Thursday, January 29, 2026

On Hieromonk Tarasy Kurgansky’s Refutation of the Sevenfold Number of the Mysteries of the Orthodox Church

Finally, one cannot pass over in silence Fr. Tarasy’s views on the number of the Mysteries of the Orthodox Church.

[See: https://www.pravmir.com/the-false-teaching-about-the-seven-sacraments/]

He overturns the teaching concerning the seven Mysteries for the reason that it is allegedly, by its origin, a [Roman] Catholic teaching. “The striving for completeness and definiteness,” says Fr. Tarasy, “forced Western theologians to treat the external Christian sacred rites with unequal attention, to select from them the most important ones and to single them out from the series of the others on the basis of their special importance.” [842] According to Fr. Tarasy, this Catholic and scholastic teaching about the seven Mysteries was transferred by the Kiev theologians into the Russian Church in the 17th century. Moreover, the Russian people accepted this teaching without protest, thanks to their simplicity of heart. [843]

With regard to this view of Fr. Tarasy, we must first of all say that the Orthodox Church contains within itself the teaching concerning the seven Mysteries not for the reason indicated by him, but because this teaching has as its foundation Divine Revelation and the patristic writings. Long before the appearance of Catholicism, the Holy Church possessed a great multitude of testimonies of Holy Scripture and the holy Fathers, by virtue of which it established from the very apostolic times precisely seven, neither more nor fewer, Mysteries for the communication through them of the salvific grace of the Holy Spirit to the faithful. We will not set forth the incontrovertible truth of the sevenfold number of the Mysteries and adduce testimonies of Holy Scripture and the holy Fathers to prove the existence of seven Mysteries in the Church from the very apostolic times. All this has already been done excellently, clarified in detail, and set forth in the dogmatic systems of Archbishop Philaret, [844] Metropolitan Makary, [845] and Bishop Silvester. [846]

In the given dogmatic works, on the basis of God-revealed and patristic testimonies, it is indicated that the seven Mysteries were founded by the Apostles. In these testimonies we even have an indication that the founder of these Mysteries was the Lord Himself—either through the imparting of Divine teaching, which became the basis for the introduction into ecclesiastical life by the Apostles of chrismation, [847] repentance, [848] and marriage; [849] or through the granting to them of a direct command concerning the establishment of the Mysteries of baptism [850] and communion; [851] or, finally, through the command in general to observe all that He had commanded them. [852] To the fulfillment of this general Divine command one must undoubtedly ascribe the establishment by the Apostles of the Mysteries of priesthood and anointing with oil, although with regard to the latter there is even a direct fore-indication in the words of the Savior. [853]

In general, much of what was done by Christ did not enter into the Gospel, as the Evangelist John notes. [854] But everything that the Apostles performed proceeded from their Divine Teacher. All the more must this be said with regard to their God-revealed testimonies in general and, in particular, with regard to the establishment by God of the Mysteries of anointing with oil and priesthood, as well as of the other five Mysteries.

In the Dogmatic Theology of M. Makary, we even find a clarification of the question of why there exist in the Church precisely seven Mysteries, and neither more nor fewer. According to our renowned dogmatist, the reason for this is hidden in the will of the Founder of the Mysteries, the Lord Jesus Christ. “We can only,” says M. Makary, “following others, find here a correspondence with the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit (Isa. 11:2–3), communicated to the faithful through the seven Mysteries of the Church; with the seven loaves that miraculously fed whole thousands of people (Matt. 15:36–38); with the seven golden lampstands, in the midst of which the seer of mysteries was deemed worthy to behold the Son of Man (Rev. 1:12–13); with the seven stars which the Lord Jesus then held in His right hand (Rev. 1:16); with the seven seals by which the book seen thereafter by the Prophet in the right hand of God was sealed (Rev. 5:1); with the seven trumpets which, upon the opening of the mysterious book, were given to the seven angels standing before God (Rev. 8:1–2), and so forth.” [855]

In addition to what has been said by M. Makary in clarifying the question of why seven Mysteries have been established in the Church, one should recall the words of the Optina elder, great in grace-filled gifts, hieroschemamonk Fr. Ambrose, spoken by him in the explanation of a certain wondrous dream concerning the final destinies of the world. From this explanation it is evident that the number seven has great significance in ecclesiastical enumeration. It denotes fullness and perfection. Therefore, Fr. Ambrose, illumined by the Holy Spirit, in his explanation of this significant dream, says: “The Orthodox Church is maintained and guided by the rules of the seven Ecumenical Councils. There are seven Mysteries and seven gifts of the Holy Spirit in our Church. The Revelation of God was manifested to the seven Churches of Asia. The book of the destinies of God, seen in the Revelation by John the Theologian, is sealed with seven seals. There are seven bowls of the wrath of God poured out upon the impious. All this sevenfold enumeration pertains to the present age and with its end must also come to an end. The age to come, however, in the Church is designated by the eighth number. The sixth psalm has the following superscription: A Psalm of David unto the end, in songs concerning the eighth—according to the interpretation, concerning the eighth day, that is, concerning the universal day of the resurrection and the coming fearful judgment of God... The week of Antipascha, or of St. Thomas, in the Triodion of Flowers is called the week of the eighth, that is, of the eternal and unending day, which will no longer be interrupted by the darkness of night.” [856]

Thus, bearing in mind the significance which M. Makary and the elder Fr. Ambrose ascribe to the number seven, we may say that the Holy Church established seven Mysteries because in precisely this number they embrace the entire fullness of our Christian life and correspond to all its needs.

It is also necessary to note that Fr. Tarasy overturns the teaching concerning the sevenfold number of the Mysteries not only because it is allegedly established by Catholics and scholastics. As we have seen, he also rises up against this number on account of what he considers an inadmissible singling out of seven Mysteries as the most important from among all other sacred rites, which Fr. Tarasy also calls Mysteries. He declares that Mysteries should be called not only those known to us as seven in number, but also the events in the life of the Lord, Christian doctrine, the feasts of the Nativity and Baptism, and tonsure into monasticism. [857] Having in view the assertion in the catechism of Lavrenty Zizany that the Mysteries are only seven, Fr. Tarasy writes that this number “was indicated by the scholastics arbitrarily and artificially; that discussions about the greater or lesser necessity for salvation of one or another Mystery are senseless, since salvation is accomplished not by separate sacred rites, even the most important ones, but by union with the whole of ecclesiastical life, in which there is nothing of little importance; that certain sacred rites, for example, the great blessing of water, tonsure into monasticism, and the burial service for the departed, have a power and significance no less than the majority of the Mysteries.” [858]

Of course, the word Mystery is used not only with reference to the seven Mysteries, but also in a broader sense. One may call a Mystery even tonsure into monasticism, which, as the lives of St. Anthony the Great and the venerable John and Simeon the Fool-for-Christ testify, [859] may even be called a second baptism, since through tonsure the Lord forgives all sins committed from birth. One may also call a Mystery every rite and prayer in the Church, since here our faith in God’s help is expressed, which is communicated to us by God invisibly and mystically. But in the proper sense, only seven are recognized by the Church as Mysteries. Thus believes the Holy Church, which in its full entirety contains within itself grace and truth. And thus we, her members, must believe in humility, so as not to fall, through divergence from the Church, into pride, not to depart from her and not to perish forever. Therefore, it is not we who fall into senselessness by recognizing only seven Mysteries and thereby singling them out as the most necessary for salvation in comparison with other sacred rites. In this preference for the seven Mysteries we manifest only our faith in the infallibility of the Church’s teaching concerning the God-revealed origin of the seven Mysteries, whereas Fr. Tarasy undermines this faith. It is clear from this who falls into senselessness: those who recognize the seven Mysteries on the basis of God-revealed and patristic teaching, or Fr. Tarasy, who overturns the sevenfold number of the Mysteries contrary to the teaching of Holy Scripture and the holy Fathers of the Church, and thus diminishes the salvific significance of these Mysteries?!

