Hieromonk Nikandr (Pinchuk) | April 17, 2016 | Vologda
Eldership in the Church was a
kind of informal institution of spiritual guidance exercised by individual
ascetics of holy life (primarily monks) over the brethren of monasteries,
laypeople, and even entire nations. Elders exerted immense spiritual influence;
entire generations modeled their lives after them, the youth were brought up
under their guidance, learning proper spiritual practice through living
examples of holiness. The elders were spiritual leaders who protected Christ’s
flock from false teachings and delusions, reproved negligence and sinful
living, taught prayer and the struggle against the passions, and raised
successors in their ministry who continued their work. Examples of outstanding
elders of antiquity include St. Anthony the Great, Pimen the Great, Agathon,
Sabbas the Sanctified, Isidore of Pelusium, John of the Ladder, Maximus the
Confessor, and Theodore the Studite. In the Russian Church, such holy elders were
known as Sts. Anthony and Theodosius of the Caves, Sergius of Radonezh, Cyril of
Beloozero, Nil of Sora, Joseph of Volokolamsk, Seraphim of Sarov, Paisius of
Moldavia and his disciples, the Elders of Optina, John of Kronstadt, and
others. In patristic literature, an elder is a person with sufficient
experience in monastic life, a spiritual guide for the novice monk: “...an
elder in monasteries is called a monk who has advanced in the spiritual life,
to whom is entrusted the edification of the brethren” (St. Ignatius). That
is, under normal circumstances, an elder is not necessarily a saint, at least
not glorified during his lifetime. The meaning of this word has taken on an
entirely different sense in Russia in recent times. Despite the fact that
living vessels of the Holy Spirit no longer exist, the tradition has been
broken, and only elders of dubious spiritual practice remain, today in the
minds of most Orthodox Christians the word “elder” is almost the same as
“living saint,” endowed with all spiritual gifts—clairvoyance, revelations,
healings, and so forth. Moreover, the modern image of the elder was formed
in the apocryphal tales and legends of the Moscow Patriarchate, and this has
become a part of its tradition, which is not subject to question.
How can one distinguish true
eldership from false eldership?
The signs of true eldership are
the preservation of the Orthodox faith and adherence to the patristic tradition
of spiritual practice. In this report, we will examine the quality of spiritual
guidance of true and false elders in the context of their existence during the
period of Turmoil. True eldership is possible only within the Church; false
eldership exists in heresy, schism, and sects. This does not mean that false
eldership cannot arise within the Church—for anyone can fall into delusion and
distort their spiritual practice—but it does mean that outside the Church,
eldership as such cannot exist; there, there will always be various
distortions, delusions, and heresies.
How is the quality of spiritual
practice related to being outside the Church? What comes first: delusion
(incorrect spiritual practice), or heresy, or schism? Let us read from St.
Ignatius Brianchaninov: “...from the delusion called ‘opinion’ arose pernicious
heresies, schisms, godlessness, blasphemy. Its most unfortunate visible
consequence is improper, harmful activity—harmful both to oneself and to
others—a great evil, which, despite its obviousness and extent, is scarcely
noticed and scarcely understood.”
SCARCELY UNDERSTOOD!
The quality of eldership is
revealed in temptations, which uncover what was not visible to the ordinary
eye. As a rule, if an elder was in a proper spiritual disposition, not infected
with opinion, then with the coming of persecutions, schisms, and heresies, such
a struggler—by God’s help—stood firm, understood the temptation that had come
upon him, did not fall away himself, and helped others avoid these stumbling
blocks. But if in the ascetic-elder there was opinion, or insufficient
experience in spiritual practice, then such a one would fall—even in the
absence of obvious sins—but would imperceptibly change, accepting false
reasoning.
Chronologically, the eldership of
the MP can be classified into three periods:
1. Elders of the period of the
emergence of the Sergianist heresy and the "pre-ecumenical" existence
of the MP (1927–1961)
During this time, they still
quite resembled the "pre-Sergian" elders; the distinction lay only in
their recognition of an unlawful ecclesiastical authority and a God-fighting
civil power—a kind of reconciliation with the violence that had occurred.
2. Elders of the period of the
MP’s acceptance of the ecumenist heresy (from 1961 to the present day)
Here the difference from Orthodox
elders becomes more pronounced. Reconciliation was now required with the
appearance of open heretics among the hierarchs, including even patriarchs.
3. MP junior elders
("young elders") of the 2000s
Those who not only tolerate the
heresies of the hierarchs but even defend these crimes, attempting to
present them as “beneficial for the Church.”
As is known, the cause of the
Church’s division was the schism initiated by Metropolitan Sergius
(Stragorodsky), which gradually over time developed into heresy. The Holy New
Martyrs and Confessors suffered unto death, but did not accept this betrayal of
the Church. True eldership likewise went into the catacombs and abroad.
It is known that the last Optina
elders—Venerable Anatoly (who died in 1922; his prophecy concerning the spread
of heresies and schisms and the seizure of power in the church organization by
heretics is well known), Venerable Nectarius (+1928), and Nikon (+1931)—did not
accept the new course and denounced Sergianism. They, as well as other ascetics
such as Elder Theodosius of the Caucasus and Elder Schema-Bishop Peter Ladygin,
very sensitively perceived the essence of the substitution and did not succumb
to the delusion. Many confessors were thrown into imprisonment, and the greater
part of them died there. But after the death of Metropolitan Sergius, a portion
of the former confessors and catacomb-dwellers—who had previously also suffered
for the faith—recognized as lawful the election of the new “patriarch” Alexei
I, despite its uncanonical nature, due to the participation of the authorities,
the absence of other candidates, and the continuation of Sergianist policy.
Among these we even find some disciples of the aforementioned
elders-confessors, who are now being glorified in the MP. Let us examine
several examples of these metamorphoses.
