State teaching of St. Philaret (Drozdov), Metropolitan of Moscow

The collection “State teaching of St. Philaret (Drozdov), Metropolitan of Moscow” examines the relationship and interaction of church and state power. The text contains excerpts from the saint's sermons, conversations and letters. An article from Moskovskie Vedomosti dated December 24, 1882 is included as introductory material, replacing the traditional preface. In the teachings of St. Philaret, state power is perceived as God's institution: the king, like the father in the family, receives his power from God and is obliged to rule the people with humility, goodness and justice. The rule of the monarch is seen as the highest form of autocracy, receiving indispensable legitimacy only when it is subject to the Orthodox faith, and the faith itself serves as the foundation of laws, morality and social order. St. Filaret sharply rejects secular theories of the social contract, pointing out that true power cannot be built on arbitrary human agreements, but must correspond to the natural and divine structure of society, where the law lives only in the minds of righteous people and is manifested through moral principles. Among the practical aspects of the teaching, social reforms and foreign policy occupy a special place. The liberation of peasants and the development of rural education and culture are interpreted as a manifestation of divine grace. Russia's military victories appear to be a manifestation of God's providence, confirming the legitimacy of tsarist rule and its role in defending the Orthodox faith. At the same time, the saint warns against cultural and moral threats: literature, spectacular entertainment, “fashionable” Western ideas and reforms are considered dangerous for the spiritual health of the people and can undermine the unity of the Church and the state. St. Filaret of Moscow emphasizes the importance of harmony and cooperation between the Church and the state to ensure the moral and spiritual development of society. He views the Church as a divinely established institution, a source of spiritual and moral values, which should play a leading role in shaping the moral character of society and state institutions. By publishing the main features of the state views of Philaret, Metropolitan of Moscow, we had in mind both their highest and irrespective significance among political teachings, and the fact that they are an expression of the historically established state views of our Orthodox hierarchy, which took an active part in the centuries-old structure of the great Russian kingdom. We outlined the state teaching of Metropolitan. Philaret in his own words. Most of the excerpts cited were published on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of the hierarch, in the Moskovskie Vedomosti. Instead of a preface, we find the best and most relevant to the subject is the editorial of Moskovskie Vedomosti dated December 24. 1882, which appeared on the eve of the 100th anniversary of the great saint of the Orthodox Church. 26 Dec 1882 marked the 100th anniversary of the birth of the great saint of our Church, Metropolitan Philaret, who died at the age of 85 in 1867. The All-Russian Church in the person of the Holy Synod and the Moscow Diocese, which the saint ruled for more than 40 years, honored his memory with special triumph. Honoring the memory of the Metropolitan is not only a worthy thing, but also especially useful in our days. It is useful for us to now revive his memory and even more useful to hear his silent word again. He taught in those times, not yet distant, but as if separated from us by a whole century, when no questions were raised in the life of our fatherland and the roar of turmoil reached our ears only from foreign countries. The word of the great teacher, full of wisdom, was listened to reverently; but it was heard at a height, it turned to spiritual contemplation. In the sermons of St. Philaret hides the teaching of state wisdom, which in those days could seem like an abstraction, although instructive, but not caused by the demands of life. Everyone listened to these edifications, marveling at their depth, vigilance of thought, and power of words; but they did not find application to life in his instructions, instructions, advice related to state issues, because these questions did not exist, their life did not ask them. Already at the end of the life of the famous archpastor, movements began in Russia and innovations appeared that were supposed to change our entire social life; but the reforms that had begun had not yet expressed themselves in their consequences, life had not yet spoken, the questions were of a more theoretical nature at a time when the lamp that had been burning in the Russian Church for 50 years had gone out. 15 years have passed since the death of Filaret, and how many events have happened, how everything around has changed! Our Fatherland stands unshakably on its foundations, but what confusion in the minds, what hesitations in the government itself! If God had extended the life of Metropolitan Philaret to this day, if he had been able to retain the power of his word to this day, how practically instructive it would have sounded now, with what thirst the minds that had not broken away from the Church would have listened to the teachings of state wisdom; how warmly, with its strength and depth, his word would resonate in hearts! Metropolitan's edifications Philaret, addressed to the civil sense, would now not seem just speculation, but would be a direct answer to the burning questions of life. But, leaving us, Metropolitan Philaret left us a legacy of his teachings, which in our days not only have not lost their meaning, but have acquired more than they had in those distant times when the bishop himself pronounced them from the church pulpit. Now they will become understandable not only speculatively, but also experimentally; now they can become an effective force in our lives. The 100th anniversary of Metropolitan Philaret will encourage us to collect and publish everything that he left us as a legacy, for the glory of the Church and for the benefit of our fatherland. In addition to the works published during his lifetime, in addition to his sermons, known not only in Russia, many of his letters to various people have been preserved, letters that return to us his moral image in greater vitality than people who did not know him closely knew him. Much has already been made public, but much is still expected, and meanwhile, in honoring the memory of the great saint, we will do something worthy of his memory and useful for ourselves if we select from his sermons what relates to issues of state order, which are now in great circulation, confusing and exciting minds. Much in these teachings will seem to us to be said to stimulate current events and issues. Vladyka spoke as if as a lesson for our time. Reading it, we seem to listen to his voice, as if he himself ascends again to his holy pulpit to admonish those who are rebellious, to strengthen those who waver, to strengthen the power itself in the consciousness of its inviolability and holiness. We have selected some passages from Metropolitan's sermons. Philaret, related to political issues, and offer them to the reader in some sequential order. We will present his teaching about the state, the supreme power in it, the attitude of subjects towards it and other aspects of the state structure, as well as his views on the course of the state life of our fatherland from the beginning of this century until the death of the saint. Now it is better for us to remain silent and give the floor to the great hierarch, the word that will most surely and best revive the memory of him. (“Moskovskie Gazette”, No. 357, 1882, see also No. 9, 49 and 51, 1883) “Where does this multitude of people, united by language and customs, come from, which is called the people? It is obvious that this multitude was born from a smaller tribe, and this came from a family. So, in the family lie the seeds of everything that later unfolded and grew in the great family, which is called the state. There we must look for both the first image of power and subordination visible today in society. The father, who naturally has the power to give life to his son and to form his faculties, is the first ruler; a son who cannot develop his ability to educate himself or preserve his life itself without obeying his parents and educators is naturally subservient. But since the power of the father was not created by the father himself and was not given to him by the son, but occurred together with man from the One who created man, it is revealed that He is the deepest source and the highest beginning of the first, and therefore of all subsequent power among people in God.” Metropolitan Filaret points to the involuntary nature of the state as a force of nature that precedes any contract and agreement. “It is necessary, say the wise men of this century, to obey public authorities on the basis of a social contract by which people united into society and, for the common good, by common consent established superiority and subordination. This is an excellent basis for building a state on it in a highly intelligent book or in a dreamy head, and not in the nature of things. If they think that it is impossible to found a society otherwise than on a social contract, then isn’t that what the societies of bees and ants are based on? And shouldn’t it be necessary to instruct those who truly break out honeycombs and tear apart anthills to look for in them… the charter of bees and ants? And until this is done, nothing prevents us from thinking that bees and ants form societies not by agreement, but by nature, by the idea of ​​​​communication impressed in their being, which the Creator of the world deigned to realize in this low circle of his creatures. What if an example of the formation of human society was found in nature? And what good is the fiction of a social contract? No one can argue against the fact that the initial type of society is a family society. So, the baby obeys the mother, and the mother has power over the baby because they agreed among themselves so that she would breastfeed him, and he would scream as little as possible when he was swaddled? What if the mother offered the baby conditions that were too harsh? Will the inventors of the social contract order him to go to someone else’s mother and negotiate with her about his upbringing? How convenient the application of the social contract is in this case: it is almost as convenient in all other cases for every person, from baby to old man, from first to last. Any human agreement can only be valid when it is entered into with consciousness and good will. How many people are there in society who have heard about the social contract? and of the few who have heard a lot about him, how many have a clear understanding of him? Ask, I don’t say an ordinary citizen, ask a sage of contracts: when and how did he enter into a social contract? During adulthood? But who determined this time? And was he out of society until he came of age? Through birth? This is excellent. With this thought, I gladly congratulate every Russian for the fact that he was able, I don’t know whether with his parents or with Russia itself, to agree that he would be born in powerful Russia... The only thing to fear is that neither the one born nor the parents thought about this agreement at one time, and therefore, referring to it does not mean falsifying it? And consequently, isn’t it more correct and simpler, both in obedience and in other relations to society, to understand the right and duty of the birth of a real instead of a fictitious contract - this dream of social life, which, being told at the wrong time, has produced and is producing material disasters in human societies. “The transgressors have told me mockery, but the Lord is not like your law” (Ps. 119:85) (Ed. 1877, vol. 3, pp. 448,449). “What must be obeyed, is it necessary to prove it? Where there is human society, there must be power that unites people into society; for without power one can only imagine an unsettled multitude of people, and not a society. But power operates in society and preserves it through obedience. Consequently, obedience is necessarily connected with the existence of society. Whoever would shake or weaken obedience would shake or weaken the foundation of society. Are there many people in society capable of obedience based on ideas and speculations? When I look at experiments, how some peoples and states in our time want to base obedience on such speculations, how nothing stands firmly there, thrones and altars shake, the reins of government are torn, rebellions swarm, vices are shameless, crimes mock justice, there is no unanimity, no trust, no security, every coming day threatens - seeing all this, I cannot help but conclude: Apparently, state improvement should not be based on human speculation.” (Ed. 1848, vol. 2, p. 181). ... "Three types of obedience: selfish for one's own benefit, slavish out of fear, ambitious to achieve advantages. What should be said about their dignity? It is indisputable that all of them are better than disobedience, all can in different cases be successfully used against the temptations of disobedience; but is there pure and solid virtue here? A virtue that is not quite pure cannot be quite constant, just as impure gold changes its appearance and shows impurity. Just as it is natural that every action should be equal to its cause and not extend beyond it, so it is to be expected that obedience, based only on fear, on self-interest, on the satisfaction of ambition, will waver when ambition is not satisfied either due to the inattention of the rewarder, or due to the greed of ambition itself; when obedience required by the common good is contrary to private interests; when the power that threatens with legal vengeance or punishment is either not quite strong, or not quite insightful and active ... " “...God, in the image of His heavenly unity of command, created a king on earth; in the image of His omnipotence - an autocratic king; in the image of His eternal kingdom, lasting from century to century, a hereditary king. Oh, if only all the kings of the earth would pay sufficient attention to their heavenly dignity and would faithfully add to the features of the heavenly image that are required of them the godlike truth and goodness, heavenly wakefulness, purity of thought, holiness of intention and activity! Oh, if all peoples were sufficiently aware of the heavenly dignity of the king and the structure of the earthly kingdom in the image of heaven and constantly marked themselves with the features of the same image - reverence and love for the king, humble obedience to his laws and commands and mutual consent and unanimity, and removed from themselves everything that has no image in heaven - exaltation, discord, self-will, self-interest and all evil thoughts, intentions and actions! All earthly kingdoms would be a worthy threshold to the Kingdom of Heaven. Russia, you have a share in this good more than many kingdoms and peoples. “Take hold, O imashi, that no one may take your crown” (Apoc.3:11). “...In some peoples in our times there are so many disputes and strife about the state structure and about the relations between the ruling power and the subjects that all social ties are cracking because of them, all the pillars of political buildings are shaking; Let them read in our (Russian) hearts more clearly than on the charters, the short but comprehensive state decree written, which consists in the following words: the sanctity of power and the union of love between the sovereign and the people ... " (Ed. 1877, vol. 3, p. 442). “...The Prophet, distinguishing among the destinies of God throughout the entire earth the special fate of the anointed, is not content with his own indication of the obvious effect of this fate, that God did not leave man to offend them; He opens the sky and makes it possible to hear from here the Creative word that creates their safety: do not touch My anointed... It is not surprising that this commandment had to be proclaimed with a thunderous voice to the pagan peoples, deaf to the meek word of God. Who would have thought that for Christian peoples it would be necessary to write it again with the blood of Christian peoples? But it is written in blood and fire on the hard tablet of Europe; and in the enlightened age there are sages who to this day still do not know how to read these formidable and at the same time saving letters... A government that is not protected by sacred inviolability from all the people cannot act with all its power or with all the freedom of zeal necessary for the establishment and protection of the public good and security. How