Fr. Tarasy lowers these Mysteries still further and even completely devalues them by his assertion that salvation is accomplished not by separate sacred rites, even the most important ones—by which he understands the principal Mysteries—but by union with the whole of ecclesiastical life.

Here a genuinely sectarian view of salvation is expressed. Together with the Holy Church we confess that salvation is accomplished by the inner, regenerating grace of the Holy Spirit, which is granted to us in the Mysteries of baptism and chrismation. Together with the Holy Church we testify that this grace is unfolded within us with the cooperation of our free will, that is, through our striving always to be in union with Christ and the Orthodox Church by means of the fulfillment of the Divine commandments and our zealous participation in the prayers, divine services, and Mysteries of the Church. The realization of this union is impossible without the regenerating grace of the Holy Spirit. This grace-filled union of ours with the Holy Church is precisely ecclesiastical life, by virtue of which our salvation is accomplished. Thus, the principal power and foundation in this union, or in our salvation, is the inner, regenerating grace of the Holy Spirit.

One may ask: how, then, can our salvation be accomplished, and what will our union with ecclesiastical life represent, if it proceeds without the Mysteries, that is, without grace, and especially without the grace of holy baptism, chrismation, repentance, and communion? To say that “salvation is accomplished not by separate sacred rites, even the most important of them, but by our union with the whole of ecclesiastical life” means not to have an Orthodox understanding of salvation, not to know the essence of Christianity, which consists in our reception and the unfolding within us of the grace of holy baptism and chrismation—what was the purpose of the sufferings and death of Christ, [860] and what, according to the teaching of St. Symeon the New Theologian and St. Seraphim of Sarov, is also the purpose of our entire Christian life.

Therefore, the view of Fr. Tarasy on the sevenfold number of our Mysteries and on the accomplishment of salvation apart from these Mysteries with their inner, regenerating grace must be acknowledged as heretical and absurd.

 

NOTES

842. “A Turning Point in Ancient Russian Theology,” pp. 175–176.

843. Ibid., pp. 176–177.

844. Archbishop Philaret. Dogmatic Theology, part 2, pp. 201–354. Chernigov, 1864.

845. Metropolitan Makarii. Dogmatic Theology, vol. 2, pp. 313–518. St. Petersburg, 1883.

846. Bishop Silvester. Dogmatic Theology, vol. 4, pp. 353–583; vol. 5, pp. 1–63. Kiev, 1897.

847. John 7:37–39.

848. John 20:21–23.

849. Matthew 19:3–12.

850. Matthew 28:19.

851. Matthew 26:26–28.

852. Matthew 28:20.

853. Matthew 10:1, 8; cf. Mark 6:13.

854. John 20:30; 21:25.

855 M. Makarii. Dogmatic Theology, part 2, p. 512.

856. Archimandrite Agapit. “The Life of the Optina Elder Hieroschemamonk Ambrose.” Appendix 6–11. Moscow, 1900; cf.: the works of St. Gregory the Theologian, vol. 1, pp. 576–578.

857. “A Turning Point in Ancient Russian Theology,” p. 179.

858. Ibid., p. 181.

859. Chetii-Minei, January 17 and July 23.

860. John 16:7.

 

Russian source: Искажение православной истины в русской богословской мысли [The Distortion of Orthodox Truth in Russian Theological Thought], by Archbishop Seraphim (Sobolev), Sofia, 1943.

 

 

Online source:

https://azbyka.ru/otechnik/Serafim_Sobolev/iskazhenie-pravoslavnoj-istiny-v-russkoj-bogoslovskoj-mysli/6_7

No comments:

Post a Comment

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

For reference - Conclusions of the Conference with the theme: “The 15th Canon of the First-Second Council and the cessation of ecclesiastical communion.”

November 27, 2014 | Piraeus     The Sacred [New Calendar] Metropolis of Piraeus, with the blessing of our Most Reverend Metropolitan...