1.2. From sermons and epistles

TO THE FLORD OF THE EPISCOPATH, APPEAL OF SPIRITUAL CONSISTORIES

No. 23. From a sermon to the flock of the vicar of the Yaroslavl diocese, Bishop Cornelius of Rybinsk (Popov)

You and I, like a thunderstorm, are alarmed by the sad news of the terrible internecine strife in Petrograd. The reason for everything is the tsarist government. It has already been overthrown by the will of the people, as it did not satisfy its purpose and allowed the country to starve and unrest. The State Duma, at the request of the people, elected a new government from among the representatives of the people, so that this new government would lead the Russian people and the Russian army onto the path of victory and glory.

Yaroslavl diocese. statements. Yaroslavl, 1917. No. 9-10. Part of the informal S. 109.

No. 24. Order of the Bishop of Vyatka and Sloboda Nikandr (Fenomenov) to the Vicar Bishop of Sarapul and Yelabuga Ambrose (Gudko) and the Deans of the Diocese on March 3, 1917

Upon receipt of newspapers and telegrams with Manifestos about the abdication of the Sovereign from the throne, order to read the Manifestos in churches and replace petitions for him and the reigning house in litanies and prayers with the words "about the All-Russian Ruling Synclite." Do this until you know the order of the Holy Synod. Reassure people.

Word and life. Vyatka. No. 19. P. 4.

No. 25. From a note on the political position of the vicar of the Vyatka diocese, Bishop of Sarapul and Yelabuga Ambrose (Gudko)

Bishop Ambrose, in a cathedral crowded with worshipers, praised the former tsar [Nicholas II] and especially his wife [Empress Alexandra Feodorovna], thereby introducing undesirable excitement among the people.

Kama. Sarapul, 1917. No. 52. P. 4.

As a reaction to the mentioned sermon from the city duma of Sarapul and representatives of all population groups on March 5, 1917. a complaint was sent to the Holy Synod against Bishop Ambrose. The archpastor was accused of delivering a monarchist sermon and expressing sympathy for Nicholas II and the empress. In less than two weeks, the Synod of Yp March decided to dismiss Bishop Ambrose for retirement, with his appointment as rector

one of the remote monasteries (TsV. 1917. No. 9-15. P. 70; Word and Life. Vyatka, 1917. No. 23. P. 4.).

#26 Lvov at the first meeting of the Holy Synod under the Provisional Government on March 4, 1917

[Metropolitan Vladimir] stated that he had known V.N. Lvov as a zealous defender of the Orthodox Church and welcomes him as a welcome guest, under whose leadership the work of the Synod will be more successful for the benefit of the motherland and the Orthodox Church.

Russian word. M., 1917. No. 51. P. 2.

1 An excerpt from the Metropolitan's welcoming speech in the source is given in the exposition.

No. 27. From the speech of Archbishop Arseny (Stadnitsky) of Novgorod and Staraya Russa1 at the first meeting of the Holy Synod under the Provisional Government on March 4, 1917

At this moment in history, I cannot help but say a few words, perhaps incoherent, but coming from the heart. Mr. Chief Procurator speaks of the freedom of the Church. What a wonderful gift! Freedom is brought from heaven by our Savior and Lord: “If the Son sets you free, then you will be truly free” [Jn. 8, 36]; it was suffered by the apostles, bought with the blood of the martyrs. And the great gift of freedom is worth trials and suffering. For two hundred years the Orthodox Church has been in slavery. Now she is free. God, what space! But here is a bird, languishing in a cage for a long time, when it is opened, looks with fear at the vast space; she is unsure of her abilities and, in thought, sits down near the threshold of the doors. This is how we feel at the present moment, when the revolution has given us freedom from Caesaropapism... The great gift of freedom has been bought and is always acquired at the cost of trials. Establish, O Lord, Thy Church!

Novgorod diocese. statements. Novgorod, 1917. No. 7. Part of the neo-official. pp. 324-325.

2 The speech was delivered in response to the announcement by Chief Prosecutor V.N. Lvov about granting by the Provisional Government of the Russian Church “freedom from Caesaropapism”. The speech was reproduced by Archbishop Arseniy on March 26 at a meeting of the clergy in Novgorod.

No. 28. Statement by Archbishop Arseny (Stadnitsky) of Novgorod and Staraya Russian at the first meeting of the Holy Synod under the Provisional Government at the time of the removal of the royal chair on March 4, 1917

Here, they bring out the symbol of Caesaropapism!

Theological works. M., 1998. Issue. 34. Anniversary issue. S. 81.

1 In Theological Works it is said that at this meeting the chair of the chief prosecutor of the Holy Synod was taken out and the following statement was uttered by Archbishop Arseniy as a reaction to this event. However, numerous eyewitnesses (including Arseny himself) testify that it was the royal chair that was taken out. Moreover, hierarchs, members of the Holy Synod, including Metropolitan Vladimir (Bogoyavlensky) took part in the removal of the throne (see: Zhevakhov N.D. Decree. Op. T. 2.

From 191; VTsOV. 1917. No. 1. S. 2-3; Novgorod diocese. statements. Novgorod, 1917. No. 11. Part of the unofficial. C 451; Russian word. M., 1917. No. 51. S. 2; Stock listings. Pp, 1917. No. 55. P. 4).

According to Archbishop Arseny, the royal chair (throne), which stood at the head of the table of meetings of the members of the Holy Synod, was “a symbol of Caesaropapism in the Russian Church” (Novgorod Eparch. Vedomosti. Novgorod, 1917. No. 11. Part of the unofficial. S. 451). It was located next to the chair of the hierarch presiding in the synod and was intended exclusively for the king.

Narrating the same (March 4) meeting of the Holy Synod, at the Novgorod diocesan congress on May 31, Archbishop Arseniy reproduced his words in a different way at the moment of the removal of the royal chair. Arseniy said: “... I could not restrain myself and addressed a greeting [to the members of the Holy Synod and the chief prosecutor] that the Church is free” (Novgorod Eparch. Vedomosti. Novgorod, 1917. No. 11. Part of the unofficial. S. 451; Novgorod Life, Novgorod, 1917, No. 21, p. 3).

No. 29. From an appeal to the pastors and flock of the Georgian Exarchate1 by the Exarch of Georgia, Archbishop of Kartal and Kakheti Platon (Rozhdestvensky), March 4, 1917

To you, my coworkers and my flock, my word at this historic moment.

Our Motherland is embarking on a new path. Not rebellion now, not decomposition, not ruin, not strife, our Motherland needs, but unification, strengthening, calmness. In a peaceful, meek, long-suffering Russia there should not be, and, God willing, there will not be a revolutionary hell. There should be no vacillation of minds and hearts, and, God willing, there won't be now in Crusader Georgia. That is imperatively demanded of us, first of all and most of all, by the present state of affairs. Strong in spirit, our valiant troops march victoriously at the direction of their glorious leader, our August Viceroy2, to Baghdad.

And now, fighting with one hand against the insidious enemy, with the other we will do peaceful creative work, we will peacefully and possibly calmly rebuild our inner life, if it requires alteration and restructuring. Should we worry, should we grieve each other and, moreover, shed blood, if this will benefit not us, but our enemies. Conscious of the importance of the moment being experienced, let each of the citizens who stay at home devote themselves to peaceful creative work, knowing that only peace, harmony, love and unanimity will lead us to the promised land of an orderly and well-ordered life.

Without calmness, without unity, unity and awareness of our duty to the Motherland, no government, no matter how ideal it may be, will save us. As the archpastor of the Church of Christ, a preacher of peace and love, I fatherly appeal to you, my colleagues and my flock, not to lose self-control, patience and prudence at this historical moment and calmly meet everything that God sends us, without whose will and hair does not fall from our head. He, the Most Merciful, will not send us anything that would not be for our good and for our benefit.

Tiflis sheet. Tiflis, 1917. No. 51. C. 1.

1 Four Caucasian dioceses of the Russian Orthodox Church were united in the Georgian Exarchate: Georgian (Kartala and Kakheti), Imereti, Guria-Mingrelian and Sukhumi. The exarch was a plenipotentiary, independent official representative of the corresponding four dioceses and their vicariates. Until 1917, the chair of the Exarch of the Caucasus in the Russian Orthodox Church was considered the fourth in honor after Petrograd, Moscow and Kyiv (Bulgakov S.V. Decree. Work. T. 2. S. 1399; Complete Orthodox Theological Encyclopedic Dictionary. T. 1. S. 686 -687, 853).

From the definitions, decrees and messages of the Holy Synod...

sermons and messages to the flock of the episcopate of the Russian Orthodox Church

2 The viceroy of the emperor in the Caucasus and the commander-in-chief of the troops of the Caucasian front was the cavalry general, Grand Duke Romanov Nikolai Nikolaevich (the Younger; 1856 - 1929; grandson of Emperor Nicholas I) (Soviet Military Encyclopedia. Vol. 5. M., 1978. S. 597 ).

Today the Tsar's manifesto has been printed in our city. Here is a document by which the Tsar Himself releases us from the oath given to faithful service to him and, transferring the Throne of the Russian Brother to His Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich, commands Him to manage state affairs in full and inviolable unity with the representatives of the people in legislative institutions.

Thus, we found ourselves under a new, but completely legal power, consisting, as it were, of two halves: a legitimate sovereign and representatives of the people in legislative institutions. It was necessary to wait for the manifesto of Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich on His accession to the throne, but instead an official telegram was received about the Abdication of Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich from the Throne.

Thus, freed by the Sovereign Himself from the oath to Him, we have, in the person of the Provisional Government, established by the State Duma, a completely legitimate authority, to which the Sovereign and, after him, Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich transferred their Supreme rights. Therefore, we must now obey our Provisional Government, as we obeyed not out of fear, but out of conscience to our Sovereign, who has now renounced the government of us.

