanasius became bishop of Kovrovsky, vicar of Metropolitan Sergius (Stragorodsky) , a dramatic story of their relationship began, which led to a break.




Immediately after the arrest of Patriarch Tikhon in 1922, Bishop Sergius went over to the Renovationists—these “red priests” who temporarily seized power in the Church. And here's how it happened. The ruling bishop joins the heretics, while the vicar, Bishop Athanasius, fights the Renovationists and ends up in prison.

Then, it is true, Metropolitan Sergius sincerely repented of his misdeed and was again accepted into communion by the Orthodox.

For the second time, the destinies of Metropolitan Sergius and Bishop Athanasius intersected even more closely - it does not happen closer. In 1927, they ended up together in a solitary cell in the Moscow Internal Prison. Metropolitan Sergius was accused of creating a church group in order to elect the most authoritative bishop of that time, Vladyka Kirill (Smirnov), to the Patriarchate.

And again Bishop Sergius could not resist. At that time, the Bolsheviks were deciding the question: how to find a bishop who would sign the Declaration of Allegiance to Soviet Power? Vladyka Kirill was the first to receive the offer. Upon learning that he would have to help the atheists deal with objectionable clergy, the metropolitan replied to one of the leaders of the OGPU: “... You are not a cannon, and I am not a bomb with which you want to blow up the Russian Church from within .

But Vladyka Sergiy agreed to the conditions of the Chekists. As a result, he - the head of the "conspiracy" - left solitary confinement to take a high post, and his younger "accomplice", Bishop Athanasius, received a term - 3 years in the Solovetsky camps. Ridiculous, sad situation.

A few days before the signing of the Declaration, a terrible earthquake occurred in Jerusalem. The Russian Cathedral, our main temple in the Holy Land, suffered greatly. The middle dome was cut by a deep crack. One of the small domes bent. The Church of the Holy Sepulcher was damaged. The monastery of John the Baptist on the banks of the Jordan was completely destroyed.

A major theologian, a man who wholeheartedly supports the Church , Metropolitan Sergius had one fundamental feature. For him, the Church as an organization was probably higher than Christianity - its apostolic, catholic spirit. This delusion came to us from Catholicism in the 18th century and won a lot of minds for itself. But by the time of the revolution, we had a whole galaxy of bishops, priests, deeply Orthodox in spirit, as if stepping towards us from the old pre-Nikonian and pre-Petrine Rus'. Their clash with Sergius was inevitable, and the higher he rose, the more serious the conflict became. I note that as a person, Vladyka Sergius was loved by many, very many, and he loved many. The dispute was about ideals.

* * *

But not signing the Declaration was the reason for the break of Metropolitan Sergius with his old comrades.

The fact is that under pressure from the OGPU, Bishop Sergius, as it were, usurped the place of the head of the Russian Church. According to the will of Patriarch Tikhon, Metropolitans Agafangel (Preobrazhensky), Kirill (Smirnov), Peter (Polyansky) had the right to primacy . And only then, as the deputy of Vladyka Peter, could Metropolitan Sergius lead the Church . But when the three elders were in chains, his hour struck.

Everyone recognized the provisional authority of Metropolitan Sergius, but then he behaved strangely. At first he refused to give way to Metropolitan Agafangel, who was released. And then he made it clear that Vladyka Peter, recognized by all as the First Hierarch, was not a decree for him. Only after that did our most prominent bishops of that time, several dozen Orthodox leaders, break off relations with the Deputy First Hierarch.

And Metropolitan Sergius at that time believed in his energy, in his ability to lead the Church through the Russian Catastrophe. I don't think he was power hungry. But, perhaps, he believed that a noble end justifies dubious means. History has cruelly laughed at these illusions.

Contemporary publicist Yuri Miloslavsky recently compared the behavior of Metropolitan Sergius with that terrible night when the Apostle Peter denied Christ three times. The most active person, who met the soldiers who came for the Savior with weapons in his hands, Saint Peter could not be appeased further. He entered the courtyard of the house where Jesus was imprisoned, planning, presumably, the Lord's escape from the bonds. And pragmatically, in the “interests of the cause,” he recanted. And only when the rooster crowed three times did he realize what he had done. There is reason to believe that Vladyka Sergius had his own insight. That at the end of his life he realized what he was wrong about, and died, marked with the seal of some mournful greatness.

On this topic, you can talk and argue for a long time. I just want to add that we, who live today, do not have the right to a court. Years after the death of Sergius (Stragorodsky) , Bishop Athanasius, a man who has suffered his right to bring some kind of accusation, writes:

“And I, a sinner, sometimes condemn others who remain not in exile. But can anyone vouch for me, can I vouch for myself, what would I do if I were not in exile?

