Родные отголоски

I. Russian holiday overseas Russian anniversary. - American voices. – Their view of the past twenty-fifth anniversary of Russia. – Russian and American press. Along one of the longitudinal New York streets, namely Second Avenue, the aerial railway track runs at a terrible height, above five-story buildings. The trains constantly scurrying along it present a monstrously grandiose picture, at the sight of which fear fights with surprise in an unaccustomed viewer. On the Avenue crossing 50th Street there is an airway station; from the station a four-part staircase goes down, resting on a stone sidewalk, above which rises a row of slender chocolate houses, simple to the point of monotony, and at the same time elegant to the point of originality, American architecture, with a whole series of entrances that are monotonous to the point of indistinguishability. One of these entrances, however, immediately attracts the attention of those who go down the stairs from the aerial railway station. As soon as the royal luminary of the day rises above the horizon, its rays focus with special love on a small golden cross standing above the entrance, under which, above the door itself, there is a golden inscription: “Greek-Russian Church” 16. On Tuesday, March 2, new style (February 19, old style), 1880, at 11 a.m., unusual movement occurred near this entrance. Luxurious carriages, one after another, rolled up to the entrance and, having released their riders, stood in orderly rows; Ordinary Russian people came out from the air stairs and from the carriages of the horse-drawn railway, bowed before the golden cross and entered the open door; American passers-by stopped with interest in front of the entrance and admired both the golden tints of the Orthodox-Russian cross and the movement taking place at its foot. The Americans had nothing to inquire about the reason for this movement at the entrance of the Russian church. They all knew her. There was not a newspaper in New York that would not have published articles on this day about the “great Russian holiday”, about the “anniversary of the Tsar.” Yes, it was a great Russian holiday on American soil and the movement described above was its outward expression. On this day, we Russians, separated from our homeland by distant lands and a boundless ocean, merged in thought and heart with our native land and together with it sent warm greetings of love to our beloved Monarch, on the eternally memorable day for Russian history of the twenty-fifth anniversary of his reign. We began preparations for this great holiday long before its onset. In addition to decorating the church, the main concern was to form a singing choir, since the monophonic singing of the psalmist was completely insufficient for such a solemn day and service. The question of forming a choir, given the insufficient number of Russians living here, turned out to be quite difficult. True, many Americans and especially American ladies were very sympathetic to our holiday and promised their assistance; but the rehearsal that was done showed that their assistance could only complicate the matter, since they had to write the entire mass in English letters and teach them to pronounce Slavic words that were completely beyond their ability. To serve mass in English, as happens on Sundays, was considered inconvenient for such an exclusively Russian holiday. As a result, I had to decline the kind offer of services from the American ladies, thanking them for their sympathetic attitude towards Russia and the Russian celebration. We had to limit ourselves to the Russians. Fortunately, among them there were people who willingly got down to business. This is the Russian doctor P. who lives here and the leader of the nobility B., who was in Russia, who together with the psalm-reader made up a trio. A Slavic divine service with such a Russian choir, with a mass of selected audiences led by official representatives, had an extremely solemn character and corresponded to the importance of the day being experienced in Russian history. This prayerfully grateful offering to the Almighty of Russian hearts overseas was, as it were, an echo of the fiery unanimous prayer of the Russian land itself, which offered it for its Tsar seven hours before us. The time difference between Moscow and New York is approximately 7 hours; therefore, when our service began at 11 o’clock, in the heart of Russia it was already 6 o’clock in the evening and the illumination was lit. I will not describe the details of the service and its setting, and will leave the description to the peculiar language of one of the American reporters. In the evening edition of the largest and most widespread American newspaper, Herald, the following was published on the very day of our holiday. “The twenty-fifth anniversary of the Tsar's accession to the throne was celebrated today in the small Greco-Russian church in due manner with some degree of pomp and ceremony. Honorable Fr. Bierring performed the service in a rich gold-embroidered outer robe (i.e. chasuble), under which was worn a silk purple inner dress (i.e. sacristan), and in a hat of the same color, recently sent to him from St. Petersburg as a badge of honor. In Russia, only bishops wear such a hat 17. The service was performed in Russian, except for instructions from St. scriptures that were read in English. Liturgy of St. Chrysostom, usual on holidays, was sung by a selected choir of male voices, and prayers were offered for the Emperor and the Imperial family and the fleet, so that God would take their side and subdue every enemy and adversary under their feet. Prayers for a long reign, good health, constant victories and the final salvation of “the most pious and God-protected Alexander Nikolaevich” were frequent and touching. Prayer was also offered for the peace and welfare of the church and the whole world. The President of the United States and the Tsar were mentioned together in the petitions. The song “We praise God to you” concluded the entire service. Among the pilgrims were: the Russian envoy in Washington, his wife and two sons. The envoy was dressed in his formal court costume, with the insignia of his position on his chest and shoulders; as the Emperor's representative, he occupied a place behind a special fence. Russian Consul General with his wife; several foreign consuls in New York and two or three dozen distinguished American ladies were also present at the service. Many important clergy and secular persons of the city sent their congratulations on the long and fruitful reign of the Emperor and on the preservation of his life, and expressed their strong contempt for the nihilists who attempted his life. The queen was mentioned touchingly both in the prayers of the church and in letters received by Fr. Bierring from the Americans. The small chapel was crowded with people and the whole service made a strong impression.” The extent to which the Americans were interested in our Russian holiday can be seen from the fact that in some illustrated publications a detailed engraved image of the church and the entire setting of the service appeared. Only here free art has already given complete freedom to the imagination, behind the bold and unashamed scope of which one can hardly recognize the actual subject of the image. So in the picture published in the illustrated magazine “Frank Leslie”, the priest is dressed completely in Anglican attire, with a kamilavka, however, on his head, and with a Catholic cross with a bas-relief image of the crucifix raised high in his hands; and the three-voice choir is swollen into a countless one, in which it is impossible to count the masses of heads stretching towards the music notebooks. The general situation of the church, however, is captured quite correctly. A fairly correct portrait of the Sovereign Emperor is also placed nearby. I had the opportunity to read the letters from various high-ranking American officials mentioned by the reporter myself, and I must say that they are all imbued with such a warm feeling of love and sympathy for our crowned Jubilee and for the entire Russian people, which can only come from the hearts of friends who truly love Russia. The Americans expressed their sympathy for our beloved Monarch and for all of Russia, but not only in private letters; they expressed them openly – in newspapers. All newspapers published an editorial on the very day of the holiday expressing these sympathies and congratulations to Russia on the day of its great holiday, and the main newspapers, for example. “Herald” gave entire essays on the past twenty-fifth anniversary in its columns. In its editorial, the Tsar newspaper wrote, among other things, the following, dwelling mainly on the evil that is disgracing the Russian land: “Today marks twenty-five years since Alexander II ascended the throne of the Russian Empire, after the death of his father, Emperor Nicholas; and this day the nihilists have chosen, if their threats can be taken seriously, as the moment in which they want to amaze their fellow citizens with an act of diabolical rage 18 . And for what? Because Russia is not governed the way they would like to govern it. Because the ruler is part of a complex state organism and does not create chaos by declaring a wild world republic, these people are plotting brutal revenge on the most humane, animated by the best desires for the good of his people, and the most enlightened Monarch that Russia has had since the overthrow of the Mongol yoke. A liberal and constitutional system of government is preferred because it provides moral and material benefits, better provides for life and property, and enhances popular development in general. But do the nihilists promise all these benefits with their system of murders and arson? And can the Russian people be convinced with fire and a revolver that the nihilists are better than those whom they want to replace? Never before in history has there been a coup that was based on such an insane, childish theory. The essence of the nihilistic theory is to force the government to reform through intimidation. This theory is based on the assumption that the whole people are imbued with cowardice and that the fear of death is quite sufficient to force everyone to the course of action that is presented as an alternative to murder. But everything was just the opposite. No one was afraid, the government only became more and more strengthened and the people now hate nothing more than insane political theories, in the name of which their houses are burned and their best people are killed.” As proof of the love of the Russian people for their Monarch, the newspaper elsewhere cites a review from its St. Petersburg correspondent, who says that “when the national anthem rang out near the Alexander Column at nine o’clock in the morning: “God Save the Tsar!” and the frosty air trembled with the movement of a thousand common people’s voices, then it was difficult for a foreigner to think that nihilism is anything other than the product of some detective’s frustrated imagination, and that Alexander II does not have a firm place in the hearts of his fellow tribesmen and subjects.” Another American newspaper, second after the Herald in terms of circulation, but first in the seriousness of its direction, namely the New York Times, published an article under the title: “Twenty-five years of empire,” in which, in a purely American way, it proves with numbers the beneficialness of the past twenty-fifth anniversary for Russia. Here's what the newspaper wrote: “The present reign, which is twenty-five years old, was the most fruitful period in Russian history. Since the accession to the throne of Alexander II, Russia has made more real progress than in the entire previous century. In 1855 it had only 419 miles of railway; now it has more than 10,000. In 1855, only three cities in the entire empire, namely St. Petersburg, Moscow and Odessa, were tolerably paved or illuminated; now each of the main provincial cities is well furnished in both these respects, and the new St. Petersburg gas company is one of the most flourishing in the empire. In 1855, the total number of factories and factories in European Russia was 17,536, producing annually 350,000,000 rubles; in 1867 - in the first half of the current reign - there were already 23,721 of them with an annual production of 500,000,000 rubles, and now both of these figures are of course much larger. The irregularity and confusion in legal proceedings carried out according to outdated medieval forms were incredible; Now the jury, introduced in 1865, has become a popular institution. The length of military service of Russian soldiers was 25 years or more, now it is limited to 7 years. The various cruel and humiliating punishments constantly practiced in the imperial army are now almost completely abolished, and since 1861 there has only once been a case of racing through the gauntlet. In 1855, 23,000,000 peasants were slaves; now they are free and many of them have become landowners and rich merchants. Even in the territory Russia made significant acquisitions during this period. In Europe it acquired southern Bessarabia; in Asia Minor it annexed part of northern Armenia; in central Asia conquered a territory equal to France; the southern border of Siberia was extended by almost 1,000 miles at the expense of China, and the important island of Sakhalin was acquired on the Great Ocean. But besides all this, Russia has taken a step that perfectly compensates for one of its biggest shortcomings. It formed, if not quite a middle class, then the embryo of this class, which is now spreading more and more widely every year. Of the 55,000,000 population that was actually in Russia in 1861, 29,000,000 were free peasants and 23,000,000 slaves, so that to counterbalance them only 1,000,000 nobles, 4,000,000 townspeople and 650,000 clergy remained. All that is needed for the mass of the Russian people is conscious obedience to the government. The chosen instruments of nihilism are those who have no place in the world and dreamy half-educated people who have nothing to lose and whose heads are as empty as their pockets. The security of Russia requires the formation of a class of business and industrial people for whom order would be the first condition of prosperity and any violation of it would be ruin.” From the above excerpts one can see with what seriousness the American press is concerned with the fate of a foreign country, Russia, with what sound practical understanding it weighs the conditions of its existence and development. What is our Russian press doing? When will she be freed from the disgraceful nightmare of gossip, bickering and phrase-mongering liberalism? When will she, with the sincerity of heartfelt love, look at the crying needs of her native land and call to action the forces that lurk in the unexplored depths of the Russian people and are waiting not only for a flabby false call, but for a call that comes straight from the heart? It's time to come to some sense, it's high time!.. An echo of Russian grief overseas. - Condolences from the Americans. –Voices of society, press and government. - Funeral services in Washington and New York. – American preacher on freedom and its abuse. Joy and grief are inseparable in human life, and grief often follows on the heels of joy. Only a year ago the Russian people celebrated, together with their Tsar, another anniversary of the twenty-fifth anniversary of the reign of their beloved Monarch, and popular rejoicing thundered throughout the country. But grief, terrible and heavy grief was already at the door. And then it appeared, and the people’s cry swept across the Russian land, covering up the traces of the joy they had just experienced. O joy! fleetingness is your real name! From the horror of the villainously bloody tragedy that forever disgraced the Russian land, the entire globe shook, wherever the iron nerves of the earth ran. Overseas, in New York, terrible news was received on the very day the sacrilegious crime was committed. The newspapers received telegrams at about six o'clock in the evening, and at about the same time a telegram was sent from Washington from the Russian Imperial Embassy to the priest of the Russian Church, calling him to the national capital to perform a memorial service. Meanwhile, newspaper reporters spread the fatal news throughout the city and all of New York instantly became a place of terrible excitement: the talk of indignation and horror spread throughout all public and private institutions where there were living people. The next morning, the sad fact found a place on the pages of all newspapers, and the mood with which the American people reacted to it was also expressed there. Never before had he expressed such strong and unanimous indignation as he now expressed against the villains who raised their deadly hand against the crowned head of the Russian Tsar-Liberator. The American people themselves once experienced the shame inflicted on them by the villains in the assassination of President-Liberator Lincoln; therefore he is able to understand Russian grief more deeply than any other people. And the deeper he felt his condolences for the Russian people, the more formidable was his indignation against the perpetrators of his grief. The New York Herald, publishing the next day a huge account of the regicide, together with a detailed outline of the past reign, said in an editorial: “Murder can never be beneficial for the destinies of kingdoms and peoples; on the contrary, all friends of freedom, above all others, deplore any attempt to achieve it through murder. Nihilism or revolution will never receive a more severe blow in the eyes of humanity than from the murder of this noble and valiant sovereign. These attempts to change the fate of the people through violence against the fundamental law of social existence are the essence of extreme madness. As far as America is concerned, the fate of the Tsar will be accepted with deep sorrow. He was not only the head of a nation connected with the United States by ties of special sympathy, but he was a friend of the Union at a time when the Union needed friends. The world will remember him as the liberator of the serfs. America will not forget him as the only sovereign who, during our civil war, was generous and open in his sympathy for our cause. And now that the shadow of death has fallen upon his royal brow, our sorrow is increased by the fact that in his loss civilization has lost a far-sighted and beneficent sovereign, and America has lost a loyal and powerful friend.” The majestic newspaper then attacks nihilism with bitter indignation and thunderous curses. But to characterize American public opinion in this regard, I present an excerpt from another serious American newspaper, The Times. In an editorial entitled: “What have the Nihilists done?” newspaper says: “The nihilists killed the king, but didn’t they also kill nihilism? These savages and half-crazed women in vain imagined that the throne, the crown and the imperial rule would instantly disappear as soon as the vital spark in the cruelly mutilated body of their victim was extinguished. They expressed no goal other than that which they had now achieved. They were called the apostles of pure destruction; and, besides this, they have no cure for human evils, no plan to rebuild the state and form a happier society. This is a disgusting and soulless bunch. Their main and deadly goal (regicide) has now been achieved, and they are brought face to face with the most complete test of any system - the first success. When the shock of horror from their terrible crime passes, the world will wait to see what the nihilists propose to do next, and it will see that - nothing. Their empty and inhuman teaching does not lead them further. But they will answer for their bloody deed, if not before Russian justice, then before the rest of the world, and will lose the last spark of sympathy with which some poorly educated friends of freedom in other countries treated them. Now, more than ever, nihilism has thrown off its mask and openly stands as the main enemy of the freedom of the Russian people. He killed the Tsar Liberator, whom the peasantry loved because he had broken the chains on their hands, and whose only enemies were the outcasts of the bloated and dissolute middle class and the false friends of freedom who called themselves nihilists. Nihilism has constantly retarded the growth of Russian freedom and now, perhaps, has dealt it a blow from which it will not recover for a generation. It is known that Alexander II was a sovereign of liberal inclinations. In proof of this it is sufficient to point to his emancipation of the serfs and the warm sympathy with which he regarded popular institutions as they exist in the United States.” The American people expressed their sympathy for the Russian people not only through the press, but also through their representative meetings. Thus, the New York State Legislative Assembly, one of its first acts in the session on March 14 (2), adopted the following resolution regarding Russian grief: “Resolved: That the Assembly of the State of New York, representing more than five million of the American people and the moral, political and social feelings of the State and the whole country, heard with the deepest sorrow of the death through the assassination of Alexander II, former Tsar of Russia since 1855. He was a friend of the American Union when the country was plunged into a terrible civil war. The liberator of 23,000,000 Russian serfs, the liberator of Bulgaria, and by his death was busy establishing a constitutional form of government for the entire Russian people. During the past year he abolished the heavy tax on the poorer classes of his people and destroyed the despotic power of the third department, which arrested citizens on suspicion and exiled them to Siberia without investigation or any form of trial. The people of this State, while everywhere sympathetic to constitutional liberty and fair equality, at the same time abhor murderers, whether they be under imperial government, as in Russia, or under popular government, as in the republic of the United States. He remembers the brutal murder of his own elected head, President Lincoln, and wishes to testify to his disgust with the crime of political murder, considering it hostile to freedom, civilization and Christianity, and the most bitter enemies of all reform - both in the states and nations of America, and in the states and empires of the whole world. A member of the legislative assembly, Mr. Erastus Brooks, who introduced this resolution, addressed the meeting with a long, fiery speech of sympathy for the Russian people, and the meeting unanimously accepted and approved both the speech and the resolution. Similar resolutions were adopted by the legislative assemblies of other states of the American Union, and as if a general summary of them was the resolution of the United States Senate in Washington. During the session on March 14 (2), the American Senate unanimously adopted the following resolution: “Since the Senate of the United States of America, now convened in special session, has received news of the death, through lawless and inhuman violence, of His Majesty Emperor Alexander II of Russia, then It was determined that the Senate unites its voice with the voice of all civilized peoples in denying murder as a means of revenge for all oppression, real or imagined. Defined; that remembering and cherishing with pleasure the relations of true friendship which have always existed between the peoples and governments of Russia and the United States, for the strengthening and maintenance of which the late Emperor earnestly exercised his great influence, the Senate expresses its condolences to the government and people of Russia for its bitter national loss. It was determined that the Secretary of the Senate will transmit a copy of these determinations to the President of the United States, with a request that he communicate them to the Russian government.” Regarding this Senate resolution, the Herald wrote: “The universal expression of sympathy and condolences for the late Tsar throughout the civilized world is what could be expected, and is quite worthy and touching. We are glad that the United States Senate followed the prompt action of Blain (the First Minister) in sending a message of condolence to the Russian Government. Regarding the crime, only one opinion is possible.” Finally, American students did not lag behind others in expressing their sympathies for the Russian people and contempt for the villainous gang of murderers. Students of the best college in New York, Columbia, Faculty of Political Science, “unanimously adopted a resolution of condolences to the reigning house of Russia and to all the benevolent and law-governing Russian people, striving for gradual, peaceful and constant social development. And they cannot strongly and severely condemn all seditious outbreaks of violence and criminal excesses as insane, invalid and entailing the most disastrous consequences for the constant progress of society. Newspaper reporters scattered throughout the city, looking for and questioning everyone who had somehow come into contact with Russia, and the opinion of all such people (with the exception of a few fragments of the nihilistic party, who openly took pride in the villainy, incurring even greater public contempt) was unanimous and powerful sympathy for the Russian people and indignation at the villains. The flags of all foreign consulates and even private institutions were lowered to half mast - in a position of sadness, and through the usual hum of the monotonous industrial bustle of the American metropolitanate, a mournful note of condolences was noticeably heard for the poor Russian people, who allowed an atrocity to be committed among themselves, the news of which threateningly cries out to the sky. Having received a sad telegram from His Excellency, the Russian Imperial Envoy in Washington, the rector of the Russian Orthodox Church in New York quickly got ready for the journey, and on Tuesday night went to the national capital of the American people, together with the psalm-reader and the Consul General of New York. The fast train thundered through the darkness of the night and arrived in Washington early in the morning. There, active preparations were already being made for the funeral service, and the wife of Mr. Imperial Envoy Bartholomew was personally involved in bringing her hall into a position appropriate for the mournful service. Meanwhile, the capital of the American people followed these preparations with warm sympathy, and this, among other things, was expressed in the fact that the priests of one Episcopal church offered their church as a place for performing a memorial service, accompanying this offer with warm declarations of their sympathy and condolences. “By daring to make such an offer of my church for Orthodox use,” says the venerable rector of the church Herold in his letter, “I only mean to declare my deep respect for your ancient Catholic Church and express my heartfelt condolences to the Imperial family and the Russian people.” Since the necessary preparations had already been made at the residence of the Russian Imperial Envoy, the Russian priest could only thank the Episcopal American rector for his kind offer and warm sympathy for the Russian people, which he did by personally paying him a visit. The funeral service was scheduled for 3 pm on Tuesday (15) March 3, and official invitations were sent out by representatives of the powers. By the appointed time, the envoys' carriages, one after another, began to roll up to the entrance of the Russian embassy and brilliantly uniformed persons emerged from them, who were kindly greeted by the Russian imperial envoy and his wife, dressed in deep mourning. The brilliance of the various court uniforms, obscured by the mourning crepe of the entire surrounding environment, with the dim flicker of three candles burning on the table, in front of which stood the priest and the psalm-reader waiting for a sign to begin the funeral service, the smoking of incense, which fell in thick clouds on the group of representatives of the powers, and the quiet murmur of greetings and condolences - all this was a solemn and impressive expression the prevailing mood of grief. Reporters closely followed the funeral service and the next day detailed reports about the “Russian requiem” appeared in all newspapers in Washington, New York and other cities. The Washington newspaper The National Republican published the following description of the funeral service: “The residence of the Russian minister, on Connecticut Avenue, was the scene of an impressive and brilliant assembly yesterday afternoon on the occasion of a memorial service in honor of the late Tsar of Russia. It was interesting to see how the diplomatic corps and the family of ministers and attaches passed under the heavy arch of crape, which served as an emblem of sadness. Inside the house, an overwhelming silence reigned and a mood of sorrow reigned. The windows were shaded, the walls were hung with heavy folds of mourning material, framed with silk crape and fringe, and all the signs of mourning were visible, with which only the Eastern church and the Russian court express all the grief for the royal dead. At the eastern edge of the hall an altar was improvised, on which three lighted candles were the only signs of the church's faith. In front stood members of the Russian embassy and Consul General Veletsky from New York, whose court uniforms were wrapped in crepe and the buttons of the court dress were covered with black. The British envoy with his family, the French and German envoys, in short, the entire diplomatic corps were crowded behind the Russian embassy. The United States Secretaries of State (Ministers), Vlan and Lincoln, with their spouses and specially invited friends, witnessed the religious service performed by Father Nikolai Bierring and his assistant, the Honorable Father (!) Lopukhin, from New York. “Rest, O Lord, the soul of Your departed servant, the most pious Emperor Alexander Nikolaevich,” said Father Bierring, and this was the dominant spirit of the entire service. The assistant answered him and sang: “I will pour out my prayer to the Lord, and to Him I will declare my sorrow.” At the conclusion of the ceremonies, a blessing was given to everyone by raising the cross and a proclamation of eternal memory was sung to the royal deceased. In one of the back rooms of the house one could see a large portrait of the late Emperor, hung with emblems of mourning, and adding even more sad solemnity to the entire surrounding situation.” Similar reports were transmitted by telegraph to newspapers in New York, Baltimore, Philadelphia, Boston, Chicago and other cities around the country. Among the members of the diplomatic corps were not only representatives of European and Christian powers, but also Asian ones. So, there were members of the Chinese embassy in their national costumes, and members of the Japanese embassy in shiny European uniforms. The Turkish embassy was present in full force. A remarkable feature of it is that it is all Greek Orthodox, and therefore belongs to the parish of the Russian Orthodox Church in New York. It was assumed that the newly elected President of the United States, Garfield, would be present at the funeral service, but his difficult work in his new position forced him to limit his representation to the first cabinet ministers - Blanc and Lincoln, who stood out sharply from the ranks of members of the diplomatic corps with their simple black dress. For the last of them, presence at a Russian Orthodox memorial service was accompanied not only by a feeling of general condolences for the Russian people, but also by deep personal sorrow of his own heart. He is the son of the famous President of the United States, Lincoln, who, like our late sovereign, was a benefactor of mankind, a liberator of millions of slaves, and like our sovereign fell from the villainous hand of the enemies of true freedom. The mournful sounds of the memorial service for the late sovereign now fell heavily on his filial heart, revived in him the memory of his valiant father, who died for the good of humanity, he could not overcome his feelings. He cried throughout the entire memorial service... Yes, the dark power of hellish malice on earth is truly great, and only with the blood of martyrs can the kingdom of truth and goodness in humanity be purchased! On the following Sunday, a memorial service was held in the Russian church in New York. The church was dressed in the deepest mourning, in which, thanks to the solicitude of the consul, elegant taste was happily combined with signs of severe grief. The memorial service was scheduled for 11 a.m., after the usual liturgy; but masses of Americans began to arrive early in the morning, and by 10 o’clock not only was the church closely occupied, but the entire sidewalk outside was blackened with people, which a patrol of eight policemen sent to monitor order could barely cope with. In addition to personal presence in the Russian church, Americans expressed their sympathies in written statements. Both on the very day of the memorial service and the next day, the Russian priest received a lot of letters expressing deep condolences. Letters were received not only from residents of New York, but from neighboring cities and even from distant states. The preachers of American churches joined the general chorus of sympathy for the Russian people and in their own expressed both condolences to Russia and contempt for the insane and brutal movement of nihilism. One of the preachers, namely Dr. Newman, developed a whole treatise on this subject on freedom and its abuse, which may not be useless for those who vaguely imagine the idea of ​​​​freedom, of which we unfortunately have quite a few in Russia - even among such persons who consider themselves leaders of public opinion 19 . The preacher took the words of the apostle as his text. “You have been called to freedom, brothers; If only your freedom is not an excuse to please the flesh, but serve one another through love.” Gal.5:13. “Many imagine,” says the preacher, “that under the Gospel they can do whatever they want, and this without sin. Some people think that virtue and vice are conventional terms that do not represent realities, but only conventions. Others think that freedom is the negation of law, order and decency, and, as applied to morality, politics and welfare, it means liberation from all restrictions. On the contrary, freedom in its very concept contains limitation and responsibility. Unconditional freedom is not only an absurdity, but the attempt to exercise it is a crime against the universe. Man is an organized limitation. The human body can only grow to a certain height. Throw away this law of limitation, and man's head would reach such a height at which life is impossible. A person can eat and drink only a certain amount, can sleep so much, and can endure cold and heat for so much - all this contains a limitation. We are designed in such a way that even sensitivity has its limits. Feeling tension above this point leads to fainting or death. We could hear the music of the celestial spheres if we had sufficient auditory sensitivity for this; we could see the throne of the Invisible if we had the appropriate optical power. Our mental capacity is such that there are certain limits for it, beyond which we cannot think. Nature everywhere calls for a stop. Man has social responsibilities just as he has personal rights. Marriage is limited to two persons because the number of sexes is equal. Children must obey their parents to ensure domestic harmony and happiness. An organized society is an organized limitation. This means giving up personal freedom for the benefit of organized society. Government is a necessity that arises from our social needs. Every man is so created that he instinctively entrusts to the community of his fellows the care and defense of his rights and the vengeance of his wrongs, and his fellows in turn instinctively assume this authority. He and they do this with all the force of natural law. There is no room for choice whether a person wants or does not want to be a member of civil society. He becomes such as soon as he begins to live, and society immediately provides him with all the benefits of its care and requires him to fulfill certain duties. From this mutual relation arise the duties and rights of patriotism, and in recognition of this relation the citizen renders obedience to the law, pays taxes, and lays down his life, if necessary, for the good of his country. As a reward, the citizen receives protection of life, property and family, the benefits of education and religious freedom. There is currently a cry against the restrictions presented by the government; but this is the cry of madmen against wise and beneficent provision and protection. This is the cry of the wicked, the prodigal son, the drunkard, the swindler, the robber and the murderer. One form of government is undoubtedly better than another, but what matters most here is not the form of government, but the character of the citizen himself. The best men lived under the worst forms of government, like the apostles under Nero, the Puritans under the Stuarts. They were oppressed, persecuted, put to death, and they - valiant men - were models of virtue. It was also the case that under the best, paternal forms of government, the most vicious, bestial people lived. Of all the most honorable words in our spoken world, the sweetest to enchant, the most powerful to inspire, is “freedom.” It warms our hearts, expands our minds, inspires our courage. Because of her, humanity has fought for sixty centuries, for her people have died at the stake, on the battlefield, in the hands of an angry crowd. But what terrible crimes were committed in the name of freedom! The fires of the French Revolution ignited with cries of freedom; the commune stained the streets of Paris with human blood while screaming - freedom; The Tsar of Russia was killed in the name of “freedom.” But this is licentiousness; it is contempt for law, order and decency; it is the destruction of organized society; it means robbery and murder; this is an abuse of freedom. The hand that struck the Tsar of Russia or attempted the life of the Emperor of Germany would also strike the President of the Republic. They are the enemies of established authority, of organized limitation, and should have no connivance on the part of those who love order and respect the law. There is a cry against capital in our country at the present time, but capital is as necessary to the welfare of society as government itself. The enormous commercial enterprises of our time, which provide income to thousands of industrial citizens, cannot be carried on without enormous capital. These political and social errors arise for the most part from the philosophy of free thinkers who claim the right to think, speak and act as they please. I deny this right. The law of limitation everywhere has the same dominance as the law itself, and human thought is no exception to this rule. There is, of course, a difference between the ability to think and the right to think. I have the power to think that two times one makes four, that a part is greater than the whole, that an effect can be without a cause; but I have no right to this. By right I mean justification. To think that a part is greater than the whole is to think an absurdity. You have the ability to think that there is no God, but you do not have the right to think so, because you are obliged to think according to the laws of thought, the facts in a given subject and the results that can come out of your thinking. To think that an effect can exist without a cause is to commit a crime against reason, because you have no right to think something that is contrary to self-evident truth. Communism and nihilism are the offspring of this monstrous absurdity that a person has the right to think as he pleases. The freest man in the world is he who renders the fullest obedience to the law, and who recognizes the beneficent limitations under which he is created. This is religious freedom in its highest form. It is the emancipation of the soul from sin into a life of righteousness.” III. Russian Church in New York New York plan. – Location of the Russian church. – American house and premises occupied by the church. - Consecration. - Rector and psalm-readers. - Parishioners. – Chronicle of the decade. – Russian Charitable Society. – Sunday worship and a motley congregation of pilgrims. The layout of American cities is usually extremely simple. It consists of fiber, regularly divided into squares by streets bearing a numbered name. Cities in America were usually built so quickly that the first settlers could easily plan the entire future city at their own discretion, and the streets were built and populated with such speed that the city elders did not have time to come up with special names for them and therefore they resorted to the simplest method - calling them numbers: first street, second street, etc. New York has exactly the same plan. It is located on an oblong narrow island formed by the Hudson and Eastern rivers with the Harlem channel connecting them in the north. The island stretches like an arrow from south to north and is ten miles long and two miles wide. The streets running along the island are called avenues and there are only eleven of them, and the cross streets are called simply streets and there are more than two hundred of them, with a numbered name, except for a few streets in the old “lower” part of the city, where they are called by proper names. The settlement of the city moved from the ocean pier into the interior of the island, from south to north; That's why the streets are counted from south to north. In the southern part of the city there are many horse-drawn railway stations, from where carriages and trains depart every minute to the north along various avenues of the city. On the very shore of the ocean bay there is an aerial railway station. Let's go up the stairs to the high station, fixed on iron pillars, and take a ticket for the air train. Trains don't take long to arrive. After a minute or two, the puffing monster jumps out from around the corner of the red buildings and instantly stops at the station. "All aboard!" the conductors' command is heard, passengers crowd into the carriages, the iron doors snap shut and the monster, puffing and knocking, rushes on its usual path along the lattice railway, reinforced by high pillars above the street. The train rushes at a speed of forty miles per hour and in front of you only the tops of red and brown houses are dazzling in your eyes, and below the masses of bustling people are still swarming. The conductors shout out the names of the stations, the train stops at each of them after four or five blocks to take on new passengers in half a minute, and rushes further and further north. On one of the fortieth streets, across Second Avenue there is a transverse track of the overhead railway, and our train, in order to avoid collisions, waves through it, so that the track rises to a terrible height. The unaccustomed passenger's heart sank with horror, and he hurried to get off at the nearest station. "Fiftieth!" – the conductor mechanically shouts and, seeing your Russian baggyness, unceremoniously pushes you into the station to slam the door and rush on. A long staircase of more than a hundred steps leads down from the station and ends on a stone sidewalk, above which rises a row of chocolate houses of simple but elegant American architecture, with a series of entrances that are monotonous to the point of indistinguishability. One of the middle entrances, however, stands out sharply from the others. Above it shines a golden Russian cross, under which one can see a golden, but English inscription: “Greek-Russian Church” 20. So, here is this Russian Orthodox sanctuary, the only one on the entire eastern ocean coast of North America. The house in which the Russian church is located is located exactly in the middle of the square block on the left or western side of the street and is no different from the neighboring houses that closely converge with it on the right and left sides, under one continuous roof. The entire block, 40 yards long, looks like one big house, but in fact it consists of seven or eight houses. An American house is completely different from a European one. In large European cities, a house usually has dozens or hundreds of windows onto the street and is divided into apartments by floors with one or two common passages. Not at all the same here. Americans laugh at the European system. According to their proverb, “my home is my fortress,” and the American cannot tolerate anyone other than himself and those who deserve his special favor entering the door leading to his house. Therefore, the houses here usually consist of three windows facing the street, rarely of four and often of two, and each house has its own special front entrance from the street, and the entire house, mostly four or five floors, is occupied by one owner. On one floor he has a living room, on another a dining room, on a third a bedroom, on a fourth an office or nursery, and running up and down the stairs is the most characteristic feature of domestic American life. The house occupied by the Russian church has exactly the same structure. It consists of four floors, has three windows facing the street and a main entrance with steps leading directly to the mezzanine. Having climbed the steps, the visitor rings the bell, the door opens, and he enters a narrow corridor designated for staircases to all floors and occupying the space of one window. Upon entering the corridor on the left side, the visitor sees a door, and it leads into the church itself. This is a small room with two windows to the street, one and a half fathoms wide and three fathoms long. In ordinary American houses, this floor constitutes the so-called parler or living room and usually consists of two halves, separated in the middle by sliding doors. This arrangement of Parler made it possible to turn it into a church without any reconstruction. All you had to do was install an iconostasis instead of sliding doors, and immediately the front part of the parler became a church, and the back part - about one and a half fathoms long and wide - became an altar. This arrangement represents the current premises of the Russian Church in New York. It makes a good impression on every visitor - elegant simplicity and coziness. On the walls, gold-crested icons of the Moscow type are hung crosswise; in front of the iconostasis, on both sides, there are small bars for choirs and above them there is one banner. In the left wall in the middle of the church there is a fireplace, which usually burns with a bright flame during winter services, and the entire floor is covered with a good Persian carpet, as is usually the case in any parler among Americans who are not particularly fond of parquet. At the back there are several soft stools for American visitors who are not used to standing in church, and in front of the iconostasis there are three candlesticks and a lectern on the choir. The iconostasis is of good elegant workmanship. It was sent in finished form from Russia. In terms of its size, it is obviously designed for a small room, but here, thanks to the described feature of the American house, it turned out to be too wide, it could not fit the whole thing, and therefore it had to be shortened during installation. For this purpose, both side doors are bent towards the walls and present simple paintings, and the iconostasis has only one door to the altar, namely the royal doors. This, of course, is a great inconvenience in many respects, and above all in liturgical terms, since it does not provide the opportunity for the completeness of great and small exits, but there was no way to avoid it. As a result of this, the visitor cannot directly enter the altar from the church. To do this, he must go out into the corridors and from there enter the altar through another door. The furnishings of the altar are very elegant and represent the usual type of Russian altar. Only it faces not to the east, but directly to the west, which again could not be avoided in this room. The windows offer a magnificent view of a series of small courtyards covered with the greenery of vines and ivy, and in the distance the white bulk of the new Catholic Cathedral of St. Patrick. This immeasurable contrast between the modest, unnoticeable Orthodox altar and the majestic Roman Catholic church, towering grandiosely over the entire city, strikingly depicts the comparative position of these two churches in America. One has just timidly set foot on American soil, while the other has already reaped a rich harvest. Last fall, on November 12 (24), it was exactly ten years since Russian Orthodox worship was first heard in the capital of the eastern ocean coast of the American continent. On this day, the church was consecrated by His Grace Paul, the former bishop of Alaska, who performed the first divine service in it during his accidental stay in New York - while passing through Russia. Needless to say, what an important event this was for the local Russian colony. I don’t have the strength to portray the feelings that ordinary Russian people, abandoned by fate overseas, experienced at this sweet moment. Suffice it to say that one elderly Russian sailor, who has been living in America for twenty years, still cannot help but cry when he remembers how, for ten years, having almost never heard his native word, he suddenly heard: “Let us pray to the Lord in peace!” - “Lord have mercy!” “E-them, Al-r P-ch, just like my own mother suddenly spoke to me,” he conveyed his feelings to the author of these lines. “I fell into the ground, and the tears kept flowing, and I don’t know how I got up.” Americans, mostly from the upper classes, filled the church as much as the space would allow and looked in amazement at the Russian Orthodox service they had never seen before, and newspaper reporters spread the news throughout the country, heralding a new addition to the cosmopolitan world of American religiosity. After the consecration of the church, regular Sunday services began, first in English, and then little by little in Slavic. The rector of the church was priest Fr. Nikolai Bierring. He is Danish by birth, born in 1831 in a town in Denmark, where he received a solid education. Upon reaching adulthood, he was a zealous minister of the Roman Catholic Church and in various countries of the globe he carried out various assignments of the Roman Catholic authorities. In 1868 he was appointed professor of philosophy and history at the Roman Catholic Academy in Baltimore in the United States, and held this position for about a year. At this time the Roman Catholic world was agitated by the question of papal infallibility, and when this question, to the astonishment of the world, was resolved by establishing the dogma of papal infallibility, the spirit of many zealous Catholics was troubled by such an untruth. Between them was Fr. Nikolai Bierring. He could not reconcile this untruth with his convictions and turned to where the eternal, unchanging truth lives, turned to the fold of the Orthodox Church. In 1870, he was solemnly joined to Orthodoxy in the church of the St. Petersburg Academy and then was ordained a priest and appointed rector of the Russian Orthodox Church in New York. Everyone who had to enter into close relationships with Fr. Nikolai Bierring, they recognize that he is an educated person, well-read in philosophical and theological literature and a wonderful linguist. In addition to his native Danish, he speaks fluent German, English and Swedish and has literary knowledge of Latin and French. This extensive linguistic knowledge gives him the opportunity to easily communicate with multilingual church visitors, of whom there are usually many at every Sunday service. But it is surprising that the Russian language does not lend itself to him at all and he still does not speak or read it. He is a family man, has a wife and four children. Three floors of the house in which the church is located are occupied by his family. Psalm-readers serve as assistants to the rector. The New York Russian Church usually has one psalmist, who is appointed for three years. The position of the Russian Church, appearing for the first time among the most lively and developed people in the world, undoubtedly required great rigor in the choice of both its rector and psalm-readers. With the constant struggle of various confessions and churches in America, history has developed here a wonderful type of priest who must always know for certain all the philosophical, historical and theological foundations of his church, so that in any case, and there are many of them, he can give an answer about his beliefs. The same thing, of course, was required from the Russian priest and his assistants, so that they could become on par with the ministers of other churches. In general philosophical and theological education, the rector of the Russian church stands at the height of his calling. But many of the theological and historical foundations of the Russian Orthodox Church, which give it a particularly distinctive character, are rooted in the East and are perfectly known only by those who were born and raised in the East and in the bosom of the Orthodox Church. For Westerners they are unclear and inaccessible. To fill this aspect in the representation of the Russian Orthodox Church in America, an assistant was needed for the rector - a completely Russian person with a higher theological education. This has indeed been the case since the very establishment of the Russian Church in New York. Over the past decade, four psalmists have served here successively - all with Russian higher theological education. Of these, three have already served their term and the fourth is now serving. The first psalm-reader was candidate of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy E.K. Smirnov, now the rector of the Imperial Embassy Church in London. He was followed by a candidate from the same academy, A. Ya. Perov, who is now Fr. teacher of law at the Elizabethan Women's Institute in St. Petersburg. For the next three years, the psalm-reader was A. I. Mikhailovsky, a candidate at the Kyiv Academy, now a lecturer in English at the same academy. The current psalm-reader, candidate of the St. Petersburg Academy A.P. Lopukhin, entered the position at the end of 1879 and has been there for about two years. The parish of the local Russian church is not large, but diverse. In addition to the official parishioners - members of the Russian embassy and consulate, it includes Russians living here, Slavs of various tribes and Greeks. There are currently about fifty Russians in New York; about a dozen of them are educated people, and the rest are simple workers, mainly Russian sailors. Despite the difference in education, they are all the same in their fate. With two or three exceptions, all the Russians here are unfortunate stepchildren of fate, forcibly driven to the soil of the New World and most of them are in distress. All of these are, so to speak, prodigal sons: some fled from Russian justice, others from debts, others from military and naval service, and so on. But prodigal sons often return to the bosom of the Heavenly Father with such fiery, repentant love, which is often lacking in those who are constantly in this bosom. For many of the local Russians, the church is their only support - both moral and material. The Slavs also number up to fifty people and most of them are Austrian Serbs who fled from the German yoke. They understand the Church Slavonic language of worship well. The Greeks constitute the most important nation of the parish. There are more than a hundred of them in New York; All of them are economical family people and some of them are very rich and conduct an extensive cotton trade. When comparing the social position of these three Orthodox nationalities in America, it is regrettable to say that the Russians turn out to be least of all capable of winning for themselves a tolerable position in that country of free labor. A Greek and a Slav quickly settle down here and start a household and a family, but a Russian always remains a proletarian and a bourgeois, unable to withstand the competition of more savvy, courageous and independent people. Two or three of the Russians belong to those who in Russia call themselves “preachers of honest labor.” Their current life in the country of free labor shows that preaching honest work is far from the same as actually living it. Parasite illusions have now turned into hungry reality. By the way, it should be noted that most of the Russians here lead a miserable life and regret leaving their homeland, declaring that they were sorely mistaken in their hopes for a better life in the New World. This partly depends on themselves. Truly worthy of amazement is the frivolity with which Russians usually decide to move to America. Most of them arrive in America not only without defining a plan for their future life in the country, but often without the slightest understanding of the actual living conditions, customs and even the language of the country to which they are moving. Considering sufficient the information that is read in various tempting and at the same time deceitful little books, filled with all sorts of fabulous nonsense from ignorant and superficial travelers in America, Russians come here as to the promised land of free, profitable and easy labor. Meanwhile, American labor requires such persistent will, agility and experience in special crafts that we have no idea about in Russia. As a result, Russians, even ready-made artisans, cannot withstand competition with Americans, are rejected in the labor market and are therefore forced to work for half pay in various dubious establishments, and often remain completely out of work. There is nothing to say about the disastrous and helpless situation of those Russians who arrive without any knowledge of a special craft, with only a so-called general education. There is literally no place for such people in America, native competition completely kills them, and they are the ones who most often need help until they learn some kind of craft. And there is a place to study. One young Russian, with a university education, arriving in New York without knowing a trade, was in the most dire straits for a long time, until he ended up in the Poi-Poi state prison. Prisons in America are run on a practical level, like all Americans, and are something like huge factories in which prisoners necessarily work for the benefit of the state. Our compatriot was assigned to the hat trade, and during the six months of his stay in prison he became so sharp that upon his release he could already earn his living with his newly acquired craft. For others, of whom, unfortunately, there are many, this school often passes without a trace, and they continue to remain in a helpless state. With such a composition of clergy and parish, the Russian Church in New York began its existence ten years ago and exists now. The family element in the parish, mainly Greeks and then Slavs, remains unchanged, since they are firmly settled in America, and the Russians are constantly changing, except for a dozen people who have also settled. Before the founding of the church, this Orthodox population was in the most abandoned state. More or less wealthy people even went to San Francisco, seven thousand miles away, for church services, while others took advantage of the occasional passage of Orthodox priests through New York, and for the most part were deprived of any religious consolation, weakened in their devotion to Orthodoxy and, having married American women, became adherents of the confessions of their wives. With the founding of the Russian Church, the Orthodox population began to group around it, and many Orthodox Christians who had married women of other faiths and had hitherto baptized their children in churches of other faiths now began to baptize new children in the Russian Orthodox Church. There could not have been many essential needs, of course, given the small size of the parish, and yet in ten years a sufficient number of them had accumulated to justify the existence of the Russian Church in New York, even simply from a practical point of view. From 1870 to 1880, 55 baptisms of children of both sexes, 12 marriages and 14 burials took place there. There were also affiliations with the Orthodox Church, although few and somewhat random. In ten years, four people joined, one male and three female. Including the priest's wife and daughter. Americans are the most widely read people in the world, and every institution, religious or political, can make its way into their consciousness and win their sympathy only through literature. For this purpose, the rector of the church translated and published several works in English, which are mainly designed to initially introduce the teachings of the Orthodox Church into the consciousness of people of other faiths. Every American church or community then has its own literary organ, and it is considered such a necessity here that without it Americans cannot imagine the church as a living body. In view of this, the Orthodox Church also needed a literary organ. This organ was founded at the end of 1878 under the name “Oriental Church Magazine” and is now entering its third year of existence. Over these three years, the magazine has presented a lot of interesting material that is very important for familiarizing Americans not only with the teachings and rituals of the Orthodox Church, but also with the life of the Russian people in general. This is the only organ from which Americans can draw direct and impartial knowledge of the Russian people - with their beliefs and life, and it is a strong exposer of the false untruths spread among Americans about Russia by the German-English press that is hostile to us. The American press usually greets each of its releases with liveliness and sympathy. Its continued existence is undoubtedly a living need of the church. One of the prominent aspects in the life of American churches is their charitable activities. Charity is considered an essential duty of the church, and in other churches it reaches remarkably wide proportions. The Roman Catholic Church is particularly different here in this regard. It has so many charitable institutions and such an excellent organization that even the government of New York State has recognized this activity as being of great public importance and, despite the legal separation of church and state, makes significant financial contributions to it and has actually transferred to it all the care of public benefit. Each church and community, in turn, takes care of the charity of the poor members of its parish, and for this, each church has its own charitable society and its own circle for the “poor of the parish.” Both in view of this general principle, and especially in view of the plight of many members of the Russian parish, the need for organizing charity in the Russian Church itself was expressed. The idea originated a long time ago, but in the complete absence of any financial resources, it could not be realized until recently. Only at the end of last year, thanks to the assistance of their excellencies, the Russian envoy and the consul general, the rector managed to collect some funds, relying on which it was possible to found the “Russian Charitable Society”. The fund was made up of voluntary donations from the clergy, members of the embassy and consulate, and wealthy Americans. The society turned out to be extremely useful and began to gather the local Orthodox population around the church with even greater force. It’s rare that some needy Russian doesn’t show up asking for help. Many come with the statement that they have nowhere to sleep and are hungry for two days at a time. To organize more correct and substantial assistance, the priest entered into an agreement with wealthy American charitable societies and, for a cheap price, purchased a whole pack of tickets, giving each bearer the right to free use of bed, board and hospital in the institutions of these societies. Any poor person who receives such a ticket from him can consider himself protected from hunger and bad weather for two or three days. Sometimes direct cash benefits are also given - on loan or free of charge, and over the past year the society has already spent more than $200 on charitable needs. The news of the benevolence spread throughout the entire population that had at least some contact with the church or even just with Russia. Poles and Jews who migrated from Russia often come for benefits and are barely able to explain themselves in Russian. One day a German even came, not knowing a word of Russian, but calling himself Russian and therefore entitled to benefits, since he had lived in Russia for some time. What a great unifying moral force Orthodoxy has can be fully understood and seen only in a foreign land. Here it unites into one family often such persons who have nothing in common with each other - except the Orthodox faith. One Sunday, leaving the church after a service, I met two dark-skinned men in Turkish red fezzes at the entrance. They hesitantly peered at the golden cross and the inscription under it, trying to clearly penetrate its meaning. Seeing me, they addressed me in French, from which, as well as from the card in their hands, I understood that they wanted to see a Russian priest. It turned out that these were Turkish subjects - Orthodox Arabs from Syria. Arriving in America, they found themselves in a difficult situation in a country completely alien to them, without knowledge of the English language, and now turned to the Orthodox priest as the only leader who, for them, distant sons of the east, was the only close person in the far overseas west. On Sundays there is a regular service, on Saturday at 5 pm all-night vigil in Slavic and on Sunday at 11 am mass alternately in Slavic and English. The All-Night Vigil is rarely dedicated by anyone, but mass is always attended by quite a lot of people. The meeting is usually very diverse. There is a Greek millionaire trading cotton with India and Australia, and a former Russian actor selling matches on the street; a Russian doctor doing his homework and a Moscow University student moving logs on the pier; an escaped sailor serving as a clerk in a toy store, and a former leader of the nobility brewing coffee in a restaurant; a merchant's son who fled from military service and cried without knowing the language, and a former lieutenant who lived by collecting rags in the streets; an Austrian Serb serving as a Russian interpreter at a hotel, and a Russian radical living on loans without repayment; a Pole who calls himself a pure Russian, and a lieutenant of the Russian fleet working on smoking sausages in a German establishment. There are usually several Americans of both sexes, and representatives of the American clergy of various denominations often come. Various bishops of American churches visited the church several times. Of the Russian highest representatives, the church saw within its walls the Grand Dukes Alexei Alexandrovich and Konstantin Konstantinovich during their stay in New York, and the Eminence John and Nestor of Alaska during their passage through New York. On highly solemn holidays of a civil nature, there are many representatives of various powers and the government of the United States, headed by Russian official representatives, and a good dozen reporters from various newspapers. All visitors usually make a good impression, although there is always a lack of musical side of the service. The whole musical force of the church consists of one psalmist, and his monophonic singing, however good, is in poor contrast with the full choir of instrumental and vocal music of American churches. In Slavic worship, a simple Russian church chant is usually used with some selections of melodies from Russian church composers, and for English worship there is a special musical arrangement of the liturgy by the Viennese professor of ancient literatures, Haviara. The music of this arrangement is very melodic, and Americans prefer this music to Slavic music; but it has a strong flavor of Anglican sacred melodies, especially, for example, in "The Grace of the World." At one time, a passing Russian merchant made a donation to the church specifically for the choir, and indeed a small choir existed for some time, but due to the depletion of funds, it disbanded. At present, as we hear, the Russian government has allocated a significant sum for the construction of a real church in New York, and this will undoubtedly constitute a new era in the history of the mission of the Orthodox Church on the American continent. It is only necessary that, along with the construction of the church, the splendor of the church rite be increased and at least a small singing choir be established, the absence of which is strongly felt by all visitors to the church. IV. Americans in the Russian Church American visitors to Russian Sunday services. - Their impressions. – Social position of the Russian priest. – The need for familiarization with the Russian Church. – The importance of the church organ. - Conclusion. The opening of the Russian Orthodox Church in New York in 1870 was a new and extraordinary phenomenon for Americans. The capital of the New World is a real metropolis of churches. Here on one street you can count a good dozen churches - and they are all of different confessions and sects. But until that year, there was no church among them, which, like a majestic queen, sits on the throne of the distant and mysterious East for Americans. Their long-standing friendly relations with the Russian people, as the main representative of the Orthodox Church, aroused interest and the need for a closer acquaintance with the mysterious church of a friendly people for them. When, therefore, a distant and hitherto inaccessible church suddenly appeared among the Americans, they reacted to it with keen interest, carefully delving into the rituals and teachings of the Orthodox Church. On the American continent, it is true, there was already an Orthodox Church and even an entire diocese - namely in the “far west” in Alaska and San Francisco, but this far west, seven thousand miles away from the main center of American life, until very recently, when railroads were built, was a completely special world, and the existence of the Orthodox Church there still has almost absolutely no significance in the sense of familiarizing Americans with our church. That church is a church for the Orthodox population already existing there and for kindling the light of true faith among the half-wild sons of the far north. For Americans, only the church on the eastern ocean coast of the continent could matter, and therefore the appearance of the Orthodox Church in New York was such news to them as if the Orthodox Church had not previously existed at all on the American continent. From the very opening of the church in New York, it became a subject of keen public interest. Despite its modest external setting, which was completely at odds with the prevailing American idea of ​​the dazzling splendor of Eastern church rites and ceremonies, and in general its insignificant position among the stately churches of other confessions, it immediately occupied a prominent position in society and at first there was not a single Sunday service of which the newspapers did not give the most detailed reports. Over time, of course, this interest, aroused by the novelty of the subject, waned a little, but even now, every more or less outstanding holiday in the church attracts newspaper reporters from the best newspapers and a lot of Americans of different confessions and communities. Over the course of ten years, several people have emerged from the casual American visitors who now make up the regular visitors to the Sunday service. On the great annual holidays, so many of them usually come that the church cannot accommodate even half of the total number. The belated ones return home with regret, and the happier ones closely fill the church, although afterward they usually complain about the inconvenience of such crowding. For Americans, accustomed to comfortable seating in their churches, our Russian custom of admitting into church those who come freely and diligently, not by tickets and numbers, seems the height of inconvenience, and only the most lively interest in looking at Orthodox worship makes them ignore such inconvenience. Americans behave in church with extreme decorum, carefully watching all the smallest details of the service, and their faces are drawn into a wonderful picture of curiosity when, for example, the royal doors are opened, a great exit is made, or even a candlestick is simply moved from one place to another. Newspaper reporters are the most curious. Not understanding the Slavic language, in which services are usually performed on great holidays, they focus all their attention on the external environment of the church and the service: they describe pictures (icons), banners (banners), count candles and describe their location, monitor the spread of smoking clubs and the method of incense smoking itself, draw the appearance and techniques of the priest and singer and make considerations regarding the similarities or differences between the Orthodox worship and the worship of other churches, determine the number of worshipers and their behavior, etc. At the end of the service, they attack the priest or psalm-reader with questions regarding the internal side of the service, ask about the meaning of certain rituals, about the content of prayers or hymns, and inquire about the text of the gospel read and the apostle. The next day, and often on the same day, in the evening editions, detailed reports appear in the newspapers, eloquently compiled on the basis of observations and inquiries, with curious titles like: “Father Bierring and his Russian altar,” and with a lot of oddities in the content itself. Some American visitors to the church stay for some time after the service and turn to the priest for an explanation of the aspects or acts of worship that most struck them, and an American lady often asks to take a closer look at the church clothes, their cut and the material from which they are made. In addition to ordinary Americans, representatives of various American churches - pastors and bishops - often come to church. Others come from far away. Recently, for example, there was a pastor from Chicago, fifteen hundred miles from New York. As educated theologians, they look at the church and worship not with simple curiosity, but with criticism, and in conversation with a priest or psalm-reader they enter into an examination of the historical and theological foundations of the Orthodox Church. From these conversations with both pastors and ordinary Americans, it was possible to partly notice common features in their attitude to the worship of the Orthodox Church. Americans are generally extremely kind and will give you a lot of compliments before going on to express their views critically. Therefore, to the first questions regarding how they liked the Russian divine service, they always answer that they “really, really liked it” and that they were “the best impression in the world.” They are extremely interested in the very external furnishings of the church and they curiously ask about all its details, having first secured the assurance that this church represents the type of Russian church in general. They look at our church as a wonderful archaeological monument preserved from the golden ages of Christianity. Moving on then to the service itself, they also cannot help but recognize its antiquity, but here they look from a more practical point of view and consider it somewhat outdated for our time. They cannot understand why in our worship services there are so many repetitions of the same prayers (“let us pray again and again in peace to the Lord”). In their opinion, this is a big anachronism for our time. Instead of these repeated prayers, it would be much better, according to their thinking, to introduce into the divine service as many moral lessons as possible from the Holy Scriptures or in the form of preaching. American worship is reduced to the last degree and consists of only a few hymns and mainly a sermon. The absence of a sermon during our services surprises them most of all, since for them all the glory of the church is based on preaching. Reporters usually conclude their reports in newspapers with the words that “there was no sermon, according to Eastern custom, during the service,” and when there is one, they make extensive excerpts from it. The lack of music in the church also, in their opinion, takes away a lot from Russian worship in comparison with Western ones. They cannot understand why our church is rigoristic about music, when music, according to St. Scripture exists even in heaven and the trumpets of the archangels silently praise the Creator. In this regard, Americans are indeed closer to the archangels: the musical program of their services often includes a “trumpet voice” in the form of some kind of solo on the cornet. Such remarks about the lack of music in our church are rather caused, however, by the poverty of vocal forces in the worship of the New York church itself. A small choir would completely eliminate this remark, as one can judge from the review of the St. Petersburg correspondent of the Herald about church singing in the large cathedrals of our capital. In his opinion, “it’s hard to imagine anything better than Russian church singing in a choir of men’s and children’s voices.” In America, children's voices are usually replaced by women's, and therefore this remark is especially interesting from a certain point of view. Despite, however, the wretchedness of Russian singing here, Americans are interested in it, are surprised at the uniqueness of the melodies and often ask to see the notes themselves. During one of the Sunday services, Bishop Young from Florida visited our church with his wife and examined in detail the notes used during the service. He became so interested in some of the melodies that he asked the psalm-reader to write out for him several similar musical church works from Russia. The bishop traveled a lot in the east, was in St. Petersburg and Moscow, and conveyed his impressions with lively interest. He was a member of the commission that the American Episcopal Church sent to the east in the 60s to study the question of the beginnings of the union of churches. Of the other bishops, Bishop Quintard from Tennessee visited our church the most. He is especially interested in the canon law of our church and once, in a difficult case in his episcopal practice, turned to Fr. Nikolai Bierring with a question about how such cases are resolved in the Russian Orthodox Church. In general, it is pleasant to see how Americans are interested in our church, but it is even more pleasant to hear how, generalizing their observations, they finally conclude that, in any case, they have “the best impression in the world.” One of the interesting aspects of the church and religious life of Americans is the social position of their priest. Their priest is, one might say, the soul of society. Not a single more or less significant meeting can do without him, and at the same time he is the first friend of every house in his parish. Thanks to their high level of education and strong oratorical talents, pastors play an important role in the political life of the country, and at every political meeting among the speakers there are always several “divine doctors,” as pastors with the highest academic theological degree are officially called. As a result of this order of things, Americans have formed a view of the priest as an important public figure and, in addition to the church, a person with great connections and influence, so that he is most likely to be resorted to for “protection” in case of any difficulties or needs. The more influential the priest is in this regard, the more highly his church is valued. The rector of the Russian church occupies a very advantageous position in this regard. He is a member of quite a few societies, both charitable, literary, scientific, and political, and thanks to this he has extensive acquaintance both in the city and beyond. Among learned societies, for example, he is an honorary member of the famous “geographical society.” Americans are passionate fans of clubs and there are countless of them scattered around the city, with different names and purposes, and each club has a priest who makes speeches at meetings and reads a prayer before the ceremonial, monthly or annual dinners of the club members. Americans consider prayer necessary even before public dinners and in clubs. In our country, as we know, music has long replaced prayer in such cases. O. Nikolai Bierring occupies such a position in one of the richest clubs in the city, namely in the “St. Nicholas,” which gave him the opportunity to enter into close relations with such top government officials as, for example, the former democratic candidate for the presidency, General Gencock, with whom he maintains a family acquaintance. It is interesting here, by the way, to note one feature that is reminiscent of the famous saying: Amicus Plato, sed magis amica veritas. O. Nikolai Bierring, as an American citizen, has long been a Republican in his political convictions, that is, a supporter of the Republican Party. Now the election of his family friend to the presidency by the Democrats should naturally have pulled him over to the Democratic side, but he remained faithful to his party and cast his vote for the Republican candidate, declaring that in this case he preferred the principles of the party to the interests of personal relationships. But he enjoys even more respect among Republicans. At the recent reception in New York of the former president of the famous General Grant, the leader of the Republican Party made him a personal invitation to participate in the celebration. This social position of the Russian priest is extremely important for the local Russian population. With his patronage, every Russian can find a more or less decent position for himself, unless the abilities, education and “convictions” of the petitioner prevent this. Unfortunately, the majority of the more or less educated Russians here are of a “radical” mood, and to recommend such gentlemen to the trust of the Americans means losing your own trust. Nowhere, perhaps, are people of a “radical” mood more despised than in this free country. For other Russians, he provides important services. Various societies often invite a