can it develop all its strength in its most beneficial direction, when its strength is constantly in an unreliable struggle with other forces that suppress its actions in as many different directions as there are opinions, prejudices and passions that more or less dominate in society? How can it indulge in all its jealousy, when it must of necessity divide its attention between concern for the welfare of society and between concern for its own safety? But if the government is so unstable, the state is also unstable. Such a state is like a city built on a fire-breathing mountain: what do its strongholds mean when underneath it lies a force that can turn everything into ruins at any moment? Subjects who do not recognize the sacred inviolability of the rulers are encouraged by the hope of self-will to strive for self-will and dominance, amid the horrors of anarchy and oppression, and cannot affirm in themselves obedient freedom, which is the focus and soul of social life.” (1848 edition, vol. 2, pp. 133,134). “...The commandment of the Lord does not say: do not rebel against the powers that be. For those in power themselves can understand that by destroying power, they destroy the entire composition of society and, consequently, destroy themselves. The commandment says: do not touch even as one touches something without effort, without intention, but frivolously, through carelessness; for it often happens that in this they sin unnoticeably. When power imposes on its subjects some burden, although light and necessary, how easily a murmur is aroused! When those in power see a work of power that does not agree with their image of the concept, how quickly words of condemnation come out of their mouths! How often does the thought of a subordinate, untrained in obedience, touch with an unclean touch the very intentions of power and impose its own impurity on them! My minion, who gave you power over your rulers? (Ed. 1848, vol. 2, p. 136). “...The sovereign and the state require loyalty from their subjects in general and in special ministries, positions and assignments. This loyalty needs firm confirmation, because without this, public order would not be ensured and there would not even be public safety. How to ensure fidelity? Laws? – But for the laws to have full force and effect, this requires strict fidelity in their use. Consequently, the proposed question is not resolved here, and only takes on a special form: how to ensure fidelity in the use of laws? So, what? Isn’t it honesty, which is pre-determined? For this purpose, it is more convenient to find time and methods in a small circle of private relations than in the vast space of state relations. Power uses its closest and most important tools, no doubt, with preliminary testing and inquiry, as far as the limited human gaze reaches and penetrates; But is it possible, through testing and inquiry, to decisively determine the honesty of each of the thousands of people before using them as instruments of the state? The question returns again: how to ensure fidelity? Isn't it fair? An honest word can only be accepted as a guarantee from the lips of a person of proven honesty; and where a preliminary full inquiry into honesty is inconvenient, there is no guarantee of a word that declares itself honest... How can one ensure fidelity? Is it not fear of punishment? How unpleasant it would be, even if it were possible, to base general tranquility on one common fear! But this is also impossible; because there may be breaches of fidelity which human discernment cannot discover and human justice cannot prosecute. Fear of punishment is necessary and useful for curbing those prone to crime, but is not sufficient for developing the quality of loyal subjects. Thus, the unsatisfactoriness of closer and more ordinary means of ensuring fidelity leads to an extreme means - to seal the promised fidelity with the great and terrible name of God, so that everyone respects fidelity as much as they revere God; so that whoever would boldly touch his promise; inevitably met the name of God, which is not only a spoken sound, but the invoked power of God, penetrating souls, testing hearts, blessing the faithful and punishing the unfaithful...” (Ed. 1861, vol. 3, pp. 348,349). “When it gets dark outside, they turn up the lights in the house. Take care, Russia, and kindle your home light more strongly: because beyond your borders, according to the prophetic word, darkness covers the earth and darkness covers the tongues. The nations are reeling and people have learned in vain. Having ceased to affirm state decrees on the word and authority of Him by Whom kings reign, they no longer knew how to either honor or preserve kings. The thrones there became unstable; the peoples went crazy. It’s not that there are no longer any who understand; but daring madness has gained the upper hand and tramples upon cowardly wisdom, which has not strengthened itself with the wisdom of God. From the thought of the people they have developed an idol: and they do not even want to understand the obviousness that for such a huge idol there will not be any victims. They dream of reaping peace when they sow rebellion; not wanting to freely obey the lawful and beneficent power of the Tsar, they are forced to servile before the wild power of self-willed crowds. Thus, the solid land there turns into a turbulent sea of ​​peoples, which partly swallows up, and partly threatens to swallow up institutions, laws, order, public trust, contentment, security. But blessed is He who prohibits the sea! For us, His voice is still heard in events: you will come to this and will not pass. Russia, strong in piety and autocracy, stands firm..." (Ed. 1861, vol. 3, p. 226). “The king, according to the true concept of him, is the head and soul of the kingdom. But you will object to me that the soul of the state should be the law. The law is necessary, venerable, blessed; but the law in charters and books is a dead letter: for how often can one observe in kingdoms that the law in the book condemns and punishes a crime, and yet the crime is committed and remains unpunished, the law in the book improves public ranks and affairs, and meanwhile they are upset. The law, dead in the book, comes to life in deeds; and the supreme statesman and the motivator and animate of subordinate leaders is the King.” “One cannot help but pay attention... to the sad image of a people and society, divided into rumors and complicities. By dividing the people and society into separate units, they damage the unity of the whole - the first condition of social life; reduce the overall force, cutting it into private, mutually opposing forces; weaken public trust; worry thousands of people, instead of arranging their welfare through correct activities in calm obedience to authority; shake the building of society, turning into questions and disputes what was recognized at the establishment of societies, laid at their foundation and approved by necessity; They wage an internal war in society, of course, not to its peace and security, and sometimes even more disastrously - they conclude a feigned truce among themselves for a strong rebellion against truth and truth. Good for the people and the state in which the King stands as a single, universal, bright, strong, all-pervading, all-moving focus, like the sun in the universe, freely limiting his autocracy by the will of the Heavenly King, wisdom, generosity, love for the people, desire for the common good, attention to good advice, respect for the laws of his predecessors and for his own, and in which the relationship of subjects to the supreme power is not established on questions, daily reborn, and not on disputes, never ending, but on the sacredly preserved tradition of our forefathers, on hereditary and acquired love for the Tsar and the Fatherland and, even deeper, on reverence for the King of kings and the Lord of lords. Lord, You have given us this blessing!” “What a struggle is the subject of election to public office among other peoples! With what struggle, and sometimes even anxiety, is it achieved to legitimize the right to elect the public! Then the struggle begins, and then subsides, then resumes, now for the expansion, now for the limitation of this right. The incorrect expansion of the right of public election is followed by its incorrect use. It would be difficult to imagine it possible if we had not read in foreign news that electoral votes are being sold; that for those seeking election, sympathy or dissympathy is expressed not only with affirmative or negative voices, but also with stones and darts, as if a man could be born from a beast, from the fury of passions - a reasonable thing; that ignorant people make distinctions between people in whom state wisdom should be discerned, lawless people participate in the election of future participants in legislation, villagers and artisans argue and vote not about who could well keep order in the village or in the society of artisans, but about who is capable of governing the state. Thank God! Not so in our fatherland. Autocratic power, established on the age-old law of heredity, once renewed in a time of impoverished heredity and strengthened on the previous basis by a pure and reasonable election, stands in inviolable steadfastness and acts in calm grandeur. Subjects do not think of seeking the right to elect to public office because they are confident that the authorities care about the common good and understand through whom and how to arrange it. The government, by the free will and trust of the subject to the subject, gives them the right to choose the public, assigning reasonable limits to it.” (1861 edition, vol. 3, pp. 322–323). “Water, although there is silt in it, is clean when it lies at the bottom; but when, by some improper movement, the silt rises up, all the hitherto pure water loses its appearance of purity and becomes cloudy. Similarly, human society, although there is a part of unkind people in it, is pure and prosperous when this unfortunate element lies at the bottom, when unkind people, justly humiliated in general opinion, do not achieve power, honor and influence over others; but when the unkind element rises upward, when unkind people achieve power, honor and influence over others, then they muddy the clear waters and good people, either with their influence they lead into temptation, or with their power they subject them to difficulties and sorrows, and, growing in strength, they harm the whole society.” “Some people, I don’t know if they have more wisdom than others, but, of course, they trust their wisdom more than others, work to invent and establish the best, in their opinion, principles for the formation of human societies. For more than half a century, the most educated part of the human race has seen their transformative efforts in action, but nowhere and never have they created a quiet and serene life. They know how to shake the ancient buildings of states, but they do not know how to create anything solid. Suddenly, new governments are built according to their drawings and just as suddenly collapse. They are burdened by the paternal and reasonable power of the king and introduce the blind and cruel power of the popular crowd and endless feuds among power seekers; they seduce people, assuring them that they are leading them to freedom, but in fact they are leading them from legal freedom to self-will, in order to then overthrow them into oppression ... " (Ed. 1861, vol. 3, p. 291). “Freedom is the ability and freedom to choose wisely and do the best. It is the property of everyone... But in the innumerability of the human race, how many have such an open and educated mind as to correctly discern and distinguish the best? And those who see the best, do they have enough strength to decisively choose it and put it into action? What can we say about the freedom of people who, although not in slavery to anyone, are subjugated by sensuality, possessed by passion, possessed by an evil habit? Observation of people and societies shows that people who have allowed themselves more into this internal slavery - into slavery to sins, passions, vices - are more often than others zealots of external freedom - as much expanded freedom as possible - in human society before the law and authority. But will the expansion of external freedom contribute to their liberation from internal slavery? There's no reason to think so. In whom sensuality, passion, and vice have already gained predominance, he, upon removing the barriers opposed to vicious actions by law and power, will, of course, more uncontrollably indulge in the satisfaction of passions than ever before and will use external freedom only to plunge deeper into internal slavery.” “To betray the Tsar and the Fatherland in war, to plunder a state treasure, to condemn an innocent person to heavy punishment - these blatant infidelities against the Tsar, the Fatherland and the law amaze everyone, and the gravity of the crime is among the means that protect against an attempt on it. But not to perform royal service and to enjoy rewards or rewards for service, to introduce types of personal gain into the disposal of public affairs and funds, to accept a petition in court instead of evidence and to justify the wrongdoer - these, they say, are small inaccuracies that are not very small, especially because they are pregnant with major infidelities. This seemingly harmless untruth in small quantities leads to infidelity in large numbers.” “Defending the fatherland against a belligerent enemy is obviously impossible without selflessness, without the willingness to sacrifice even life. But even in peaceful relations in all matters of state, loyalty is not guaranteed if one is not ready for self-sacrifice. Is it necessary, for example, in court or in government, to protect a right but weak person from a wrong but strong rival or persecutor? Who can do this? Without a doubt, only those who are ready to undergo persecution rather than betray persecuted innocence. Is it necessary in the face of the mighty of the earth to express a truth that disagrees with their thoughts and desires, but is saving for society? Who can do this? Without a doubt, one who is ready to suffer for the truth, so that the common good does not suffer damage.” (Ed. 1861, vol. 3, p. 221). “The common thought about truth in society is that the rulers must observe the truth, and the subordinates and the whole society have the right to demand and expect it from the rulers. The thought is fair; but it contains only half of that truth; by which society is improved, and therefore complete peace cannot come from it; how can one notice from experience that people who demand the truth from the rulers, as from their subjects, without any other considerations, at the slightest sight or even suspicion of untruth, raise a murmur, begin to judge and want to write new laws for the rulers... Everyone and everyone, to the best of their ability, in their circle must observe the truth; and with greater severity we must demand truth from ourselves than from others... The joy and happiness of the king and kingdom begins when strength is felt, reflecting the fear of treachery or violence in which every society naturally finds itself. If civil law guarantees private security, then public peace and the inviolability of the law itself are protected by force. The heart of a weak state is shaken by every movement that occurs near its borders, and the light wind of rumor seems to it a formidable force.” (Ed. 1873, vol. 1, p. 191). “In the kingdoms more or less allied with Russia and part of the neighboring ones, among numerous educated peoples, in moments of slumber of governments, from the dens of secret gatherings, immoral and godless, a whirlwind of rebellion and anarchy suddenly erupted, which, shaking and destroying the order of one kingdom after another, threatens the peace and security of all the peoples of Europe, and especially against the Russian power breathes rage with noise and cries, as against a strong and zealous defenders of the legitimate power of order and peace..." (Ed. 1861, vol. 3, p. 228). “A generation that is obstinate and bitter, a generation that does not straighten its heart and does not trust its spirit with God” (Ps. 77:8), worries the peoples... kingdoms divided among themselves waver... untruth seeks to seize power, and power does not sufficiently honor the truth... they dream of establishing legality on rebellion, in national strife to find a source of public harmony, to have free governance through an enslaved government... anarchy wants to be the beginning is obviously not creative, but destructive" “Why do other arrogant minds, having come out of obedience to the all-powerful wisdom of Christ, strive to spontaneously and arbitrarily dominate over affairs