* * *

Today we have decided to bring to the attention of our readers the message of Bishop Athanasius to spiritual children about the need to reconcile with the Patriarchal Church . In recent years, the topic, which is raised in it, has again acquired great relevance.

“There are many seductive things in our day” (from a letter to a person who had long avoided visiting temples)

It seems to me that you have not yet fully resolved the issue of going to temples. And I decided this question for myself without any hesitation.

I remember the example of Christ the Savior Himself, Who came to abolish the Old Testament representative worship. And yet, all His life, until the last moment, He took part in the Divine service performed by the Jewish priests, despite the fact that He denounced the priests themselves menacingly. And the holy apostles, after the new Christian Divine service was finally established, for a long time, apparently, until the very destruction of the temple of Jerusalem in the year 70 A.D., continued to go to the temple, participated in the already canceled Old Testament Divine service, bowed their heads when the high priest or priests delivered the blessing in the name of God.

The Church of Christ is holy and blameless. But until the Second Coming, only one half of her children - members of the Heavenly Church - cannot sin. The other half of it - the Church , militant on earth - seeking the salvation of sinners, does not drive them out of its fence.

In the Church on earth, Divine grace is poured out on all her children who keep communion with her through the primates of the Church, priests and bishops, blessed in the lawfully perfected sacrament of the priesthood.

Each individual member of the earthly Church enters into real, mysterious, grace-filled communion with Her and with Christ only through his or her authorized spiritual father, provided that the latter is in communion with the First Hierarch, who is recognized as such by all the First Hierarchs of all other autocephalous Orthodox Churches constituting in its totality the One Universal Church . Apart from this hierarchical chain, there is not and cannot be any other way for grace-filled union with the Church.universal and with Christ. Even the great hermits, who spent many decades in complete solitude, always thought of themselves as holding on to this grace-filled hierarchical chain and, at the first opportunity, hastened to receive the Holy Mysteries, consecrated by the grace-filled servants of the Church. But grace is poured out to the Church of Christ, and sanctification and salvation is accomplished not by the clergy, but by the Church Itself through the clergy.

Priests are not creators of grace. They are only distributors of it, like channels through which Divine grace is poured on the faithful and apart from which it is impossible to receive Divine grace.

Both hierarchs and clergymen come from ordinary mortal, sinful people: there are no saints on earth.

Clergymen, even leading an obviously shameful way of life, continue to be effective distributors of grace until the lawful ecclesiastical authority deprives them of the grace-given authority granted them in the sacrament of the priesthood to distribute Divine grace and lift up the prayers of the faithful to the throne of God .

For unworthy clergy, the Lord sends His angel to perform the holy Mysteries. The sacraments performed by unworthy clergy are for judgment and condemnation of the clergy, but for grace-filled sanctification of those who receive them with faith.

Only one circumstance, if a clergyman begins to openly, publicly, from the church pulpit, preach a heresy already condemned by the Fathers at the Ecumenical Councils, not only gives the right, but also obliges everyone - both clergy and laity, - without waiting for a conciliar court, to break off all communication with such a preacher, no matter what high position in the church hierarchy he occupies.

From church history we know many cases when unworthy persons occupied high positions, when patriarchs were heresyarchs.

But the Ecumenical Councils, which met to judge and condemn the new heresy, until the very last moment sent them the first, and the second, and the third time an invitation to come to the Council, calling them “the most God-loving bishops.”

And only when the invitees refused to appear even at the third invitation, the Council proclaims an anathema to them, and only from that moment they are deprived of grace, and the sacraments performed by them become graceless.

And look, for example, at the history of the Patriarchs of Constantinople in the 17th century. The patriarchs were appointed by the Turkish sultans and the one who made the most contribution to the sultan's treasury was put on the patriarchate.

Some patriarchs occupied the patriarchal see for a year, for several months, for several days. There were secret Jesuits here, there were sympathizers with Protestantism...

The sultan removed one patriarch because the other promised to contribute more to the sultan's treasury. How quick and unexpected the changes of patriarchs were can be seen from the fact that from 1598 to 1654 54 patriarchs were replaced.

What a temptation for the believers!

And the life of Greek Christians at that time was one continuous suffering ... but they did not separate from their shepherds and archpastors, did not shy away from visiting temples where the names of the patriarchs appointed by the Mohammedan sultan were exalted.

And among the patriarchs of that time was St. Athanasius Patelarius, who three times, with the payment of an appropriate contribution to the treasury, entered the see of Constantinople and then in Russia, in Lubny, died and was canonized.

And what a temptation was for the Orthodox Russian people Peter's associate, the leading member of the Synod, Archbishop Theophan Prokopovich , hawk, lecher. Maybe his seductive behavior pushed other zealots into a split. But not the schismatics, but those who prayed in the churches where the name of Theophan was raised, remained in the Orthodox Church and received grace and sanctification.

