Is the Soviet church good? Professor Ivan Andreev
Professor Ivan Andreev: Is the Soviet church good?
Power is the establishment of God: "Let every soul be subject to the higher authorities, for there is no power not of God, but the existing powers of God are established" (Romans 13: 1). About this same in pre-Christian antiquity, Plato claimed, understanding power, as a hierarchy, ascending to God.
In other words, only God-established authority is genuine power. Power, however, which does not recognize the supreme authority of God over itself, is not power, but autocracy.
Soviet power in the USSR is not true power, but a denial of the very essence, the very principle, the very idea of power and the assertion of autocracy.
Atheism is a terrible evil. He is born either by the greatest sin of pride, or is conditioned by complete indifference to questions of religion and morality (ie to Truth and Love), or is the result of criminal thoughtlessness. "Speech is insane in your heart: there is no God" (Psalm 13).
State power in the USSR, which is a frank and cynical autocracy, is the main task of its ideological policy to spread the spread of atheism with the help of the principled greatest spiritual and physical state violence. The perfected system of universal propaganda, built on state-organized lies, deceit, temptations and terror, together with the diabolically brutalized advanced system of torture and torture, which are principally and systematically used by the Soviet state for the triumph of atheism, is a completely new phenomenon, qualitatively profoundly different from All known forms of cruelty and violence in world history.
The main struggle of the Bolshevik state is aimed at Christianity, as the most perfect kind of religion and especially on Orthodoxy, as the most perfect kind of Christianity. Bolshevism, as the highest phenomenon of anti-Christianity, is the idea of antichrist ...
If the Orthodox Christian Church is mystically the "Body of Christ", then the Bolshevik Communist Party is mystically the body of the Antichrist.
The personal historical apocalyptic phenomenon of the Antichrist will not add anything fundamentally new to this idea of the Antichrist. It will only finalize, centralize and universalize this idea throughout the world, creating an absolutely hopeless situation for all mankind. For before each person will arise if a question that will not be able to answer (not only in word but in deed): Is it "government" is subject to the Antichrist to receive the Antichrist seal "on the forehead" or "at hand" (on the interpretation of Bishop. Damascene "on the forehead" - means "voluntary, full spiritual enslavement", and "on hand" - familiarizing "fear for the sake of").
Those who have not received the seal will be tortured and persecuted in such a way that even the chosen ones are "tempted," and if the terms were not shortened, "no flesh would survive."
Bolshevism sets its ultimate goal, with the help of the world revolution, to establish its "power" throughout the world. If this happens, and at the head of the whole world becomes the Bolshevik Communist world government represented by the "Leader of the Nations of the World" - then this will be the place for the personification of the apocalyptic antichrist.
It is necessary to clearly, clearly and firmly understand that Soviet power is for the first time in world history a genuine cynical-outspoken anti-Christian power, that is, the God-struggling autocracy.
Without recognition of this deeply qualitatively distinctive assessment of "Soviet power" - there is no "problem of communism". If the Bolshevik Communism is only one of many, is not qualitatively new phenomena in world history, when "Soviet power" is only just one of the worst and most brutal (even if the worst of the worst and most brutal), then there is no special "spiritual human crisis," no And in general there is no new spiritual problem. Then the phenomenon of communism must be treated only from the political, economic, military or "utilitarian-moral" point of view, as the overwhelming majority of political figures of the world now treat it. We saw the results of this understanding: Bolshevism is slowly, unimpeded, conquering the world.
The mystical power of Bolshevism is not understood by many.
The Catacomb Orthodox Russian Church in the USSR, the Church of the Confessors and Martyrs, qualifies the Soviet State power as the authority of the Antichrist.
The historical delegation of the Petrograd diocese in 1927, led by the bishop Gdovskiy Dimitri (shot in 1937 after 10 years' imprisonment), directly put the question before the deputy and locum tenens of the Patriarchal throne, Metropolitan Sergius, in Moscow:
"After all, the Soviet government is anti-Christ, and can the Orthodox Church be in league with the anti-Christian power and pray for its success and rejoice in its joys?"
Metropolitan Sergius laughed and waved: "Well, what's the antichrist here", and this was the most important, fatal, decisive divergence, after which in 1927 there was a church split. Those who qualified owls. As the power of the antichrist (that is, as an anti-Christian power), did not find a moral-possible (not for political reasons, but for religious conscience) that the Orthodox Russian Church "only spiritually" obey Satan, retaining its "full autonomy "Guaranteed by the" constitution "of the USSR.