and over laws and over the general understanding of the people? Why is it that the guardianship of truth and honesty is not the lofty and strong fear of God, but the cowardly and insignificant fear of human opinion? Oh, if no one in the kingdom of earth acted in oblivion of the power of heaven!” (Ed. 1861, vol. 3, p. 313). “In our time, many peoples know little about the relationship of the state to the Kingdom of God... They do not like the ancient construction of the state on the basis of the blessing and Law of God; They think it much better to erect the edifice of human society in a new taste on the sand of popular opinion and support it with a storm of endless strife. Their new buildings are never completed, every day they threaten to fall, and often actually collapse..." “Behold, darkness covers the earth, and darkness over the tongues” (Is. 60:2). Christian peoples, or, to be more specific, people who are allowed to be the language of these peoples, representatives and proclaimers of their wisdom, directors of their activities, for the most part not only do not know, but, what is much worse, do not want to know Christianity; the kingdoms of the earth do not seek, do not recognize the Kingdom of God and pay less attention to it than to the kingdom of the last of their neighbors, they make new decrees for themselves, not based on divine decrees, with such strength as is characteristic of buildings without a foundation: their decrees crumble in their eyes; however, they do not notice what the lack is, and erect others, no more hopeful. (This is how Metropolitan Philaret spoke in 1830 about constitutions in France since 1789). These builders of the new Babylon are working to confuse everything, so that, having refuted accepted social concepts, established on the very truth of things or strengthened by custom and antiquity, they end up not understanding each other. They want kings who have not been sanctified by the King; rulers enslaved by their subjects; on the contrary, they attribute royal and autocratic power to the people, that is, they assign the position of head to the hands or feet, and this position reigns among them with rebellions, sedition, robberies, robberies, burnings, and the fruit worthy of this imaginary autocracy of the people is the absence of public and private security. Thus the pagans stagger because they teach in vain, because in their unblessed assemblies they gather against the Lord and against His Christ. But for this reason the Lord is already torturing them with His fury; “Like wicked vessels he breaks them” (Ps. 2:9)? and will not cease to crush, until the remaining people seek Him and His kingdom (Am.9:12). … Let us hasten to fully render the inalienable glory to the Heavenly King on earth, still looking towards the eternal East, not yet enveloped in the darkness of the West, not yet mixed with the new mixture of Babylon...” (1877 edition, vol. 3, pp. 461–462). “...How do peoples arise from small tribes and grow, and are not suppressed by their strongest neighbors, but at times overcome or subjugate the strongest? How, on the contrary, do great nations, whose natural strength is increased by the arts that serve it, not always rise, but in their turn fall and crumble? And history, uninitiated in the mysteries of God’s destinies, responds to this that piety, although sometimes not quite enlightened, but sincere, rightness and kindness of morals elevate and invest the spirit of the people with victorious strength; that, on the contrary, the decrease in piety among the people, the damage to morals, the predominance of vices, destroy unanimity, weaken loyalty and courage, steal the power of the laws and turn education and enlightenment, revered as means of social improvement, into instruments of insolence, disorder and destruction... If inattention and coldness to faith diminishes reverence for the sacred oath, and thus weakens the bond of fidelity which unites the subjects to the King and the kingdom; and the cunning, to further weaken this union, is not afraid to use an oath in order to tie with it in the general composition of the state special knots of self-willed thoughts and lawless crowds - this is a great loss of social strength, which consists in the union. If the tendency towards luxury, idleness, and amusements upsets the order in families, depletes their wealth, and causes children, forgotten by their parents during their upbringing, to mutually forget them after their upbringing - won’t this disorder extend to the family? Where will be the wealth of the state, which is made up of the wealth of its subjects? Where will the sons of the fatherland be when there are no children of families? If the various states of society, due to the wrong movement of passions, like dislocated members of the body, go beyond their proper places and limits, are not so much concerned with their own duties as with those of others, and are squeezed into matters that do not belong to them at all, for example, a warrior wants to legislate; one who is not called by the Church sets himself up as a teacher of the faith; the villager puts his ear to the rumor about freedom, which he does not understand and which he does not know how to use; a citizen dreams of a nobility of name that does not belong to his rank, without putting at a fair price the nobility of spirit, the acquisition of which no one prevents him - what can follow from this, if not that the entire composition of the state body will not produce harmonious and healthy movements? If in serving the Tsar and the kingdom the goal is clearly personal honor and gain, what will such a desire lead to more conveniently: sacrificing oneself to the fatherland, or, on the contrary, sacrificing oneself to the fatherland? Have ears to hear, let him hear" (Ed. 1848, vol. 2, p. 143). “...Yes, there is benefit when the altar and the throne are united - but not mutual benefit is the first basis for their union, but an independent truth that supports both. Goodness and blessing to the king - the patron of the altar; but the altar is not afraid of falling even without this protection. The priest is right when he preaches respect for the king - but not out of the right of reciprocity, but out of pure obligation, if it happened without the hope of reciprocity, but out of pure obligation, if it happened without the hope of reciprocity. Here is a man who was recently a fisherman and who, having ceased to be such, did not become more important for Jerusalem and Rome. And several others like him cry out to the Jerusalemites and Romans, Jews and pagans: “Fear God! Believe in the Lord Jesus!” This voice passes centuries. Thousands and myriads of Jews believe in Jesus, whom they crucified. Millions of former polytheists feared the one God. Everywhere there are Christian altars on the ruins of Jewish synagogues and pagan temples. Which powerful king helped this huge revolution? Constantine the Great? But how? He came to the altar of Christ when it already stood in the space of Asia, Europe and Africa; He did not come to prostrate himself with his majesty before his shrine. He who lived in heaven early laughed at those who late decided to humiliate his Divine religion to dependence on human benefits. To make their wisdom ridiculous, He delayed for three centuries to call the strong king to the altar of Christ; and meanwhile, from day to day, kings, peoples, priests, sages, strength, art, self-interest, cunning, rage rose up to destroy this altar. What finally? All this has disappeared, but the Church of Christ stands - not because it is supported by human power... Here is another appeal from the former fisherman: “Honor the Tsar.” Let the wise men search for doubts and suspicions, what kind of reciprocity, benefit, hope could make the preacher biasedly favor the king. Who was the king who first and most closely encountered the preaching of Saint Peter? Herod. What services did Herod provide to Christianity? “Put,” says the book of the Acts of the Apostles, “Put Herod the king on the hand to embitter a certain man from the church. Kill James, John’s brother, with the sword. And... put the yat and Peter, ... and put him in prison” (Acts 12:1-4). The angel miraculously delivered Peter from prison and from the king, and after that Peter preaches: “Honor the king.” What did the Roman power reward Peter for his apostolic exploits? Not with the cross of honor, but with the cross of crucifixion. Peter expected this... and he preached respect to the king’s subjects, from whom he was preparing to suffer? Of course, not on reciprocity, benefit, on what, without a doubt, on the truth of God. Fear, honor the king” (1 Peter 2:17). The first of these commandments is firm in its own right: the thought of God necessarily contains the thought of reverence for God. The first establishes the second: for if you fear God, you cannot help but respect what God has ordained; but as, according to the word of another apostle, there is no power except from God; But the existing authorities were created by God, and the supreme authority is God’s servant closest to God on earth, then, truly reverent before God, you cannot help but zealously honor the king ... " “...In our time, a new wisdom has arisen among some peoples, which, through the centuries-old works of state wisdom, finds that state institutions, processed and improved, not only require correction, but are completely unsuitable and wants to break and rebuild everything. Judging by the enormity of the enterprise, one might think that this must be enormous wisdom: and here is a case of deception. So, perhaps, it is not superfluous to test this new wisdom on the apostolic touchstone. Is she clean? - No. She does not speak at all about reverence for God, which is the only source of purity, and therefore has no thought about what Christianity calls purity. Is she peaceful? - No, it lives and breathes strife not only between its followers and non-followers, but also between followers. Is it meek? - Arrogant and daring. Is it filled with mercy and good fruits? - No, she is cruel and bloodthirsty. Is it certain? “On the contrary, it produced nothing but doubts, suspicions, complaints and mistrust... Passionate lovers of knowledge may object that this is a confusion of concepts: that one thing is knowledge, and another is activity, another is wisdom, and another is virtue. We don’t argue that they are separated in concept: but is it so in life? You can take the head and heart separately - they are dead; but in a living person they are in unity, and the head does not live without the heart. Thus, you can take wisdom and virtue separately in a dead concept: but in true life they are in unity; the mind cannot live without the heart, and wisdom cannot live without virtue.” (Ed. 1861, vol. 3, p. 233). “...Truth is the life food of the human spirit. Destroy the truth - the mind will remain emptiness, hunger, thirst, languor, torment, unless it is in the state of mortification or in the swoon of extreme ignorance. If you decide to feed him with images of the imagination that have a passing shine, but do not contain solid truth, he will soon get bored of drawing water with a bottomless vessel, his thirst will remain unquenchable and his torment will remain incurable. What does children’s curiosity mean, their desire to ask about everything and find out everything? This is a natural thirst for truth, which does not yet know exactly what it thirsts for, and therefore strives to absorb whatever it can. What does a judge look for in the law and in a court case? Truths. If you could assure him that he would not find the truth, you would destroy law and justice. What is science looking for in the immeasurable space of the universe and in the secret repositories of human nature? Truths. If you say that it cannot be found, you will strike science with a fatal blow. But is it really possible to find the truth? One must think that it is possible if the mind cannot live without it, but it seems to live and, of course, does not want to admit that it is deprived of life. There were people who wanted to prove that truth is inaccessible to human knowledge. But what does it mean to prove? This means that the truth hidden in the darkness of the unknown or in the darkness of doubt can be brought to light through one or more truths that are clearly known and undoubtedly recognized. So, truth exists before evidence, is already present at their birth and laughs at those who want to prove its absence or non-existence, but for this they are forced to call on it for help. From the philosophy of modern times one can hear that the limited, many-part, conditional, relative, sensually revealed, changing, transitory does not represent the perfect truth; that the fundamental, perfect truth must be found in the imperishable, in the unchangeable, in the intelligible, in the detached, in the unconditional, in the individual, in the infinite. In these words one hears something about the truth; but isn't there too little clarity in them? How many will comfortably and correctly understand each of them? But is the truth only for a few who torture their own minds, and not for all of humanity? And is it really necessary to take the dark path to the beginning of the world? Is it less satisfactory and not more understandable for everyone if we say that the root and foundation of truth, the focus of truths, the sun of the mental world is pure mental representation, or, in your opinion, the idea of ​​God, the Creator, the Almighty, and that this truth is very accessible to the knowledge of all people; “The knowledge of God is manifest in them; God showed them food; His invisible being, from the creation of the world, has been conceived by created things; His essence and ever-present power and Godhead are visible” (Rom. 1:19-20). In the hearing of the capital of paganism, in the hearing of the nations and pagan sages, said St. Apostle Paul, that the understanding of God is manifest in them. So he was sure that there could be no fundamental objection to this truth. But after this, he, without fear of being in contradiction with himself, said that these very people, for whom the rational of God is manifest, have used the truth of God in lies and falsehood, and have served the creature more than the Creator. And he also had before him the whole pagan world and the experiences of centuries and millennia as obvious proof of this. After this, please see, zealots of truth, in what position humanity is in relation to the truth. Truth is so necessary for him, like food, truth is accessible to his knowledge - and yet the whole world, for centuries and millennia, was not able to find and put into action the first fundamental, predominantly necessary, clearly stated truth. Isn’t humanity unhappy, not being able to recognize the truth, which is primarily necessary and saving? And yet, is it not guilty before God by not accepting the truth that God has revealed to be? What is next according to the natural consequence of the previous one and at the same time according to the justice of God? An insoluble haze of doubt? Wandering in the darkness of the unknown or following deceptive ghosts? The smooth death of the spirit and, through a short-term ghostly spiritual life, the death of the whole person? Such certainly was and would forever be the fate of mankind, if God, Who revealed knowledge of Himself to men through the nature of created things, out of an abundance of mercy, had not revealed Himself again through His incarnate Word, His Only Begotten Son, our Lord Jesus Christ. This is how the meaning is determined and the power of the sayings of Christ the Savior is revealed, that for this reason He came into the world to testify to the truth; that only those who abide in His word have hope of understanding the truth; that He Himself is the truth and the way to truth and life. Grace and truth came by Jesus Christ, says His beloved disciple... Will someone tell me: this is the truth of God; we leave it to theologians; Is there a feat before us about natural truth, useful for man and for human society? And I, brethren, have to take care and strive to ensure that you do not alienate the truth of God from yourselves. Why do they want to dissect the truth? To cut means to kill. There is no life without unity. Do they really think that the truth of God and Christ is something extraneous to natural truth, useful to man and human society, and that the latter can live just as well without the former as in conjunction with it? Look at the nations and human societies, Christian and non-Christian. Doesn’t natural truth shine so clearly - natural, mental, moral, creative, livable and beautifying for human societies, where the sun of the truth of God and Christ shines? Doesn’t night cover the natural abilities and life of peoples over whom the