An Example of
Confessorship: Venerable Nectarius of Optina. [1]
After the Bolsheviks closed the
Optina Monastery on Palm Sunday in 1923, Venerable Nectarius was arrested. Upon
his release from prison, the authorities demanded that Father Nectarius leave
the Kaluga region. The elder lived in the village of Kholmishchi in the Bryansk
region, in the home of a peasant who was a relative of one of the elder’s
spiritual sons. Despite all hardships, spiritual children made their way to
Kholmishchi in search of consolation and counsel; a stream of people from all
corners of Russia began to flow to the Elder. Holy Patriarch Tikhon would
consult with Venerable Nectarius through his trusted messengers. Once, a group
of priests came to him and began to ask: now they are beginning to allow
churches to be reopened—not only the renovationist or Gregorian (i.e.,
schismatic) ones, but also Tikhonite churches. Can we also register and go to
those churches? To this the Elder Nectarius replied that it was the same
renovationism, just of a different kind. They asked him: it seems that
Metropolitan Sergius has repented? And the elder responded: he repented, but
the poison remains in him. Here we see that Venerable Nectarius foresaw that
Sergius would be the cause of many misfortunes; therefore, he did not recognize
his authority and did not bless his commemoration. Not long before the elder’s
death, Father Sergius Mechev (a Holy New Martyr, also among the “non-commemorators,”
the son of the well-known Moscow elder Fr. Alexei Mechev, who had reposed in
1923) came and communed the Elder. On April 29, 1928, Father Adrian Rymarenko,
a priest and spiritual son of the elder, barely made it to Kholmishchi, and it
was in his arms that Venerable Nectarius reposed that same night. As is known,
Fr. Adrian later emigrated abroad and became a priest of ROCOR, spiritual
father and elder of the Novo-Diveevo Monastery in America. After the death of
his matushka, Fr. Adrian was tonsured with the name Andrew and was consecrated
a bishop of ROCOR. This is an example of a true elder, who stood firm in the
temptation of Sergianism.
But here is an example of a
fall.
Elder
Schema-Archimandrite Sebastian (Fomin)
Elder Nectarius had a disciple
and cell-attendant, Hieromonk Sebastian (Fomin, +1966). [2] He arrived at
Optina in 1909 and was received into the Skete of Optina Hermitage as
cell-attendant to Elder Joseph. After the elder’s repose in 1911, he came under
the spiritual guidance of Father Nectarius and remained with him as
cell-attendant until 1923. Stephan was tonsured into the mantle with the name
Sebastian in 1917, at the very onset of the time of persecution against the
Church of Christ. He lived continuously for 14 (!) years under the elders,
whose sanctity is undisputed by anyone.
In 1923, monastic services were
completely halted, and the authorities began the expulsion of the monks. In
1927, Monk Sebastian received the priesthood from the Bishop of Kaluga. After
the repose of Elder Nectarius in 1928, Father Sebastian went to the city of
Kozlov, where he received an assignment to the Church of St. Elias. There he
served from 1928 to 1933, until his arrest. During interrogations, he gave a
direct answer: “I regard all the actions of the Soviet authorities as the wrath
of God, and this power is a punishment for the people. I expressed such views
among those close to me, as well as among other citizens with whom I had
occasion to speak on this topic. At the same time, I would say that we must
pray to God and live in love—only then will we be delivered from this. I was
not at all satisfied with the Soviet regime because of the closure of churches
and monasteries, since through this the Orthodox faith is being destroyed.” He
was sentenced to seven years of imprisonment in the logging camps of the Tambov
region, but after a year he was transferred to the Karaganda camp, to the
settlement of Dolinka, where he arrived in 1934. After the war he was released
and remained in the village of Bolshaya Mikhaylovka near Karaganda, where he
provided spiritual care to all those who sought God, visiting them in their
homes and performing services, although he had no official permission from the
authorities (the lack of permission attests to a catacomb situation). Spiritual
children of the elder began coming from all corners of the country—he received
everyone with love and helped them to settle in their new place. Only in 1955
did the faithful succeed in obtaining official permission from the authorities
for the registration of a religious community in Bolshaya Mikhaylovka, and
through joint efforts they managed to build a church. A monastic women’s
community gathered around the elder.
It was likely sometime between
1944 and 1953 that Fr. Sebastian, who previously had not recognized
Metropolitan Sergius, acknowledged the election of the Soviet “patriarch”
Alexei I (Simansky), who—as is well known—together with Metropolitan Sergius
(Stragorodsky), during the arrest of St. Patriarch Tikhon, had recognized the
authority of the renovationist Supreme Church Administration (VTSU) and joined
its ranks (he remained with the renovationists for one year, and after the
release of Patriarch Tikhon, hypocritically repented). What exactly caused this
recognition is unknown, but it can be assumed that it was influenced by the
changed position of another authoritative confessor of that time, Bishop
Athanasius (Sakharov), who himself spent 20 years in prison, did not recognize
Sergius (Stragorodsky) as a lawful Patriarch, but in 1945 acknowledged the
legitimacy of the election of Patriarch Alexei I. In 1955, he wrote, justifying
this decision: “The heresies condemned by the Fathers are not preached by Patriarch
Alexei and his associates... Patriarch Alexei has not been condemned by any
lawful higher hierarchical authority, and I cannot, I have no right to say that
he is without grace, or that the sacraments performed by him and his clergy are
invalid. Therefore, in 1945, while still in prison, I and the priests with
me—who had not commemorated Metropolitan Sergius—learned of the election and
enthronement of Patriarch Alexei, and after discussing the situation, we
unanimously decided that, since apart from Patriarch Alexei, who is recognized
by all the Ecumenical Patriarchs, there is no other lawful First Hierarch of
the Russian Local Church, we ought to commemorate in our prayers the name of
Patriarch Alexei as our Patriarch. This I have unfailingly done from that day
on.” It is difficult to suppose that such unyielding prisoners could have
simply broken like Metropolitan Sergius himself, who did not last even a few
months in prison, or like Archbishop Luke (Voyno-Yasenetsky), once a catacomb
bishop, broken on the torture "conveyor," and thereafter passed over
to the Sergianist side. More likely, it was a case of delusion, to which they
succumbed, having believed in the legitimacy and canonicity of the installation
of Alexei I. One might suppose that Sebastian was a simple man, unfamiliar with
the Book of Canons—but what can be said about Bishop Athanasius, who was
highly educated and well-read, and yet believed? It was precisely after this
recognition of the authority of the Soviet patriarch that they were released
from imprisonment. To understand how this fall affected the subsequent quality
of the “eldership” of Sebastian, one can take as an example one of his
spiritual sons—Metropolitan Pitirim (Nechayev) of the MP, who became a KGB
agent (a situation absolutely unthinkable among true confessors!), a deputy of
the Supreme Soviet of the USSR (!), and after years of ecumenical
activity—including a final prayer “for peace” jointly with Pope John Paul
II—died suddenly upon his return home. “In whatsoever I shall find you, in that
shall I judge you,” saith the Lord.
Another Example of
Confessorship: Catacomb Schema-Bishop Peter the Confessor. [3]
He began his monastic life on
Mount Athos. In 1898 he was tonsured into the mantle with the name Pitirim, and
from 1900 he served as a hierodeacon. In 1904 he was ordained a hieromonk. He
struggled against the heresy of "name-worshipping." From 1911 he
served as the superior of the metochion of the Andreevsky Skete in Odessa. In
1918, Archimandrite Pitirim (Ladygin) participated in the enthronement of St.