A lot of seductive today. But, despite all sorts of temptations, we have no legal right to avoid communion with the clergy, who are in canonical dependence on Patriarch Alexy.

The current state of church administration is not at all like the time when Metropolitan Sergius was in charge of the affairs of the Russian Church as a deputy of Metropolitan Peter and on his behalf. When Metropolitan Sergius declared that his authority stemmed from the authority of Metropolitan Peter and that he, Metropolitan Sergius, was entirely dependent on Metropolitan Peter, we all recognized Metropolitan Sergius as the legitimate leader of the church life of the Orthodox Russian Church, of which Metropolitan Peter remains the First Hierarch.

which in due time were given to him and frees the Orthodox from subordination to Metropolitan Sergius and the Synod formed by him. I stated this frankly, in writing, to M. Sergius upon my return from exile in December 1939. Having refused any participation in church work under the leadership of Metropolitan Sergius, I did not shy away from visiting churches where Divine services were performed by clergy who recognized Metropolitan Sergius.

Sharp, abusive reviews about the so-called Sergian churches and about the Divine services performed there, I considered and still consider “blasphemy against the Holy Spirit”.

True zeal for faith cannot be combined with malice.

Where there is malice, there is no Christ, there is the suggestion of dark power. Christian zeal - with love, with sorrow, maybe with anger, but without sin (when angry - do not sin).

And malice is the greatest sin , the unforgivable sin - blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of love, the Spirit of goodness. And the most zealous Vladyka Metropolitan Kirill, who, as a protest, allowed non-attendance at Sergius churches, condemned the blasphemy of unreasonable zealots and said that he himself, in case of mortal need, would confess and take communion with a Sergius priest.

At present, the state of church affairs is completely different from what it was under Metropolitan Sergius. Metropolitan Peter, of course, is no longer alive. Apart from the First Hierarch of the Local Russian Church, none of us – neither laity, nor priests, nor bishops – can be in communion with the Universal Church, those who do not recognize their First Hierarch remain outside the Church, from which the Lord deliver us.

There is no other First Hierarch other than Patriarch Alexy in the Russian Church. He was recognized as such by all Eastern patriarchs. He was recognized by all Russian hierarchs. I do not dare to avoid it either.

Now there are no commemorating and non-commemorating temples. Then it was possible, as a protest, not to visit those churches where, along with the name of the legitimate first hierarch, their deputy was illegally commemorated not for the first hierarchical rights, but for the conduct of current affairs.

Now the name of the Russian First Hierarch, Patriarch Alexy, is being raised everywhere. Perhaps something else in the activities of Patriarch Alexy seduces, confuses, makes zealots alert. But all this does not deprive either him or the clergy subordinate to him of grace.

Heresy condemned by the fathers, Patriarch Alexy and his associates do not preach, and according to the canons of the church, this is the only case when communication should be interrupted even with the patriarch, without waiting for the court of the church.

Patriarch Alexy has not been condemned by any legitimate higher hierarchical authority. And I personally could only testify against him if necessary: ​​but I cannot and have no right to say that he is without grace and that the sacraments performed by him and his clergy are invalid.

Therefore, when in the year 45, being imprisoned, and the priests who were with me, who did not commemorate Metropolitan Sergius, learned about the election and appointment of Patriarch Alexy, we, having discussed the situation that had arisen, agreed that since, apart from Patriarch Alexy, recognized by all Ecumenical Patriarchs, now there is no other legitimate First Hierarch of the Russian Local Church, then we must lift up in our prayers the name of Patriarch Alexy as our Patriarch, which I have been doing since that day.

All that in the activities of the Patriarch and the Patriarchate confuses and seduces zealous zealots, all this remains on the conscience of the Patriarch, and he will give an account to the Lord for this. And because of the embarrassing and seductive, which sometimes may not be quite what it seems to us - only because of this it is terrible to deprive yourself of the grace of the Holy Mysteries.

Let us not separate ourselves, but let us more earnestly pray to the Lord that He would make wiser and help Patriarch Alexy and give everyone the Church the right to rule the word of truth and that the Lord would instruct us all to do so, so as not to distort our conscience, not to sin against the unity of the Church and the temptations of the Church do not appease.

“The affirmation of those who hope in Thee, establish, Lord, the Church , which you have acquired with Your Honorable Blood.”

I invoke God's blessing on you. Save yourself in the Lord!

Bogomolets Vash E.A./praying for you (your) Bp. A./
St. Nicholas Day 9 (22) V – 55
Svt. Athanasius (Sakharov), confessor, Bishop of Kovrov.


No comments:

Post a Comment

To comment you MUST be
a Google account user