gracious sun of the truth of God and Christ has not risen? Take the sun out of the world - what will happen to the world? Take the heart out of the body - what happens to the body? Is it necessary to say? Take away the truth of God and Christ from humanity - it will be the same as with a body without a heart, as with a world without the sun. But by vocation I am a wise man and a natural scientist; What should be my attitude towards the truth of revelation? Don't dream that you can create wisdom; think better that wisdom can come and recreate you; and when you find with Solomon that in the abundance of self-made, unsatisfactory wisdom there is a great deal of frustration and only ruin of the spirit, then do not hesitate to confess and call upon the help of your natural wisdom for the help of Him, “in whom are all the hidden treasures of wisdom and understanding” (Col. 2:3). I am a seeker of the truth of human descriptions - what do I owe to the Divine truth? Do not allow yourself to see in the existence of humanity with dull eyes only the discordant play of chance and the struggle of passions or blind fate; sharpen your eye and notice the traces of God’s wise, good and righteous providence. Be careful not to fall into pagan fables, trustingly following those who, in the depths of the ancient world, indicate the so-called. prehistoric times. Among the pagans, the fable absorbed the truth of ancient events - we have the true book of existence, in which the thread of human existence begins with God and the first man, and is not interrupted until it finally enters into such a fabric of heterogeneous legends and everyday life. I am a researcher of the stars, planets and their laws; What does the truth of God require of me? You have very skilfully raised the insight of your vision in order to see in the heavens what is invisible to the simple eye - strive to also skillfully raise the insight of your hearing, so that you can clearly hear and proclaim to others how the heavens will tell the glory of God. It was pointed out to you as an example to one of the ascetics in your field. When he saw that one long-observed star, during the continuation of his observations, changed its silver-shaped light in the form of a hot coal and then disappeared, he concluded that something similar to what was predicted about our earth had happened to it: “the earth and the works in it will be burned up” (2 Pet. 3:10), and therefore he said: “Glory to God! We have before us new evidence that the world is about to end, that, consequently, it had a beginning, that there is God, the Creator of the world and the Lord of its destinies.” I am a lover and cultivator of elegant words; Should I enslave the freedom and beauty of speech to the severity of the highest truth? Consider whether the dignity of your work will be great if the beautiful flowers of your words turn out to be barren empty flowers? Is it not better that the fruitful seed of edifying truth is hidden in them and that they emit the fragrance of moral truth? Let all of us Christians, both those who are wise and those who are humble in simplicity, never forget that Christ is not only the truth, but also the life. In His word and in His example He became a way for us to lead us to the truth and through the truth to true life. Whoever thinks to ensure himself by achieving some knowledge of the truth of Christ and does not try hard enough to turn it into real life according to the teaching and example of Christ, deceives himself with the truth and exposes himself to the danger of dying on the way ... " (Ed. 1861, vol. 3, pp. 333–338, “Word on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of Moscow University”). “The Lord opens... His school, which no one except Him, neither before Him nor after Him, could form - a school that is always quite high for the most exalted minds and souls, and at the same time quite simple for the simplest and humblest of the earth; a school that does not caress with the hope of a teaching degree, but wants to make all peoples nothing more than students, but which, being so unattractive, during its initial education attracted and re-educated the learned world in its own ancient way; a school in which, without violating just respect and love for known sciences, one can notice mainly subjects of study worthy of superficial curiosity. The word of life is a philosophy not according to the elements of the world, which are killed and crushed into little things by artistic experiments and, according to the natural proportionality of the consequences with the cause, giving not very living and not very enormous knowledge, but according to the living and life-giving principles of the wisdom of God in the hidden mystery, which God prepared before the age for our glory; contemplation of the supreme Unit in the consubstantial Trinity and the Trinity in Unity as the true root of everything numerable, as the immeasurable foundation of everything measurable; knowledge of the earth and sky is not that grave knowledge of the earth, which, in blocks and layers, descends into its depths as into a grave and with the remnants of destruction wants to interpret the life buried and left without hope of resurrecting the buried and preserving the rest; not that glassy knowledge of the sky, which, through far-sighted glasses, follows the paths of the stars, without paving the way for the viewer to heaven, - but the knowledge of the earth and heaven in the beginning are good, then the earth, cursed in the deeds of man, and the sky, which has become unclean (Job 15:15), then the earth, which with the deeds existing on it will be burned up, and the heaven, which will pass away, - finally, a new heaven and a new earth, into which We too can move if we live by the truth; legislation is not some ancient Greek and Roman legislation, to which time has given importance and to which time has shown weakness, because the states that wanted to improve and strengthen this legislation have long disappeared - but the legislation with which the King of heaven and earth improves his kingdom of all ages and his dominion in every generation and kind... Medical science, which teaches means not only to heal from mental illnesses, but also to give resurrection from spiritual death, showing ways not only to preserve the life we ​​have from destructive moral ailments, but also to find a new, better one, revealing not dreamy, but genuine all-healing medicine, the flesh and blood of the God-man and the only beginning of the highest life, the grace of the Holy Spirit. Shouldn't these subjects be entertaining? Isn't the only Teacher worthy of zealous listening and following, Who taught and teaches them in His universal school? And what prevents you from listening to Him and learning from Him? On the contrary, how close and how convenient! Come to Him and be enlightened" (Ed. 1848, vol. 2, pp. 3,4, “Word at the consecration of the Church of the Holy Martyr Tatiana at Moscow University”). “The family is older than the state. Man, spouse, wife, father, son, mother, daughter and the duties and virtues inherent in these names existed before the family grew into a people and the state was formed. Therefore, family life in relation to state life is in some way the root of a tree. For a tree to turn green, bloom and bear fruit, the root must be strong and bring pure sap to the tree. So, in order for state life to develop strongly and correctly, to flourish in education, and to bear the fruit of public prosperity, for this it is necessary that family life be strong with blessed marital love, sacred parental authority, childish respect and obedience, and that, as a result, from the pure elements of family life, equally pure principles of state life naturally arise, so that with respect for the parent, reverence for the king is born and grows, so that the love of a child for his mother is a preparation love for the fatherland, so that simple-minded obedience at home prepares and guides self-sacrifice and self-forgetfulness in obedience to the laws and sacred authority of the autocrat..." (Ed. 1848, vol. 2, p. 169). “...It’s true that today’s upbringing is conducive to self-will. I am often amazed at how important and independent young children behave in front of their parents, and they don’t seem to dare to touch them.” (Letters of Metropolitan Philaret to Archimandrite Anthony, vol. 3, p. 133). “In modern times, there is so much talk, writing, and arguing about the subjects, rules and methods of education that this almost reduces the trust of educators from those being educated, who hear them bickering among themselves and see what has recently been approved by the convicted. Perhaps this is inevitable, due to the multiplying and diversifying demands of public and private life, which education must satisfy. Moreover, some consider publicity to be a universal cure against social evils, although it is sometimes the source of social illnesses if it expands its mouth too uncontrollably not only for the truth, but also for untruth.” (Ed. 1861, vol. 3, p. 309). “...In the wisdom of the sons of this century, two thoughts are visible that dispose them to live in the present with blind hope or, on the contrary, with desperate carelessness in relation to the future: the first is that the world follows its own laws, and therefore one or more people would in vain strive to give this huge machine the desired direction; the other is that humanity moves towards perfection by itself, and therefore there is little importance in how you strike with your insignificant oar the wide river of time, which already flows and draws everything that floats along it to a sea of ​​perfections of various kinds... They think to embrace all of humanity with one glance: they indicate some kind of self-propelled progress towards perfection; extol the successes of the so-called enlightenment and education; promise a golden age. And where they most think that all this is happening and will happen by itself and least of all care about blessing and enlightenment from above, there precisely and at the same time they find neither virtues, nor morals, nor peace, nor security, vices are unbridled, feuds are endless, alliances are unreliable, wisdom has become nothing more than an industry, and knowledge is a commodity, books and shows are filled with crimes and horrors, like dungeons and places of executions. Tell me, please, is this really the direct road and natural course to the perfection of mankind? Or, on the contrary, aren’t these the essence of crossroads, wilds, abysses, deviations, delusions, falls?” ...What is now the lot of the righteous among us? What kind of judgment do we pronounce on ourselves and on our contemporaries, when we ourselves usually say that our times are not the times of the saints, that the piety and morals of our fathers remained almost without heirs; that the disasters with which so many innocent victims are delighted from the midst of wickedness, did not stop, if only did not accelerate, the successes of wickedness - and we talk about these sad phenomena with such participation, as about night ghosts during the day? (1873 edition, vol. 1, pp. 217–218). “In our time and near us, are not the lips multiplying that speak vanity in the forgetfulness of God and His commandments? Don’t they speak often, freely and obligatorily, in conversations, at shows, in books? The work of vanity begins with the fact that attention to the Divine decreases, the taste for the spiritual is muffled and the inclination towards the sensual intensifies: they are captivated by the elegant, looking for the pleasant with a cooling towards the true and good; They are more engaged in the game than listening to reason and moral sense. But only the Divine, spiritual, true and good, as immortal and akin, gives constant pleasure to the soul; and the sensual, as perishable, cannot satisfy her. What is pleasant, not strengthened by the true and good, instantly ceases to be pleasant with repetition and satiety, hence the incessant thirst for something new is born: passions, when the reins of reason and moral feeling are weakened, easily turn into mad horses. The business of vanity, having received strength, cannot stop at mere amusements, but, depending on the circumstances, more or less, faster or slower, it moves forward. Where? This is all too obvious in our time among the sons of strangers. Their many lips speaking vanity, first spoke pleasant vanity, then immodest, then seductive, then clearly vicious, finally outrageous and destructive. They stirred the minds: they called, encouraged, even re-formed people, their right hand is the right hand of unrighteousness, and thus many waters arose, then evil, which undermines the foundation of all public improvement and well-being of public and private. So it is with the sons of strangers. Are we being careful enough? (1873 edition, vol. 3, pp. 229–230). “Farmers in village fields far from the capitals sow their seeds in order to collect their daily bread from them; but God gives an abundance of fruit, which goes through villages, feeds cities, and goes up to the princess’s table. Likewise, sow the word of truth and righteousness - whoever is able - in a large field, and others - in a small field; encourage each other to do this; sowing can become extensive and public. From the zealous dissemination in society of the words of truth and truth should come the fruit of public sanity and love of truth, and from this an abundance of social peace and improvement; and this will be a good gift from the subjects to the king, who cares about their welfare, contributing to his feat in the improvement of the kingdom... The habit of frivolously throwing words to the wind, unfortunately, is very common, does not allow us to notice what treasure we often squander without benefit or with harm to ourselves and our neighbors... What treasure a person squanders, what high gift he overthrows and tramples, what powerful, life-giving and beneficial power he makes ineffective and dead or, on the contrary, harmful, when he uses the word not for truth, righteousness and goodness, but for idle talk, profanity, lies, deception, slander, abuse of an oath, spreading evil. Do not be inattentive or indifferent to this, you who respect the dignity of the word; be jealous of him; animate and arm your word with truth and righteousness and, acting with it faithfully and firmly, do not allow the verbs of the flood to spill out (Ps. 51:6). Near the path of the word of truth, two crossroads are especially noticeable: on one side is flattery, on the other is slander. One says: “You must treat your neighbors in a way that is pleasing to them, especially the higher ones,” and as a result of this he flatters. Another says: “Black must be called black,” and under this pretext he indulges in slander. Neither one nor the other is on the right path - both are at crossroads that do not lead to good... Slander, which some people think is used to correct evil, is the wrong medicine for this. Evil is not corrected by evil, but by good. Just as dirty clothes cannot be washed clean with dirty water, so with descriptions of vice as unclean and stinking as he himself, it is impossible to cleanse people of vice. The multiplication of images of vice and crime before the eyes of the people reduces the horror of crime and disgust from vice, and the wicked, at the sight of such images, says: “I’m not the only one, there are many of them: it’s not very shameful.” Point out the dark image of vice, without tormenting feelings and without offending taste by excessive exposure of its vileness; and on the other hand, depict virtue in its genuine truth, in its pure light, in its unshakable firmness, in its wonderful beauty ... " (1873 edition, vol. 3, pp. 304–305). “...It is easier to discover and expose shortcomings than to correct them. The misfortune of our time is that the number of errors and carelessness, accumulated over more than one century, almost exceeds the power and means of correction. Therefore, it is necessary to rebel not suddenly against all shortcomings, but especially against the more harmful ones, and to propose means of correction not suddenly that are universally needed, but first primarily those that are necessary and possible.” (“Letter to the Right Reverend Innocent of Kamchatka, former metropolitan in Moscow,” Russian Archive, 1881, vol. 2, p. 28). “... An intense desire for change, unlimited but inexperienced freedom of speech and publicity have produced so many diverse views on subjects that it is difficult to find and separate the best among them and bring disagreement to unity. It would be careful to shake as little as possible what stands firmly, so as not to turn reconstruction into destruction. May God enlighten those who are destined to extract solid truth from the