Patriarch Tikhon. That same year, by assignment of Patriarch Tikhon, he
traveled to Constantinople to deliver to the Ecumenical Patriarch the
notification of the election of the Patriarch in Russia. After fulfilling the
task, he visited Athos and returned with the Ecumenical Patriarch’s reply. Soon
after, Fr. Pitirim was again arrested and sent into exile in the Ufa region. On
the way, he stopped in Moscow, where he managed to meet with St. Patriarch
Tikhon and other Orthodox hierarchs. Already in exile, in the forests of the
Ufa region, he founded a secret skete. For his steadfastness in true Orthodoxy,
his faithfulness, and invaluable help to the Patriarch and the Russian Church,
the Most Holy Patriarch Tikhon issued a decree elevating him to the episcopate,
sending a letter to Archbishop Andrew (Prince Ukhtomsky) of Ufa. Thus, in exile
in the Urals, Fr. Pitirim became a bishop. On June 8, 1925, he was consecrated
Bishop of Nizhny Novgorod (in the Ufa region) and Urzhum by Archbishop Andrew
(Prince Ukhtomsky) of Ufa and Bishop Leo (Cherepanov) of Nizhny Tagil. But
already by 1926, Bishop Pitirim was under investigation in the case of the Ufa
clergy. On April 21, 1927, he was tonsured into the great schema with the name
Peter. He did not recognize the apostate Declaration of Metropolitan Sergius
(Stragorodsky) or his uncanonical Synod, stating: “I could not recognize
Sergius because he was a renovationist, and according to our holy canons, he
illegitimately assumed the place of Patriarchal Locum Tenens.” For his fidelity
to True Orthodoxy and his refusal to recognize the Soviet church, he was
repeatedly subjected to arrests, imprisonments, and threats of execution. In
December 1928 he was again arrested in the case of a "branch of the True
Orthodox Church" and sentenced to three years in a labor camp. From 1931
to 1933 he was imprisoned. After his release, from 1934 to 1937 he lived in
hiding in Glazov. From 1937 to 1940 he lived underground in Kaluga. In 1945 he
was arrested in Ufa and, for his affiliation with the True Orthodox Church, was
sentenced to five years’ exile in Central Asia. There he escaped and hid in the
mountains. Schema-Bishop Peter (Ladygin), the confessor, remained until the end
of his days a faithful hierarch of the persecuted Catacomb Church. Vladyka
Peter united various groups of catacomb believers throughout the USSR and
ordained many secret clergy for them. This outstanding hierarch of the Catacomb
Church ended his long-suffering life in complete isolation and under covert KGB
surveillance, being a profound elder and blind, at the age of 96 in the city of
Glazov (Udmurtia). He is buried in the city cemetery.
A characterization given of
Schema-Bishop Peter by MP Metropolitan Manuel (Lemeshevsky), who is also
venerated as an elder in the MP, although he was an informant for the NKVD and
denounced many "non-commemorators" for repression: “...Bishop
Pitirim, in schema Peter, was a practitioner of the Jesus Prayer, possessed the
gift of tears and clairvoyance. He slept three hours a day, sitting in a chair,
and lay in bed only during illness. Living in seclusion, he followed the full
Athonite rule. His rule included 1,350 bows at the waist and 135 full
prostrations. He was tall, broad-shouldered, and despite his old age, his
figure was upright. The hair on his head and beard was white and long. After
taking the schema, he never served in full episcopal vestments, but only wore
the small omophorion.”
This is an example of a true
elder, a man of prayer, a guide in spiritual life, who possessed the gift of
discernment of spirits and preserved his canonical standing in faithfulness.
An Example of the
Fall of His Disciple, Schema-Archimandrite Seraphim (in the world — Mikhail
Tomin). [4]
In the mid-1940s in Orenburg, he
became a spiritual child of the catacomb Schema-Bishop Peter. Together with him
and his followers, he formed a community with the intention of founding a
secret monastic skete. After Mikhail was discharged from the army in 1943, he
fled with Schema-Bishop Peter and his spiritual children to Central Asia to
establish a monastic habitation. According to his recollections, they disguised
the bishop as an Uzbek, put a chapan on him, wrapped his hair under a
turban, and for seven days traveled to Tashkent in a freight train. From there,
they went to Jalal-Abad, and then into the Tian Shan mountains. Altogether,
with the bishop, there were 22 people—those who had decided, for the sake of
serving the Lord, to depart from the vanity of the world. In those mountains,
the monks built twenty cells and a church in honor of the Great Martyr
Panteleimon.
The rule in the skete was
Athonite. The entire Tian Shan brotherhood even slept in their podryasniks.
If someone took off his podryasnik at night, he imposed on himself one
hundred prostrations as penance—just as for walking without a belt or without a
skufia—such was the epitimia. The spiritual father of the
community was Bishop Peter. He always instructed in a restrained and very
simple manner: “Read, don’t invent anything, don’t bring the mind down into the
heart. In due time all will come by itself. Deliver us, O Lord, from diabolical
haste!”
The monks lived in those
mountains for seven years. And during all that time, they did not encounter a
single person. The entire brotherhood was tonsured into monasticism. Mikhail
was tonsured into the ryasa in 1944 with the name Misael, in 1946 into
the mantle. There he also became a hierodeacon, and later, in 1947, he was
ordained a hieromonk. The skete was discovered in 1951—they were seen from an
airplane. All were taken to the prison in Jalal-Abad. Newspapers across the
country wrote at the time that deep in the mountains, an entire gang of monks
had been uncovered! Bishop Peter was sent to the city of Glazov in the Kirov
(Vyatka) region. There, under house arrest, he reposed on October 1, 1956, at
the age of 96. His spiritual children never saw him again.
After the death of his elder, Fr.
Misael entered the Moscow Patriarchate and became the spiritual father of
Metropolitan Nestor (Anisimov), who was one of the former bishops of the
Russian Church Abroad that had returned to the USSR, having believed Soviet
propaganda. Bishop Nestor did not follow the example of St. John of Shanghai,
who remained faithful to ROCOR despite the pressure.