Those who did not agree with these moral motives (according to conviction or fear for the sake of), went after Metropolitan Sergius, and now they are following the "patriarch" Alexis, "rejoicing at the joys of the God-struggling autocracy, praying for the successes of this autocracy, giving him nationwide gratitude for attention to the needs of the Orthodox population "by denying to the world the facts of the former and the present persecution of the true Orthodox Christians, qualifying and martyrs" political criminals "and" champions of black deeds ", considering the established relationship between r sudarstvom godless autocracy and the Orthodox Church (which has to be immaculate bride of Christ) - "ideal", and calling the head of the godless Antichrist Stalin state, "the elect of God."
When Metropolitan Sergius first embarked on this disastrous path of the "new church policy" (as he himself put it) for the first time in 1927, then a lot of "messages" from the episcopate, clergy and laity poured from all over Russia, written with tears and blood of the heart, Urging him to abandon the intended path.
Countless delegations from different dioceses came to Moscow and on their knees, sobbing, begged him to correct a fatal mistake. From the prisons, exiles and concentration camps came the protesting voice of the confessors and martyrs to Metropolitan Sergius.
Metropolitan Sergius, violating the basic Orthodox Church law, the foundation of the foundations of St. (The 34th apostolic rule, according to which the first bishop should not do anything without the reasoning of all other bishops, refused (verbally, in writing and in print) to heed the protesters' voice and attacked the clergy with the most terrible abuses, having qualified all those who disagreed with His "new church policy" - "counterrevolutionaries", thereby betraying them to the tearing of the organs of GPW.
After all apparently protesting were "liquidated" punitive organs of the godless state (ie, were shot, tortured, exiled in links) - the True Orthodox Church left the Catacombs.
With a clear further violation of St. Canons, Metropolitan Sergius with the help of an autocratic Soviet state became a patriarch. After his death, with the help of the same means, the "patriarch" Alexy became the head of the Soviet church (we will now call it that). (Note: On the issue of the canonical violations committed by the Soviet church, see a wonderful book - a collection of documentary evidence - Archpriest Michael Polish: ". The canonical position of the highest ecclesiastical authority in the USSR and abroad," 1948).
The Soviet Church violated not only Saint. Canons. She trampled and the main dogma of Orthodoxy - the dogma of the Church. After all, is it true that the words of St. John are applicable to the Soviet Church, after all its "deeds" and "words" (and the "words" of the church are its "deeds"). Dogma: "One, holy, catholic and Apostolic Church"? Does not this sound blasphemy? For there is in her neither unity, nor holiness, nor catholicity, nor apostolic spirit.
Not a holistic unity, but a total conglomerate, not the spiritual organism of the "Body of Christ," but only a formal church organization, in which there is no hint of holiness (for holiness and fundamental lie are not compatible), or, more importantly, the Apostolic spirit of love and jealousy towards Purity and truth - that's what the present "Soviet church" represents.
This church did something even more terrible than the breaking of the canons and dogmas: It changed the Holy Spirit, telling the world that in Russia, now called the USSR, is dominated not by the godless government of the God-struggling autocracy of the antichrist spirit, who hates and persecutes Christ and is faithful to Him before The end of the true Orthodox Church, but "the elect of the Lord, leading our fatherland to prosperity and glory."
"Who can quietly hear this shameful false praise," wrote Metropolitan Anastassy, First Hierarch of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, "where man-pleasures border on blasphemy." Indeed, is it possible to allow a person, blood-stained with blood Head to toe, covered with crimes, like leprosy and deeply poisoned by the poison of atheism, could be called "the chosen of the Lord", intended to lead our Motherland to prosperity and glory "? "Does this mean," continues Metropolitan Anastassy, "to spread slander and blasphemy against God Almighty Himself, Who in this case would be responsible for all the evil that has been for many years on our land Bolshevik power headed by Stalin?"
"The atomic bomb," concludes Metropolitan Anastassy, "and all the other destructive means invented by the current technology are truly less dangerous than the moral decay that the highest representatives of civil and ecclesiastical authority bring to the Russian soul by their example." The decomposition of the atom brings with it only a physical Devastation and destruction, and the corruption of the mind, heart and will entails the spiritual death of a whole people, after which there is no resurrection. "
What is the nature of that "ecclesiastical" power, which introduces moral decay into the Russian soul and, "the corrupt mind, heart and will," entails "the spiritual death of an entire nation, after which there is no resurrection"?