diversity of opinions.” (“Letter to the rector of the Moscow Theological Academy, Archpriest A.G. Gorsky, April 10, 1867,” “Creations of the Holy Fathers,” ed. 1882, book 4, pp. 432–433). “A strong movement of government from unity to democracy is unfavorable to the principles of spiritual government and can weaken the apostolic and ecclesiastical idea of obedience...” “The spirit of censure is breathing violently in the field of Russian writing. He spares neither persons, nor titles, nor institutions, nor authorities, nor laws. What is this for? They say: for correction... But what should really happen if everything is burdened and everyone is burdened with censure? Naturally there is a decrease in respect, trust, and hope for everything and everyone. So, does the spirit of reproach create or destroy? (“Speech at the opening of the Society of Lovers of Spiritual Enlightenment in Moscow”). About the election of judges, back in 1818, Filaret (at that time the vicar of the St. Petersburg Metropolitanate) pronounced a word in the St. Petersburg Kazan Cathedral, many places of which have a direct application to the new courts, although their structure is no longer the same as before: “...Don’t voters of judges need to know and feel the importance of the court just as much as the judges themselves? The election of judges is the sowing of that which is to bear fruit in judgment; and judgment is the harvest of what is sown in election - can one hope for a good harvest after a bad sowing, and can there be a good sowing when the sower does not think about what he sows? Sowers of truth and peace, would you not sow untruth and discord, slander and bribery? Noble men and citizens, now clothed with the dignity of voters, and thus appointed as judges of future judges! When preparing to take an oath of fidelity to this extraordinary service to your throne and fatherland, first consider carefully what important task is before you. “See what you are doing”? ( 2 Chronicles 19:6-7 ). ...The organization of the court through the election of the most important guardians of public order and justice is one of the most important human affairs; the good or evil of many people, the improvement or disorder of society, the perfection or imperfection of the union between the sovereign and the state depend greatly on it. The court is a fence of property and personal safety, and the judge is the guardian of the fence. Without judgment, every land would be, like the land of Canaan once was, a land that devours those living on it: there would be no other property except the prey of a predator, which the hand of another predator did not reach; there would be no other security than the security of an armed and awake warrior or the security of a strong oppressor until he meets the strongest... But what is a strong fence if its guardian is unreliable! What is a court strengthened by laws if an unworthy judge acts in it! True, the law was established not only for the defendants, but also for the judge, in order to admonish him and govern him; but the wisdom and justice of the law are hidden treasures, unless the eyes of the judge be opened by wisdom and justice. The law is subject to necessity and cannot be moved to keep the judge with itself; but the judge is free and can evade the law. Just as a skillful hunter catches cunning animals and defeats the strong, and brings the meek flock to safety, so a skillful judge, spreading a wise net of legal research and acting by the power of laws, catches the treacherous, and overthrows daring criminals, and brings good citizens to safety; But for the unskillful, either the innocent get caught in the net that is laid out for the guilty, or the guilty break it apart. A just judge, explaining the law with his conscience, does good to both the innocent, whom he justifies, and the guilty, whom he condemns, stopping for one the evil that he suffered, in the other, an even more significant evil that he did; and an unjust judge most disastrously multiplies the evil that he should have destroyed or at least reduced... Not limiting itself to the good of private people, which cannot exist without the general, the court is also an instrument of public improvement and welfare. The judge, as a guardian of social order, must embrace and penetrate with thought the entire composition of society, must comprehend the unity of this multi-membered body at its very foundation and its needs in all their diversity, so that he can be a reliable guardian of his life and a doctor of his illnesses. If we are careful in choosing a doctor and for a slight illness of even the smallest member of our body, what kind of caution is required... See what you are doing. An instrument of welfare for the whole body of society and its members is in a special way an instrument of the supreme power, which is the head and heart of this body. And all the members of the body are united with the head and are subjugated to it, contributing to its beneficial dominion over others? They all draw the power of life from the source of the heart; but are not the most important those who, being its closest successors, must spread it throughout the entire composition? The judge is the eye of the supreme power, in order to oversee the welfare of the entire body of the state and each of its members; her muscles, in order to bring them into the correct movement; her hands, to stretch out her arms to guard them. He is the successor and accompaniment of the life-giving force flowing from the heart into the entire body of the state - the love of the sovereign for his subjects. But what will be the union of the head or heart with the whole composition of the body, the supreme power with society, if dim or faded it will not represent to the head either the state in which the members are, or the dangers that threaten them? What if a relaxed muscle does not lift the weights of the members that must be set in motion through it, or only produces random tremors? If the hand, which by the will of the head should cover and protect the members, should expose and torment them? If the instruments of wisdom and goodness of the sovereign block their beneficial influences, and not spread throughout the entire state? You, voters, are required to present, through election, worthy instruments of the supreme power, to present them as such even before yourselves in the election itself; your work should, if not strengthen the already closest union of the sovereign with the state, at least contribute to preserving it perfect and inviolable - a union always desired, but all the more precious in our fatherland, the more obviously it is based on love and is adorned by the sovereign’s power of attorney for his subjects, as evidenced by the very right of election granted to you... You, voters, must justify this high power of attorney, not upset this sovereign love. See what you are doing" (1877 edition, vol. 1, pp. 250–254). “The concern for the establishment of such a system of punishments, which would be aimed at the goal of correcting the guilty and counteracting attempts to commit misdeeds and crimes, and which at the same time would soften justice with meekness, touching the limits of the spiritual department, gave rise to the question: what could be the correct view of corporal punishment on the part of Christianity? When considering this issue, first of all, it must be borne in mind that Christ the Savior created the Church, and not the state. By the power of the internal law of grace, He improves the internal and external life of people. The state tries, by the force of external law, to put in order and protect in order the private life of a person and the public life of the state. And therefore the state cannot always follow the high rules of Christianity, but has its own rules, without thereby becoming unworthy of Christianity. For example, Christianity says: whoever wants to sue you and (through untruth in court) take your robe, let him have the swearing too. But the state cannot say to the robbed: give back to the robber what has not yet been taken from you. With such a rule, a state in which there are both good and evil could not stand. It necessarily says to the robbed: go to court; according to the court, the robber (cunning or arrogant) must return what was taken, and be exposed and punished. Here is the saying of Christ the Savior regarding the punishments defined in the Law of Moses: “Hear, as it was said: An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth. But I tell you not to resist evil” (Matthew 5:38–39). That is: according to the Law of Moses, he who gouges out another’s eye must be punished by having his eye gouged out, and he who knocks out a tooth must be punished by having his tooth knocked out; but do not resist those who do you evil, do not repay insult for insult, endure generously, leave vengeance to God. And here again is a rule that state legislation cannot follow. The Savior does not correct the criminal code, He does not speak about changing the type and degree of punishment, He teaches the spiritual law - to endure and not seek punishment for offense. So, the question of the use or non-use of corporal punishment in the state stands apart from Christianity. If the state can refuse this kind of punishment, finding milder forms of it sufficient, Christianity will approve of this meekness. If the state finds it inevitable in some cases to use corporal punishment, Christianity will not condemn this severity, as long as the punishment is fair and not excessive. Some believe that corporal punishment has a destructive effect on popular morality. It is impossible to think that the Lord God through Moses legitimized corporal punishment for the guilty: “let them inflict on him fourty stripes” (Deut. 25:3), so that this would have a destructive effect on the morality of the Jewish people. It is believed that corporal punishment destroys any sense of honor in the punished. There are many things that prevent us from being convinced of the strength of this objection to corporal punishment. The criminal killed his sense of honor when he decided to commit a crime. It is too late to spare this feeling in him during punishment. Is the imprisonment of a guilty person less striking in his sense of honor than corporal punishment? Is it possible to recognize as correct such a judgment that a guilty person leaves from under the rod with dishonor, and from prison with honor? If any consciousness suppresses the guilty person, causes a decline in spirit in him and thereby prevents him from rising to correction, then this is the consciousness of the crime committed, and not the punishment suffered. Those who have the opportunity to deal with the conscience of such people sometimes notice that they feel inner relief, having suffered a humiliating punishment, thereby satisfying justice, strengthened in the hope of heavenly forgiveness and encouraged to reform. Previously, when corporal punishment was more severe, those who came to Siberia met with fear people who had a mark on their forehead and no nostrils; the people there assured that these were honest people and worthy of complete trust. Apparently, corporal punishment did not prevent them from rising from the abyss of crime to perfect honesty. It is not known whether this is the case now: perhaps those who were not punished in a different way than before set an example for those who were punished. But let the word return to the Christian point of view. The apostles, having suffered innocent corporal punishment from the Sanhedrin, “went rejoicing on behalf of the council, because for the name of the Lord Jesus I was counted worthy to receive dishonor” (Acts 5:41). The Apostle Paul writes to the Corinthians: “strike them with clubs” (2 Cor. 11:25), not thinking that by doing so he was humiliating himself before them. So, according to Christian judgment, corporal punishment in itself is not dishonorable, but only crime is dishonorable. Some would believe that corporal punishment should be completely abolished and replaced with imprisonment. For this, with a crowded city, it would be necessary to build and maintain almost a prison city. This would require enormous costs, one-time and ongoing. From what amounts? From government revenues. Where does government revenue come from? From taxes on the people. So, in order to alleviate the real or imaginary burden of the guilty, it is necessary to place a new burden on the innocent. In this case, both Christian and human mercy can say: it is good to have mercy on the guilty, but it is even more necessary not to burden the innocent. The following saying is indicated in the direction against corporal punishment: Saints of all faiths have constantly defended the person of the being created in the image and likeness of God. Many witnesses are listed; It’s a pity that not a single one is named or shown, although about some they say exactly what they say. Even non-existent ones are listed. Those whom we call saints, in some confessions they are not recognized and do not exist. From the fact that the saints defend the personality of a being created in the image and likeness of God, one cannot draw conclusions against corporal punishment. Protecting the identity of a being created in the image of God is not protecting the identity of a criminal. And what does it mean to protect a person’s identity? Doesn't that mean making it inviolable? But if it is possible to make the personality of a guilty person inviolable from the rods, is it possible to make the personality of every guilty person inviolable from shackles? Inspired writers defend the person created in the image of God not from corporal punishment, but from vice and its consequences. “You beat him with a rod, but deliver his soul from death” (Proverbs 23:14). There are thoughts that sparkle with moral beauty, so that in them, like in the sun, one cannot suddenly discern a dark spot, although there is one. This is the following saying: the law of mercy and meekness unconditionally condemns all violence and torture. Wonderful. However, if you look carefully, then in this brilliant saying there will be some stain, that is, something that is not true. All violence cannot be condemned unconditionally. If someone rages uncontrollably, then violence is necessary to bind him. If it is necessary to catch and detain a criminal, a thief, a robber, he, of course, will not allow this to happen voluntarily, but it is necessary to use force to capture and shackle him. Thus, the idea is brilliant, but not strictly correct, and does not promise reliable conclusions in relation to the issue of punishment. It is heard that recently in England they were considering the issue of abolishing corporal punishment in military ranks and that the military leaders there voted to preserve it, without fear of destroying the sense of honor in soldiers, which is especially important for them, and even admitted that without this it would be difficult for them to maintain discipline in the lower military ranks. But the word already goes beyond the limits of the proposed question. “The special time for which Alexander II, who had the power of the earth in His hands, raised up Alexander II as necessary, was not the quiet morning of Russia, but the stormy evening of Europe. The storm of rebellion destroyed both the throne of the king and the altars of Christ among the people, who until then, apparently, breathed only a light wind; and the terrible ruins were washed by a continuous bloody rain. From the impulses of anarchy, the thief of power (Napoleon I) was born, like a strong whirlwind, who either carried away thrones from the places where they were, or placed them in places where they were not, and who, finally, having raised most of Europe, brought it down on Russia. What if at this time, when this superfluous thing on earth has become so strong and exalted, what if the Lord had not raised up what was needed on it? What would happen to the peoples who, from day to day, multiplying the number of enslaved people, thereby multiplying the number of instruments of enslavement and increasing the power of the enslaver? What would happen to the sacred royal dignity, which the non-porphyritic king insulted purely by humiliating the porphyritic and exalting the non-porphyritic? What would have happened to the spirit of the people, what would have happened to the enlightenment and reason of the most educated part of the world, when the unlimited pride of a ruler who did not respect any boundaries certainly demanded that everyone only know how to servile before him, that virtue strive only to fulfill his will, truth - to caress him, knowledge - to invent only means for his goal, art - to produce him monuments of his glory or to multiply his idol? What should Christian worship expect from the imaginary restoration