The author of the report, being a
monk of a monastery of the MP, visited Schema-Archimandrite Seraphim in his
house chapel, spoke with him, and even asked to remain with him, but was
refused and advised to return back. In a remarkable way, this elder combined in
himself a dislike for the first patriarch of the MP, the renovationist Sergius,
with full loyalty to the following four ecumenist patriarchs. Fr. Seraphim, for
many years being among the metropolitan “elite” of the MP, for some reason
never once uttered a word about the rampant blossoming of ecumenism, the
constant delegations of heretics, the violations of the canons, and other
lawlessnesses. Perhaps he simply tried to “not notice” the obvious, so as not
to condemn—mistakenly believing that in this way he was somehow “covering the
sin of his fathers and brethren.” He held a very negative attitude toward the
Church Abroad, asserting that “there is no grace among the people of the Church
Abroad.” Thus, in this example as well, we see that having fallen into delusion
and succumbed to the Sergianist temptation, the spiritual practice of Elder
Seraphim diverged from the practice of his teacher, Schema-Bishop Peter the
Confessor, and he no longer gave importance to such “trifles” as the ecumenism
of the hierarchy—condemning only privately some of the modernist and heretical
excesses of individual church officials. Schema-Archimandrite Seraphim reposed
in 2013 near Orenburg, in the monastery he founded.
Elder Lavrenty of
Chernigov. [5]
One of the most venerated elders
of the MP from the first period of Sergianism. Beginning in 1891, Luka (the
secular name of the elder) served in obedience as the choirmaster of a monastic
choir. Before long, news of the talented choirmaster reached the Holy Trinity
Monastery in Chernigov, and he was invited there to direct the choir. In 1912,
at the age of 45, Luka was tonsured a monk with the name Lavrenty. Two years
later he was ordained a hierodeacon, and in 1916—a hieromonk. During the
renovationist schism, Fr. Lavrenty firmly stood on the side of Patriarch
Tikhon. In 1930, after the church was closed, he went into an illegal position.
(An illegal position at that time meant refusal of registration,
non-recognition of Metropolitan Sergius’s Declaration.) From 1930 to 1942, he
lived secretly in a private apartment, receiving his spiritual children at
night. After the German occupation of Chernigov during the war, he organized
two monastic communities: a men’s community (35 persons) and a women’s
community (70 persons). The women's monastic community settled in the Trinity
Chernigov Monastery, where on Pascha of 1942, he reopened the church, which
became one of the centers of religious life in the Chernigov region. But after
the Red Army reoccupied Ukrainian territory, the elder recognized Patriarch
Alexei Simansky and served under the appointed renovationist bishop Boris
(Vik), whom he found displeasing due to shortened services or because of the
excessive pomp and theatricality of his conduct in worship. That is, he
expressed dissatisfaction over minor faults, but did not understand the
canonical reasons for the illegitimacy of the MP—either due to his simplicity
and ignorance of the canons, or due to delusion. Most likely, it was both.
He is known for his
prophecies, among which is the following: “…Shortly before the enthronement of
the Antichrist, even the closed churches will begin to be repaired, adorned not
only on the outside but also on the inside. The domes will be gilded—of the
churches as well as the bell towers—and when they finish the main one, then
will come the time of the Antichrist’s enthronement. Pray that the Lord may
prolong this time for us to be strengthened: a dreadful time awaits us. The
repairs of churches will continue right up to the very coronation of the
Antichrist, and there will be an unprecedented splendor among us.”
“And do you see how cunningly
all this is being prepared?” — the elder continued with tears. “All the
churches will be in the greatest splendor, as never before, but one will not be
able to go to those churches, for there the Bloodless Sacrifice of Jesus Christ
will not be offered. Understand: there will be churches, but for the Orthodox
Christian it will be impossible to attend them, for there will be nothing but a
‘synagogue of Satan’ (Rev. 2:9)! I repeat once more: it will not be possible to
go to those churches—there will be no grace in them!”
This is also paradoxical: to
recognize the Soviet patriarch, and at the same time to prophesy about the
future fall of the Moscow Patriarchate. To suffer, to endure imprisonment and
exile, and then to acknowledge that which one had once fought against. In the
book about him, there are later redactions and insertions regarding the elder’s
alleged negative attitude toward the Church Abroad.
Elder Seraphim of
Vyritsa. [6]
Another example of a former
confessor. A caveat must be made here, as information about the elders of the
“pre-ecumenical” period varies greatly, with different sources presenting
completely opposite portrayals of these elders. According to some versions,
they remained in a catacomb position, while according to others, they
transitioned into the “official” Moscow Patriarchate.
Vasily Nikolaevich Muravyov, a
former merchant and great benefactor of the Church, patron of many churches. On
September 13, 1920, he submitted a petition to the Spiritual Council of the
Alexander Nevsky Lavra to be received into the brotherhood, which was granted;
he was accepted as a novice and assigned the obedience of a sexton. At that
time, the abbot of the Lavra was Archimandrite Nikolai (Yarushevich) (The name
of Archimandrite Nikolai Yarushevich—later Metropolitan and one of the chief
Sergianist-Stalinists—was well known abroad, where he often traveled after the
war to agitate for the return of émigrés to the USSR, claiming that
persecutions of the faith had supposedly ceased and “freedom” had come. But
many who returned were arrested and ended their lives in labor camps). The
former merchant Muravyov donated all his property for the needs of the
monasteries. To the Lavra alone, Vasily Nikolaevich gave 40,000 rubles in gold
coin. On October 29, 1920, he was tonsured a monk with the name Barnabas. In 1921,
he was ordained to the priesthood by the Holy Hieromartyr Metropolitan Benjamin
(Kazansky). At the end of 1926, Father Barnabas received the great schema with
the name Seraphim (in honor of Seraphim of Sarov) and became the spiritual
father of the Alexander Nevsky Lavra. In 1930, on the recommendation of doctors
and with the blessing of MP Metropolitan Seraphim (Chichagov), he left his cell
in the Fyodorovsky wing of the Alexander Nevsky Lavra for a private house.
Doctors diagnosed Seraphim with rheumatism, vein blockage in the lower
extremities, and intercostal neuralgia. In 1933, he moved to the settlement of
Vyritsa, where he lived until his repose. Throughout this time, Fr. Seraphim
was gravely ill, enduring severe ailments that caused him unbearable
suffering—especially in his legs. He was an ascetic and man of prayer. There is
a legend that Seraphim prayed for ten years every day on a stone in the garden
of his home (according to some versions, day and night; according to others,
for one or two hours daily). During the German occupation, the Church of the
Kazan Icon of the Mother of God was opened in Vyritsa. Elder Seraphim continued
living in a private home, where he received visitors. He was communed by
priests of the Pskov Mission, who were canonically under Metropolitan Sergius
(Stragorodsky). After the Red Army’s advance, the Pskov Mission was liquidated,
its leader Metropolitan Sergius (Voskresensky) was killed by the NKVD, and the
last rector of the church in Vyritsa was arrested. Protopriest Alexei Kibardin,
a former Josephite and non-recognizer of Metropolitan Sergius, testified that
from the autumn of 1945 until the elder's repose—Hieroschemamonk Seraphim of
Vyritsa (April 3, 1949)—he was the elder's spiritual father. The pastors
offered mutual spiritual care and engaged in long spiritual conversations.