"The Soviet Church," writes Mr. SP in his remarkable pamphlet "On the Church in the USSR" (Paris, 1947), is the establishment of a Soviet anti-Christian totalitarian state, performing its assignments serving its purposes, unable to judge freely either , He can neither freely pray nor freely observe the secret of confession ... only he can consider the "patriarch" of Alexy "the guardian of canons" who never read and did not penetrate into their deep Christian meaning.This meaning is primarily freedom from human pressure "on the will of the Spirit Holy "and on the inspired Obedience to His suggestions ... and therefore, the fact that Alexy can, of course, store, within the acceptable and convenient Soviet political police, is the traditional appearance of historical Orthodoxy. "
Analyzing the motives and "ecclesiastical" considerations of the Supreme Soviet ecclesiastical authority, Mr. SP in the same pamphlet writes: "Why did they do this?
In order to extinguish the Antichrist or at least mitigate the persecution of believers, the clergy, the temples; Buy a respite at the cost of promoting Bolshevism in Russia and abroad.
For fear, no matter how Antichrist did not agree with the Vatican on the final eradication of Orthodoxy; In order to fight against Catholicism, have the Antichrist for oneself. "
"However, no doubt," SP further writes, "that the future of Orthodoxy will be determined not by compromises with the Antichrist, but by the heroic stand and confession that they (ie representatives of the Soviet ecclesiastical authorities) so treacherously Have disavowed. "
In conclusion, Mr. SP puts forward a clear, precise, simple and convincing thesis, with which one can not but agree:
"Orthodoxy, which obeyed the Soviets and became an instrument of the world anti-Christian temptation, is not Orthodoxy, but a seductive heresy of anti-Christianity, clothed in the tattered garments of historical Orthodoxy."
To every unprejudiced Russian Orthodox man it is perfectly clear how St. Joseph would act at the present time. Met. Philip, if he was now in Moscow and would lead the Russian Church. Condemned the Orthodox king in his atrocities, would not he have been able to convict an even more formidable god-ruled ruler of clearly Satanic affairs? For the confession of the TRUTH for the Orthodox Church is no less obligatory than the confession of faith. The path of Metropolitan Philip is a true path, and treachery to this path is treason to the very spirit of Orthodoxy.
True to his father-devil - "the father of lies," the Soviet state laid the foundation of its activities in a lie. "State-organized lies" is a completely new phenomenon in history. Separated from the state, the Soviet church followed in the footsteps of the Soviet state and showed the world "a church-organized lie." In the 10th edition of the Journal of the Moscow Patriarchate, Archbishop Alexander writes: "And now Moscow is the heart of Russia - in miniature all of Holy Russia." With this one can agree only on the condition that "miniature" is a "crooked mirror". Characterizing the "patriarch" Alexy, the same archbishop. Alexander writes: "Enlightened by the Holy Spirit, wise with the sacred experience, our holiest patriarchal activity testifies that now is not the time for the fire denunciations of St. John the Baptist, but the time of mercy, healing of feeble souls according to the precepts of St. Sergius of Radonezh and Seraphim of Sarov."
This is how the Soviet bishop writes in the USSR. But people think differently. Escaping from the Soviet hell, Mr. G. in the article "The Voice of the New Emigrant" writes: "The people came to the conviction that the great sorrow that fell upon him, the punishment of God for his sins ... The improvement of the people begins with the elevation of religion to such a height as It was only in the first centuries of Christianity, but for this it is necessary that the spiritual shepherd be ready to die for the truth, and not crush the soul ... Communism will be defeated not by an atomic bomb, but by a cross ... And Stalin understood this better than others. , We need the Mininas and the Pozharsky from the clergy, They would go themselves and lead the people, if necessary, to Golgotha for the glory of Christ, and the people will follow such shepherds, for the soil is ready.This is why our main enemy is not communism, but the clergy that went to To him at the service, for he is doing a truly Cain thing ... We want on behalf of all Russians living in Italy to address an open letter to the clergy who have fled to the camp of the Antichrist "...
The hypocrisy of Bishop Alexander's hypocrisy is too clear. Why "now is not the time" for the fiery accusations of St. John the Baptist, who called for repentance? There is no one to denounce? It's my pleasure? There is no one to repent? You should not repent? And if our time is primarily a time of mercy and condescension, then why not call on Stalin himself? Or, perhaps, "mercy and indulgence" now deserve only the executioners, and not the victims? - St. Sergius of Radonezh and St. Seraphim of Sarov never gave such covenants, for they taught the spirit of true, and not hypocritical love, which, in the name of "mercy and condescension," does not exclude "fire denunciations" - the best means for healing souls.
Hypocritic hypocrisy, along with adulation and manliness, is becoming the most characteristic feature of the representatives of the Soviet church and their defenders abroad. More and more often they say, write and declare on the topic of love, condescension and forgiveness, on non-judgment, on the need to stop disputes.
This new kind of "church Tolstoyism" with its new preaching of "non-resistance to evil" is not only violence but also an accusatory word - it is the most unbearable lie and deception.
