Tuesday, December 17, 2024

The Critical Attitude of some True Orthodox Christians towards St. Seraphim of Sofia

The critical attitude of some True Orthodox Christians towards             St. Seraphim the Wonderworker of Sofia (+1950)


In 1944, as a result of the Soviet occupation of Bulgaria, Archbishop Seraphim and his flock were torn away from the Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad and did not have any connection with it. By the way, at the end of the war, the Synod itself did not exist for a certain period of time. In 1946 St. Seraphim joined the jurisdiction of the Moscow Patriarchate. This fact is the reason why some True Orthodox Christians look upon the veneration of Archbishop Seraphim as a Saint with some reservations. The current glorification by the two official Patriarchates was the reason for the voicing of some opinions that he is “their” Saint and for assuming this act is a confirmation that the reservations towards his holiness are grounded – if he was not “theirs”, they would not have glorified him.

Indeed, it would have been very easy and clear if the ecumenists and New Calendarists glorified only “theirs” and left to us “ours”. But the reality is much more complex than such a black and white picture in which we can easily become oriented only on the basis of a few formal signs. Let us recall the words of the ever-memorable Hieromonk Seraphim (Rose) from his famous article “What does the Catacomb Church Think?”: “The information from Metropolitan Philaret that Archimandrite Tavrion was a catacomb priest who joined the official church (the Moscow Patriarchate) without betraying his catacomb convictions and genuine Orthodoxy – may at first sight seem surprising. How can such a thing be? Are these two church bodies not entirely separate and mutually exclusive? Is the very joining of the official church not a betrayal of the catacomb position? In theory it would seem so, but often church life cannot fit convenient rational and canonical categories. So it is in this case.”

From 2000 onwards, the Moscow Patriarchate included in its ecclesiastical calendar a whole series of New Martyrs and Confessors who were glorified in 1981 by the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad and who had ceased both their communion with her and the commemoration of Metropolitan, later – Patriarch – Sergius (Stragorodsky). These are Metropolitan Cyril (Smirnov), Archbishop Seraphim (Samoilovich), Archbishop Peter (Zverev), Bishop Victor (Ostrovidov), Bishop Damascene (Tsedrik), Bishop Vasiliy (Zelentsov) and many other Hierarchs, Priests and laymen. Furthermore, in the heat of the fight for the independence of the Church, some of these Martyrs and Confessors considered the betrayal of Metropolitan Sergius so serious, that they regarded both him and his subordinate Hierarchs and clergy as apostates from Christ, and the Mysteries performed by them – as graceless and invalid. Here, for example, is what Bishop Victor (Ostrovidov) wrote:

“Mingling in one at the great and most holy Mystery of the Eucharist, in spite of the word of God, “those that believeth with the infidels” (cf. 2 Cor. 6, 14-18), the Holy Church and her foes [Bishop Victor means the order of Metropolitan Sergius to commemorate the Soviet government during the services] who fight with her to death, the Metropolitan with this blasphemy of his, violates the prayerful meaning of the great Mystery and destroys its graceful significance for the eternal salvation of the souls of the Orthodox. Hence, the service not only becomes graceless due to the lack of grace of the serving person, but it becomes abomination in the eyes of God; therefore, both the performing and the participating persons are subject to double condemnation.”

In spite of that, in 2000 the Moscow Patriarchate glorified this Confessor, who considered it a graceless earthly organization. His relics were uncovered and translated to the Transfiguration Convent in Kirov and now lie there exposed for veneration. Should the fact that MP usurps the memory of those Martyrs and Confessors make us feel uncomfortable and renounce their veneration? On the contrary, we must unmask the wickedness of Sergianism, for which it is very important to include in its “pantheon” Confessors who shone forth in the struggle for freedom of the Church.

Likewise, for the supporters of ecumenism it is extremely important to include in the ranks of “their” Saints righteous persons like St. Seraphim, who shone forth in the struggle against the ecumenical heresy and the modernistic deviations from the patristic Faith. Thus the leaders of the apostasy mingle lies with truth, mix up concepts, and use the authority of the champions for the purity of the Faith in order to confuse the church people and to overcome their resistance against the betrayal of the Faith by the ecumenists. Through the glorification of the Wonderworker of Sofia they seem to say, “Behold, we are glorifying such a champion for the purity of the Faith, how can you think that we shall betray the Faith?”

But still a question is being posed, “Has St. Seraphim abandoned his principled position when he joined the jurisdiction of the Moscow Patriarchate in the middle 1940s?” With regard to ecumenism and the New Calendar, there cannot exist any doubt. St. Seraphim himself delivered his famous presentations against ecumenism and the New Calendar at the Congress of Moscow in 1948, after he joined the Patriarchate. But what about the Sergianism – did he not submit to Patriarch Alexis?

In this respect we must carefully take into consideration the specific historical conditions. In the 1940s, during World War II and immediately after it, the Soviet authorities gave some freedom to the development of church life, which started to recuperate. Owing to this relative freedom, St. Seraphim personally remained uninvolved in the sins of Sergianism – he never cooperated with the Soviet services in their destroying the Church and restraining Her freedom; he never permitted the subordination of the internal church life to please the Soviet authorities; he never cooperated with the authorities to achieve their political goals; he never uttered a praising word about the communist regime. Yes, it must be said that he had this relative freedom and never experienced the pressure of the repressive apparatus. Precisely these were the historical circumstances until the end of the 1940s and the specific conditions in which he found himself in the relatively short time of these last four years of his life. And when this period was over and the first repressive measures against the Saint – deprivation of his position in Bulgaria and recall to the Soviet Union, which usually ended in exile to a remote monastery or sending to a camp – were going to be applied, he reposed in the Lord. From the distance of time, based on the information we have today from the published archival documents, and also taking into consideration the historical development after that, we can say that the hopes of St. Seraphim for further expansion of the church freedom in Russia and the opportunities for missionary work among the Russian people remained unjustified. His expectations that the change in the politics of the Soviet authorities towards the Church would remain permanent and that the positive tendencies would deepen were illusory. These hopes and expectations were an important factor for his decision to join the Moscow Patriarchate. They proved to be erroneous. The positive trends turned out to be only temporal tactical retreats of the atheistic regime that shortly thereafter once again began to restrict church life. It is typical of men to make mistakes in their assessments and St. Seraphim is not an exception in this regard. Yet we must note that the absolute purity and unselfishness of the motives that guided him in his decisions and actions are above any suspicion. Ultimately, beyond doubt is his holiness, which is confirmed by God Himself through the immeasurable graceful help that constantly pours through the intercession of the Wonderworker of Sofia upon the faithful who address him in prayer.

- Reader Konstantin Todorov, excerpt from The Glorification of St. Seraphim of Sofia by the Russian Orthodox Church – Moscow Patriarchate and the Bulgarian Orthodox Church – Bulgarian Patriarchate.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.

The Calendar Schism: Potential or Actual? A Response to a Related Letter from Monk Mark Chaniotis

Monk Theodoretos (Mavros) | Mount Athos | 1973   And if a man also strive for masteries, yet is he not crowned, except he strive lawfull...