of this in its land, which gave it the appearance of restoration only in order to thereby receive for itself the appearance of sanctification? What an abyss of evils opens up upon this reflection! Therefore, what an infinite goodness of Him who has the power of the earth in his hand, that he raised Alexander on it in order to close this abyss!... God, who raised Alexander up for a time of extraordinary battles and exploits, taught him to oppose the weapons of carnal armies not only to the flesh, but especially to the spiritual?; cunning - truth, audacity - firmness and patience, arrogance - meekness and humility, hope in art and human strength - hope in the help and providence of God. And what happened next? The idol of France was crushed on the chest of Russia... His unwitting admirers were given the freedom to come out of their delusion. The union called the fetters of many kingdoms fell apart. Alexander with victory - in the capital of those who destroyed you, then the capital of Alexander was reborn! (talks about Moscow, burned in 1812, and Paris, taken by Russian troops). Will not touch anything; does not require anything; does not show or apply the glory of the winner; gives them prisoners; pays Christian honor to their martyr king (Louis XVI); gives them the safety to proclaim the exiled king and restore the rightful, but long-destroyed throne. What an extraordinary victory over enemies!.. ...The hitherto indomitable spirit of warfare is bound. For the unions of kings and kingdoms, for which until then no more decent law had been found, like the law of self-interest and mutual envy, Alexander, by his strong example, laid the foundation for the law of unselfishness and benevolence - in a word, the Christian law. The disagreements of peoples are either stopped or weakened. The seditionists, if not destroyed, are driven to despair. Matters that were decided by the sword are already being resolved by councils. Alexander's numerous army stands in silence, like a majestic guardian of peace not only in Russia, but also in Europe. Protecting himself from external enemies, Alexander turns against internal enemies, against injustice, indecency, impiety; like the sun, in regular processions it goes around the earth under its control... King of kings! You took this king as righteous from the face of unrighteousness, when it was preparing to be born again by apostasy from the kings; for the destroyer of world sedition had to be removed from the grave fate of seeing their industry penetrate even into the fatherland” (Sermon at the tomb of Emperor Alexander II, vol. 2, pp. 253–254). In his famous argument “On the reasons for our successes in the war of 1812,” Metropolitan Philaret said: “...The fate of states is determined by the eternal law of truth, which is the basis of their existence and which, as they establish themselves on it or deviate from it, pronounces judgment on them, which is then carried out under the comprehensive jurisdiction of Providence. What is a state? A certain area in the universal dominion of the Almighty, separated in appearance, but connected by invisible power with the unity of the whole. So, the more constantly it maintains itself in the union of the Supreme Ruler of the world by observing His law, piety and virtue, the more accurately it enters into the general order of His rule, the more undoubtedly it is protected by Him, the more abundantly it receives from Him strength for its preservation and improvement. Having left God, it may be left to itself for a while - according to the law of long-suffering, or in anticipation of his correction, or as an instrument of punishment for others, or until the measure of his iniquities is fulfilled - but is soon struck by justice as an outrageous area of ​​​​God's power. What is a state? The great family of people, which, due to the multiplication of its members and the division of genera, could not be governed, as in the beginning, by a single natural father, recognizes over itself in this capacity a sovereign chosen by God and the law. So, how sincerely do subjects submit to the sovereign’s paternal care for them and, with filial trust and obedience, fulfill his will; the more naturally the sovereign and the rulers of the people placed under him in his image represent the fathers of the great and in the great smaller families, adorning power with charity, dissolving truth with mercy, extending the charity of wisdom and goodness from palaces to huts and dungeons - the more inextricably the ties connecting the government with the subjects, the more alive the zeal for the common good, the more tireless the activity, the more inseparable the unanimity, the fortress is irresistible. But when the members of society are bound only by fear and animated only by their own selfishness, when the head of the people, despising him, uses the instrument of his ambition and malice, then there are obedient slaves as long as there are strong shackles, there are servants of bloodshed as long as there is hope of prey, and when a common danger comes, all the ties of society weaken, the people without courage, the thrones without support, the fatherland is orphaned. What is a state? A union of free moral beings united with each other by sacrificing part of their freedom for the protection and establishment by common forces of the law of morality, which constitutes the necessity of their existence. Civil laws are nothing more than the interpretation of this law applied to special cases and the fences placed against its violation. So, where the sacred law of morality is unshakably established in the hearts by upbringing, faith, sound, undistorted teaching and respected examples of ancestors, there they remain faithful to the fatherland and when no one guards it, they sacrifice property and themselves to it without motives of reward or glory. There they die for the laws, when they are not afraid to die from the laws and when they could save their lives by breaking them. If the law that lives in the hearts is driven out by false enlightenment and unbridled sensuality, there is no life in the written laws; commands have no respect, execution has no trust; self-will goes hand in hand with oppression, and both bring society closer to its downfall. Let us apply these universal truths to the present situation of the fatherland (in 1812): they will show the composition and measure of its greatness. The Russian kingdom believes that the Most High owns the kingdom of man, and, relentlessly holding on to the faith and hope of this almighty Master, it received power from Him, so that, without hesitation, it could hold on its shoulders the entire weight of its disaster, when all earthly forces were either fighting or abandoning. When righteousness and generosity were abolished in security measures by treachery and violation of the people's rights, the most pious monarch did not waver, but entrusted his work to God and did not doubt his people. The faithful people did not waver, but entrusted their fate to God and the monarch. The continuation and increase of the general danger could not be noticed anywhere, except at the altars, where the prayers became longer, the number of people flowing increased, the hearts opened to the Lord, no longer hiding their meetings, poured out in tears of tenderness, and where those departing for battle received their last parting words. When the government was forced to place citizens who were not experienced in battle against an excessive number of enemy hordes, faith sealed them with its own sign, confirmed them with its blessing, and these inexperienced warriors reinforced, delighted, and surprised the old warriors. And when the frantic crowds of the wicked did not leave unarmed faith in the world, when, especially in the capital rich in ancient piety, they filled their hands with sacrilege, desecrated the churches of the living God and cursed his shrine - zeal for faith turned into a fiery, tireless zeal to punish the detractors and even into an encouraging hope that the enemy of God will not long be a happy enemy ours. Finally, from the time when, after the completion of the days of grave temptation, the Lord of hosts crowned us with the weapon of His favor in the boundless field of so many famous and equally difficult deeds, is it not the same high feeling that animates and adorns the victorious army that marches under the invisible leadership of the God of vengeance? The gentle union of love between subjects and the sovereign, whom they are accustomed to seeing as their tender father and wise, vigilant provider, is another source of strength that preserved the integrity of the state unharmed against the most intense efforts to shake it and imparted prosperity and vitality to its actions in the days of disorder. When the enemy already occupied some areas and threatened many, it was only forced to collect new forces and military benefits. What extraordinary measures were required in order for this to be accomplished with unperturbed precision, and with tireless haste, and with the satisfaction of immense needs, and without dangerous embarrassment of the people? One word from the sovereign. Confident in the feelings of his people, he invited them to a general uprising against the enemy - and as if everyone rebelled. Each local owner established an army within his power to merge into a common force; many free hands left the scales, pen and other peaceful instruments and stretched to the sword; free donations for the needs of the war were brought not only freely generously, but also by those freely who themselves could be donated by others. Those whose families were in danger turned from them to the general danger; families cried less than usual when seeing off new warriors: they forgot kinship, thinking about the fatherland. The people's commitment to their government did not weaken even where relations with the government were difficult or interrupted. It can be said that in Moscow, at the very time of its unfortunate transformation from the capital of Russia into a terrible French camp, the subjects of Alexander were more faithful to their sovereign than the slaves of Napoleon to their master: for it is known that the willfulness of the French army, even more destructive for itself than for the capital it devastated, could not be tamed either by presence, or commands, or justice, or cruelty itself. Napoleon; Meanwhile, the citizens of Moscow, maintaining obedience to their sovereign, according to repeated and affectionate and formidable demands, but even wanted to appear before the foreign ruler, deciding to suffer and die, but to run away with him, leaving him with only his bodyguards to rush along the deserted paths around the Kremlin, like crowds of ghosts near tombstones. Simple, but pure and firm rules of morality, handed down from their ancestors and not weakened by foreign innovations, supported this fidelity to their duties in the midst of the most dangerous temptations and the greatest difficulties. When the voice of the laws was almost inaudible amid the noise of war, the inner law spoke to the heart of the Russian just as strongly and commandingly: “Do not be embarrassed by doubt and uncertainty; in the oath that you took in loyalty to the king and the fatherland, you will find the key to wisdom that resolves all perplexities. Having spent your whole life under the protection of laws and government, take the opportunity to be at least once protected by laws and government. Do not be afraid of danger, striving for the truth: it is better to die for it than to survive it. Redeem with blood for your descendants the blessings that your ancestors bought for you with their blood. Avoiding death for the honor of faith and for the freedom of the fatherland, you will die a criminal or a slave; die for the faith and the fatherland, and you will receive life and a crown in heaven.” These are the rules that the Russian people are not so much able to explain as they are able to feel, respect, and implement! Here is the wonderful art of being invincible, gathering troops without military leaders, transforming entire villages into militias, taking up the weak hands of women in battle, defeating the victors! This is the truly free science of a people uneducated according to the latest speculations, with which he exposed Western educators in violent and slavish ignorance and with which he is now freeing them from slavery with such success!.. “Lord, in whose hands is the power of the earth and who raises up the need on it in time” (Sir. 10:4)! For what a difficult time did You find the chosen and erected Emperor Nicholas! swallow up both the throne and the kingdom. He did not stop the abyss; (Ed. 1877, vol. 3, p. 464). “...The evil one appeared with insolence at the very time when Nicholas I was supposed to sit on the ancestral throne; and a sudden storm threatened public order and safety. But the king, firm in the truth of his calling and trust in God, did not waver for a moment: with the strength of his spirit he forbade the storm; established the throne at the very time when he sat on it; on the first day of his reign he became the deliverer of the kingdom.” (Ed. 1861, vol. 3, p. 249). “Soon afterwards two non-Christian powers, one after the other, challenged him to heroic deeds; and although the open force of the enemies was supported by the no less significant secret force of those who envied Russia, the truth and strength of our tsar in battle and confidence in victory overthrew the open and disarmed the hidden confrontation... This was also the case when a people who were not entirely foreign (the Poles), having received the lost dignity of the kingdom only by the grace of the Russian Tsar and brought to a state of prosperity and well-being unparalleled in the previous history, repaid the benefits with ingratitude and the good management of the rebellion. The thunderbolt of the royal truth was menacing and inevitable, striking sedition and self-will: but after that, like a thundercloud with beneficial rain, the royal truth was resolved by royal mercy... Do you want to see the Tsarev’s truth, unperturbed by difficulties, in the internal affairs of the state? Look at the legislation. The century passed before Nicholas I in unconfirmed assumptions and in unsuccessful efforts to give improvement to Russian legislation. He accomplished this in a few years. ...Unity of faith is an important reinforcement of the unity of the people, and both of these unities together have an important relationship to the strength of the state. About two million of the Russian people, formerly of the same faith, were torn away from the Orthodox Church in the past three centuries by alien cunning and violence, and continuous, all possible efforts were made to attach them to the Western Church. The Russian government dealt with them according to the rules of religious tolerance. Therefore, as much as one could wish for, one could just as little hope for their reunification with the Orthodox Church. But they suddenly, by their own movement, under the leadership of all their senior shepherds, almost all the clergy, quietly and freely came to the Orthodox Church, just like sheep returning to the sheepfold, from which they had recently left... But I am not reaping the harvest, I am only plucking some ears of corn on the field of the Tsar’s twenty-fifth anniversary. Is it possible, however, not to mention the latest events (the Hungarian revolution), when the truth of our king was moved to defend the offended king-ally? To resist, an entire people was raised almost entirely, deceived and possessed by the sons of wickedness, from many nations united in a unanimity of wickedness..." (1861 edition, vol. 3, pp. 249–250). “Truly Russia can,” the Metropolitan said about the war of 1853–55, “bring to the God of truth the ancient complaint: multiply upon me the untruth of the proud. After the untruth of a neighbor, who, having been protected by the Tsar of Russia from a strong rebel, violated royal treaties and the ancient rights of holy places, oppressed Orthodox Christians and thus began a feud, how many more untruths were born. The untruth of the proud arose, which could not calmly look at the victorious power of Russia - however, for no kingdom or people it was not painful, but for many beneficial - and, judging by itself, did not want to believe the truth of Russia, invented dreamy suspicions and accusations against it and irritated the minds of the people with them. The untruth of self-interest arose and, dissatisfied with the many already wide paths to acquisition, sought to open new ones for itself through weapons and bloodshed. Was there truth in the peacemaking enterprise when those who proposed peace terms, which they found harmless for both discordant parties, having received Russia’s consent