In the article "The Legend of the Great Inquisitor" of Dostoevsky (Chronicle Notes, Munich, 1947), John Shakhovskoy (now bishop in America) wrote: "Christ in silence, which is louder than all exclamations and more significant than all philosophies, approaches its deep enemy and Kisses him, kisses his humanity, through the babbling of all his evil and lying words.If there was not this love, who would live from us? Silent love suffering in the world of truth, love for us suffering from us Truth - that can be more beautiful than this Even in heaven, maybe there will not be this beauty S, for there - the native home of heavenly beauty. "Here she is a patriotic patient, where she is the mistress of the universe."
First of all, for the Orthodox consciousness, words are completely unacceptable: "even in heaven, there will not be this beauty." Only an enthusiastic poet can say this, but not an Orthodox monk. Beauty in the sky - All-perfect beauty, including all the beauty that is on earth.
As for the main idea of the bishop. John, who sees the "super-heavenly" beauty in Christ's kiss of antichrist (for the Grand Inquisitor in the "Legend" of Dostoevsky expresses the ideas of the Antichrist), then she is completely unorthodox. This idea is not accidental and is one of the main thoughts - the convictions of the exalted poet-bishop. "Kiss" in the "Legend" - a false idea of rationalist Ivan Karamazov. Christ could never kiss the Antichrist, because Truth can not kiss a lie. "Sverhhristianskaya" love - a spiritual charm. The devil can seduce that assumes the form of "angel of light" ... Satan can tempt the fact that "Christ's truth by denying" it "higher truth awaits passionate than the Seraphim, and feared that the soul tempting, mind it seems holy ". (Minsk: "My Demon").
As Christ can not kiss the Antichrist, and the true Orthodox Christian can not, for example, kissing "humanity" Stalin "through the babble of his evil and false words." True Orthodoxy and the true love of Christ we see in the covenant of Metropolitan. Anastasia: "if you see the lies and hypocrisy, expose them to all, even if they were clothed in purple and fine linen." (Speech at the consecration of the Bishop of Serpukhov in 1906).
"Non-resistance to evil by denouncing" - is now very common. "There is no dispute nor reprove another," quoting the prophet Hosea, in the epigraph says that the same Bishop Ioann Shahovskoy (the most "loving" of all "only the spiritual" children of the Moscow Patriarch Alexy), in his "Ecclesiastical diary."
Why not argue and do not rebuke? I have never, or only "now" when "no fiery denunciations of St. Ioanna Predtechi"?
Disputes and accusations have been and always will be: during the Savior's life on earth, and during the "Acts of the Apostles.", And at the time of the Ecumenical Councils, and throughout the history of the Christian church, to the very last day of the history of the world when they come to the false prophets wolves in sheep's clothing, false Christs, and finally - the Antichrist himself, which would have to denounce and would argue that it is necessary.
Further, Bishop Ioann Shahovskoy in his "Ecclesiastical Diary", speaking of jealousy to the purity of the Orthodox Faith, wrote: "Unfortunately, it (jealousy) is often reduced today to an open frame of mind, vividly expressed in the Gospel first preparation for Lent week. the faithful soul ozhatsya these Frigid waves and ice splashing our "infallibility." the truth is that all we are Orthodox people are sinners, and none of us can not be wrapped in the mantle of infallibility. "
What does the gospel of the 1st preparatory weeks, which speaks of the Publican and the Pharisee, is our disputes and reproof, dictated by a sincere and ardent jealousy to the purity of the Orthodox faith? Why confuse the concept of "exposure of errors in matters of faith" with the concept of "moral condemnation of the sins of your neighbor"? And what slander of confessors, that they are "wrapped in the mantle of infallibility"?
Reception is not new. Recall the court trial of Maximus the Confessor. It was accused of the same, in what Bishop John blames modern confessors and zealots of the purity of faith. When we, the members of the Catacomb Church, bursting out of the Soviet hell, reproved "patriarchs" Sergius and Alexis for their unnatural alliance with the antichrist power, and Metropolitan Theophilus and bishop John as their "filial bow works and exploit (?) Of Patriarch Alexy," then no hypocrisy here and there in any cloak of infallibility we are not wrapped. We are clear, simple, sincere face of God, from the depths of our religious conscience, say that morally can neither "thanks" owls. government nor the "backtrack" from the confessors and martyrs, calling them "accomplices of the black case" or considered "ideal" relationship rights. Church with the atheistic government, nor rejoice "joy" persecutors of every religion, and most of the rights. Church nor considered Stalin "chosen of the Lord," as it is possible to do, to speak and even to declare the Soviet church.