Diocese of Tambov statements. Tambov, 1917. No. 10-11. Department of unofficial pp. 247-248.

No. 31. From the speech of Bishop of Pskov and Porkhov Evsevy (Grozdov) in the Cathedral of Pskov

Beloved brethren, at an hour full of profound historical significance, at an hour when a new form of state government is being built, I dare, together with the holy apostle, to turn to you with the same prayer: “Children, love one another.” Let us remember that this commandment is not only of the apostle, but also of Our Beloved Savior the Lord Jesus Christ. Let us remember that the Provisional Government, to which the Supreme Power has now quite legally passed to, is calling us to tranquility, to the absence of hatred and enmity, mutual respect, the fulfillment of one's duty by everyone.

But I, a humble servant of the Crucified One, for my part, call on God's blessing for your peaceful and fruitful activity in the new construction.

Pskov diocese. statements. Pskov, 1917. No. 6-7. Department of unofficial S. 89.

No. 32. From a conversation between a correspondent of the Moskovsky Listok newspaper1 and Bishop Antonin (Granovsky), formerly of Vladikavkaz2

[Bishop Antonin] looks brightly at the future, but declares that there is a struggle ahead, for which one must be prepared.

Moscow sheet. M., 1917. No. 67. P. 3.

1 The conversation with Bishop Antoninus is printed in a summary, which is published in full.

2 Bishop Antonin lived in retirement in Moscow, in the Bogoyavlensky (according to other sources - in Zaikonospassky) monastery. He had a reputation as a fighter against the autocracy. In 1905, after the release of the Manifesto on October 17, Antonin (at that time - Bishop of Narva, vicar of the St. Petersburg diocese) stopped commemorating the emperor at church services as "autocratic", for which he was subjected to church punishment in the form of exile to the Trinity-Sergius Monastery St. Petersburg Metropolis. See the comments to document No. 686 and its appendix.

Firmly believing that a bright resurrection and renewal of Great Russia will come behind the cross of our trials and internal discords of the dear Motherland, the Orthodox clergy of Novgorod calls on everyone to unite in a common fervent prayer to the Merciful Lord, may He bless in these difficult moments the creative work of the new, endowed with trust people of the Government2, and asks the Orthodox population of Novgorod, for the sake of the good of the Motherland, to remain in full and indestructible unity with the representatives of the people in the Legislative institutions, observing complete unanimity in all their actions and calmly fulfilling the legitimate requirements of the Authority, which is currently represented in the city of Novgorod by the Committee of Public Peace .

Novgorod diocese. statements. Novgorod, 1917. No. 5. Part of the unofficial. S. 252; Theological works. M., 1998. Issue. 34. Anniversary collection. S. 72.

1 Vicar of the Novgorod diocese, Bishop Alexy (Simansky): from 22.01 (04.02). 1945 - Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia Alexy I.

2 The Journal of the Moscow Patriarchate (ZHMP) reprinted only a part of this appeal (ZhMP. M., 1957. No. 11. P. 40). The passage in the JMP ends at the place marked with the sign "2". Unlike the original source, the end of the last sentence in the JMP sounds like this: "the creative work of the new system."

No. 34. From the sermon of the vicar of the Novgorod diocese, Bishop Alexy (Simansky) of Tikhvin, at St. Sophia Cathedral in Novgorod, March 5, 1917

[Recently in Russia], on the one hand, there was a difficult war unparalleled in the history of peoples, and on the other hand, unheard-of betrayals were committed inside by those who were called by the tsar as the closest employees in government. ... Gradually, an increasingly dense wall was erected between the tsar and the people, which was deliberately built by those who wished to hide the needs and cries of the people from the tsar. ... Calling on everyone to fervent prayer for God's help in the present time of terrible trial, to unite in the spirit of Christian love and peace, to calmly submit to the new government, which arose at the initiative of the State Duma and is invested with full power to create future power and happiness in the dear homeland , His Eminence2 called on God's blessing on this new Government, pointing out that without God's help, the best human impulses are in vain.

Novgorod provincial sheets. Novgorod, 1917. No. 18. P. 2.

From the definitions, decrees and messages of the Holy Synod...

From sermons and messages to the flock of the episcopate of the Russian Orthodox Church

1 In the source, the sermon is given in the exposition. Even more briefly, it was published in the journal "Theological Works" (M, 1998. Issue 34. Anniversary collection. S. 72-73).

2 Bishop Alexy (Simansky).

No. 35. From the speech of Archbishop Alexy (Dorodnitsyn) of Vladimir and Shuisky before a prayer service in the Cathedral on March 5, 1917

Let us do everything we can for her, so that in these days she will be peaceful, calm and confident in her children, confident that no one and nothing will prevent her from creating a new state system, creating a new state power.

In these sacred days of the creation of a new state life, there should be no violence and murder, robberies, drunkenness and other manifestations of evil will. We must indulge in intense prayer for the good of our dear Motherland with the hope of God's mercy, peacefully waiting for what power He will send us. We are not alone. There, in Petrograd, the people's representatives are working to build state power. They have already created a government for our city - this is the Provisional Executive [Vladimir] Provincial Committee. He is the central authority, we must obey him and carry out his orders. Moreover, we must help him with all the measures in our power to maintain order and a calm course of life in our province, we must firmly remember that by helping him, we are doing a common nationwide task of building a new state life.

Eparch of Vladimir statements. Vladimir, 1917. No. 9-10. Department of unofficial S. 82.

1 That is, for the Motherland.

No. 36. From the message to the flock of the Archbishop of Tauride and Simferopol Dimitri (Prince Abashidze)
March 5, 1917

Done. He, without whose will not a hair falls from our head, put an end to the reign of the former Sovereign. The innumerable destructive disorders committed by the former government, which performed its service extremely dishonestly, abused its power, constantly and skillfully misled everyone, led to state ruin, disorder in all our affairs.

The current bloody Great Patriotic War has clearly revealed to everyone that our country and the Russian people are standing on the edge of an abyss that has greedily opened its mouth to swallow our Fatherland. This terrible abyss was created, and the supreme power returned to the great Russian people both in terms of the expanse of the earth, and in its numbers, and in spirit, to arrange its state life on new principles. The will of God concerning the new destinies of our Fatherland has been accomplished. Who will resist His will? [Rome. 9, 19].

Now the Providence has left us to ourselves. Now the Heavenly King Himself has occupied the Throne of the Russian Kingdom, so that He, the One Almighty, may be our faithful helper in the great sorrow that has befallen us, in the calamities brought upon us by the former leaders of our state life.

A truly difficult difficult time has come for the Russian land. Our Fatherland now endures the labors and illnesses of birth. Our days, delighting us with the bright and peaceful future of the Russian land, now almost in everything remind us of the ancient great shock that befell our Fatherland three hundred years ago, when the neighboring people attacked the Russian land, captivated its villages and cities, took the capital of the Kingdom and prepared to erase the most Russian name off the face of the earth. Similarly, now external enemies have surrounded us, are waging a life-and-death struggle with us, trying in every possible way to break our fortress, take possession of us, seize our land, deprive us of royal freedom and make us their slaves, equate us to senseless cattle.

We all must now forget all the strife, contention, quarrels, disputes and misunderstandings that have ever existed between us and, remembering the commandment of Christ God about our unity, the testament of His great Apostle about maintaining saving unity, about non-division, about not speaking: “I am Pavlov , I am Apollosov, I am Kifin ”, to be the sons of a single Fatherland, to defend it, not sparing his life and in everything diligently and conscientiously, not out of fear, but out of conscience, without grumbling and hypocrisy to obey our new Government. It is a saving obedience demanded of us by the Word of God, which tells us that the existing authorities are established by God, and in which God Himself proclaims: "By me the rulers make righteousness law" [Rom. 13, 1; Prov. 8, 15], should first of all be manifested in the preservation of silence and order by all of us, in the peaceful performance by each of us of the duties of public and private that lie on him.

The fighting Army needs food, it demands a huge amount of bread for itself. The army itself has nowhere to get food. We must feed it, it is our sacred duty. For the best, most useful fulfillment of this duty of ours, we must be one with the Army in the field; must form one continuous chain from the battlefields to our peaceful dwellings; we must have an inexhaustible supply of food and equipment for our army; we should be like a wagon train for her, delivering everything she needs. At the very first call of our People's Government, we are obliged to open our barns, granaries and bring grain for the army, leaving for our families only the amount that we need before the new harvest ...

Taurida church-societies. messenger. Simferopol, 1917. No. 8-9. pp. 175-179.

No. 37. From the sermon of the Archbishop of Chisinau and Khotinsky Anastasy (Gribanovsky) in the Cathedral of Chisinau on March 15, 1917

Let each of you renounce his deeds and surrender to the service of the common good of saving the Motherland from an external enemy. Renounce2 your deeds and become like the Sovereign Emperor Nikolai Alexandrovich, who, out of love for the Russia-motherland, as he proclaims in his manifesto, renounced the throne of his pious ancestors, resigned his supreme power, so that it would be good for the common motherland.

Remember all the deeds of the Sovereign, everything that he did on his way of the cross in his reign. Remember his last testament, by which he calls on all the faithful sons of the fatherland to fulfill their duty in a difficult moment of national trials in order to lead the Russian state onto the path of victory, prosperity and glory.

Watch and pray, but do not enter into misfortune, and be faithful sons of your mother, the Church of Christ. Only by common efforts is it possible to implore the Lord to withdraw His punishing hand from us and not let us perish.

From the definitions, decrees and messages of the Holy Synod...

From sermons and messages to the flock of the episcopate of the Russian Orthodox Church

RGIA. F. 797. On. 86. 1917. Ill department. IV table. D. 64. L. 70 b. Clipping from the newspaper "Bessarabets" (Chisinau, 1917. March 6).

1 There is another version of this sermon, printed on the pages of the diocesan magazine: “Let each of you renounce your deeds and surrender to the service of the common good of saving the Motherland from an external enemy, like the Sovereign Emperor, who, out of love for Russia, made the greatest sacrifice which one can bring, laying down the heavy burden of governing the state. Let us be tempted from the visitation of the Lord, lest He add sickness upon sickness to us; let us watch and pray, as faithful children of the Church of Christ, for the days are evil (Kishinev Eparch. Vedomosti. Kishinev, 1917. No. 15-16. Department of the unofficial, p. 277).

2 So in the text.

3 At the request of the chief prosecutor of the Holy Synod about the content of the sermon published on the pages of the right-wing newspaper Bessarabets, Archbishop Anastassy answered that “the expressions in which the sermon is stated are more than inaccurate, but the main idea is presented correctly.” Archbishop Anastassy also noted that his words “brought a noticeable calm to the people’s thought and conscience”, and that he “received a number of expressions of gratitude from the pilgrims for his short word” (RGIA. F. 797. Op. 86. 1917. III section 4th table D. 64. L. 69-70a.ob.).

No. 38. From the teaching of Archbishop Anthony (Khrapovitsky) of Kharkov and Akhtyrsky in the Assumption Cathedral in Kharkov on March 15, 1917

They ask me why I did not respond to the flock awaiting my word about who they should now obey in civilian life and why they stopped commemorating the royal family in prayer.

I answer, but I answer on my own initiative. Representatives of the new Government did not see me, they did not write to me, and they did not convey their desires through others. Let no one think that this silence, or what I am about to say, is inspired by fear in me. I am not afraid of the arrest that some orators in the square threaten me with, nor am I afraid of death. I will say more: I will be delighted to die for Christ. - So, from February 28 to March 3, I did not say anything because I did not know what the will of the sovereign to whom we swore allegiance was. His name was still lifted up in prayers; On March 3, it became known that he was abdicating the throne and appointing his brother Sovereign; then on March 4, in the meeting of the clergy, we worked out a commemoration of Mikhail Alexandrovich as the Russian Sovereign. However, an hour later, a manifesto about his abdication became known until his election by the Constituent Assembly, if such an election takes place. At the same time, the new sovereign ordered to obey the Provisional Government, the composition of which, headed by Prince Lvov, Mr. Rodzianko, is known to you from the newspapers. - From that moment on, the aforementioned Government became legitimate in the eyes of all monarchists, that is, Russian citizens who obey their Sovereigns. And I, as the pastor of the church, who is always obliged to exhort my people to obey the powers that be, I call on you to fulfill this duty now, that is, to obey the Committee of New Ministers2 and its head - Prince Lvov and Mr.] Rodzianka, as the temporary head of the State, as well as to all local authorities, which have been and will be approved by the said Committee and its representatives. We must do this, firstly, in fulfillment of the oath given by us to Sovereign Nicholas II, who transferred power to Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich, who handed over this power to the Provisional Government until the Constituent Assembly. Secondly, we must do this in order to avoid complete anarchy, robberies, massacres and blasphemy against shrines. Only in one case, one should not listen to anyone now or in the past - neither kings, nor rulers, nor the crowd: if they demand to renounce the faith, or desecrate shrines, or generally do obviously lawless and sinful deeds.

Now the second question: why don't we pray for kings? Because we don’t have a tsar now and we don’t have it because both tsars themselves refused to govern Russia, and it’s impossible to call them by force the name that they gave up on themselves. If our tsar had not renounced power and even languished in prison, then I would have exhorted to stand for him and die for him, but now, for the sake of obedience to him and his brother, we can no longer exalt his name as the All-Russian Sovereign. It depends on you, if you wish, to re-establish tsarist power in Russia, but in a legal manner, through reasonable elections of your representatives to the Constituent Assembly. And what will be the legal order of the elections, they will decide about it, we are no longer spiritual, but the Provisional Government3.

Shepherd and flock. Kharkov, 1917. No. 10. Part of the unofficial S. 279-281.

1 The memoir literature contains the same sermon by Archbishop Anthony, but in a different, shorter edition: “When we received the news of the abdication of the Throne of the Most Pious Emperor Nikolai Alexandrovich, we prepared, in accordance with his order, to commemorate the Most Pious Emperor Mikhail Alexandrovich. But now he too has renounced and commanded to obey the Provisional Government, and therefore, and only therefore, we commemorate the Provisional Government. Otherwise, no forces would have forced us to stop commemorating the Tsar and the Reigning House” (Antony (Khrapovtsky), Metropolitan. Letters from His Beatitude Metropolitan Anthony (Khrapovitsky). Jordanville, N.Y., Holy Trinity Monastery. 1988, p. 57).

2 to the Provisional Government.

In 2006 year in the publishing house "Indrik" Mikhail Babkin published a book "The Russian clergy and the overthrow of the monarchy in 1917. Materials and archival documents on the history of the Russian Orthodox Church", where everything is collected to a greater extent, divided into headings: these are private letters, entries in diaries, official messages, official reports, articles, sermons - all this is collected in one book. You can read.

Here are some of the most striking, in my opinion, quotes:

1. Bishop of Pereyaslavsky Innokenty Figurovsky(this is exactly the circle of people from which the Metropolitans are elected, and then the Patriarchs, i.e. this is the highest hierarchal rank), this is April 1917: “ How we all sincerely rejoiced and triumphed when God overthrew the weak-willed emperor from the throne, who fell under the power of the whips, and by the will of God, and not by the will of the people, as unbelievers falsely claim, the best people were placed at the head of our Fatherland, known to the whole world for their incorruptible honesty and nobility».

Here's another, quote #2- This Bishop of Alexandrov Mikhail Kosmodemyansky, also the spring of 1917, in the Stavropol region, he explained to church elders and vicars what was happening, for which he made a detailed speech: “ In Russian nature and in Russian life there is a complete and all-round resurrection to meet man. Christ is Risen! Christ has risen, and the slave devilish chains have fallen, the autocratic system, the despotic regime has fallen, and the fetters that have fettered the whole life of a person from the womb to the grave tomb have collapsed.". Those. in this case, the overthrow of the emperor is glorified as Easter - the resurrection of the Russian people to a new life.

There are still no Bolsheviks on the horizon as a ruling force, at this time the Bolsheviks are a small marginal party, consisting of a little more than 27 thousand people. It's just that Lenin begins to pronounce the "April Theses", he is still, in general, nobody, by and large.

This is how another hierarch of the Russian Orthodox Church, let me remind you, is very high, spoke about the so-called. Caesaropapism, because we remember that before the Bolsheviks - mind you - starting from Peter the Great, the ROC did not have a Patriarch, and the conciliar management of the Church, i.e. through the Councils of Bishops, was abolished, and it was managed by a ministry - the Holy Synod. Let me remind you that the emperor was actually the head of the Russian Orthodox Church, he sat in the Holy Synod on a special throne that was kept there for him, he headed it. Another thing is that the chief prosecutor of the Holy Synod was constantly engaged in this, i.e. minister of the Church, to put it simply. And this was called "the sin of Caesaropapism."

And who liquidated it? -Bolsheviks! First, under Lenin, the Patriarch returned, and then the second under Stalin was the Patriarch

Vladyka Andrei, Bishop of Ufa and Menzelinsky, Prince of Ukhtomsky in the world, holy new martyr, canonized. This is the summer of 1917. A very interesting article. It's called Caesaropapism Inside Out.

« Entire mountains of paper have been written about the dangers of Caesaropapism. His destructive influence on the Church as a society is beyond doubt; everyone who could still hesitate in resolving this issue, now observing church life, can make sure that Caesaropapism has put church life in its social manifestation to the brink of death. Caesaropapism was so dangerous in church life that it interfered in an area that lay completely outside its competence. If the state power decided that it was necessary to "help" the Church, then it helped only the hierarchy and thus alienated it from the believing laity; endowing the church hierarchy with non-church attributes, state power undermined church life at the root: the pastors ceased to know their flock, and the flock ceased to love their shepherds. At the most important moments of church life, the state authorities considered it necessary to break into church life and, not understanding it at all, only spoiled everything in this life, eventually shaking all its foundations. Everyone, even sincerely thinking about their belonging to the Church, ceased to understand its nature, and political good intentions began to be confused with the fidelity of St. Churches. Instead of a church sermon, our pastors began to put into use only meeting speeches. The service of God's righteousness was replaced by the service of royal truth; and then humility before the king's unrighteousness was declared a virtue».

In general, these appeals, reports, letters can be continued indefinitely. There, the only good thing that can be heard about Nicholas II is if suddenly one of the lower hierarchs of the church asks the highest question: the tsar has abdicated - what should the flock now say from the pulpit? Those. I ask for instructions. The Russian Orthodox Church, represented by its highest hierarchs, accepted the overthrow of tsarism, and, as we can see, enthusiastically accepted it.

At the meeting of the Holy Synod, which took place in early March 1917, the abdication of Emperor Nicholas II was recognized. The Holy Synod immediately took the royal throne out of the meeting room, thus symbolizing the renunciation of this very damned Caesaropapism on its part.

There is no Bolshevism yet. The Russian Orthodox Church - again, I repeat: look, all these documents have been published now - she is all happy that Nicholas II was finally overthrown.

And these now glorified saints, hierarchs and the Catholic Church against Nicholas II, in fact, she curses him, but our Orthodox Church, the direct heir of that Orthodox Church, recognizing many hierarchs from that time as saints, recognizes Nicholas II as a saint too. How this works out, I don't understand. And, mind you, I'm not saying that the Russian Orthodox Church has no right to recognize Nicholas II as a saint - this is an internal affair of the Russian Orthodox Church, this does not concern anyone at all, except for the Russian Orthodox Church, but in our country now this is taken to the state level, and now this is already for its part begins to concern all citizens. So the question is: what's going on there? This is confusion and vacillation. Why do opinions differ so much? How is it that some people cursed Nicholas II as saints, while other people, by the way, none of them have yet been canonized as saints, Nicholas II is considered a saint. It's not very clear to me personally.

I would even repeat the words of Natalya Vladimirovna Poklonskaya: this is a threat to national security, because if suddenly, God forbid, it’s not clear who we are with now?

And someone, I'm more than sure of it, will be able to find some sore point in society, which can be pressed with a finger, so that, for example, monarchists go out into the street to beat non-monarchists, or vice versa.

Does it contribute to the unity of society?

https://oper.ru/video/view.php?t=1810

“Pay attention - we are talking about the fact that the communist period in the history of Russia was criminal. And what does this mean for the citizens of Russia? The impossibility of mentioning the Supreme Commander-in-Chief on Victory Day and the bashful drapery of the Lenin Mausoleum on holidays? It goes without saying. But the main thing is elsewhere.

The main thing is this. As soon as the era of communist rule is recognized as criminal, it will immediately be necessary to recognize the results of communist rule as criminal. First of all, the victory of our communists over Nazi Nazism will be declared criminal. And this means that the results of the Second World War will need to be reviewed. For our ancestors achieved everything by criminal means. And this means that it will be necessary to revise the territorial integrity of the Russian Federation, during which it will be necessary to satisfy the "territorial claims" of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Finland, and Japan. And all the rest who wish to declare such - for example, to give the Kuban to Ukraine.

When they deal with our territories and Russia is reduced to the size of the Moscow principality, they will take care of the citizens who suffered from the "totalitarian regime". First of all, it is, of course, Bandera. That's really who suffered from the communists! And after Bandera - the Baltic "forest brothers", the Asian Basmachi - all the troubles of the accomplices of Nazism are strictly from the "totalitarian regime". All accomplices of the Nazis will have to pay multi-million dollar compensation: after all, they did a good deed, they saved humanity from the “red plague”. And, of course, this is all only after all the monuments to these "liberators", but in fact - to the criminals, are demolished.

And here the question arises: where to get money for payments to SS veterans and their relatives up to the seventh generation? Yes, we have a lot of oil and gas. Manage all this, as everyone knows for sure from Navalny, strictly "crooks and thieves." Swindlers and thieves, the International Forces of Good will be removed from power and resource management - and immediately, of course, under the tribunal, with the confiscation of all personal savings. And they will send smart Western managers instead of them, who will fix the production and put the money where it needs to be.

What are we? And we will repent. Pay and repent.”

Dmitry Goblin Puchkov. On the opposition to the "rehabilitation" of Stalinism: so that we pay and repent.

http://www.russiapost.su/archives/57556

Telegrams, letters and appeals from the laity to secular and church authorities and to the people

No. 677. Telegram to Emperor Nicholas II of the Saratov Departments of the Union of the Russian People (Dubrovinsky) and the Union named after Michael the Archangel

February 1917

Tsarskoye Selo, His Imperial Majesty Sovereign Emperor Nikolai Alexandrovich.

Great Sovereign and Sufferer for the Russian land! Your meek heart mourns, Your kind straight soul worries at the sight of the inner turmoil that has begun. Legislative institutions are setting an example of monstrous lawlessness, they are striving to wrest your paternal Tsarist power over the Russian Land. By flattery, deceit, threats of revolution, they force you to give them those supreme rights that your ancestor Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov received from the Russian land in 1613. All of Russia continues to look at You in the same way as it looked at the founders of Your glorious dynasty, as at the autocratic, unlimited Russian Tsar-Autocrat. Only blind people and conscious haters and contemptators of the Russian people desire a change in the state system in a foreign fashion, they desire it in order to split the great Russian State, in order to subordinate it to foreigners and cosmopolitans.

There is no doubt that the change of the autocratic system to a parliamentary one is a betrayal of Russia. Great Sovereign! We bow to the earth and tearfully implore You: do not lay off Yourself, however, the heaviest royal burden, do not change the will of the people, expressed in their oath to the Tsar-Autocrat.

By authorization of the meeting of the Saratov Provincial Department of the Dubrovinsky Union of the Russian people

Department Chairman G.I. Karpenko, priest M. Platonov. Chairman of the People's Union of Mikhail the Archangel Grishin, No. 678. Telegram to the first-present member of the Holy Synod, Metropolitan Vladimir (Bogoyavlensky) of Kyiv, members of the Council of the Yekaterinoslav Department of the Union of the Russian People

Pg. His Eminence Metropolitan Vladimir.
The gates of hell will not overcome the Church of Christ, but the fate of Orthodoxy in our fatherland is inextricably linked with the fate of the tsarist autocracy. Remembering on the Sunday of Orthodoxy the church-state merits of the Russian hierarchs, filially we dare to turn to Your Eminence and other first hierarchs of the Russian Church with unanimous blessings and advice in the spirit of peace and love to strengthen the autocratic Sovereign to defend the sacred rights of autocracy, handed to him by God through the voice of the people and the blessing of the Church, against which the same seditious who attempt to attack our holy Orthodox Church.

Your Eminence spiritual children - members of the Council of the Yekaterinoslav department of the Union of the Russian People.

Chairman V.A. samples.

RGIA. F. 796. On. 204. 1917. 1 department. Vtable D. 54. L. 29-31. Script;

No. 680. Telegram M.V. Rodzianko of the nobility of the Kazan province

The Kazan nobility welcomes the new constitutional government, believes and hopes that it, led by the monarch, will lead great Russia to a bright future, an unconditional victory over a stubborn enemy, and will bring peace and order to the life of the people. Provincial marshal of the nobility Sergei Tolstoy-Miloslavsky. RGIA. F. 1278. On. 54. 1917. D. 1272. L. 12. Original.

Holy Governing Synod.

Your Holiness. God-loving Fathers and Archpastors!

Raise your voice: ask the State Duma and the Provisional Government not to violate the people's conscience by an accidental majority of the Constituent Assembly. Let the Russian Orthodox people, by a nationwide vote (plebiscite), first express their will, what to be, the Tsar or the Republic. After all, only one Russian Orthodox people, the collector of land, has the right to do this, and the Constituent Assembly should have one task: based on the already expressed will of the Russian people, to work out new fundamental laws.

Chairman of the Union Yves[...].

No. 682. Letter to Archbishop Nikon (Rozhdestvensky) from Tomsk University student I.A. Zimina

Your Eminence, Most Reverend Vladyka! I appeal to you with a request to explain to me how to look at everything that has happened in our state. Firstly, I am concerned about the question of how the clergy of all Russia, who so strongly defended the autocracy, now recognize the Provisional Government and remember it in their prayers. How to explain such a change in view of the form of government? Today the clergy pray for [emperor] Nicholas, tomorrow for the new government, etc. What is the dependence of church views on the authorities? Doesn't this prove the absence of personal convictions among the clergy? Did the clergy really not know that G.E. was hiding behind the autocracy? Rasputin? I don't think it could be. Secondly, why did this clergy always try to conform to the spirit of power. Where did the zealots of the first golden ages of Christianity disappear to? Or has the Church gone astray? But no, it can't be. I believe. Then, is it necessary to separate the Church from the state? And finally, what tasks are now facing the clergy in free Russia? Is not the freedom won the image of the freedom of the first Christian centuries? I have addressed competent persons here, but they have not satisfactorily spoken to me. I am writing to you because I have known you for a long time as the archpastor and editor of the Trinity Word, which I often read. I deeply apologize for the anxiety, but as a believing Christian, I could not remain silent, for now the time has come to speak and defend the Truths of Orthodoxy. Many people ask me the above questions and, of course, my meager answers are not satisfied.

I humbly ask Your Eminence not to refuse to answer me and indicate the relevant literature on these issues.

I ask for your blessings and prayers.

Student I.A. Zimin.

My address: Tomsk. University. Student I.A. Zimin.

No. 683. Letter to the members of the Holy Synod of a group of Orthodox Christians

March 1917
We are Orthodox Christians, we sincerely ask you to explain to us in the newspaper Russkoye Slovo what does the oath given by us for allegiance to Tsar Nikolai Alexandrovich mean in intercession before the Lord God? We are talking that if this oath is worth nothing, then the new oath to the new Tsar will be worth nothing.

Is this true, and how should we understand all this? We turned to our brother, an intelligent man, for clarification, but he sent us neither two nor one and a half, which you yourself will see from the letters of this man, which we send to the GOVERNING SYNOD for judgment.

It is desirable for us not to solve this matter ourselves, as our acquaintance advises us, but by the GOVERNING SYNOD, so that everyone understands this as it should be understood without disagreement. Because it became impossible to live from disagreement and there is no order. The Jews say that the oath is nonsense and deceit, that it is possible without an oath, the priests are silent, and the laity each in his own way, but this is not good. Again, they began to say that there is no God at all, and the churches will soon be closed as unnecessary. And we, in our own way, think why close the church to someone else to live better. Now the Tsar has been destroyed, it has become bad, and if the churches are covered up, it will be even worse, but we need it to be better. Take the trouble, OUR HOLY FATHERS, to explain to everyone equally how to deal with the old

Oath and with the one that you take za-tavut? Which oath should be dearer to God first or second? Because the Tsar did not die, but is alive in captivity. And is it right that all the churches will close? Where do we then pray to the Lord God? Is it possible to go to the Jews in one company and pray with them? Because now all their power has become and with which they boast over us. If things continue like this, then this is not good, and we are very unhappy.

No. 687. From the “Message to the Most Holy All-Russian Council” by peasant Mikhail Evfimovich Nikonov, Semendyaevsky Epiphany parish of the village of Kalug, Kalyazinsky district, Tver province

HIS Eminence Archbishop Seraphim of Tver and Kashin
MESSAGE TO THE HOLY ALL-RUSSIAN COUNCIL

Most Reverend Vladyka, I ask for your hierarchal blessing to convey this message to the Most Holy All-Russian Council.

Holy Fathers and Brothers! [...] We think that the Holy Synod made an irreparable mistake, that the bishops went towards the revolution. We do not know this reason. Is it fear for the sake of Judea? Either at the inclination of their hearts, or for some good reason, but nevertheless their act in the believers produced a great temptation, and not only among the Orthodox, but even among the Old Believers. Forgive me for touching on this question - it is not our business to discuss it: this is the business of the Council, I only put on the face of the people's judgment. There are such speeches among the people that, allegedly by the act of the Synod, many sane people have been misled, as well as many among the clergy. At parish and deanery meetings, what we heard - even our ears can not believe it. The spiritual fathers, tempted by the charm of freedom and equality, demanded that the hierarchs they did not like be removed from the chairs they occupied, and elect them at will. The psalmists demanded the same equality in order not to obey their superiors. This is how absurd they have reached, emphasizing the satanic idea of ​​revolution. The Orthodox Russian people are confident that the Most Holy Council, in the interests of the Holy Mother of our Church, the Fatherland and the Father of the Tsar, impostors and all traitors who have scolded the oath, will be anathematized and cursed with their satanic idea of ​​​​revolution. And the Most Holy Council will indicate to its flock who should take the helm of government in the great State. It must be assumed that the one who is in captivity, and if he does not wish to reign over us as traitors, subject to the parable of the Lord about a man of high rank, he will indicate to whom to take the reign of the State; so it makes sense. The act of Holy Coronation and anointing by the Holy Chrism of our kings in the Assumption Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin, who received from God the power to govern the people and give an answer to the One, but not to the constitution or to some parliament of gathered not quite clean people, capable only of devices of seditious arts obsessed with the lust of lust for power ...

All of the above that I wrote here is not only my personal composition, but the voice of the Orthodox Russian people, a hundred million rural Russia, in whose midst I am.

Peasant Mikhail Evfimovich Nikonov.

.No. 688. From the speech of Priest Vladimir Vostokov at a meeting of the Local Council of the Russian Orthodox Church

Too much has been said in this hall about the horrors experienced, and if all of them were listed and described, then this huge hall could be filled with books. So I won't talk about horror anymore. I want to point to the root from which these horrors were created. I understand our present meeting as a council of spiritual doctors over a dangerously ill mother - the motherland. When doctors come to treat a patient, they do not stop at the last manifestations of the disease, but look deep into the root cause of the disease. So in this case, you need to find the root of the disease experienced by the homeland. From this pulpit, in front of the altar of the Enlightener of Russia, St. Prince Vladimir, I testify with my priestly conscience that the Russian people have been deceived, and so far no one has told him the full truth. The moment has come when the Council, as the only legitimate and truly elected assembly by the people, must tell the people the holy truth, fearing no one but God alone. [...] The pushing of the historical train off the track took place at the end of February 1917, which was facilitated primarily by the Jewish-Masonic world organization, which threw the slogans of socialism, slogans of illusory freedom into the masses. [...] The Council must say that in February-March a violent coup was carried out, which for an Orthodox Christian is perjury, requiring purification by repentance. All of us, starting with Your Holiness and ending with me, the last member of the Council, should kneel before God and ask Him to forgive us our connivance in the development of evil teachings and violence in the country. Only after nationwide sincere repentance will the country be reconciled and revived, and God will exalt His mercy and grace to us. And if we only anathematize, without repentance, without declaring the truth to the people, then they will say to us, not without reason: “And you are guilty of leading the country to crimes for which anathema is now being distributed. With your cowardice, you condoned the development of evil and hesitated to call the facts and phenomena of state life by their real names. [...] Pastors of the Church, protect the soul of the people! And if we don’t tell the people the full truth, if we don’t call them right now to nationwide repentance for certain sins, then we will leave this conciliar chamber as traitors and traitors to the Church and Motherland. I am so unshakably convinced of what I am now saying that I would not hesitate to repeat the same thing if I were to die now. It is necessary to revive in the minds of the people the idea of ​​pure, central power, clouded by the all-Russian deceit. We overthrew the king and submitted to the Jews! (Voices of members of the Council: True, true ..,). The only salvation of the Russian people is the Orthodox Russian wise tsar. Only through the election of an Orthodox, wise, Russian tsar can Russia be put on a good, historical path and a good order restored. Until we have an Orthodox-wise tsar, we will not have order, but people's blood will flow, and centrifugal forces will divide a single people into hostile groups, until our historical train is completely broken or until foreign peoples enslave us as a crowd incapable of an independent state life. [...] We must all unite in one Christian family under the banner of the Holy Life-Giving Cross and under the guidance of His Holiness the Patriarch to say that socialism, which allegedly calls for brotherhood, is clearly an evil anti-Christian phenomenon, that the Russian people have now become the plaything of the Jewish-Masonic organizations, behind which the Antichrist is already visible in the form of an international king, that, playing with false freedom, he forges Jewish-Masonic slavery for himself. If we say this honestly and openly, then I don’t know what will happen to us, but I know that Russia will be alive then!

Acts of the Holy Council ... T. 6. Act 67. M., 1996. S. 41-44.

orthodox the clergy, who were on the staff of the military department and fed the army and navy.

The tradition of the participation of clergy in military campaigns developed in Russia soon after the establishment of Christianity, the institution of the military clergy was formed in the 18th century. The first document in which a military priest is mentioned in Russian. army, - the charter "Teaching and cunning of the military structure of infantry people" of 1647. One of the chapters of the charter determines the salary for military ranks and the regimental priest. One of the earliest documents testifying to the presence of priests in the navy is a letter from Admiral K.I. one hundred brigantines. According to the "Painting", 7 priests were required for 7 galleys, 3 priests for 100 brigantines.

The formation of the institute of the military clergy is associated with the reforms of Peter I Alekseevich. In the "Military Regulations", approved on March 30, 1716 (PSZ. T. 5. No. 3006), ch. "On the clergy" defined the legal status of priests in the army, their duties and main forms of activity. The "military charter" established the position of a field chief priest; it was introduced in wartime among the ranks of the general staff under a field marshal or general commanding an army. The field chief priest controlled all the regimental priests, transmitted the orders of the commander regarding the time of worship and thanksgiving services, resolved conflict situations between military clergy, and punished the guilty.

In Apr. In 1717, by royal decree, it was established “in the Russian fleet to keep 39 priests on ships and other military courts,” initially it was white clergy. Since 1719, the practice of appointing monastics to the fleet was established (although sometimes clergy from the white clergy were also allowed). Prior to the establishment of the Holy Synod, the right to appoint hieromonks for service in the fleet belonged to the Alexander Nevsky Mon-ryu and its rector, Archim. Theodosius (Yanovsky; later Archbishop of Novgorod). In the "Marine Charter" (PSZ. Vol. 6. No. 3485), approved on January 13. 1720, the rights, duties and financial situation of the naval clergy were determined, at the head of which, during the summer navigation or military campaign, was the “initial priest” (chief hieromonk), as a rule, from the Revel squadron of the Baltic Fleet. The first chief hieromonk was Gabriel (Buzhinsky; later Bishop of Ryazan). Separate priests were assigned only to large ships - ships and frigates. On March 15, 1721, an instruction was approved that regulated the activities of ship priests (“Points on Hieromonks in the Navy”). Based on the "Points", a special oath was developed for the military and naval clergy, which differed from the oath of parish priests.

Regimental priests and naval hieromonks were obliged to send divine services, perform rites, admonish the seriously ill with the Holy Mysteries, help doctors, and also “watch diligently” the behavior of the troops, moreover, supervision of confession and communion of the military was one of the main duties, but there was a firm warning: “Do not enter into any business anymore, below that, according to your will and predilection, to start.”

In 1721, the appointment of clergymen to the army and navy came under the jurisdiction of the Holy Synod, which instructed the bishops to determine from their dioceses the necessary number of hieromonks for recruiting V. and m.d. In peacetime, it was subordinate to the diocesan bishops. On May 7, 1722, the Synod placed Archim. Lawrence (Gorka; later Bishop of Vyatka). In the instructions of the Synod on June 13, 1797 (PSZ. Vol. 24. No. 18), in connection with the increase in the scope of duties of field chief priests, they were granted the right to elect divisional deans to help manage the clergy in wartime.

Imp. Pavel I Petrovich by decree of April 4. In 1800, he united the management of the army and navy clergy under the command of the chief priest of the army and navy, the position of which became permanent (it existed both in wartime and in peacetime). The chief priest of the army and navy was a member of the Holy Synod. After the death of Paul I, the circle of rights and duties of the chief priest of the army and navy was several. times reviewed. In 1806, his department was put in the same position as the diocesan administrations.

Jan 27 In 1812, the “Institution for the management of a large active army” was adopted (PSZ. T. 32. No. 24975). The composition of the ranks of the General Staff of each army introduced the position of field chief priest, intermediate between the chief priest of the army and navy and the senior dean (the position was introduced in 1807). The field chief priest performed his duties in peacetime and wartime, during the war, the clergy of hospitals located in areas declared under martial law, the deans and clergy of the fleet, connected with the army under the control of one commander in chief, the clergy of churches in those places , where the main apartment was located during the movement of the army. Field chief priests were usually appointed by the Holy Synod on the proposal of the chief priest of the army and navy and the emperor. In each army, the position of senior dean was introduced - an intermediary between the military authorities, the field chief priest and the clergy of the army. In 1812, for individual corps as part of the headquarters of the corps, the positions of corps priests (from 1821 corps deans) were established, who led the clergy entrusted to them as field chief priests of the army in the field. Under the authority of senior deans and corps priests were army (divisional), guards and navy deans.