Their friendship and brotherly love lasted about three and a half years. Later,
in a letter to the dean dated January 17, 1956, Protopriest A. Kibardin wrote
the following about Fr. Seraphim: “I venerate him as a great elder. Of course,
I am a small man to offer my judgment… But I know, and I was a witness to, the
attitude of His Holiness Patriarch Alexei toward the elder, whom the elder
blessed in absentia with his family icon of the Savior. That icon is in the
possession of His Holiness. This took place in 1948… Metropolitan Gregory
(Chukov) summoned me to present me to Patriarch Alexei. I was received by His
Holiness and conveyed the following from the elder: ‘Hieroschemamonk Seraphim
of Vyritsa (in the world, Vasily Nikolaevich Muravyov) asks Your Holiness for a
blessing and bows to You to the ground,’ and with that, I made a full
prostration.”
"I know, I know him,"
the Patriarch said kindly, "and how is he doing?" I replied that he
is strong in spirit, but physically weakened, as he receives many visitors who
come to him with grief and sorrow... His Holiness blessed me and said slowly
and clearly: "Convey to him from me that I ask for his holy prayers."
Elder Seraphim reposed in 1949,
being within the Moscow Patriarchate.
He is known for his
prophecies, one of which states: "The time will come when not
persecutions, but money and the pleasures of this world will turn people away
from God, and far more souls will perish than in times of open godlessness. On
the one hand, crosses will be raised and domes gilded, but on the other—there
will come the reign of lies and evil. The true Church will always be
persecuted, and salvation will be possible only through sorrows and illnesses,
while persecutions will take on the most refined and unpredictable forms. It
will be dreadful to live to see those times." This prophecy, in its
essence, exposes the Moscow Patriarchate as an institution.
And so, the elder, having entered
the monastery in 1920 at the age of 54, became, after just 5 (!)
years—essentially still in the period of his spiritual infancy—the spiritual
father and elder of the entire Lavra, at a time when it was under the control of
the renovationists. From the elder, we see no reaction to Metropolitan
Sergius’s Declaration—even though at that time tens of thousands of confessors
were suffering precisely for refusing to accept it.
And here is an example of the
conduct of a true elder, the Venerable Theodosios of the Caucasus, [7] who
chose the path of holy foolishness, not recognizing the authority of the
Renovationists or of Metropolitan Sergius.
In the early years of Soviet
power, he founded a small monastery in the Stavropol region. Grieving over the
disasters that had befallen the Church of Christ and Holy Rus’, Elder
Theodosios became a zealous guardian of the purity of True Orthodoxy, preserving
fidelity to the testament of the Holy Confessor-Patriarch Tikhon, and rejecting
all compromise with God-fighting authorities and Renovationism. Metropolitan
Sergius (Stragorodsky), at the demand of the persecutors, issued the
God-forsaking Declaration recognizing the Soviet anti-Christian
government—previously anathematized by His Holiness Tikhon—as legitimate. The
zealous heart of Elder Theodosios could not be reconciled with such apostasy
from Christ. When the Declaration was sent to him, he burned it in front of all
the people. Soon after, the elder was arrested. In prison and exile, the aged
Elder Theodosios spent five years. In 1932 he was released and came to
Mineralnye Vody. Settling in an inconspicuous hut, the elder undertook the feat
of holy foolishness for Christ’s sake: he walked the streets dressed in a
colorful shirt (which at the time was considered ridiculous), played with
children, ran and jumped with them, for which the children called him “Grandpa
Kuzyuka.” It was, most likely, the only correct decision for that time and for
the circumstances in which Elder Theodosios found himself—and the only possible
way to continue serving the Lord. Such a path was also taken during those years
by the Catacomb Bishop Barnabas (Belyaev), now a well-known spiritual writer,
and indeed by many confessors of Orthodoxy. This allowed them not only to
survive in the harsh conditions of the Soviet concentration camps, but also to
openly preach Christ among the prisoners. In Mineralnye Vody, Fr. Theodosios
served secretly, in the Catacomb Church. In the services he commemorated Saint
Joseph of Petrograd and rejected the unlawful Red Synod of Sergius
Stragorodsky.
In the elder’s small house, one
room was for living, and in the other, there was a hidden house church. In his
church, “Grandpa Kuzyuka” would transform into a strict elder and gracious
father.
Secretly, every day he served the
Divine Liturgy, communed himself, and gave Communion to his spiritual
children—catacomb True Orthodox Christians.
Many ascetics of the MP are now
venerated as true elders, and their canonical status in relation to the fallen
hierarchy is completely overlooked. At the foundation of salvation, as St. John
Chrysostom says, lie two conditions: right faith (which includes proper
canonical standing) and a righteous life.
St. Basil the Great says: “If
someone claims to fully confess the Orthodox faith, but is in communion with
those who contradict it, if after warning they do not break communion with
them, then they should not even be considered as brethren.”
The elders of the Moscow
Patriarchate lived righteous lives but remained in communion with
heresiarchs—initially the Sergianists, and after 1961, with the ecumenists.
They either did not attach importance to this, believing it to be “personal
sins of the hierarchy,” or they consciously turned a blind eye to the
lawlessness of the ecclesiastical leadership, which makes them even more
responsible for it. Among such ascetics, during the “blossoming” of eldership
in the MP, we may name the elders of Glinsk, three of whom (Seraphim, Andronik,
and Seraphim) were Orthodox, yet were in communion with and acknowledged the
authority of the Sergianist and ecumenist hierarchy. The fourth, Tavrion, had a
favorable attitude toward Catholicism; he served and communed together with a
Catholic priest who occasionally visited him—someone with whom he had spent
years in imprisonment—justifying this by saying that “our earthly partitions do
not reach Heaven.” Other such elders include Kuksha of Odessa (who also
prophesied concerning the fall of the MP), Seraphim Tyapochkin, Nikolai
Guryanov (who, according to his venerator’s accounts, was secretly a bishop,
though it remains unclear how he reconciled this with being the rector of a
Moscow Patriarchate parish), and John Krestiankin, who, according to the
testimony of iconographer Archimandrite Zinon, also concelebrated and communed
with Catholics, and Kirill Pavlov. The elders of the most recent period of MP
history—such as Vlasiy Peregontsev, Iliya Nozdrin, Iona Ignatenko, and others—paid
absolutely no attention to any heresies, adopting instead a self-justifying
formula: “Know yourself, and that is enough for you.” The spiritual children of
these elders now fill the episcopate of the MP. Special mention should be made
of one of the most active “internal” fighters against the heresies of the
MP—Elder Raphael (Berestov). He himself (or those around him) put forth a
theory that opposition to globalization was the main problem on the path to
salvation. However, the elder himself possessed the very documents and
identification numbers against which he called others to struggle. Regarding
ecumenism, he made condemnatory statements, but urged people to remain within
the MP—himself periodically ceasing (and later resuming) commemoration of the
heretical ecclesiastical leadership. The principal idea of this elder was the
fight against heretics and globalization, all while remaining administratively
within ecumenical organizations.
And so, having begun with a
schism from the True Church—which went into the catacombs and abroad—the
eldership of the MP gradually, from Sergianism (though exposed by the
Confessors, yet incomprehensible to many as a heresy), passed over to the
ecumenical heresy, either accepting it or covering its adherents and remaining
in communion with them.
One may object that the elders
performed miracles, were clairvoyant, and healed diseases.
But, according to the testimony
of St. Anthony the Great, we know that: “…One must not be vain over the
grace-given power of casting out demons, one must not exalt oneself because of
the grace-given gift of healing sicknesses. He who casts out demons is not
worthy of wonder, nor is he who does not cast them out worthy of contempt. If
one wishes rightly to judge concerning a monk, let us examine the pattern of
his struggle. The working of signs is the work of the Savior, not ours: for
this reason, He also said to His disciples, Rejoice not that the spirits are
subject unto you; but rather rejoice, because your names are written in heaven
(Luke 10:20). That our names are written in heaven serves as proof of our
virtue and God-pleasing life, whereas the power of casting out demons is the
gift of the Savior. For this reason, to those who gloried in miracle-working
and not in virtue, and who said: Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Thy
Name? And in Thy Name cast out devils? And in Thy Name done many wonderful
works? He answered: Verily I say unto you: I know you not (Matt. 7:22–23). The
Lord knows not the ways of the ungodly. It is necessary to pray unceasingly, as
I have already said, for the gift of discernment of spirits, so as not to trust
every spirit (1 John 4:1), as the Scripture teaches us.” [8]
It is evident that in our time
the chief virtue (apart from all others) must be the preservation of the faith
and of the proper canonical standing.
But the eldership of the MP
perceives this very virtue in a distorted way, according to the delusion with
which it is encompassed.
Is it possible for one to work
miracles and at the same time transgress against the faith?
Let us bring forth further
examples from the writings of the holy fathers.
In the “Word on Death” of
St. Ignatius Brianchaninov, we read: “…Venerable Daniel of Scetis relates about
a certain elder of a very strict life, who lived in Lower Egypt, that he
ignorantly said: ‘Melchizedek, king of Salem, mentioned in the book of Genesis
(Genesis 14:18), is the Son of God.’ This was reported to Blessed Cyril of
Alexandria. Cyril invited to himself the elder, who performed signs and to
whom God revealed what the elder asked. The Archbishop acted very wisely.
He said to the elder: ‘Abba! Pray for me. One thought tells me that Melchizedek
is the Son of God, and another thought tells me: no! he is a man and priest of
God. I waver as to which of these thoughts to believe. For this reason I
invited you. Pray to God, that God may declare this to you by revelation.’ The
elder, relying on his ascetic life, answered with determination: ‘Give me a
term of three days: I will ask God about this, and I will reveal to you who
Melchizedek is.’ After three days had passed, the elder came to the Archbishop
and said to him: ‘Melchizedek is a man.’ The Archbishop answered: ‘How did you
learn this, Father?’ The elder replied: ‘God showed me all the patriarchs, from
Adam to Melchizedek. And an Angel said to me: Behold Melchizedek. Be assured
that it is so.’ Returning to his cell, the elder already himself began
proclaiming to all that Melchizedek is a man, and not the Son of God. St.
Cyril rejoiced over the salvation of his brother, who—despite the fact that he
worked signs and received revelations from God, and was in communion with the
holy Angels and the souls of departed Saints—was perishing through having
adopted for himself a blasphemous thought, not understanding his own spiritual
affliction.”
Something similar happened with a
certain holy presbyter of the first centuries of Christianity. Because of his
purity and guilelessness, during the service of the Divine Liturgy he was
constantly deemed worthy to see an Angel standing near him.
A traveling deacon visited the
presbyter. The presbyter invited the deacon to perform the Bloodless Sacrifice.
When they began the sacred service, the deacon remarked to the presbyter that
in his prayers he pronounced words which contained heretical blasphemy. The
presbyter was struck by this observation. He turned to the Angel who was
present there and asked him: “Are the deacon’s words true?” The Angel answered:
“They are true.” “Why then,” the presbyter objected, “have you, being with me
for so long a time, not told me this?” “It is God’s will,” the Angel
replied, “that men should be instructed by men.” Constant communion with the
Angel did not prevent the saint from remaining in a ruinous delusion.” [9]
From the book of Venerable
Cassian the Roman:
In the land of Egypt there was
such a custom, that after the day of Theophany, the Alexandrian high priest
would send letters to all the churches of Egypt, in which, along with the
determination of the day of Pascha, he inserted a long discourse against the
absurd heresy of the anthropomorphists. This, through the error of simplicity,
was received with such sorrow by almost all the monks dwelling throughout
Egypt, that the greater part of the elders of the whole brotherhood decided to
turn away from the said bishop, as one infected with a most serious heresy.
Finally, even those who dwelt in the desert of Scetis, and who by perfection
and knowledge excelled all living in the Egyptian monasteries, rejected this
epistle, so that, except for Abba Paphnutius, the presbyter of our community,
none of the other presbyters, who in the same desert were rectors over three
other churches, would permit it either to be read or to be proclaimed in their
assemblies. Among those who held to this error was an elder of ancient severity
in asceticism and in active life, perfect in all things, by the name of
Serapion. He, through lack of learning, contrary to all who held the true
faith, erred in his opinion on the above-mentioned dogma as much as by the
merits of his life and years he excelled nearly all the monks. After many
admonitions by the holy presbyter Paphnutius, he could not take his stand upon
the path of the right faith, because this opinion seemed to him a novelty,
which the fathers had neither revealed nor handed down. At that time, it so
happened that a deacon, by the name of Photius, a man of high learning, came
from Cappadocia. Blessed Paphnutius, having received him, for the confirmation
of the faith set forth in the bishop’s letters, in the presence of all the
brethren, began to inquire: how do the catholic churches of the whole East
interpret that which is said in the book of Genesis: Let Us make man in Our
image and after Our likeness (Gen. 1:26)? When he explained that all the
Churches understand the image and likeness of God not in the simple literal
sense, but in the spiritual, and by many testimonies of Holy Scripture proved
that to the immeasurable, boundless, and invisible majesty nothing can be
applied that could be depicted in human form and likeness—because God has an
incorporeal, uncompounded, simple nature, which can neither be seen with the
eyes nor comprehended by the mind—then the elder, being moved by the many and
powerful proofs of the learned man, inclined himself to the faith, the catholic
tradition. When boundless joy filled Abba Paphnutius and all of us because of
his agreement—namely, that such an ancient man, perfected in so many virtues,
who erred only out of ignorance and simplicity, God had not allowed to stray to
the end from the path of the right faith—and when we arose to give thanks,
pouring out prayers together to the Lord, the elder in prayer was troubled in
spirit, because he perceived how from his heart had vanished that image of the
anthropomorphite deity, which he was accustomed to imagine in prayer. Suddenly
he burst into bitter weeping, often sobbing, and falling to the ground, with a
loud cry he exclaimed: “Oh, wretched man that I am! They have taken away my
God from me; now I have none to hold, none to bow to and to pray to—I no longer
know.” After this they asked Abba Isaac how it could be that Serapion,
through ignorance, had not only completely lost all the labors which he had
praiseworthily accomplished in fifty years in that desert, but had also fallen
into the danger of eternal death.
Abba answered: “One should not be
surprised that a very simple man, who had never been instructed in the
understanding of the essence and nature of the Godhead, through
ignorance could until now persist in the habit of an ancient error, or be
deceived—or, to put it more accurately, become hardened in his former delusion,
which is spread not by a new deceit of demons, as you suppose, but by the
knowledge of ancient paganism. By force of habit in that delusion, by which
demons were worshipped, represented in the likeness of men, they even now think
that the immeasurable and inexpressible majesty of the true Godhead must be
revered under some kind of depicted image, which, standing at prayer, they
continually invoked and always held before their eyes. This delusion, through
inexperience or ignorance, also struck root in the souls of those who had never
themselves been defiled by pagan superstition, so that the heresy of the
anthropomorphists arose from a perverted interpretation; and therefore,
with stubborn distortion they insist that the boundless and simple essence of
God is compounded with our features, in the form of man. But whoever has been
instructed in the Orthodox dogmas turns away from this as from pagan blasphemy,
and in this way attains such purity of prayer that he does not form in his mind
any visible image of the Godhead nor any bodily outline of Him.” [10]
Here it is evident that the
ascetic Serapion had an improper manner of prayer, imagining in his mind a
human image of God, as well as an excessive bodily asceticism without
discernment, which led him into a state of delusion and heresy. We also note
that the greater part of Egyptian monasticism at that time adhered to the
heresy.
Also, in the “Spiritual
Meadow” we read:
An elder, great before God, named
Kyriak, lived in the Monastery of Kalamon, near the holy Jordan. One day a
foreign brother came to him, from the land of Dora, by the name of Theophanes,
and asked the elder about lustful thoughts. The elder began to instruct him
with words on chastity and purity. The brother, receiving great benefit from
these instructions, exclaimed: “My Father, in my country I am in communion with
the Nestorians. Were it not for this—I would remain with you forever!” Hearing
the name of Nestorius, the elder was deeply grieved at the brother’s perdition,
and began to exhort him and entreat him that he abandon this ruinous heresy and
join the holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.
— “It is impossible to be saved
unless you rightly think and believe that the Most Holy Virgin Mary is truly
the Theotokos.”
— “Father,” objected the brother,
“but all the heresies say the very same: if you are not in communion with us,
you will not receive salvation. I do not know, wretch that I am, what I should
do. Pray to the Lord, that He may clearly show me which faith is the true one.”
The elder joyfully heard the
words of the brother. — “Remain in my cell,” he said. “I have hope in God, that
He, in His mercy, will reveal the truth to you.”
And leaving the brother in his
cave, the elder went to the Dead Sea and began to pray for the brother. And
indeed, on the next day, about the ninth hour, the brother sees that someone
appeared to him—terrible in appearance—and says: “Come, and know the truth!” And
taking him, he leads him to a place dark, foul-smelling, and belching forth
flame, and shows him in the fire Nestorius and Theodore, Eutychius and
Apollinarius, Evagrius and Didymus, Dioscorus and Severus, Arius and Origen,
and others. And the one who appeared says to the brother: “This place is
prepared for heretics, and for those who blasphemously teach concerning the
Most Holy Theotokos, as well as for those who follow their teaching. If you
like this place, remain in your doctrine. But if you do not wish to taste such
punishment, turn to the holy Catholic Church, to which belongs the elder who
instructed you. I say to you: even if a man adorns himself with every
virtue, yet if he believes wrongly, he will fall into this place.” At these
words the brother came to himself. When the elder returned, the brother told
him all that he had seen, and in a short time joined the holy Catholic
Apostolic Church. Remaining at Kalamon with the elder, he lived with him for
several years and died in peace. Let it be noted that this brother had merely
been in communion with the heretics.
The Appearance of the Most
Holy Theotokos to another St. Kyriak the Hermit. “Once I saw in a dream
that at the door of my cell stood a radiant, most beautiful Virgin, clothed in
purple, and with her two men of shining countenance. And I recognized that this
was our Lady, the Most Pure Virgin Theotokos, and the men with Her were St.
John the Baptist and St. John the Theologian. Immediately I went out of my
cell, and, bowing down, I besought Her that She might enter to me and bless my
cell, but She was unwilling. For a long time I implored Her, saying: ‘O
Lady! Let not Thy servant depart from Thee humiliated and ashamed.’ And
many other supplications I uttered before Her. Then, seeing my fervent
entreaty, She answered me:
—“Thou hast in thy cell My enemy;
how then canst thou still express the desire that I should enter unto thee?”
With these words She departed.
Awakening from sleep, I began to weep and grieve, pondering whether I had in
any way sinned before the Most Pure Virgin in my thoughts; for apart from
myself, there was no one else in my cell. Having examined myself in detail, I
found nothing by which I might have sinned against Her. Seeing that sorrow
consumed me, I, in order somewhat to distract myself amid my grief, took up a
book to read. It was a book of Blessed Hesychius the Presbyter of Jerusalem,
which I had asked from him for a time. Having read the book, I saw at its end
two words of the impious Nestorius, and thus I understood what enemy of the
Most Holy Lady was in my cell.