Our religious (and not political as slander our enemies) conscience does not allow us to not only "filial bow" labor and heroism (!) Of Patriarch Alexy, but even silently watching and listening as the "bow" and protect the Soviet church other.
If we are wrong - will reprove us, we answer in essence, show that we are wrong, but do not slander us, do not call us Pharisees. Not with a sense of proud superiority which you ascribe to us, and with a feeling of sincere love of truth, and with a sense of horror and anger before the holy lie - we want to share with all the brothers in Christ, our tragic and painful experience of beholding the evil without a mask.
Sometimes we escaped "from there," accused of the fact that our assessment of the Soviet state and the Soviet church are subjective and are explained by psychological trauma (t. E. Suffering), we moved there.
This represents a typical objection coarse logical error, called in logic Argumentum ad hominem (substitution logical proof psychological argument). Yes, we have experienced very severe suffering for our denunciation of violence and lies that we've seen in the theory and practice of the Soviet state and the church. But a sense of personal insult or abuse and not the desire for revenge for experienced guide our statements here abroad. We thank God for the weathered hard experience, we repeat for St. John Chrysostom - "Glory to God for all" and did not call for revenge.
But we can not and dare not be silent here, where so many more people, completely uncomprehending mystical essence of Bolshevism and did not even know many of the facts that are done "out there." Our prosecution argument of the Soviet state and the Soviet "church" - justified by objective documentary evidence. We quote the actual words of "patriarchs" Sergius and Alexis of "joy" - "thank you", "accomplices of black business," "perfect relationship", "chosen one of the Lord."
These objective data we add our personal testimonies, evidence of the faithful Orthodox Christians, for whom the fate of the Orthodox Church more than life, evidence of our religious conscience before God. And is there "injury"? These "trauma" (ie, experiential knowledge of Soviet reality) only help us quickly and accurately expose cleverly masquerading enemy. If "there" we exposed the lies and violence, here and abroad, we have reproved the error and folly. Such errors and folly we see, of course, not the Soviet Exarchs, (in them we see a double portion of lies and betrayal), and those who "only spiritually" (!?) pleads "child of the Moscow Patriarchate," "while maintaining full autonomy. "
Such mistakes we see, for instance, Bishop Ioanna Shahovskogo who qualifies acts of owls. Church as "holy and humble thing", and therefore can not find words to express "gratitude enough" "Saints and the pastors of the Russian land" (thanking in turn "the chosen of the Lord" Stalin for his "care of Orthodoxy").
Recently we had to meet one Orthodox priest who fled east. Germany, where he stayed for about 3 years in the "jurisdiction of the Moscow Patriarchate." While he talked about how severely damaged Orthodox priests, who did not accept the Moscow Patriarchate, and how after the call "to talk" to the NKVD (now the Ministry of Internal Affairs). All Orthodox priests (including telling) "could not enter the jurisdiction of the Moscow Patriarchate ", and enter in and should have already been executed and the MVD order. - His recognition sounded like remorse. Penitent could neither blame nor rebuke for his cowardice. And we're all listening, sad silence. But when he began to justify themselves by saying that it is also "suffered" because it was "hard to obey" and that his "mental suffering" were greater than the suffering of prisoners and suffered "only physically" - then had to interrupt and explain, that "mental suffering" to subordinate the power of Antichrist are not credit and justification, but only legitimate deserved punishment "pangs of conscience."
Takes credit for "remorse" - morally impossible. For then I would have had to justify the suffering and Judah with his suicide. Christian morality is giving us another example - the image that should be a model our behavior after the sin of renouncing Christ - is a way of "bitter-weeping" in repentance of the Apostle Peter.
Defenders of owls. Church sometimes indicate that the "patriarchs" Sergius and Alexis made compromises with the Soviet government for the sake of ecclesiastical economy, in order to prevent the complete destruction of the Church in Russia.
This statement is profoundly mistaken.
Orthodox Church until 1927 only grew qualitatively from persecution (as it has always been and will be, for "the blood of martyrs - the seed of Christianity"). The Soviet government and therefore changed their combat tactics that convinced of the invincibility of the Orthodox faith only harassment and persecution. "The Patriarch" Sergius and Alexis helped the Owls. government in its struggle with the Church. During the war, if there were no compromises Sergius and Alexis, the Soviet government was forced to go on a much larger concessions to pure and uncompromising Church of martyrs and confessors. Profoundly true and just writes a foreign Archbishop ( "Letter shepherd shepherd", Paris 1947) on this subject: "As a result of a compromise with the government of Metropolitan Sergius and the complete enslavement of Patriarch Alexy, the government sold its concessions to the church terribly high price, extending into most machine . external church management Now the Soviet authorities may, without abandoning their main task - the struggle against religion, while continuing to implement it at the same time allows you to restore the temples and monasteries, allowing worshipers to fill these xp us. The reins of the manual these temples, these monasteries, these pilgrims are entirely in the hands of the Soviet authorities through a completely submissive to her church administrative staff. "
If all the bishops in 1927, followed by Metropolitan. Sergey - the Orthodox faith would have been in the deep damage. Only thanks to confessors and martyrs, especially the episcopate, not who had gone for the Metropolitan. Sergey - in the Soviet Union there are still undefeated and ineradicable Catacomb Church, spiritually nourishing true Orthodox people.
Soviet propaganda tried to convince the world that no Catacomb Church in the USSR does not exist, and some people see this.
Deny the existence of the Catacomb Church - then did not know and do not understand what is happening in our country. If there is no doubt that those who hate the Soviet power in the USSR, the majority, the more it is clear that the majority of the faithful people of the Orthodox Church does not recognize the Soviet. Note overflow churches - does not disprove the above. Soviet temples are crowded because it is too small in general now have temples in the USSR, while the number of the faithful, in spite of all the efforts and tricks anti-Christian propaganda during the war and after the unusually increased.
The requirement for accurate information about the Catacomb Church with the names and places - has extreme or naive, or extreme stupidity or pure provocation. The "secret" (we call them catacomb) and churches are secret bishops, priests and secret, and secret monasticism, but they are too few in order to minister to all who can not go to Alekseevskaya temples. Therefore, the secret church services are rare. But the common prayers (sometimes called the charges "a candle"), mainly with reading akathists occur very often and cover a huge number of worshipers.
In addition, the Catacomb Church restored the custom of the early centuries of Christianity, the period of persecution, allowing reverently kept in their own homes St. Gifts particle to be able to partake in a moment of danger and death to torture. All the fullness of inexpressible spiritual beauty Russian invisible, secret Catacomb Church will manifest world only when our country will disappear from bogomerzkih Soviet state and enslaved them spiritually - Soviet church.
"Freedom of prayer and preaching" in the Soviet church there. Soviet church demands complete loyalty to the Soviet state. This "loyalty" is understood in a very peculiar. For example, you can not tell the truth about what is happening in the USSR, for it would be "political crime". It can not be criticized atheism and materialism, because it is too "political crime". You can not criticize and do not recognize the Soviet church, for that too would be a "political crime".
Participation unusually severely punished in the Catacomb Church. We can only pray for the success of state power (ie the success of the atheist autocracy). Pray also for mitigating the evil hearts of disciplining erring or deliverance of the church from persecution is strictly prohibited. It is also forbidden to pray for those in prisons and exile. For those who persecute you can pray (just their successes). And it is impossible for the persecuted. Anti-religious lectures take place in the Soviet Union everywhere, but apologetic discussion prohibited. In response to statements by promoters of atheism: "Science has proved that there is no God" - priests do not have the right to object, and their silence is explained by the same promoters as "the darkness of ignorance and powerlessness in dealing with science."
Soviet church submits to these insolent demands and silent. But then, indeed, "silence betrayed God."
Despite the nightmarish terror among the truly and firmly Orthodox believers sometimes there are those who can not participate in the constant lies, especially when the lie violates their religious conscience (for example, recognition of Stalin as "the elect of the Lord"). These people want to be Orthodox confessors and martyrs for Christ. But then the Soviet church begins to denounce "political criminals" and "accomplices of the black deeds", for confession and martyrdom in the atheistic Soviet State is prohibited not only by the state, but "separated" from his Soviet church.
After all of the above, the nature and character of the Soviet church is quite natural question arises: Is this fertile church?
Look with particular attention being said in defense of grace in the Soviet church. "Patriarch" Alexis admitted all the Eastern patriarchs, therefore, he is right, and the church he heads fertile "(!?) - some say.
The question of recognition of the Soviet Church Ecumenical Patriarch unclear last communion with the Moscow Patriarchate, in our deep conviction, is based. on ignorance, misunderstanding on the nature of the Soviet Eastern patriarchs of the church. The errors of the Eastern patriarchs in relation to St. Patriarch Tikhon now most clearly show that further communication of the Eastern patriarchs to the Soviet state does not guarantee ovano of new bugs If we see mistakes and thoughtlessness in relation to the Moscow Patriarchate by the Russian Bishops (for example, a group of m Theophilus.), the error is further spiritually standing of Russian life of the Eastern patriarchs -.. the more affordable
Community-based on ignorance of the true facts, is not yet recognized. In short, we repeat, the issue of recognition is not yet clear.
But if all eastern patriarchs recognized the lie for the truth, a lie of this would not become true. The truth does not cease to be true from the fact that from it renounce "even the elect", and perhaps even renounce almost everything that might be in the last days. ( "Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on whether the earth?" Lk. 18: 8). Therefore, bearing in mind the example communication. Maksima Ispovednika (against which there were "Cathedral" and the patriarchs, and the emperor), we can not only recognize a formal approach to the resolution of religious truth enough.
Much more serious and stronger, at first glance, appear to other considerations in favor of grace in the Soviet church.
These following arguments.
Exhausted, emaciated, wretched Russian people go to the Soviet public temples to get there consolation. Here for the sake of the many millions of people, bringing the church faith, their prayers, their grief, their tears, perhaps stored in a Soviet church grace and the sacraments, despite the fact that the highest church hierarchy sinned by entering into a compromise with the owls . state. Coming in Soviet temples to hear the service on which the words of the Gospel reading, pray at the miraculous icons, touched by the marvelous church chanting, repent of our sins and the fear of God coming to St. Bowl to join St. Mysteries. For their sake, for the sake of these simple believers, do not understand the complex and subtle theological questions, do not understand and often know nothing about jurisdictional differences among the clergy, perhaps perpetrated St. Sacraments. Does a merciful God will not give this simple, naive, unsophisticated, simple childlike believers any comfort?
"We do not need any political considerations, we do not need any explanation about the jurisdiction, and tell us, sir, the best on mountain Jerusalem," - say sometimes these simple believers (according to the testimony of a priest).
"On the Day of Judgment God will ask us about abstract truths, and whether we were visiting patients in the dungeons of beings, whether clothed the naked, fed or watered hungry and thirsty" - others say. (The words of "just believing" the professor).
Let's try to answer these objections.
First of all: grace and the sacraments do not depend on "the dignity or unworthiness" perceiving them. From the "dignity" or "unworthiness" it depends only on the actions of these ordinances in their souls. For what were established communication. canons and communication. dogmas? What was the fight against heresies?
The grace does not appear graceless church only from the fact that this church will believers, but deceived people. The "live" and "renovationist" church too, because sometimes went "ordinary believers" do not understand the "theological subtleties" and knew nothing about the issue of jurisdiction. Really for them there occurred St. the sacraments?
If "exhausted, emaciated, wretched Russian people is with great sorrow and tears, with a thirst for consolation in the Soviet temples", then of course he gets a consolation there. But what is comfort? Spiritual or mental? Gracious or just psychological? Consolation through communication. the sacraments of grace or through a simple moral "catharsis"?
After all, a confession can only be psychological (which is studying psychoanalysis), and perhaps the sacrament of penance. You can pray and cry and lament sins at home, and receive from God, and comfort, and tenderness, and forgiveness of many sins. Something that depends on the person, on the strength of his prayers and sincere repentance, he gets both at home and in church without grace.
But that depends on grace communication. the sacraments of grace of the Church and its hierarchy - he was in the Soviet church, if it is without grace, can not receive.
Soviet church has preserved not only the Russian Orthodox Church clothes (appearance of the temple, outside of the service), but her body (ceremonial side and the formal church organization), and even her soul (spiritual experiences of the faithful), but not the spirit of Orthodoxy, the spirit of the truth of Christ, who gives life to the body and soul. And it is said: "Quench not the Spirit" (1 Thessalonians 5, 19)..
Graceless church are not a terror to the soul of people (because they get emotional comfort and satisfaction, they only look for), but for the spiritual, who are looking for a purely spiritual grace comfort in St. the sacraments - and do not find.
Mental and emotional tears bring consolation in Soviet temples. Aesthetic perception of beauty of the church and the beautiful church singing - and bring aesthetic delight in these temples, but spiritual tears, eager mysterious gracious help over - wiped away in the Soviet church can not be.
That's why people are spiritual, "living in the church," rather than calling it just - spiritually suffocated in the Soviet temples, because can not feel the falsehood and deceit, falsehood or other spiritual abominations "desolation" in the holy place.
Note that the "ordinary believers" do not understand the complex theological issues and jurisdictional subtleties - is neither merit of "just believe", or the protection of grace in the Soviet church.
For understanding and a sense of grace in it does not necessarily need to be educated in the theological and philosophical questions. On the contrary, too much education is often even prevents a person to understand the simplicity of the grace of truth (as we have seen in Berdyaev, Merezhkovsky and others.).
Honest, chaste mind, do not rely on itself, and feeding the mind of Christ, and the pure love of Christ loving heart - that orthodox sobriety conditions and considerations to help the believer to the church the right person to deal decisively in all matters.
Who "lives in the Church" and breathe the scent of her sacraments, who has a single drop of spirituality, can not fail to understand as in "difficult theological issues", and the "jurisdictional intricacies," because in these subtleties and determined - where truth and falsehood.