In 1815 imp. the decree established the position of chief priest of the General Staff (since 1830 chief priest of the General Staff and a separate Guards Corps, from 1844 chief priest of the Guards and Grenadier Corps), which had equal rights with the position of chief priest of the army and navy. The synod spoke out against the division of the administration of the military clergy. The appointment to both positions remained with the emperor, but he approved the chief priest of the army and navy from candidates nominated by the Holy Synod. Chief priests of the General Staff, then the Guards and Grenadier Corps in 1826-1887. also headed the court clergy in the rank of protopresbyters, were imp. confessors, rectors of the court cathedral of the Winter Palace in St. Petersburg and the Cathedral of the Annunciation in the Moscow Kremlin. Since 1853, the chief priests received the right to appoint and dismiss regimental priests without prior permission from the Holy Synod. From 1858, chief priests were called chief priests.

The first chief priest of the army and navy was Prot. Pavel Ozeretskovsky (1800-1807), who used the imp. Paul I with great influence and relative independence from the Synod. On May 9, 1800, all military ranks were instructed to treat spiritual matters with the chief priest, bypassing the consistory, for which an office was formed. In 1800, an army seminary was created, in which the children of the army clergy studied at public expense (closed in 1819).

In the 1st floor. 19th century the salaries of the military clergy increased, pensions and benefits were introduced for the elderly and sick military priests, their widows and children. Among the chief priests of the Guards and Grenadier Corps, Protopre. Vasily Bazhanov (1849-1883). He initiated the creation of a library at the temples of his department, supplied them with books. In St. Petersburg, he arranged a Nikolaev almshouse for the elderly clergy of the spiritual department, as well as for their widows and orphans. By his order, houses were built for clergy in a number of regiments, parish charities and brotherhoods were organized at some churches. In 1879, the Charitable Society for the Care of the Poor with the clerical rank of the department of the chief priest of the army and navy was established, he was taken under the patronage of led. kng. Maria Feodorovna (later Empress). Shelters, Mariinsky in Kronstadt and Pokrovsky in St. Petersburg, were kept at the expense of the ob-va.

Many are known. examples of the courage shown by the clergy during the Patriotic War of 1812. The first among the clergy, the Knight of the Order of St. George of the 4th degree was the priest of the 19th Chasseur regiment Vasily Vasilkovsky, who participated in the battles near Vitebsk, near Borodino, near Maloyaroslavets, he was several. once wounded, but remained in the ranks. Priest of the Moscow Grenadier Regiment Fr. Miron of Orleans in the Battle of Borodino was under heavy cannon fire ahead of the grenadier column, was wounded. In the 19th century the clergy participated in the Caucasian wars. In 1816 the position of Corps Priest of a separate Georgian Corps was introduced (from 1840 Chief Priest of a separate Caucasian Corps, from 1858 Chief Priest of the Caucasian Army), in 1890 the position was abolished. A number of heroic deeds of field priests are known during the Crimean War of 1853-1856. Particular courage on the battlefield was shown in March 1854 by the priest of the Mogilev regiment, Fr. John Pyatibokov, who raised the soldiers to attack after the death of officers, he was among the first to climb the walls of the tour. fortifications and was shell-shocked. Prot. John was awarded the Order of St. George of the 4th degree and granted the nobility with a letter. The state took care of the material support of the priests during the war, and after its end - on the appointment of benefits for the losses incurred, on the issuance of established salaries for shortened pensions and awards for service in the army.

In con. 19th century the heyday of the institution of the military clergy began. In 1888, all the military and naval clergy were subordinated to the chief priest of the guards, grenadiers, army and navy. On July 24, 1887, the regulation on new service rights and salaries for the maintenance of the military clergy (3 PSZ. Vol. 7. No. 4659) was approved, since 1889 the provision was extended to the naval clergy. According to the regulation, the chief priest of the guard, grenadier, army and navy was granted the rights of a lieutenant general, the chief priest of the Caucasian Military District - the rights of a major general, the regular archpriest-dean - the rights of a colonel, the supernumerary archpriest and the priest-dean - the rights of a lieutenant colonel, the priest - the rights a captain or company commander, a deacon - the rights of a lieutenant, a full-time clergyman from a spiritual rank - the rights of a lieutenant. Instead of the previously existing heterogeneous (very modest) salaries, a salary corresponding to officer ranks was established. The clergy of the military department of the European districts were given the right to periodic increases in salary for length of service, while the priests were forbidden to charge soldiers for services, which was practiced earlier.

On June 12, 1890, the regulation “On the management of churches and the clergy of the military and naval departments” (3 PSZ. Vol. 10. No. 6924) was issued, in accordance with the Crimea, instead of the position of chief priest of the guard, grenadier, army and navy, the position of protopresbyter was established in. and m. d. His candidacy was elected by the Synod on the proposal of the Minister of War and approved by the emperor. In matters of church administration, the archpriest received instructions from the Synod, and in matters of the military department, from the Minister of War. He had the right to personal reports to the emperor, and was equal in rank to the archbishop and lieutenant general. Under the archpriest, there was a spiritual board, which consisted of the presence and the office and corresponded to the consistory under the diocesan bishop. The positions of divisional and navy deans appointed by the archpriest, who in peacetime were subordinate to local bishops, were retained. The protopresbyter also appointed regimental and naval (from hieromonks and widowed priests) priests. In wartime, field chief priests were appointed in each army. The military clergy continued to be subordinate not only to the ecclesiastical, but also to the military authorities, which in a number of cases created difficulties, since the legal spheres were not clearly demarcated.

After the publication of the "Regulations" in 1890, special attention began to be paid to deanery in the performance of worship and the religious and moral education of the troops: sermons, extra-liturgical conversations and religious and moral readings, teaching the Law of God in regimental training teams. Military priests began to organize parochial schools not only for soldiers, but also for the local population. In wartime, they were charged with the duty to help with the dressing of the wounded, perform the funeral of the dead and arrange their burial. In addition, like other clergymen, they kept and kept documentation: inventories of regimental churches and their property, income and expense books, clergy's statements, confession lists, parish registers, etc., and compiled reports on the morale of the troops.

Since 1890, the railway has been published. "Bulletin of the Military Clergy" (in 1911-1917 "Bulletin of the Military and Naval Clergy", in 1917 "Church and Public Thought" (Kyiv), in 2004 the publication was resumed). Since 1889, regular meetings of military shepherds, revision trips of the protopresbyter of the army and navy through the military districts were held. Since 1899, the places of priests in the military department were provided mainly to persons with an academic education. In 1891, the department of the military clergy consisted of 569 clergy and clergy (Catholic chaplains, rabbis, Lutherans and evangelical preachers, mullahs, who were subordinate to the Department of Spiritual Affairs of Foreign Confessions of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, also served in the army and navy).

During the Russo-Japanese. wars of 1904-1905 The regulation "On the field command of the troops of the Russian army in wartime" dated February 26 came into force. 1890 (3 PSZ. T. 10. No. 6609). In the Manchurian army, the post of field chief priest was introduced - the head of all the clergy in the army and the rector of the church of the main apartment. The war was marked by the heroic service of both military and naval priests, some of them died. Among the priests of this war, famous is Mitrofan Srebryansky (later Schema-archim. Rev. Sergius), who served with the 51st Chernigov Dragoon Regiment. Prot. Stefan Shcherbakovsky during the battle of Tyurenchen 18 Apr. In 1904, together with the 11th East Siberian Regiment, he went on the attack twice with a cross in his hands, was shell-shocked, despite his serious condition, admonished the dying soldiers. For his courage, he was awarded the Order of St. George 4th degree. Aug 1 1904, during the naval battle in the Korean Strait, the ship's priest of the cruiser "Rurik" hierom. Alexy (Okoneshnikov) inspired the crew of the sinking cruiser. Jerome. Alexy, along with the surviving sailors, was captured, as the clergyman was released, he took the banner out of captivity and delivered a report on the death of the cruiser. He was awarded a gold pectoral cross on the St. George ribbon. The same award was awarded for the Battle of Tsushima on May 14, 1905 by the ship's priests, hieromonk. Porfiry (cruiser "Oleg"), Hierom. George (cruiser "Aurora").

After the end of the war, changes were made to the regulation “On the management of churches and the clergy of the military and naval departments”, in wartime the positions of the chief priest of the armies of the front, priests at the headquarters of the armies were introduced. In 1910, a funeral fund for employees was established under the department of the military clergy. In the same year, the Synod adopted a mobilization plan, which provided for the conscription of clergy during the period of mobilization of the army in wartime states and in exchange for those who had died during the hostilities. Warehouses of religions were to be created in the armies and navies. and propaganda literature.

On July 1-11, 1914, the 1st congress was held in St. Petersburg. and m.d., 40 priests from the troops and 9 from the fleets were present at Krom. At the meetings of the sections, in particular, the problems of relations with the regimental authorities, the behavior of the clergy in the conditions of hostilities were considered, during the battle the place of the priest was determined at the advanced dressing station. The congress developed and adopted a memo-instruction to the military priest.