Russian priest as a guest to their ceremonial meetings, where representatives of science, literature, and art are present, and sometimes there are some oddities. Such, for example, was a meeting at the Arcadia club, where poets, philosophers, politicians were present and, by the way, a Russian priest was invited. At the meeting, as usual, endless speeches were made - an inevitable feature of any American meeting. Among the speakers, the poet Joaquin Miller and Fr. Nikolai Bierring. A newspaper report puts it this way: “The next speaker to be called was the poet Joaquin Miller, but he answered the call that he decided this time not to make any speech and calmly sat down again in his chair. This rather famous American poet makes a strange impression. He looks like a Russian guy. He eats a lot, drinks a lot and silently works with his teeth throughout lunch. The next speaker was a Russian priest, who praised the American Constitution and declared that if there were some defects in government, it was the fault of the people themselves, who ought to have been more careful in choosing the people to whom they entrusted power. It was very interesting to observe the appearance of two vis-a-vis, a popular American poet and a modest Russian priest. The American poet looked like a Russian prasol who had gathered for the Nizhny Novgorod fair, while the Russian priest looked like a very decent American farmer.” It is very easy to guess which of the concerned persons liked this report more. The high position of the priest of the Russian Church in American society is important both in the sense of the representation of the Russian people among Americans and in the sense of the representation of his church. Americans are aristocrats at heart and treat the church with great respect and interest, the representative of which is a person with a good position in society and with a high education. Meanwhile, by some strange accident, books about the Russian Church that portray it and the Russian clergy from the most unattractive side for Americans are still circulating among Americans. It is all the more pleasant for Americans now to see in the representative of the Russian Church qualities that are exactly the opposite of those described in malicious books, and the more keenly they are interested in the Orthodox Church. Meanwhile, the need for acquaintance with our church is great among Americans. In addition to the fact that they come to church to observe and get acquainted with Orthodox worship, they often make more serious requests in this regard. In the first years after the opening of the church in New York, American visitors so often turned to the priest with questions about the history and characteristics of the Russian Orthodox Church that he was forced, in satisfaction of these requests, to give a series of lectures - from the church pulpit instead of a sermon - briefly outlining the history of the introduction and spread of Christianity in Russia and sketching the current state of the Russian Orthodox Church. He had to give similar lectures more than once outside the church. It is the custom in American schools to invite speakers, mostly preachers, to deliver edifying or generally appropriate speeches during their annual celebrations. Many schools in these cases turned to Fr. Nikolai Bierring, asking him to give a lecture about something from Russian life, about the religious state of the Russian people, about education in Russia, and so on. And oh. Bierring always willingly agreed to requests and gave several lectures for the edification of the young American generation. More than once he had to give lectures on the same thing at large literary meetings, at the request of members of various societies. Thus, he once gave a lecture in one large public hall “on the attitude of the Orthodox Church to other confessions.” The hall was, according to a newspaper report, crowded with listeners from the educated classes of society. Among them there were many clergy of different confessions and many ladies, and “everyone listened to the lecture with intense attention.” “The speaker was often interrupted by signs of approval and was finally rewarded with animated applause, in which members of the American clergy who were present took a particularly active part.” Other types of questions are often asked about the hope of our church. For example, there is telegraphic news in the newspapers about some church event in Russia. In this form, it is incomprehensible to most American readers, and to explain it, newspaper reporters often come to the Russian priest with questions about what this news means, how this or that fact could have happened, etc. Since this explanation is usually intended for the press, it is easy to understand in what readiness the Russian priest must constantly be here so as not to compromise his position. Last spring the newspapers published news that Jews in Russia were beginning to be subjected to government persecution, and so the reporters attacked Fr. N. Bierringa with questions about what this news means, whether such persecution is really possible in Russia, how the Russian government generally treats people of other faiths, whether there is freedom of religious confession in Russia, etc. Then a short news was published about the memorial service that was held in Moscow for the late empress on the 40th day after her death, and again questionnaires appeared asking for an explanation of this custom of the Orthodox Church, its origin, meaning, history, etc. American reporters are inexorable tyrants of every public figure, and according to the established custom here, no public figure can be free from their questions on pain of big troubles - like public ridicule. They shamelessly invade all houses and even less shyly begin to torment with their questions any person who has become a victim of their curiosity. The conversation is often reported in the newspapers, not without caustic remarks about the victim. In view of this request on the part of Americans to become familiar with the Orthodox Church, the church magazine is of particular importance. Many articles in it were written directly at the request of readers who expressed a desire to get acquainted with this or that side in the life of our church. Coming to church and being particularly struck by some act in the sacred rite or the symbolism of Orthodox rites, Americans usually ask for more or less detailed explanations regarding these aspects, and they are given them in a literary way - in the next issue of the magazine. Americans in general provide rich soil for the work of religious and church leaders. The good soil on which the seed falls bears good and a hundredfold fruit. What fruits can be expected from the immediate acquaintance of Americans with the Orthodox Church? Such an important question cannot be answered in a few lines. Only a few data can be noted that cast the shadow of a possible answer in the future. Contrary to the legends common in Russia, Americans are deeply religious people, which immediately catches the eye of any more or less attentive observer of their life. True church and religious life is very much paralyzed by wandering sectarianism, but in this regard, modern times show a significant change. Since the fratricidal war of the 60s, the country has entered a new era in its history. The idea of ​​their national and state unity began to grow stronger among the people, and the party that looked at the states as a simple political union of separate and independent states, which could break it at any time, as soon as they found it unprofitable for themselves, began to fall more and more. Along with the development of the idea of ​​national unity, a movement in favor of religious unity began to be noticed. Religious ferment weakens, small sects disintegrate and a noticeable centralization occurs around the largest communities. The idea of ​​a single strong state involuntarily entails the idea of ​​a single strong church. The Roman Catholic Church was able to eavesdrop on this pulse of people's life earlier than others and took advantage of it for its own purposes in the best possible way. Now it is rapidly growing and strengthening in the country, and one of the main reasons for its success, without greater risk of error, can be pointed out in this very process of national centralization. The people see in her the most ancient and majestic representative of Christianity and strive to join her, despite the fact that, in essence, they are far from sympathetic to the history and system of the infallible papacy 21 . If he had previously been shown another no less majestic, but even more ancient church, alien to the system of the papacy and incomparably better preserving the purity of Christianity of the golden ages, the Eastern Church, then we can say with confidence where his sympathies would have been more inclined. Americans are an extreme Western people, but in their souls there is a stronger feeling of longing for the East, as the common homeland of humanity. They are a deeply Christian people, and the stronger their love for the East, as the cradle of Christianity. For them, more than for any other people in the world, the motto is clear - ex oriente lux 22. The inscription is in English: The Greek-Russian Chapel. It is difficult for readers to guess which hat the reporter means here. This is how he paints our priestly kamilavka, which in Russia, in his opinion, is worn only by bishops! Americans know so little even the outer side of our church. A curious example of this ignorance was presented by the St. Petersburg correspondent of the Herald. In a huge telegraph correspondence from St. Petersburg, describing the anniversary celebration there, he said among other things: “A mass was being celebrated in the Imperial Church, and the sounds of the organ reached the large hall, where a large congregation was awaiting the appearance of the Emperor.” An organ in a Russian church - there is nothing to say, an original innovation was made in it by a venerable American correspondent! – But this is an involuntary compliment to the musical singing of the court choir of singers. American newspapers published a statement by the famous “executive committee that it is preparing for St. Petersburg on February 19 such illumination as the world has not seen since Nero burned Rome.” By the way, we remember one example of an extremely vague understanding of the idea of ​​​​freedom, which accidentally caught our eye while reading one week's newspaper. Having spoken about freedom of the press, the Russian publicist notes with abandon: “It is known that in America there are no laws on the press, and the press enjoys unconditional freedom there.” In addition to the falsity of the very statement that “in America there are no laws on the press,” since here the legislation on the press is much more specific, complete and in some cases stricter than in Russia, in this saying the publicist is struck by the comparison of the absence of any laws (lawlessness) with unconditional freedom. Before this saying, as is known, the prevailing doctrine was that laws precisely determine freedom, give it life, and outside them or without them there is only arbitrariness, which is death for freedom. As for the strictness of American press laws, it is enough to point out the fact that for any personal libel, which may have a harmful effect on the moral, social or economic position of a person, the newspaper is subject to a fine of hundreds, thousands and even tens of thousands of dollars - in favor of the libeled person. As you know, we are freer in this regard. The Greek-Russian Chapel. 2 – d Avenue 951. N. Y. city. For more on this, see my special study, “On Roman Catholicism in America.” St. Petersburg 1881 For a discussion of the religious state of the American people, see my book Religion in America, chapter one. St. Petersburg 1881.