Dissociate itself from the principle of all politics truly Orthodox person also can not, because at the present time, religion and politics are fused organically. Question - with Christ or against Christ now has political importance, because the obligation to protest against those political systems that its main aim is the destruction of Christianity.
Who denies now the need for political considerations and jurisdictional clarification - one denies the need to distinguish the spirit of truth from the spirit of falsehood, that negates the need to detect wolves in sheep's clothing and find out - where Christ is, and where the Antichrist.
After all the activities of the Antichrist will be of a political nature, and certainly, if only because no political power, he will not be able to complete its business. Path "to the mountain of Jerusalem" starts on the ground, where even the greatest saints are not denied the necessity of Christian politics and personally have always belonged to the strictly defined churchyard, which is now called "ecclesiastical jurisdiction."
On the Day of Judgment God will ask not only whether you feed the hungry, but mostly about how in the name of whom and for what you have done: for God, for his own glory or for the benefit of the Antichrist? After all, if you like the Communists, will only feed the hungry, who for the sake of earthly bread renounce the bread of heaven, - then what you get for this award from the Lord?
"The wind blows where it wills". Almighty God can, when he wants, and to break the "order of nature". The grace of the Holy Spirit can manifest anywhere. Children playing in the communication. Eucharist - the Holy Spirit made a sudden St. mystery. Laughing and mocking Christians parodied communication. baptism one Gentile in the circus, and suddenly - St. mystery accomplished (St. Perfury). The Lord can do wonders in the Soviet church - and to make it binding. the sacrament of the Eucharist. But no child's play or a circus, nor the Soviet church we can recognize from this constant blessed institution.
Knowing the nature of the Soviet state (the antichrist) and the essence of the Soviet Church (collaboration with the Antichrist), we dare not question the grace in the church. And whether Christian orthodox approach doubtfully to communication. Chalice? But why do we say "doubt", rather than just say "no"? Because in the defense of the opportunity to save some time in the Soviet and grace in the church - there is another consideration. This consideration is expressed by one of the most remarkable modern Archpastors (See. "The letter to the pastor pastor," Collection "Trinity" in 1947, Paris).
"The life of the Church is always a process ... When the Church of Christ stood out from the church of the Old Testament, it was also a long-term, which had a lot in the process. Annas and Caiaphas, on the one hand, the apostles and their immediate successors, on the other hand, it was immediately denotes milestones two opposite mills. But in the Sanhedrin were Iosif Arimafeysky, Nicodemus and Gamaliel, who later became martyrs of Christ and the apostles themselves daily with one accord in the temple (Acts. 2. 46), and it was a temple, led by Anna and Caiaphas, and it was already after Pyatide . syatnitsy, ie, when the apostles were already filled with the Holy Spirit . The question to be solved by these processes, predlezhit each person "Patriarch" Alexis and his closest associates clearly allowed it for yourself: they - in full, in no uncertain terms to confess union with the godless power and against martyrs of Christ. But the other, all these people filling the church, unless they are for the one with the "patriarch" in this issue? no, they do not participate in the affairs of the council and they do not participate in the affairs of the Patriarchate, ie to the black side of her case, which connects it with the enemies of God, and separated from Christ. And if they are not formally separates from the patriarch and his clergy, it is only due to external reasons, according to the immaturity of the case at the moment, as the apostle John, the man who later would call not accept Christ the synagogue "synagogue of Satan", initially with the apostle Peter went to her for prayers "(Acts. 3: 1).
Views expressed here are extremely serious. What falling away of the church of God and its transformation into a" Satan's gathering of "a process, this can not but agree. But the Soviet church stood on the path that leads her to this "collection seeking "- there can be no doubt of the Church, which is in." ideal "relation with the state of the godless autocracy, which puts its main task antichrist thing; the church, the Forsaken" from the pillar and ground of "the truth of Christ - confession and martyrdom and calling us at "feat" chelovekougodnichestva and sacrilegious church-organized lies, church, named after the leader of the world's anti-Christian forces - Stalin's "chosen one of the Lord" - certainly stood on the terrible path of cooperation with the Antichrist who first leads her to the transformation of the church of Christ in the "synagogue of Satan."
This leads us to the horror. And we, the Orthodox Russian people, without prejudging the final trial of the Soviet church, the court, which, according to "volition" the Holy Spirit will make in due time Russian Orthodox Cathedral, must clearly and definitely say. Of any kind has been communicating with the Soviet church we refuse, for her grace in doubt.
Professor Yves. Andreev
related articles on the internet:
The Occult in Modern Russia
Occult Roots of the Russian Revolution