During the First World War, at the Headquarters of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief, the field office of Protopresbyter v. and ppm and a warehouse of church literature. The mobilization schedule of 1910 began to operate, thousands of parishes were called to recruit new regiments with clergy. Before the war, there were 730 priests in the department of the protopresbyter, during the war more than 5 thousand priests served in the army, they not only performed their direct duties, but also taught the soldiers to read and write, read letters from their relatives to them, and helped to compose response letters. Chaplains, rabbis, and mullahs also served in the military districts. In a circular on 3 Nov. 1914 Protopr. Georgy Shavelsky turned to the Orthodox. priests with a call to "avoid as much as possible any religious disputes and denunciations of other faiths." In 1916, new positions were established: army preachers in each army, chief priests of the Baltic and Black Sea fleets. In the same year, under the jurisdiction of Protopresbyter v. and M. D. was referred to the question of the Uniates in Galicia and Bukovina, occupied by Russian troops. Protopr. George preferred to meet the spiritual needs of the Uniates and not require them to join the Orthodox Church. Churches. By the definition of the Synod on January 13-20. In 1916, a commission was created "to meet the religious and moral needs of Russian prisoners of war", which could send priests to Austria-Hungary and Germany.

During the war, several Bishops filed petitions to take priestly places in the army and navy. The first of them was Bishop Dmitrovsky. Trifon (Turkestanov), who served in 1914-1916. regimental priest and divisional dean. Bishop of Taurida Dimitri (later Anthony (Abashidze)) several months in 1914 he served as a ship's priest in the Black Sea Fleet.

One of the first in 1914, for his courage, was awarded a gold pectoral cross on the St. George ribbon, the priest of the 58th Prague Regiment, Partheny Kholodny. In 1914, the priest of the 294th Chernigov Infantry Regiment, John Sokolov, rescued the regimental banner from captivity. The feat of the priest of the 9th Kazan Dragoon Regiment Vasily Spichek, who raised the regiment to attack, is known. The priest was awarded the Order of St. George 4th degree. Igum had military awards. Nestor (Anisimov; later Metropolitan of Kirovograd), who voluntarily served at the front, organized and led a sanitary detachment. During the entire war, more than 30 military priests died and died from wounds, more than 400 were injured and shell-shocked, more than 100 were captured, which significantly exceeded the losses in previous wars.

In 1915, the Supreme Commander-in-Chief led. book. Nikolai Nikolaevich (“We must bow at the feet of the military clergy for their excellent work in the army” - quoted from: Shavelsky, vol. 2, p. 102). However, the influence of the clergy weakened in conditions when the military priests, representing the state. apparatus, performed the role of spiritual authorities in the army, and especially with the approach of the revolution. Gene. A. I. Denikin wrote that “the clergy failed to cause a religious upsurge among the troops” (Denikin A. I. Essays on Russian Troubles: In 3 vols. M., 2003. T. 1. S. 105).

After the February Revolution of 1917, the military clergy continued to be active. 2nd All-Russian Congress in. and m.d., held in Mogilev on July 1-11, 1917, was welcomed by the Supreme Commander-in-Chief Gen. A. A. Brusilov. In the spirit of the times, the congress established the electivity of all military religious posts. As a result of a secret ballot on July 9, Archpriest. G. Shavelsky retained his post. Jan 16 In 1918, the institution of the military clergy was abolished by order No. 39 of the People's Commissariat for Military Affairs (SU. 1918. No. 16. P. 249).

Military priests remained in the White Army. Nov 27 1918 Denikin appointed G. Shavelsky as Protopresbyter of the Volunteer Army and Navy. The troops of Admiral A.V. Kolchak had more than 1 thousand military priests, the gene. P. N. Wrangel - more than 500. March 31, 1920 Bishop of Sevastopol. Veniamin (Fedchenkov), at the request of Wrangel, accepted the position of manager in. and m.d. with the title of bishop of the army and navy. He represented the Church in the Wrangel government, traveled to the front to perform divine services, provided reception and accommodation for refugee clergy. After the capture of the Crimea by the Red Army in November. 1920 Bishop Benjamin, together with parts of the Volunteer Army, emigrated to Istanbul and continued to patronize the Rus. military clergy in Turkey, Bulgaria, Greece, the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes. On June 3, 1923, by the decision of the foreign Synod of Bishops, he was relieved of his duties as a manager of c. and m.d.

In the 90s. 20th century The Russian Church again began to take care of the servicemen. In 1995, for these purposes, the Synodal Department of the Moscow Patriarchate for Cooperation with the Armed Forces and Law Enforcement Institutions was established. The gatherings of priests who minister to military units have resumed (they were held in 2003, 2005).

Jerome. Savva (Molchanov)

Temples of the military spiritual department

In the XVIII century. for the permanent deployment of military units, plots began to be allocated on the outskirts of cities. Barracks, outbuildings, and churches were erected on this land. One of the first military churches was the Cathedral of the Transfiguration of the Savior of the Entire Guard in St. Petersburg, founded on July 9, 1743 (architect D. A. Trezzini, rebuilt in 1829 after a fire by V. P. Stasov). Last in the capital, a cathedral of all artillery was erected in the name of St. Sergius of Radonezh (consecrated July 5, 1800), c. vmch. George the Victorious in the building of the General Staff on Palace Square. (February 1, 1822), etc. Initially, military temples did not have a unified system of subordination. 26 Sept. In 1826, a decree of the Synod followed, transferring them to the military spiritual department.

Cathedral of the Holy Trinity in St. Petersburg. Archite. V.P. Stasov. 1835 Photograph. Beginning 20th century (Archive of the Central Scientific Center "Orthodox Encyclopedia")

Cathedral of the Holy Trinity in St. Petersburg. Archite. V.P. Stasov. 1835 Photograph. Beginning 20th century (Archive of the Central Scientific Center "Orthodox Encyclopedia")

The temples of the military clergy were divided into permanent and mobile. The first were erected at regiments (or smaller military formations), garrisons, fortresses, military schools, hospitals, prisons, military cemeteries. Land and ship churches stood out among the marching churches. The construction of temples was entrusted to the commission for the construction of barracks under the Military Council. In 1891 there were 407 military and naval temples.

In 1900, Minister of War A.N. Kuropatkin submitted a report to the emperor with a proposal to allocate funds for the construction of new churches at military units, to develop a type of military church focused on large capacity and economy. The model for military temples was approved on 1 Dec. 1901 According to him, a separate building with a capacity of 900 people was to be built for the church. for a regimental temple or 400 people. for the battalion. For the needs of church construction, the military department allocated 200 thousand rubles in 1901, in 1902 and 1903. 450 thousand rubles each A total of 51 churches were built between 1901 and 1906. One of the first was laid the church of the 148th infantry regiment of the Caspian Sea in the name of the Navy. Anastasia the Solver in Nov. Peterhof (consecrated June 5, 1903). In 1902-1913. The Kronstadt Naval Cathedral was erected in the name of St. Nicholas the Wonderworker - a grandiose temple-monument to Russian sailors. A prayer service for the start of construction was served on 1 Sept. 1902 right. arch. John of Kronstadt in the presence of the chief commander of the Kronstadt port, Vice Admiral S. O. Makarov. In 1913, there were 603 military churches, according to the maritime department - 30 coastal churches, 43 ship churches, including at the floating military prison in Sevastopol. Each military unit and each military educational institution had its own temple holiday and heavenly patron. In military churches, battle banners, weapons and armor of famous military leaders were kept, the memory of soldiers who died in battles was immortalized.

On July 15, 1854, in Sevastopol, according to the project of K. A. Ton, the Admiralty Cathedral was laid in the name of Equal Ap. book. Vladimir. Due to the outbreak of the Crimean War, work was interrupted, the lower church was consecrated in 1881, the upper one - in 1888. The cathedral is the tomb of the Russian. admirals M. P. Lazarev, V. A. Kornilov, V. I. Istomin, P. S. Nakhimov. From 1907 to 1918, his rector and dean of the coastal teams of the Black Sea Fleet was schmch. arch. Roman Medved. In the Cathedral of the Life Guards of the Izmailovsky Regiment in the name of the Holy Trinity (founded in St. Petersburg on May 13, 1828, architect Stasov) trophy tours were kept. banners captured during the Russian tour. wars of 1877-1878 In 1886, a column of Glory, cast from 108 rounds, was installed in front of the cathedral. guns. In 1911 in St. Petersburg, near the Naval Cadet Corps, a memorial church of the Savior on the Waters was erected. Boards with the names of sailors (from admiral to sailor) who died during the Russo-Japanese era were fixed on the walls. wars, and the names of ships. Near the iconostasis, they installed the rescued banner of the Kwantung naval crew that defended Port Arthur.

Camping portable churches, as a rule, were spacious tents with a throne, an antimension, a folding iconostasis and an icon - the patroness of a part. During the Russo-Japanese. wars of 1904-1905 at the headquarters of the commander of the Manchurian army, located in a special train, there was a church car - the residence of the field chief priest. In 1916, the Committee for the construction of movable temples at the front was formed. Floating churches were erected on the Caspian and Black seas. On the front line, divine services were often held in the open air.

Divine services in the army and navy were performed, as a rule, on Sundays and holidays, in the so-called. highly solemn days: on the days of the name day of members of the imp. families, on the anniversaries of the victories of the Russian. weapons and on holidays of military units and ships. Attendance at services was mandatory for all personnel of the Orthodox troops. confession, which was reinforced by special orders of the commanders of military units.

AT . M . Kotkov

Military Clergy Awards

Since 1797, by decrees of the emperor, representatives of the clergy began to be awarded orders for special merits. Military clergy received the Order of St. Anna, equal to book. Vladimir, St. George and gold pectoral crosses on the St. George ribbon. The last 2 awards were given only for military distinctions. In 1855, the military clergy received the right to attach swords to orders awarded for distinction in a combat situation, which used to be the privilege of officers.