to them, instead of uniting with her and supporting the common cause of peace with her, turned to the side of her enemy and started a war? Was there truth in another similar enterprise, when the trustees of the belligerent and non-belligerent powers found a way by which they all believed it was possible to reach peace, but the two powers again decisively turned to the path of war, without justifying this with any reasons and hiding their intentions? Are not the untruths of the war obvious, in which our enemies think to compensate for their failures against fortified places by devastation of the defenseless, they insidiously use the banner of peace to kill and rob those who do not expect battle, they do not spare the weaker sex and age, they insult the shrine with desecration and sacrilege? Is there truth in the alliance that Christians entered into with infidels against Christians, with the desire to make treaties in favor of Christians, concluded by right, without the right to destroy, in which those who defend trample on the protected, in which, not by the motives of justice, but by threats and seductive promises, they try to draw kings and peoples so that they shed blood for a cause that is alien to them? (Ed. 1861, vol. 3, p. 288). “One cannot indifferently remember what difficulties the Russian army had to overcome in this battle, what hardships the people had to endure, what hardships and suffering our compatriots who were close to the disgrace of war were subjected to from their enemies. But with these sad memories there is something consoling and majestic. Our warriors of the sea, having begun their exploits by destroying the Turkish fleet, when they had to evade the excessive superiority of the sea power of several powers, not only did not give up their ships, but also made of them an underwater fortification to protect the pier and the city. Then, for eleven months, the united warriors of sea and land victoriously resisted in Sevastopol the most numerous troops of the four powers and destructive weapons unprecedented to this day. Finally, although the enemies were allowed to work on the ruins they left behind to multiply the ruins, the Russian army remains in Sevastopol to this day (before the conclusion of the Peace of Paris). In the Far East, a small fortification with a handful of people repelled sea and land attacks from incomparably powerful enemies, who admittedly participated in this more by prayer than by force. In the west, the two strongest fleets were uselessly exhausting their efforts against one fortress, and looked at the other only from afar. In the north there was a strange confrontation: on the one hand - military ships and firearms, on the other - clergy and monks walking along the wall with shrines and prayers, and several people with weak and faulty weapons: both the monastery remained undefeated and the shrine inviolable. Troops of four powers acted against Russia; and among these were the strongest in the world. Of the peaceful powers, some were completely peaceful, and some, with their unclear position, reduced the convenience of our action, and everything turned into convenience for the enemies. And despite all this, in Europe we are undefeated, and in Asia we are winners. Glory to the Russian army! Blessed is the memory of the ascetics of the fatherland who sacrificed courage, art and life!” (Ed. 1861, vol. 3, p. 343). On the occasion of the conclusion of the Peace of Paris, Metropolitan Philaret on March 29, 1856 said the following to Emperor Alexander Nikolaevich: “Our eyes and hearts are towards you, as before, while we see no more of the same in your second royal year. You inherited a stubborn war against us and against the world - and gave us peace. Your truth and courage did not refuse the war - your love for humanity did not refuse the proposed peace. The enemies did not defeat Russia - you defeated the enmity..." (Ed. 1861, vol. 3, p. 378). In April 1856, Metropolitan Philaret, in his letter to Prince S.M. Golitsyn seems to explain his idea that Russia was not defeated at Sevastopol: “I return to your Excellency the Kiev teaching. Sorry, it didn't really captivate me. The first year of the reign (Alexander II) is described with dark and needy features. What's the use of this? We must speak for instruction: no instruction can be derived from this. The preacher says that Sevastopol has been “given to the enemies.” - Not true. Its northern part has not been given back to this day. He says: the enemies are triumphant. - Wrong. The British have been defeated by us; and for the French there is no great triumph when they are repulsed from several fortifications and only take one. Struggling with the question: why are the enemies not punished? Here again there is an inaccuracy. They have been punished quite a bit: many of them died as a result of the war, many were destroyed by disease and storms at sea. Consequently, justice should not only be expected in the future, but in part it has already appeared. He says that the sovereign “could not renounce the world.” – Again an inaccuracy that has an unfavorable appearance. What kind of impossibility? The sovereign had the power to continue the war, but decided to prefer peace. If God sends something unpleasant, we must humbly acknowledge it, but not exaggerate it, for it can lead to discouragement and not to benefit” (the autograph of this letter is currently, among others, in the editorial office of the Orthodox Review, in which the heirs of Prince S.M. Golitsyn publish letters to him from Metropolitan Philaret). On the day of the sacred coronation of Emperor Alexander Nikolaevich, August 26. 1856, the Metropolitan said the following to the sovereign in the Assumption Cathedral: “Most pious, God-crowned Great Sovereign Emperor! Blessed be the King of kings! “He has placed...on your head a crown of honorable stones” (Ps. 20:4). I say this with confidence because from the lips of the prophet I take a word depicting the fate of the king who reigned righteously. God crowned you: for His providence led you to this by the law of succession to the throne, which He laid down and sanctified when, having accepted the king as the instrument of His rule of God, He uttered His definition about him: “I will plant from the fruit of your womb on your throne” (Ps. 131:11). God has crowned you: for He “gives according to your heart” (Ps. 19:5), and your heart desired not only the solemn appearance of your Majesty, but especially the mysterious overshadowing from the Lord of the Sovereign Spirit, the Spirit of wisdom and knowledge, the Spirit of counsel and strength. We have listened to your prayer about this now: The Heartbreaker heeded it earlier; and when you were slow to accept your crown, because you continued to defend and pacify your kingdom, He hastened to calm the storm of battle, so that you could fulfill your royal prayer in peace and so that the crown of inheritance would be for you the crown of achievement. So, “In the power of the Lord... the God-crowned king rejoiced, and rejoice greatly in His salvation!” (Ps. 20:2). Rejoice in the same way, most pious Empress, in the glory of your most illustrious husband, illuminated and sanctified from above and illuminated by a sacred ray... Rejoice brightly, Orthodox Church, and let your collective prayer of faith, love and gratitude ascend to the throne of the Most High, when He places the seal of His election on the chosen one from His people, as on the longed-for firstborn of your sons, on your faithful and strong defender, on the successive executor of the ancient word of destinies about you: “kings will be your feeders” (Is. 49:23). Glow with joy, Russia! God's blessing has shone upon you in the sanctified glory of your king. What could be more desirable, what is more joyful, what is more reliable for the kingdom, like a king who places his heart in the power of God (Ps. 47:14), to whom the royal crown is then pleasant when received from the King of Heaven, who desires to sanctify royal virtues, intentions, activities and sanctifies them with anointing from the Holy One? Truly, most pious Sovereign, so that from the crown of the king, as from the center, the life-giving light of the “honest ... most valuable stones” (Proverbs 3:15) of government wisdom extends to the entire kingdom, so that the waves of the king’s scepter always point to the subordinate authorities and servants of the king’s will the right direction to the good of the public, so that the hand of the king firmly and completely embraces his power, so that the sword of the kings is always prepared to defend the truth and with his very appearance already struck down untruth and evil, so that the royal banner would gather millions of people into unity and bring into order, so that the labor and vigil of the king would be sufficient to excite and elevate their activity and to ensure their peace - is not the highest measure of human gift required for this in the king? But for this reason we rejoice most of all, that, having been born to reign, being destined to reign by your ever-memorable parent, actually reigning, you still seek from above the gift of reigning. And He who exalted You from His people is faithful (Ps. 88:20), according to the faith of you and your people in the sacred anointing now acceptable to you, to grant you an invisibly gracious, luminous, abiding anointing, acting by you for our true well-being, for your true joy about our well-being, - like in ancient times, according to the royal anointing, the Spirit of the Lord graciously and beneficially “was carried over David from that day forward" (1 Sam. 16:13)." (1861 edition, vol. 3, pp. 379–380). Recalling in another conversation with his flock the coronation of Emperor Alexander II, the Metropolitan said: “Let us remember that it was the memorable Borodino day, on which Russia alone stood up to all of Europe, on which the spirit of conquest and dominance, which had hitherto known no barriers, fell headlong against the wall, meeting with the spirit of love for the Tsar and the Fatherland. This day deservedly has the honor of being the day of the Tsar's crown and a solemn witness of the people's love for the Tsar. Let us remember that clear and quiet morning. It was as if it had been deliberately prepared to appear as a mirror and image of the Tsareva’s soul. Let us remember the wonderful closeness in and around the Kremlin at that time, which expressed the heartfelt desire for the Tsar of the entire population of Moscow and, if possible, through representatives of the entire Russian people, or more precisely, all the peoples of the All-Russian kingdom. Is there a strong enough word that would describe the general delight of that time? - And let it not be found. This unfound word is both audible and understandable to you: since from those heartfelt exclamations of that time there is now a faithful echo in faithful hearts. I would especially like for every son of Russia to see in the same light now with the mental eye, as we then with the mental and sensory eye saw our Most Pious Tsar and His Most Pious Spouse, and what happened to Them in this sanctuary (In the Great Assumption Cathedral in the Kremlin) in the most sacred moments of the sacred day. How humble Their greatness appeared in the face of the King of the reigning, and together how majestic Their humility! What reverence for the shrine! What animation of prayer! What heavenly silence in the church, when the crowned King alone knelt and a fervent prayer for a blessing from above on Him and on His kingdom shone from His heart, and eyes, and lips and quietly ignited all the hearts: poured them into one censer, into one fragrant incense; and, without a doubt, he was invisibly received by the Guardian Angel of Russia, “and incense smoke arose through the prayers of the saints from the hand of an Angel before God” (Rev. 8:4). Let us look at this now with the eye of a rejoicing heart, but also, as I said, with the eye of a reflective mind. How the King, blessed for the kingdom by the Parent and the law of succession to the throne, strives to win the highest blessing and sanctification! How the Holy Church strives for its part to assimilate the highest blessing and sanctification to the Tsar! The Orthodox Church begins the ceremony of the royal wedding by inviting the Most Pious Emperor to pronounce publicly the Orthodox confession of faith. What does this mean? “This means that the Church, just as it is itself founded unshakably on the rock of faith, also desires to establish both the royal dignity and the desired blessed reign unshakably on the rock of faith. Truly, if to our Lord Jesus Christ, who rules over all according to Divinity, as a result of the merit of saving suffering and resurrection, in a new way, as the God-man, was given, according to His own saying, “all power on earth as in heaven” (Matthew 28:18); if He, according to the word of the Seer of Mysteries, is “the prince of the kings of the earth” (Apoc. 1:5), then the king and the kingdom can be truly blessed and prosperous only when they are pleasing to Him and His supreme dominion; and they can be pleasing to Him when they rightly profess and actively preserve faith, which is the power, means and goal of His dominion. Our most pious Sovereign actively recognized this truth at his royal crowning. Oh, if only all the sons of the kingdom were animated by this truth, and especially all those called by a special title and position to serve the sovereign will of the Tsar and the good of the kingdom! The Holy Church wraps the entire rite of the royal wedding as if in a cloud of spirit, as if it fulfills it with the fragrance of a sacred censer - with abundant prayer. Each sign of majesty accepted by the Tsar, purple, crown, scepter, orb, she overshadows with the Divine name of the Most Holy Trinity. And this is not enough. In order to assimilate the king to a more internal, mysterious sanctification, she, with sacred anointing, places on him the seal of the gift of the Holy Spirit: she brings him closer to the Lord’s Table itself and, in the person of the priests and clergy, strengthens him for the great feat of reigning with the Divine food of the Body and Blood of the Lord. Looking mentally at this as sacred as a majestic spectacle, who would not think with reverence how great truly is the significance of the Orthodox Royal Majesty. It is overshadowed, embraced, imbued with sanctification from above. It seems to me that here recently I heard the ancient Jerusalem prophetic voices from the face of God: “I have lifted up the chosen one from My people; with holy oil... anointing him; My truth and My mercy are with him” (Ps. 89:20–21, 25) (Ed. 1861, vol. 3, pp. 300–301). It is known that Metropolitan Philaret participated in the drafting of a memorable manifesto on the liberation of peasants from serfdom, which began with the unforgettable words: “Across yourself with the sign of the cross, Orthodox Russian people, and invoke God’s blessing on your free labor...” Meeting the Tsar-Liberator in the Assumption Cathedral in the Kremlin this year, the saint of the Church told him the following significant words: “We welcome you to the seventh year of your reign. Among the ancient people of God, the seventh summer was the summer of legal liberation from slavery (Ex. 21:2). We did not have slavery in the full meaning of this word; there was, however, a strong hereditary dependence of part of the people on private owners. With the onset of your seventh summer, you pronounced absolution. As a rule, the powerful of the land love to seek pleasure and glory in conquering and imposing a yoke. Your desire and consolation is to ease the ancient burdens of your people and increase the measure of freedom protected by law. The class of noble owners sympathized with you and sacrificed a significant part of their rights to this sympathy. And now more than twenty million souls owe You gratitude for new rights, for a new share of freedom. We pray to God that the good gift will be used wisely; so that zeal for the common good, justice and goodwill are ready everywhere to resolve difficulties that are sometimes inevitable with the news of a case; so that those who received new rights, out of gratitude, would give back to those who ceded ancient rights, so that the pleasant thought of free labor would make work more diligent and productive, leading to an increase in private and general prosperity. May your love for your people be crowned with unfading joy under the shadow of Providence, graciously extended with you over your spouse and your blessed children.” (1861 edition, vol. 3, pp. 383–384). Addressing the state of his flock in his report for 1863, Metropolitan Philaret said the following: “The state of piety in the Orthodox flock is generally favorable and is evidenced by diligence towards