Then, rising up, I carried the
book to him who had given it to me and said to him:
—“Brother, take thy book; I have
received from it not so much profit as harm.”
He asked me how his book had
brought me harm rather than benefit. And I related to him the vision that had
befallen me. Then he, being filled with divine zeal, cut out from the book the
two words of Nestorius and burned them in the fire, saying: “Let not the enemy
of our Lady—the Theotokos and Ever-Virgin Mary—remain in my cell.” [11] An
instruction on how the holy fathers guarded themselves even from the slightest
presence of heresy.
From these examples we can see
that even with an ascetic and even holy life—when signs, miracles, and
prophecies are performed—it is still possible at the same time to fall into
heresy or be deceived by heretics by entering into communion with them. Why, in
fact, are the examples of these elders so popular in the milieu of the Moscow
Patriarchate, mainly among people who have only superficial notions of
Christianity but are satisfied only with outward forms? Because in the books
there are created images of SAINTS to whom, supposedly, everything was revealed
by God. And since such an elder in no way reacted to the canonical crimes of
the higher hierarchy, then it means this had no significance whatsoever. Here
arose a dangerous precedent, where the canonical side of the matter is
deliberately obscured, while the “wonder-working” side of the ascetic is
brought to the forefront as the chief condition for his glorification—which is
advantageous precisely for the heretical myth-makers, making it all the easier
to draw inexperienced, newly-begun Christians into their nets.
The elders of the Moscow
Patriarchate, by justifying or simply NOT objecting to Sergianism and
Ecumenism—heresies no less, if not more, dreadful than the ancient ones
(the first blasphemes against the dogma of the Church that She is preserved by
the Lord Jesus Christ Himself and presupposes an agreement with the Antichrist
for the preservation of administration; the second has been called by
contemporary holy fathers the PAN-HERESY, i.e., containing within itself all
heresies)—through simplicity sinned against the Truth and the Church, thereby
involuntarily leading millions of souls into delusion. With the collapse of the
authority of the Sergianist and Ecumenist hierarchy of the MP, the authority of
the elders remained as the last argument in defense of the thesis that in the
MP “not all is lost and there is grace, because there were wonder-working
elders.” And we see that such things, by God’s allowance, can unfortunately
exist. From all that has been said we may conclude that for successfully
resisting the temptations of this world in our time, personal asceticism alone
is not sufficient, but canonical consciousness is also needed, which—together
with a proper humble disposition of soul and the help of God—will keep the
Christian upon the right path to salvation. It was precisely with such
qualities that St. John of Shanghai was endowed, when he did not succumb to the
delusion of those who tried to deceive him with the outward “legality” of the
elections of the Soviet Patriarch Alexei (Simansky).
Will any of the modern elders
recall the example of St. Anthony the Great, who left his desert for the sake
of affirming Orthodoxy against Arianism? Will any of them follow St. Maximus
the Confessor, who said: “If the whole universe communes with a
patriarch-heretic, I alone will not commune with him”? Will any of them be
struck with fear by the words of Venerable Theodore the Studite, who taught: “Not
only the unbelieving heretics does the serpent take under his power, but also
those who are indifferent toward all such and enter into communion with them”?
Will anyone take heed of the
instruction of St. Joseph of Volotsk, who said: “Let everyone be deemed worthy
by you, except him who teaches heresy. But if he be found a heretic, then let
us strive to receive neither teaching nor Communion from him, and not only
shall we not commune with him, but we shall condemn him and with all our
strength reprove him, that we may not be found partakers in his destruction”?
This only the Lord knows—Who does
not will the death of the sinner, but desires to bring him to the knowledge of
the Truth.
But we, the children of the
Russian Church Abroad, must strictly follow the teaching of the holy fathers of
the Ancient and the Russian Church, and of our great elders—hierarchs St. John
of Shanghai and Philaret of New York—who left us the true path to salvation,
guarding us from delusion, heresies, and schisms, and showing us an example of
holiness.
By their prayers, O Lord Jesus
Christ our God, have mercy on us.
Amen.
Sources:
1. St.
Venerable Nektary of Optina.
http://www.eshatologia.org/838-ieroshimonah-nektariy-posledniy-optinskiy-starets.html
2. Elder
Schema-Archimandrite Sebastian of Karaganda
http://azbyka.ru/otechnik/Sevastian_Karagandinskij/karagandinskij-starets-prepodobnyj-sevastian/
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%B0%D0%BD_(%D0%A4%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%B8%D0%BD)
3. Catacomb
Schema-Bishop Peter the Confessor.
http://true-orthodox.narod.ru/library/story/biograf2.html
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9F%D0%B5%D1%82%D1%80_(%D0%9B%D0%B0%D0%B4%D1%8B%D0%B3%D0%B8%D0%BD)
4. Elder
Schema-Archimandrite Seraphim Tomin.
http://www.pravmir.ru/rozhdennyj-byt-monaxom-pamyati-sxiarximandrita-serafima-tomina/
5. Elder
Schema-Archimandrite Lavrenty of Chernigov.
http://catacomb.org.ua/modules.php?name=Pages&go=page&pid=606
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9B%D0%B0%D0%B2%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%BD%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%B9_%D0%A7%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9
6. Elder
Hieroschemamonk Seraphim of Vyritsa.
http://www.mylektsii.ru/10-55706.html
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%84%D0%B8%D0%BC_%D0%92%D1%8B%D1%80%D0%B8%D1%86%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9
7. St.
Venerable Theodosius of the Caucasus.
http://true-orthodox.narod.ru/library/story/kashin.html
8. “Word on
Death.” Collected Works of St. Ignatius Brianchaninov, vol. 3.
9. “Word on
Death.” Collected Works of St. Ignatius Brianchaninov, vol. 3.
10. St.
Venerable John Cassian the Roman. “Conferences.”
http://azbyka.ru/otechnik/Ioann_Kassian_Rimljanin/pisaniya_k_desyati/10_3
11. Blessed
John Mosch. “Spiritual Meadow.”
http://azbyka.ru/otechnik/Ioann_Mosh/lug-dukhovnyj/
Russian source: https://web.archive.org/web/20160501221518/http://rpczmoskva.org.ru/stati/starchestvo-istinnoe-i-lozhnoe-s-nachala-cerkovnoj-smuty-v-rossii-starchestvo-mp-kak-osnovnaya-prichina-uderzhaniya-pastvy-pod-vlastyu-eretikov.html
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.