According to imp. Decree of 13 Aug. In 1806, all presentations of military clergy for awards were made through military authorities. The spiritual authorities could only express their opinion. The clergy were presented for awards on a common basis with the military. In 1881, the highest representatives of the c.v. and m.d.

The merits for which a military priest could receive most of the possible awards were not stipulated by any normative acts. The exception was the statutes of the orders of St. Vladimir and St. Anna. In the statute of the Order of St. Anna in the edition of 1833 provided for the rewarding of clergy for "admonitions and examples for regiments in battles", for preserving the health and morals of soldiers (if "for three years in a row there are no guilty of violating military discipline and peace among the inhabitants, and the number fugitives will not exceed in complexity one person out of a hundred”). The right to award the Order of St. Vladimir of the 4th degree for 25 years of service with participation in military campaigns and 35 years on a par with officer ranks in peacetime. This practice was also extended to deacons, if they were honored to receive the Order of St. Anna 3rd degree.

In wartime, the deadlines required by law for receiving the next award (at least 3 years) were canceled. The presence of orders gave the right to promotion, to receive a higher salary, to determine daughters as wives. educational institutions at the expense of the capital of orders. Orders were removed from a clergyman deprived of his dignity.

The number of awards to the clergy, including the military, has grown steadily since the end. 18th century until 1917 until ser. 19th century Orders, all degrees of which granted the right to hereditary noble dignity, were a rare award for a priest. After the Order of St. Anna of the 2nd and 3rd degree ceased to bring the named advantage, rewarding them began to be practiced more widely. For example, in Russian-Japanese. war, some clergymen were awarded the Order of St. Anna 2nd and 3rd degree and St. Vladimir 4th degree. More rare awards for military clergy remained the Order of St. George and a golden pectoral cross on the St. George ribbon.

During the Russo-Japanese. war, military priests received orders of St. Anna 2nd class with swords - c. 70, without swords - c. 30, 3rd class with swords - c. 70, without swords - c. 80; St. Vladimir 3rd class without swords - c. 10, 4th class with swords - c. 25, without swords - c. 25. During the First World War, until March 1917, military chaplains received the orders of St. Anna 1st class with and without swords - c. 10, 2nd degree with swords - more than 300, without swords - more than 200, 3rd degree with swords - more than 300, without swords - approx. 500; St. Vladimir 3rd degree with swords - more than 20, without swords - approx. 20, 4th degree with swords - more than 150, without swords - approx. 100. Order of St. George from the beginning 19th century to March 1917, 16 people were awarded. Until 1903, at least 170 people received a golden pectoral cross on the St. George ribbon, for Russian-Japanese. war - 82 people, from 1914 to March 1917 - 244 people. OK. 10 clergy were awarded the Order of St. George and the soldier's St. George's Cross from March 1917 to March 1918. At least 13 people were awarded the pectoral cross on the St. George ribbon. in the armies of Kolchak, Denikin, Wrangel. For clergy granted for distinction in the First World War and the Civil War, the awards were approved by the Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia Mansvetov (1827-1832), Protopr. Vasily Ivanovich Kutnevich (1832-1865), prot. Mikhail Izmailovich Bogoslovsky (1865-1871), prot. Pyotr Evdokimovich Pokrovsky (1871-1888). Chief priests (chief priests) of the General Staff, Guards and Grenadier Corps: Prot. Alexy Topogritsky (1815-1826), archpriest. Nikolai Vasilyevich Muzovsky (1826-1848), archpriest. Vasily Borisovich Bazhanov (1849-1883). Protopresbyters Army and Navy: Alexander Alekseevich Zhelobovsky (1888-1910), Evgeny Petrovich Akvilonov (1910-1911), Georgy Ivanovich Shavelsky (1911-1917).

Arch.: RGIA. F. 806 [Spiritual government under the archpriest of the military and naval clergy]; RGVIA. F. 2044. Op. 1. D. 8-9, 18-19, 28; F. 2082. Op. 1. D. 7; GARF. F. 3696. Op. 2. D. 1, 3, 5.

Lit .: Nevzorov N . East Essay on the management of the clergy of the Military Department in Russia. SPb., 1875; Barsov T . AT . About the management of Russian. military clergy. SPb., 1879; Bogolyubov A . BUT . Essays from the history of the management of the military and naval clergy in biographies ch. his priests during the period from 1800 to 1901, St. Petersburg, 1901; Zhelobovsky A . A ., protopr. Church management and the Orthodox. clergy of the Military Department // Century of the Military Ministry: In 16 volumes. St. Petersburg, 1902. T. 13; Kallistov N . A ., prot. East a note about the military shepherds who participated with their military units in the Crimean War during the defense of Sevastopol and were awarded special insignia. St. Petersburg, 1904; Shavelsky G. I., protopr. Military clergy in Russia's struggle with Napoleon. M., 1912; Tsitovich G. BUT . Temples of the army and navy: East.-stat. description. Pyatigorsk, 1913. 2 hours; Smirnov A . AT . History of the naval clergy. SPb., 1914; Senin A . WITH . Army clergy of Russia during the First World War // VI. 1990. No. 10. S. 159-165; History of the naval clergy: Sat. M., 1993; Clawing W. AT . Military temples of Russia. St. Petersburg, 2000; Kapkov K. G . George awards grew. clergy // 11th All-Russian. Numismatic Conf. St. Petersburg, April 14-18 2003: abstract. report and message SPb., 2003. S. 284-286; Kotkov V . M . Military Clergy of Russia: Pages of History. SPb., 2004. 2 books.

Hello, dear readers of the site! We continue to prepare for the exam in history. As you remember, we started a series of posts on the Russian estates. Here are the previous posts:

In order not to miss further posts on the topic "Estates"!

So, the history of the Russian clergy actually begins with the baptism of Russia by Vladimir I the Red Sun (the years of reign 979 - 1015). The Russian Church was not yet autocephalous, that is, it depended on Byzantium. In particular, the Patriarch of Constantinople ordained (appointed) the Russian Metropolitan. And it so happened that the metropolitan was the highest church person in Russia until 1589, when, finally, the Russian clergy received their own patriarch, Job.

Thus, only from 1589, that is, from the time of the reign of Fyodor Ioannovich (son of Ivan IV the Terrible), the Russian Orthodox Church became autocephalous, that is, independent of Byzantium. She herself, by the way, no longer existed, because back in 1453 she was conquered by the Seljuk Turks.

Starting from the 11th century, monasteries became strongholds of the clergy: the Kiev-Pechersky, Boldinsky monastery in Chernigov, etc. It was at this time that the first division into black and white clergy took place. Black monasticism took a series of vows and devoted their lives to serving God. The white clergy took care of the flock. The white clergy are the same parish priests who admonish and guide the flock.

In the 11th century, the first difficulty arises: in 1051, the western branch of Christianity separated from the orthodox (Orthodox) direction, with all the ensuing consequences: rivalry in the Christian world, both dogmatic and military.

However, the proper class of the clergy did not yet exist. The clergy were the social stratum. What is the difference? Estates have their rights and obligations, and there is no social mobility between them, that is, it is almost impossible to move from estate to estate. Ancient Russia was not a class.

Estates began to form from the 15th/16th centuries, when the process of unification of Russian lands around Moscow was completed. However, the role of the clergy in the life of the people was extremely great. Church marriage dominated, the church was the local administrative body, because in the scribe books kept at the monasteries, data on the population of the parish were recorded.

By the end of the 15th century, for the first time, the question arose of church wealth and the influence of the church on state power, and not just on the people. Where did it come from, this wealth? The Russian clergy collected funds from the population from services and other services. Of course, the monasteries had their own monastic estates with peasants living in them. Such peasants were called monastic. Naturally, over the centuries, monasteries, these major economic centers, have accumulated great wealth. And so there were two points of view on what to do with it.

The first point of view belonged to Joseph Volotsky. That, they say, the church should be rich. The second - to Nil Sorsky, that she should be poor, ascetic and serve as an example of virtue for the flock. Grand Duke Ivan III supported Joseph Volotsky, and so far the Russian clergy have not lost their wealth. In fact, it was also about whose power is higher than the Prince or the Church. But so far this issue has not been raised.

Another milestone in the development of the clergy class is Stoglav of 1551. I won’t talk much about it, it’s just that this document unified (standardized) the life of the clergy class in accordance with the needs of a single centralized state.

The next milestone in the development of the clergy was the Council Code of 1649 and the Church Schism. It was at this time that the question arose of power, whose is higher - the king or the patriarch (Nikon). The issue was resolved in favor of secular power. And in the era of Peter I the Great, the class of the clergy was already being formed directly, which had duties and rights. These rights and obligations were spelled out in the creation of the unforgettable Feofan Prokopovich "Spiritual Regulations", which was published in 1721. According to this document, the Spiritual College was established in Russia, which then turned into the Synod - the highest governing body of the church.

The patriarchate was abolished. From now on, the Russian Orthodox Church was headed by the chief prosecutor of the Synod - a secular person appointed by the emperor! Thus, the secular power finally subjugated the power of the Church. And it happened during the reign of Peter I the Great. Spiritual s=persons became servants of the state and were obliged to inform the flock if they plotted something bad against the authorities.

Somehow, you come to confession and say that you have planned a sin against the authorities, and that's it - hello! However, there were other amusements as well. Here, for example, is a quote from the Spiritual Regulations:

“On giving alms, the Collegium Spiritual should compose an instruction; for in this we err not a little. Many idlers, in perfect health, for their laziness set off to beg for alms, and walk around the world shamelessly; and others move into almshouses with promises from the elders, which is ungodly and harmful to the whole fatherland. God commands us from the sweat of our face, to sit down from righteous works and various labors to eat bread, Genesis chapter 3; and do good, not only for our own nourishment, but also so that we have something to give to those who demand, to eat the poor.