especially revered shrines, visiting holy churches, diligence in listening to catechismal teachings, and donations for the construction of churches and charitable institutions. But one cannot help but see the sad phenomena opposite to this, and it would be criminal to remain indifferently silent about them. Literature, entertainment, and wine have a detrimental effect on public morality. Excessively multiplied secular periodical publications, vigorously distributed among the people, have an unfavorable effect even in that they arouse and nourish not so much true curiosity as fruitless curiosity; They provide a lot of pleasant and entertaining reading, but little edifying, they provide fragmentary, mixed, confused knowledge, but at the same time they absorb attention and time, distract from reading solid books, make the minds superficial and lazy for deep reflection on the most important subjects of knowledge. This direction of literature is harmful to the religious, moral and civil life of societies; but the evil that comes from modern literature does not stop there. In literary works of both light and serious content, even those presented for instructional guidance to youth, divine revelation is questioned, sacred traditions are degraded to comparison with fables, the rules of Christian morality and church institutions are not respected, the effort to give a basis for disbelief in miracles goes so far as to preach fabulous scientific absurdities, as, for example, in the translated book of Zimmerman it is asserted that the tabernacle of the witness was nothing more than a large electric machine. The clergy can judge the extent to which spectacles are alien to morality and harmful only by the opinions of others and listen to them with caution, so as not to pronounce an incorrect or overly strict judgment ... " But if the authorities of the spectacles, despite the displeasure of the sensibly and fundamentally thinking part of society, for the sake of monetary benefits calculated for people who are eager for unclean pleasures, begin to repeat such spectacles and through them more strongly introduce shamelessness and corruption into morals, then will the Orthodox Christian government be free from responsibility for this before God? In France, such spectacles aroused some government measures against themselves, but there these measures, as late ones, are no longer valid. Is it necessary to encourage evil to erect obstacles to the advancement of good, in order to then enter into a later struggle with them? Isn't it better to prevent the evil that arises? While the evil of literature and entertainment affects the upper and middle classes of society, cheap wine destroys the lower class of the people. Places of sale have multiplied so much that in some cities there is a drinking establishment for every 10 and 11 houses. The cheapness and convenience of purchasing wine leads to the fact that not only the male sex, but also the female sex, not only adults, but also minors, revel in wine. Many houses and souls of the villagers are completely ruined. Drunkenness, having become a habit, constantly requires new donations and deprives a person of both the means of life and the ability to work, plunges people into poverty, idleness, vices and crimes. There is less resort to the church, less reverence for the shrine and respect for the clergy. In the past year, many of the people have declined in morality so much that, without seeing it, it is difficult to believe their decline... But evil is growing, and it will be difficult for well-intentioned people to resist if officials (excise duty) strongly urge the opening of taverns, as has been observed in some places. If, in the pursuit of financial activities, little attention is paid to the morality of the people, this is an unprofitable calculation. The best wealth of the state and the firmest support of the throne is the Christian morality of the people. The present time seems quite favorable for the spread of true education among the people through the multiplication of well-established rural schools. The people, having been liberated from serfdom, see various fields of social activity open before them and, more than before, recognize the benefits of literacy and want to multiply schools. The secular authorities are concerned about this, but this very concern serves as the reason for new concern for the spiritual authorities, for there is reason to fear that the secular authorities will introduce such a structure to new schools, which, due to its secular nature, will not have a favorable effect on the establishment of faith and morality among the people. It is intended to form special secular mentors, who will be entrusted with schools, and the clergy will only be invited, wherever the secular authorities please, to teach the Law of God. Not to mention the fact that such schools will be expensive - while the current schools, led and often maintained by the clergy, cost almost nothing - the mentors required in great numbers are not easy to select and prepare, while now the clergy are represented by ready and certified people. From the time of the adoption of Christianity until the present time, the Russian people have had no other teachers except the clergy. The spiritual father, testing his parishioners, teaching them in church, sanctifying them with the sacraments, praying with them on all the most important solemn occasions of life, taking the closest part in their sorrows and joys, was and is the most natural teacher and head of the rural school. And that the clergy justified their calling by the instruction of the people, the entire Russian history serves as proof of this. What difficulties the Russian people have endured! He endured difficult times of princely civil strife, the Tatar yoke, impostors and the struggle with the Poles, and then the French, he generously submitted to the transformative turning point of the early 18th century. and deserved surprise at his restraint after the Regulations were announced to him on February 19. 1861. In all these cases, for 900 years, he had one school for his entire mass - the church, and was led by one teacher - the clergy. All this, of course, does not lead to a hasty change in the system of public education, which was established by itself and justified by the experience of centuries. If there are shortcomings in it, then it is more convenient and more reliable to correct them than to find and introduce new, artificial, untested, unjustified systems, not very encouraging with success and very threatening in case of failure, because this failure will extend to the whole of Russia. The imperfection of rural schools and teachers of the ecclesiastical department stems most from a lack of methods. The teacher has the necessary information; it needs to be better adapted to the task. Let there be ways for the teacher and teaching aids for the students; he will not find it difficult to acquire a reliable method of teaching, even without the help of special pedagogical instructions, through books and his own experience and meetings with people of similar occupations. This hope is based on experience... ...For some time now, in the field of the Russian word, a kind of lack of authority has been spreading, inattention to previously accepted rules, disrespect for previously recognized models - under the guise of nationality and universal intelligibility, a trend is developing not towards a pure, noble, correct nationality, but towards a mixed, low, irregular common people. As one of the harmful consequences of this direction, if it is not possible to correct it, one must be afraid that the language under the pen of writers, and then in the mouths of the people, will quickly deviate from the Slavic church dialect, that the beautiful, strong, imbued with the spirit of Christian teaching, church liturgical language will finally become completely incomprehensible to those present at the Divine service... If the state rightly takes care that the language of the state prevails over the language of subjects of different tribes, is it less worthy of care that the language of the Church does not finally become a foreign language through the capricious and in no way necessary removal of the folk language from it (Letter to the President of the Imperial Academy of Sciences, Count S.S. Uvarov). In 1862, Metropolitan Philaret ordered that in Moscow churches, at each service, a prayer should be used, which is usually read at festive litias and where they ask the Lord to turn away from us his anger, righteously moved against us, etc. This, says A.N. Muravyov, created rumors, especially in St. Petersburg, that the Metropolitan was predicting some kind of misfortune ahead of us. On this occasion, Filaret wrote to the mentioned person: “Not prayer, but a well-known prayer petition, not by prescription, but by example, began to be used more often than usual in Moscow, because our sins have multiplied and most of all require repentant and intensified prayer. This seems clear to well-meaning people; and if an explanation is needed, then I will say, among other things, that censored and uncensored literature widely disseminates thoughts and teachings that are anti-religious, anti-moral, anti-government, and many become seriously infected..." “...We have lived to see some kind of foggy time,” the Metropolitan said in another letter. - Darkness covers our minds. In some you see the unexpected, in others you do not see the expected” (Letters from Metropolitan Philaret to A.N. Muravyov, pp. 594–597). During the Polish rebellion of 1863, when the turmoil in our minds put the unity and indivisibility of Russia in serious question, Metropolitan Philaret with deep animation supported those who stood guard over this foundation of our national and state existence. In this difficult time, the saint blessed the publisher of the Moskovskie Vedomosti, who received from him, among other expressions of sympathy, an image of the Archangel Michael (on his day, November 8, 1864) with a significant inscription in his own hand. He also supported Muravyov in his fight against the rebellion in the North-Western Territory. “It was heard and seen,” the Bishop wrote to him in May 1863, at the very time of his appointment there, “that your Excellency’s busy service finally required relief, so that part of the official work could be replaced by a share of peace. But as the king’s word called you to defend and pacify the fatherland, you forgot the need for relief and peace: without hesitation, you took on a burden that required strong strength and tireless activity, and found new strength in love for the king and the fatherland. The faithful sons of the king and the fatherland learned about this with joy and hope. Your purpose is already the defeat of the enemies of the fatherland. Your name is victory. May the Lord of hosts accomplish for you the work of righteousness and the work of peace. May he send you the heavenly Archangel of the same name; May he come before you with a sword of fire and may he cover you with the shield of heaven. With these thoughts and desires, I forward to you, along with this blessing, the icon of St. Archangel Michael...” “Having first greeted in your person the ascetic of royal truth and the Russian people, I have,” the Metropolitan wrote on September 21. 1864, - it is still a duty to greet you as an ascetic of Orthodoxy in a country where it once dominated, then suffered for a long time and again recently, and where you are raising from the ground its ancient buried glory. May the Lord continue to preserve your strength, your activity and multiply its fruits. The ancient shroud, opened by your urgent jealousy, from the hands of kidnappers and desecrators, and returned and assigned to the Moscow Novodevichy Convent as the place of its origin, and the act drawn up about it, have been received by me.” After Karakozov’s attempt on the life of the late Sovereign Emperor Alexander Nikolaevich regarding the call of Count M.N. Muravyov’s response to the fight against sedition, Metropolitan Filaret wrote to him in July 1866: “By the invisible signals of God’s Providence, the Supreme Power calls you to difficult feats, and in such a way that the voice of the people responds with strong sympathy to the calling voice of the King. And now, alarmed by the terrible moment, the fatherland looks at your feat with concern and hope, and its zealous sons pray to God that you will be given enough strength and means to discover and abolish the root of evil, so that it will no longer vegetate. I learned with consolation that in the midst of the difficult feat of serving the Tsar and the Fatherland, at the same time you are performing the voluntary feat of serving God: you are building the church of the Lord (on your estate). Receive to the throne of this church the Holy Gospel, brought from my zeal, with the invocation of earthly and heavenly blessings on your soul, your life and your deeds, from time to eternity.” On the occasion of the death of Count M.N. Muravyov, the Moscow Metropolitan wrote to the brother of the deceased A.N. Muravyov the following: “From day to day my thought turns to you to say a word of sympathy about an event that is sad for all who love the fatherland, for you for a special reason. But my old age moves poorly, and my thought, having moved forward, silently sinks into thought with its weight. We pray with all our might for the ever-memorable boyar Mikhail, that in his goodness the Lord may remember his feat, strong to death, in loyalty to the Tsar and love for the fatherland, and may he reward him with peace and a heavenly crown. We included his name in church diptychs. The word about his death is on everyone’s lips and everyone has a feeling of loss, which is why many prayers for him will ascend to heaven. What to think about his sudden death? One might think that it should not increase the feeling of sadness. He moved directly from a difficult state feat to a spiritual feat. Removing himself from everything worldly, in the midst of rural simplicity, he celebrated the consecration of the church he had created, and rejoiced spiritually; his soul was exalted, and then it was said to his angel: this is a good moment to take this soul. Let us give him, ourselves, each other and our whole life to Christ our God.” During an ethnographic exhibition in Moscow, during a visit to Metropolitan Philaret by gathered representatives of various Slavic tribes, the saint said the following: “I have unexpected consolation to greet the longed-for guests and brothers whom I see here and whom Moscow now sees beyond expectation. Blessed be our God and Lord Jesus Christ, who has visited and is visiting miserably divided humanity and directing it to one salvation and salvific unity. Slavs and Slavic-Russians are one race. But its beginning is obscured by time. Its branches are divided by the movement of human affairs. This division was unfavorable to the unity of his language. God raised up two holy brothers in the flesh and in the spirit, who became our fathers in the spirit, giving birth to us with the gospel of Christ, and renewed and exalted our natural brotherhood with spiritual brotherhood. There is no doubt that kindred love is perfected and strengthened by Christian love. The unity of spirit and language is protected by the fact that the Slavic language has become the language of faith and the Church. We Russians have inherited this gift of God from our oldest brothers in Christianity and never cease to be grateful. Let us sympathize with the sorrows, rejoice in the hopes of our brothers, and through division we see towards unity. And now an unexpected incident from distant countries raises up the zealots of Slavic brotherhood and unites them in the center of Russian unity, in order to pour out brotherly feeling directly from heart to heart and, despite external divisions, to be found in living inner unity. Having seen the signs of Providence in our past, let us dare to see a sign for good in the present. In the spirit of Christianity, may our unity grow, and in such unity may we have strength capable of victoriously creating and spreading common and private good. We greet you with sincere love and good hope through faith in the all-good Providence of God.” Regarding the Greek-Bulgarian feud, the Metropolitan wrote to the Patriarch of Constantinople in January 1866: “It is worthy... of your prayers that the people, who have long remained in obedience to the throne of Constantinople, and are now agitated, struggling, tempted, be pacified and protected in Orthodoxy by providing them with the contented freedom to have pastors and teachers who are understandable, to listen to divine services in an understandable language and to teach children in a natural language...” You might be interested in: