Глава 8. Наследие пастыря

Death o. John in December 1908, like the death of any saint, was a significant event. The shepherd's admirers mourned his loss, celebrated his passage into another world and openly proclaimed him a saint. Grave of Fr. John in St. Petersburg became a new object of veneration, and evidence of new miracles occurring here was diligently collected by supporters of the official canonization of the shepherd by the Orthodox Church. Nicholas II, who had already initiated several canonizations during his reign, began the process of nationwide perpetuation of the memory of Fr. John, which was taken up by the Holy Synod. However, political events that followed the death of the shepherd intervened in the traditional course of affairs. Due to the revolution of 1917 and the Civil War, which caused mass emigration from Russia and the change from Orthodox autocracy to the communist system and the policy of state atheism, Fr. John became as much a religious as a political symbol. The unusual fact that Fr. John was canonized twice (in 1964). – the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad (ROCOR) and in 1990 – the Moscow Patriarchate), shows how differently the branches of the Russian Orthodox Church perceived their most politicized saint of modern times. The hostility that Fr. John caused those who did not sympathize with his vision of Orthodox Russia to also take on new shades. Death and funeral of Fr. Joanna Father John died on December 20, 1908 at 7.40 am at the age of seventy-nine years. His funeral was a significant event. Train tickets from St. Petersburg to Kronstadt were sold out; literally all carriages, sleighs and wagons in Oranienbaum are rented. Body o. John was first taken to the Cathedral of St. Andrew, where liturgy and requiem were celebrated in the morning, and parastas (funeral all-night vigil) in the evening. The cathedral was not locked all night until the next morning. People came in an endless stream to say goodbye to their saint 876. However, the ceremony did not end there, for Fr. John was to be buried not in Kronstadt, where he served for fifty-three years, but in the convent he founded in St. Petersburg. The coffin with his body was transported across the ice to Oranienbaum, accompanied by the 94th Yenisei Regiment and several military bands playing traditional 19th-century music. hymn “How Glorious is Our Lord in Zion” 877. A crowd of twenty thousand people followed the coffin, singing Orthodox funeral chants. Along the way, the procession made stops at such significant places as the Naval Cathedral, the Church of the Epiphany, the chapel in Kronstadt, as well as St. Isaac's Cathedral, Warsaw Station and the building of the Holy Synod in St. Petersburg, during which short litias were celebrated. Residents peered out of windows and climbed onto roofs and gates to watch the procession. Such frequent stops for short services were necessary, since funerals at the monastery on Karpovka were only allowed with tickets. Presence at the lithium allowed any resident of St. Petersburg to say goodbye to Fr. John. Those accompanying the priest from Kronstadt to his final resting place walked twenty-five miles a day 878. The choice of a convent on Karpovka for the burial of Fr. John eventually identified the main place of pilgrimage for his admirers. In the fates of saints, the location of the relics plays a key role; Moreover, it may not coincide with the place where the saint spent his life (this happened when the relics of St. Nicholas were transported from Mir to Bari). People who sought to see the saint and touch him during his life now found the opportunity for direct, physical contact with the blessed burial 879. St. Petersburg was suitable for the burial of Fr. John is larger than Kronstadt, primarily for geographical reasons, and anyone who came to the city could easily find their way to Karpovka. For the monastery itself, of course, the burial on its territory of Fr. John became an endless source of grace and income 880. That is why the Kronstadt authorities judicially investigated the suspicious circumstances related to the will of Fr. John. It was compiled by the abbess of the monastery, Angelina, when the priest was already dying. According to this will, everything went to her monastery. And the authorities of Kronstadt also wanted to benefit after the death of Fr. John, as they did during his lifetime 881. It was initially planned that his apartment would become something between a chapel and a House-Museum, but the most important things that belonged to him were transported to Karpovka. Despite the fact that a family tomb was eventually built in Kronstadt, it did not attract the attention of pilgrims. Attempts to create other places of worship - the crypt of Fr. John and the chapel over the grave of his wife were also unsuccessful 882. This is not surprising, since their significance was now purely historical, while he - that is, his relics - still remained accessible to people. Here the distinction between saints and other well-known persons becomes clear. For example, it is interesting to visit Monet's house and gardens in Giverny. A saint is a completely different matter. His task is to provide his admirers with constant access to Divine grace through his prayers and his relics. Perhaps Fr. John died, but for his admirers he was still alive in body and soul: his path as a saint had just begun. The nuns began to collect evidence of posthumous miracles of healing during the burial, and then in the chapel where Fr. John 883. On the way to canonization, 1909–1917 The beginning of the process of perpetuating the memory of Fr. John was established by an imperial rescript dated January 12, 1909. Describing the shepherd as a righteous man and a man of prayer for the entire Russian Land, Nicholas II called for annual and public celebration of the day of remembrance of Fr. John and just as widely in the coming year to honor his memory on the fortieth day from the day of his death. In addition, he expressed the hope that the Holy Synod would take other steps 884. The Synod responded immediately. On January 15, 1909, he made an official statement in which he decided to publish an imperial rescript and hold memorial services in both ordinary and military churches. It also contained a requirement to establish seminary scholarships named after Fr. John, place his portraits in Orthodox schools, seminaries and academies; introduce his works into the homiletics curriculum; establish Orthodox schools in his name in Arkhangelsk, name a newly created school in Zhitomir in his honor, and ensure that the monastery on Karpovka receives “first-class” status. The process of perpetuation, of course, began during Fr.’s lifetime. John, but then it was local and came from the people, “from below”: for example, parish schools wrote petitions to the Synod to be named after Fr. John, since he was their first, or chief, or only donor 885. After the death of the pastor, the highest church body of Russia and Nicholas II gave the process a new impetus 886. Perpetuating the memory of Fr. John and his promotion as a role model took other forms. In a collection of eulogies delivered at memorial services in his honor and published shortly thereafter, church leaders contrasted him with liberal tendencies within the Church. Bishop Alexy of Tauride contrasted Fr. John to liberals and freedom fighters, praising the shepherd and asking forgiveness for the mere mention of these “epithets” in the church 887. First of all, the bishops and priests noted that Fr. John demonstrated the only way to serve society and people - not through external changes, but through the spiritual rebirth of each person 888. The death of the priest served as a reason to condemn such initiatives as parish reforms. It was said that these reforms “immediately went in the wrong direction,” that is, they began with the drawing up of rules and regulations, and not with the spiritual revival of the parish 889. Thus, after his death, Fr. John became a symbol that was used in the fight against structural reforms of the church. In the biography of Fr. John, compiled in the period 1908–1918, several new elements were added, taking into account his possible canonization. The most valuable source is the Society in Memory of Father John of Kronstadt, which began collecting and publishing memories of the priest. The magazine “The Kronstadt Shepherd,” published in 1912–1917, published both memories and reports of miracles. The collection of material continued even after 1917, but by the early 1920s. stopped 890. New elements appear in these official descriptions. The first of them is emphasizing the “supra-class character” of Fr. John - is replaced by an indication that he is a man of the people. So, in 1912, Lieutenant General D. A. Ozerov wrote about the visit of Fr. John in Terijoki during the Russo-Japanese War of 1904–1905: “I’m standing next to Father, our universal, dear Father John, I look at the crowd at the porch and it seems to me that all of our Rus' is here, holy, tormented, simple, dear Rus': dark peasants, exhausted soldiers, narrow-minded nuns, and above them on an elevated platform is Father John, whose ardent and unshakable faith consoles and encourages everyone; simply, ingenuously, without reasoning or speculation - in Russian, in the old, ancient, biblical way" 891. This attention to the lower classes disappeared after the revolution of 1917. Once the old autocratic system was gone, the class differences that seemed so sensitive in 1908 lost their former meaning for the writers writing about it. Both emigrant and Russian publications (after 1988) again emphasize the “universal nature” of Fr.’s appeal. John 892. Nevertheless, in the period 1908–1917. the influence of radical criticism and the scandal with the St. Johnites on public opinion was still so great that it became difficult for intellectual writers to imagine that they, too, had once stood up for Fr. John. And therefore it was more convenient for them to classify him as “ordinary people.” On the other hand, we must not forget that the Church in the post-reform era began to place its hopes on ordinary people, and not on the educated class 893. The second change in posthumous representations of Fr. John - greater emphasis on his admirers, mainly - as was the case in similar cases in France and the USA - in a negative spirit 894. Alexey Makushinsky, who sang as a boy in the Cathedral of St. Andrei in 1891–1904, later recalled that “when the women found out that Fr. John, they completely lost their minds, threw themselves under the horse’s hooves, shouting: “Glory to God, you suffered for Christ!” 895 One priest said that Fr. John “snatched himself from the tenacious hands of overly enthusiastic admirers and - especially - admirers” 896. All these witnesses sought to convey their positive impressions of Fr. John. In this regard, it is noteworthy that, when characterizing his audience, they emphasize its low social origin, “ignorance” and predominantly female composition - despite the fact that during his life, pilgrims who came to Kronstadt pointed to social heterogeneity, as well as a mixed gender and age composition of the flock. Other adherents of Fr. John deliberately turned the mention of female admirers for his benefit. They wrote that the deaths of Dostoevsky, Tchaikovsky and Mendeleev had a resonance only in the cultural part of society, “without penetrating at all into the depths of the people”; the deaths of such commanders as Suvorov or Skobelev affected a wider part of the population, "but their names are almost alien to the female half of the population." And only the “saint” Fr. John managed to embrace the imagination of the entire people, “all the love of the most loving half of the nation - women.” Having won the love of the female part of the population, Fr. John, symbolically speaking, conquered the soul of the people 897. It is possible that the reference, often negatively, to “exalted” and “abnormal” relationships between women and famous religious figures was a veiled attempt to stigmatize the relationship between the Empress (and, more broadly, the Tsarist regime) and Rasputin 898 . During the period 1908–1917. most of all were kept silent in the descriptions of Fr. John's political statements. In conditions when the revolution of 1905 was decisively suppressed, and the old order, which the shepherd defended so ardently, continued to be preserved even after his death, his political views seemed less important than his Christian virtues as a saint. The cult of Father John after 1917: politics, reality and representations The apolitical nature inherent in posthumous assessments of the pastor disappears after the 1917 revolution and the Civil War. Cult o. John in the USSR is widely developed “underground” and spreads abroad thanks to millions of emigrants. Most of the emigrants lived in difficult conditions and were constantly worried about finding work and a roof over their heads. For many of them Fr. John again becomes the practical and spiritual helper that he was in Russia. Emigrants, such as P. M. Chizhov, who lived in Helsinki, begin to collect information about Fr. John. In Belgrade, all biographical information and evidence of miracles flocked to I.K. Sursky and were published in 1938 in the form of a two-volume monograph. The emigrant clergy also described him as an exemplary shepherd, from time to time comparing him with Saints John Chrysostom and Gregory the Theologian 899. Just as during the life of the priest a parallel was drawn between him and the reverend. Seraphim of Sarov, so after his death they began to notice his similarity with the Optina elders, especially with Elder Barsanuphius 900. After World War II, when a significant part of Russian emigrants moved from Europe to the United States, the main custodian of the cult became the Memorial Fund of Father John of Kronstadt, founded in 1954 and located in Utica, New York. Taking an example from Fr. John, the Foundation’s employees provided financial assistance to needy emigrants from Russia. They republished such important sources for writing Ioanniana as his “My Life in Christ” and “Two Days in Kronstadt” by Archbishop Evdokim. In addition, the Foundation constantly collected new evidence of miracles, and after the canonization of Fr. John by the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad in 1964 became the first church in the world dedicated to Saint Righteous John of Kronstadt. The modest charitable activities of the Memorial Fund are now spreading throughout the world, including in Russia itself 901. The significance of the Foundation’s charitable work should not be underestimated, but its main role is the preservation of historical memory. In the 1930s–1970s, when the connection between believers inside Russia and the Russian diaspora was very weak, the Foundation served as one of the few sources of information about Fr. John. In contrast, the St. John of Kronstadt Press in Liberty, Tennessee, deliberately downplays the "Russian context" of a figure like Fr. John. This organization was founded by American converts to Orthodoxy who are associated with the Russian Orthodox Church abroad, and it emphasizes the universality of the virtues of Fr. John - piety and charity. The missionary and English-speaking nature of the organization largely determines its departure from the specifics of the historical situation in the Russian Empire at the end of the 19th – beginning of the 20th centuries. Father John became a new, purely American iconic figure here. Since it's Fr's birthday. John's Day coincides with Halloween, and services held on this day remind Orthodox Americans not to take part in the Sabbath of witches and demons. Political representations The Memorial Fund in Utica and the St. John of Kronstadt Publishing House in Tennessee focused on the essence and characteristics of the ministry of Fr. John. Orthodox liberal thinkers emphasized his spirituality, as well as continuity with respect to St. Seraphim of Sarov, the tradition of hesychasm and the connection of his book “My Life in Christ” with the works of the 14th century theologian. Nicholas Kavasila 902. However, the shepherd's actual political legacy found other adherents. The idea of ​​Fr. John as a prophet who warned about the evil that the revolution brings, was spread by the hierarchs of the Russian Orthodox Church abroad with special zeal. For these emigrants, who represented the most conservative part of pre-revolutionary Russian society, Fr. John was a prophetic voice that had to be listened to in order to avoid the catastrophe that scattered them to different parts of the world. They were the heirs of those who collected and published his “New Terrible Words” and “Accusatory Sermons” during his lifetime. In such publications as “Father John as a prophet sent by God to enlighten Russia,” they repeated his last warning, addressed to the Orthodox flock and “sadly confirmed” now: Russia was on the verge of destruction, the revolution meant disaster, the Russian people must not betray their faith and their Tsar, otherwise the very name of the country will perish forever 903. Latest sermons by Fr. John became the cornerstone for their own political views. They were deeply imbued with his feelings, since the revolution cost both them and Russia very dearly. They bitterly mourned other emigrants who continued to hold “the very beliefs that destroyed Russia,” and argued that as long as those working for the new Russia continued to think in worldly terms and did not strive to be cured of spiritual decay, they were doomed to defeat: “That is why neither the White movement nor the so-called Russian Liberation Army achieved success.”904 For ROCOR, the canonization of Fr. John in 1964 was a testimony before God of her adherence to the ideals of the “church-state” symphony, Holy Russia and even the Third Rome 905. It is not surprising that this aspect comes to the fore in the liturgical texts written in exile dedicated to Fr. John: he is called “a mighty stronghold of the Orthodox dominion of Russia... a true intercessor of pious sovereigns” 906. Although the troparion and kontakion compiled by the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad are addressed to people of all countries and all political views and reveal, first of all, the versatility of his holiness, the akathist, composed in the early 1930s. Athonite Hieroschemamonk Pachomius and included in the divine service after the canonization of Fr. John in 1964, contains the following phrases: “A new misfortune and the wrath of God befell us, who did not want to heed your God-inspired words: the power of our kingdom was destroyed, and we were given over to the servants of Satan, who destroyed the honorable monastic monasteries, desecrated the holy churches, and all pious people became fiercely embittered, and gave over many spiritual and worldly martyrdoms to martyrdom.” 907. Thus, the canonization of Fr. John in emigration equally meant both condemnation of the 1917 revolution and approval of the concept of the “church-state” symphony, and recognition of its holiness. His political views laid the foundations for the ROCOR’s irreconcilable position towards the Soviet system and the Moscow Patriarchate. As subsequent generations of emigrants born in Australia, Europe and the Americas grow up even further away from the Russian context, I wonder whether this aspect will continue to dominate the cult of Fr. John abroad. However, on the territory of Russia, the attention of emigrants to the political views of Fr. John played an important role. In the 20th century, this is one of many examples of how the far-right tradition, forced to sink to the bottom in its homeland, was supported by the foreign diaspora. Even despite the relative isolation of the USSR from the rest of the world, both sides managed to exchange information. For example, about phenomena to someone about. John's visions were reported both in the emigrant press and in Soviet atheistic works of the 1970s, which contributed to the familiarization of domestic readers with knowledge that was otherwise inaccessible. Thus, the far right political views of Fr. John was openly supported by part of the Russian emigration and secretly by residents of the USSR, and both of them managed to maintain contact and exchange new information for many years. On the other hand, these views were ridiculed by the official atheist Soviet press and foreign liberal authors. After perestroika and canonization Fr. John by the Moscow Patriarchate in 1990. these right-wing tendencies have once again become public. Now that the 20th century has ended, we see that Fr. John seemed to be traveling in circles: texts about him appeared in Russia and abroad in the period from approximately 1900 to 1935, in 1938–1988. they were republished abroad, and then, starting in 1990, again republished in Russia and distributed both in Russia and among the emigrant community 908. In the Soviet Union itself, the political views of Fr. John was assessed from two opposing positions. If emigrants, in their struggle for existence in Paris and Berlin, felt nostalgia for the pre-revolutionary way of life, then among Soviet people, who survived collectivization, the destruction of churches and Stalin’s purges, the feeling of being robbed and in a state of siege was all the more acute. It is not surprising that in the USSR the political views of Fr. John was described in an even harsher and more polemically pointed form than in emigration. For example, in “The Dream of Father John of Kronstadt” the vision that Fr. John in 1908, was used to debunk such phenomena of Soviet life as the “Living Church”, as well as the murderers of Nicholas II and everyone who wears the five-pointed red star. The images in “The Dream” were schematic and expressive: those killed as a result of abortion are equated with martyrs for the Orthodox faith, and stinking worms crawl between “these godless, heretical books... swarming and spreading a terrible stench” 909. The descriptions contained in the dream of the Antichrist, foreheads and animals branded with his number directly go back to the prophecies of Daniel and the Apocalypse. The First Five-Year Plan, forced collectivization, and widespread persecution of the Orthodox clergy all did more to destroy the Orthodox way of life than the October Revolution itself, and as a result, the eschatological motifs always potentially present in Orthodoxy became key. For those who felt that the end of the world had already come, Fr. John, St. Tikhon of Zadonsk and St. Seraphim of Sarov became important symbolic figures not because of personal kindness or attention to heartfelt prayer, but because of their eschatological statements. For example, they remembered how Saint Tikhon prophesied that the last patriarch would bear his name, how the fate of the last Russian tsars was revealed to St. Seraphim, and how Fr. John drove away some of the little children brought to him for blessing, saying that they would grow up to be “living demons” 910. The remains of Fr. John were desecrated and tightly closed for many decades. The monastery on Karpovka was turned at the end of the 1920s into a gigantic institution with many warehouses and offices. Cathedral of St. Andrei was blown up in the 1930s, and in its place a park was built with a statue of Lenin 911. Because of this, Fr. John became inaccessible in his material form, although people “accidentally” dropped something in front of the now boarded-up basement window of his crypt in order to kneel, or celebrated the day of his memory by going out to pray in the streets 912. Then he began to appear in visions. According to a certificate from 1919, Fr. John miraculously appeared to Silaev, a Bolshevik sailor from the cruiser Almaz and a Cheka commissar, and inspired him to repent and lead the counter-revolutionary movement 913. He also appeared together with Saints Sergius of Radonezh and Seraphim of Sarov to serve funeral prayers for those who died without burial 914. The visions of these people's intercessors were associated with miraculous springs and springs, as happened in 1930, when a spring with an image of Fr. reflected in the water was discovered on a collective farm. John 915. Springs and springs have been the main places of worship since ancient times. This was less developed in Russia than in Europe, but the fight against religion during the Soviet period led to the fact that worship shifted from icons to “natural” phenomena - a phenomenon that deserves special study 916. The villagers who reported this considered it quite logical that the saints were now traveling around the world. Their traditional sources of faith - icons, processions, church services, chapels, priests - were taken away or destroyed; it was therefore entirely justifiable (though they admitted that it was “incredible”) that dead saints should appear in the flesh and serve as a source of inspiration and consolation 917 . In Soviet times, the phenomenon of Fr. John did not always mean good; the motive of retribution, familiar from earlier evidence, appears now. Thus, one eyewitness account describes the phenomenon of Fr. John at an anti-religious Komsomol meeting. One of the angry Komsomol members throws a bottle at him, but it flies through the figure of the mysterious priest, who disappears; and only the words “Father John of Kronstadt” suddenly appear on the wall. Although this vision confuses the communist agitators, they explain it as “priestly stuff” and continue the meeting. Suddenly, on a cloudless winter day, the door of the Komsomol club is illuminated by a flash of lightning. The audience is thrown back but not harmed; atheist agitators killed by lightning. Local newspapers describe the event as a malicious arson committed by anti-Soviet elements. But, of course, in the village they know better how it really happened. To avoid arrest, three young men accused of arson leave the village and become wanderers, preaching the Orthodox faith and telling everyone what happened to them 918. In another appearance, Fr. John, described in a letter from 1934, a collective farmer described how he saw a priest walking across a field with a handsome young soldier who “looked like the Great Martyr George in the icons, or maybe the Archangel Michael.” Having recovered from the shock of the presence of a priest as such - by the mid-1930s, after numerous persecutions, they were rarely seen - older people said that the priest looked like Fr. John. He blessed the land of believers in all four directions, and then went to the state farm. When the communists tried to drive him away, he remarked to them that since that field was the domain of Satan and not the Lord, they would be punished for their unbelief. Twice when trying to grab him, the ghost disappeared. Ten minutes later the field was engulfed in flames; The private area of ​​the believers remained untouched. Here, as in another case, Izvestia announced that the fire was the work of religious “saboteurs,” and named a priest and a young military man as suspects 919 . Thus, in these visions of the Soviet era, materials about which were collected underground, Fr. John is placed in the context of a rich tradition of apocalyptic visions; he acts as a defender of believers and an enemy of the atheistic Soviet regime 920. When the icons were confiscated from the people, their place was taken by portraits of Fr. John, “we just hide them so as not to anger the communists.” Some began to carve icons from wood, including images of Fr. John, which they claimed contributed to the miraculous healing 921. He also appeared in literary works: for example - allegorically - in Mikhail Bulgakov's science fiction novel "The Master and Margarita", which describes the arrival of Satan in Stalin's Moscow, as "the writer John of Kronstadt" 922. In official Soviet publications, the image of the shepherd was simply inverted, and the old formula was endlessly repeated: Fr. John was “an ardent monarchist, one of the founders of the Black Hundred “Union of the Russian People,” an irreconcilable opponent of the revolutionary movement, who pretended to be a miracle worker” 923. Paradoxically, in the midst of the fight against “remnants” in the 1970s. the Soviet press itself made public and disseminated the views it fought against. Sticking to her theory that international reactionary forces were conspiring to overthrow communism, she denounced reactionary emigrants and their “comrades” in the Soviet Union with equal force. By paying such attention to both groups, Soviet publicists strengthened their awareness of the enormous significance of their struggle - it turned out that both “international communism” and “international liberalism” were trying to overcome them at the same time. Moreover, by deliberately blurring the distinction between right-wing emigrants and home-grown oppositionists, Soviet journalists continued the tradition of pre-revolutionary radical writers who exposed the Johannites. The fate of the Johannites after the revolution The Ioannites continued to exist after the death of Fr. John. At first, they faced the same fate as other popular religious movements operating within the Church: if the hierarchs do not approve or openly condemn the movement, it usually dies. And within ten years after the death of Fr. John, the number of Johannites really began to approach zero. Only right-wing newspapers took the trouble to report on their activities; after 1913 the press stopped writing about them altogether; it was as if they had been forgotten. However, oddly enough, they survived, and solely due to the hostility of the Soviet regime. In Soviet times, both the Johannites themselves and Orthodox Christians who honored the memory of Fr. John. There were both religious and political reasons for combining them into one category. In the first decades of Soviet power, the glorification of Fr. John meant the acceptance and repetition of his apocalyptic, eschatological, anti-revolutionary judgments. After 1918, for those who suffered from the revolution, his ominous predictions about the coming apocalypse in Russia sounded more than true, but this was especially true for the Johannites. Statements from the 1920s about the visions of Fr. John was strikingly reminiscent of the eschatology of the Johannites 924. Moreover, the Soviet authorities inherited the tendency of pre-revolutionary radicals to equate the Johannites with all the followers of Fr. John; however, there were those who did not even suspect that there were any differences between them. Finally, what was most important from the point of view of the new regime, all admirers of Fr. John's shared a strong opposition to the revolution and were often monarchists, regardless of their religious beliefs. In other words, their political and eschatological views were united, and if there were differences between them in their views on Orthodoxy, then such subtleties were of little concern to the new regime. For example, in 1938, in Tver, security authorities discovered a group of conspirators - “Johannites”, hiding behind the sign of the Red Workers cooperative. They found images of Fr. John and the executed imperial family, which were known to replace icons. Although these were not overtly religious symbols, their owners' reverence for symbols of the old regime was sufficient to incriminate them. As “Atheist” wrote, they received their “deserved and fair punishment” 925. In the 1950s the shadows of the Johannites were again called to life 926. Just as the word “Johnnites” used to mean in the 20s and 30s. the same thing as monarchists or Orthodox Christians who did not accept the revolution, it has now become a common noun to designate their successors in emigration. In 1958, on the fiftieth anniversary of the death of Fr. John, the ROCOR began publishing articles and books that prepared the way for his upcoming canonization. This gave the Soviet authorities a new reason to attack this “uncontrollable body.” The Johannites have now been resurrected in the guise of the ROCOR, whose representatives were also called “Black Hundreds, ideologists of counter-revolutionary monarchism.” The “vinaigrette” of official Soviet ideologists looked like this: “After the victory of the Great October Socialist Revolution, the ideological successor of the Black Hundred monarchist party was the so-called. supporters of Old Churchism (Tikhonovism). The ideological heirs and successors of the political platform of this line in our days are the Orthodox sects: the Silents, the Johannites, the True Orthodox (Josephlanism, TOC and IPC), etc. It should be said that even in the pre-revolutionary period, the ideologists of Orthodoxy, especially John of Kronstadt, contributed to the strengthening of church influence in the backward layers of the population. After the revolution, the Johannites, followers of the Kronstadt saint, constituted the largest reactionary layer in the Orthodox sects... their white émigré leaders in the person of such as Bishop. John of San Francisco, still cherish hopes for the restoration of the monarchical system in Russia” 927. Even in 1988, this line was continued in the publication “Orthodoxy: An Atheist’s Dictionary”: it describes the Johannites as “fanatical admirers of John of Kronstadt.” As noted in the dictionary, “in our country today only isolated representatives of this reactionary group remain. However, the cult of John K. is being intensively inflated by the so-called. Russian Orthodox Church abroad, which made his name a banner of war, anti-communism and extreme obscurantism" 928. Thus, in the eyes of the Soviet authorities, opposition to the communist regime and reverence for Fr. John meant Johannity; the fact that in 1908 they were condemned by the Synod on purely religious grounds was completely ignored. In Western studies of the Soviet era, the Johannites were widely discussed in the context of other oppositional eschatological sects, such as Fedorovtsy, Innokentievtsy and Imenislavtsy, although, paradoxically, Eugene Clay insists on their belonging to Orthodoxy. Since the behavioral characteristics characteristic of the Johannites dissolved in the emigrant environment, emigrant historians of religion downplayed the importance of the Johannites 929. Canonization of Father John by the Moscow Patriarchate and its consequences Canonization of Fr. John the Moscow Patriarchate posed a problem for those hierarchs who desperately sought to create a “politically correct” image of the shepherd. Considering the fantastically politicized Soviet publications of the previous decades, this was not easy. When in the summer of 1990 the Moscow Patriarchate canonized Fr. John, then both the anti-Soviet position of the emigrant community and the Soviet accusations against Fr. John was equally dissatisfied with the compilers of liturgical texts - after all, their bishops and predecessors collaborated with the Soviet government. Then a witty solution was found - to avoid any open mention of the political views or prophetic gift of Fr. John and create your own image of the saint. Emphasizing his “Russianness,” the ideologists of the Moscow Patriarchate sought to show their geographical – and, more broadly, spiritual – continuity in relation to Fr. John. This is revealed in the troparion they composed in honor of the shepherd: “A champion of the Orthodox faith, a sorrower of the Russian land, a shepherd of rule and a faithful figure, a preacher of repentance and life in Christ, a reverent servant of the Divine Mysteries and a bold prayer-book for people, the righteous Father John, a healer and a marvelous miracle worker, praise to the city of Kronstadt and adornment of our Church, pray to the All-Good God to pacify the world and save souls ours." The above passage clearly contrasts with the “supranational” spirit of the troparion of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad, which emphasizes the worldwide significance of Fr. Joanna: “From the apostles came your broadcast to the ends of the world, from the confessor you endured suffering for Christ, you became like a saint by preaching the word, with the saints; You have shone in the grace of God. For this reason, the Lord has raised the abyss of your humility above the heavens, and given us your name as a source of wondrous miracles. To those in Christ who live forever, the miracle worker, who has mercy on those in trouble with love, hear your children who call you to believe, righteous John, beloved to our shepherd” 930. The Moscow Patriarchate justified itself even more skillfully for its collaboration with the Soviet regime: in the kontakion it composed, one can trace the idea that under the Soviet regime the church temporarily plunged itself into hell, but survived, both Christ and Fr. John approve of her choice: “Today the shepherd of Kronstadt stands before the Throne of God and earnestly prays for the faithful of Christ the Chief Shepherd, who gave the promise: “I will build My Church and the gates of hell will not prevail against Her”” 931. However, this downplaying of the “inappropriate” political views of Fr. John in liturgical texts contradicts the desire of some factions in Russia to revive his political calls. Books about modern heresies and sects in Russia end with chapters entitled “Without Orthodoxy there is no Russia,” which contain quotes from Fr. John, predicting the revival of a “powerful Russia, even stronger and mightier” if Russia, on the bones of its martyrs, begins to be built anew, returning to its origins 932. The statements that “Father John predicted a severe punishment for Russia” if the Russians violated their obligations to God, did not repent and did not return to “Holy Rus'” ensure the persistence of his political views on the territory of Russia, including among the hierarchs of the Moscow Patriarchate 933. Radical criticism has not disappeared either. After the canonization of Fr. John in Russia in 1990, a convinced professional atheist Nikolai Gordienko published a brochure entitled “Who is John of Kronstadt?” to “expose” his autocratic, anti-parliamentary sentiments 934. Nevertheless, the Moscow Patriarchate has an ace up its sleeve - the burial place of Fr. John, although not necessarily his remains. In 1923, relatives of Fr. John was petitioned to have his body transferred from the monastery on Karpovka to the Smolensk cemetery, and then, apparently, to the Bogoslovskoye cemetery; whether he was reburied, and if so, where, remains unclear. However, despite the uncertainty as to what lies under the marble tombstone, the old understanding of the saint as a genius loci is still felt in the restored monastery at Karpovka 935. Along with St. Apostle Peter, Holy Blessed Grand Duke Alexander Nevsky and Blessed Ksenia Fr. John is recognized as one of the patron saints of St. Petersburg. The fact that his figure is associated with helping the poor and healing alcoholics is obviously connected with modern Russian reality; his cult will certainly gain popularity in the near future 936. Non-political representations of the figure of Fr. John in Russia also changed after his canonization in 1990. His popularity increased again and information about him began to be scrupulously collected. Here hagiographers were helped by existing practice. There is no such thing as an Orthodox saint in general - he must fit into one of the existing categories: apostle, martyr (or passion-bearer), monk or nun (venerable), bishop (saint), prophet, warrior or virgin martyr 937. The film “Father,” filmed in St. Petersburg in 1991, proclaimed that Fr. John is one of the rare figures who combines all these categories. According to the film, although Fr. John is called the “righteous saint” (a common designation for married saints), but he was also an apostle, since he was a missionary for the entire Russian Empire; to the monks - thanks to his chastity and efforts to strengthen monasticism (he established four women's monasteries and supported many others); a saint, because, without being formally a bishop, he, as a shepherd, reached such spiritual heights that he truly ascended like an eagle over all of Russia; a prophet, because he predicted the fall of the House of Romanov and the death of Russia; and a martyr, since he fell victim to lies and slander in the press, and was also subjected to physical attack 938. Of course, there is some exaggeration here, but this is not just rhetoric. Figure o. John truly embraces more categories of righteousness than many saints, and it is the multifaceted nature of his holiness that is most striking at the end of the 20th century. Russian people who revere him as a saint. In addition, in the life of 1990, the status of mother, the wife of Fr., increases. Joanna: she is seen as an equal partner with her husband on his path to holiness. It states that “Mother Elizabeth took part in the prayers and charity of her blessed husband... He loved her very tenderly, and how could it be otherwise... Mother was the first adviser to her husband and shared with him both joys and sorrows” 939. This new emphasis on the joint bearing of spiritual burdens and the mutual affection of the spouses is at odds with the 1964 life and lifetime descriptions, which mention Elizabeth Konstantinovna’s complaints to the church hierarchs about her husband. All versions are based on meager, unconvincing facts, but the picture that emerges in them of the family life of Fr. John and Mother Elizabeth are strikingly different. Since the second life is not based on any serious data, new or otherwise, it reflects not so much reality as a change in the mood of the hagiographer: at the turn of the 21st century. it seems more convenient to present the couple's life as a "joint project" rather than describing marital discord as part of an ascetic struggle. However, previous generations of hagiographers considered the image of Fr. John - a lonely ascetic fighter who overcame the protests of both his wife and his church authorities - is either more convincing or more attractive. The greatest irony is that the canonization of Fr. John by the Moscow Patriarchate in 1990 served as a signal not only for the recognition of his holiness, but also for the rehabilitation of the Johannites. Either out of ignorance, or based on the premise that those who declared their adherence to Fr. John and was persecuted by the Soviet authorities, must be impeccable; even the leaders of the Johannites, condemned by the pre-revolutionary Synod, were counted in Russia among the supporters of Orthodoxy. Nikolai Bolshakov's book about Fr. John’s “The Source of Living Water,” written after his death, was republished in 1995 with the blessing of the late John, Metropolitan of St. Petersburg and Ladoga. The book includes quotes from letters to the Kronstadt Lighthouse, reports that Johannite traders healed a sick boy, and an edited photograph in which Fr. John is placed together with Porfiria Kiseleva and “the ascetic ascetic, elder Nazarius.” The book also claims for the first time that one of the early followers of Fr. Ioanna, Paraskeva Kovrigina, managed all his affairs behind the scenes and was “de facto” the first Ioannite - a point of view not supported by any other evidence 940. Now that Fr. John has been canonized; some bishops of the Moscow Patriarchate are convinced that the theological threat that the Johnnites posed during the life of the shepherd has receded. Blessed death of Fr. John // Pastoral wreath to dear priest Fr. John of Kronstadt. St. Petersburg, 1911, pp. 201–212. About the anthem, see: Motorin A. B. The Image of Jerusalem in Russian Romanticism // Christianity and Russian Literature / Ed. V. A. Kotelnikov. St. Petersburg, 1996, pp. 83–84. One mile is 1.06 km. On the role of chapels in the practice of piety, see: E. Poselyanin. Russian Church and Russian ascetics of the 18th century. St. Petersburg, 1905. pp. 18–20. On the role of the relics of saints and their burial places, see: Saints and Their Cults: Studies in Religious Sociology, Folklore, and History. Cambridge, 1987, pp. 4–5, 9–11. See: Bolshakov N. Ya. Source of living water. Description of the life and work of Father John of Kronstadt. St. Petersburg, 1910. P. 832; Vitovich A. Ya. Notes of the bailiff on the protective inventory of the property of Fr. John of Kronstadt // Voice of the Past. 1915. No. 5. P. 183. Wed. earlier versions of the wills of Fr. John in: RGIA. F. 799. Op. 6. D. 30 (economic management of the Holy Synod). Dept. 1. Table 1. No. 177a. L. 4, 5. For the story about the police investigation, see the book: Vitovich A. Ya. Notes of the bailiff. Vitovich A. Ya. Notes of the bailiff. pp. 177, 182–183; Trifonov A. Removal of the body and burial of Elizaveta Konstantinovna Sergieva // Shemyakina R. G. In loving memory of the deceased wife of Father John of Kronstadt, Elizaveta Konstantinovna Sergieva. Kronstadt, 1909. pp. 13–15. About the services held on the day of fortieth Fr. John in the crypt of Fedora Vlasevna, see: Bolshakov N. Ya. Source of living water. P. 242. See, for example, a collection of miraculous healings and exorcisms in the book: A Pastoral Wreath to Dear Father Fr. John of Kronstadt. St. Petersburg, 1911; repr. Utica, N.Y., 1965, pp. 252–300. Text of the rescript dated January 12, 1909, see: Pastoral Crown. pp. 226–229; resolution of the Synod of January 19, 1909, see: Pastoral Crown. pp. 230–236; RGIA. F. 802. Op. 10. Units hr. 677. L. 1. See, for example, the petition from the school in the village. Shablykinsky Omsk diocese, in: RGIA. F. 796. Op. 180. Units hr. 1441, 1 table, 2 compartments L. 14. RGIA. F. 802. Op. 10. Units hr. 677. L. 6. For the classification of monasteries, see the book: Smolitsch I. Russisches Mönchtum: Entstehung, Entwicklung und Wesen, 988–1917. Wurzburg, 1953, pp. 383–469. Pastoral wreath. C. 122. See: Why is Fr. dear to us? John of Kronstadt? // Pastoral wreath. P. 143. True missionary // Pastoral wreath. pp. 80–81. On projects and debates related to the parish school, see: Boldovsky A. G. Revival of the church parish. Review of press opinions. St. Petersburg, 1903. Saint John of Kronstadt in the memoirs of his contemporaries. M., 1994. The book includes several of these memories. Right there. P. 61; italics mine. See: Fiftieth Anniversary. pp. 175–176; Life of the Holy Righteous John of Kronstadt the Wonderworker // Journal of the Moscow Patriarchate. 1990. No. 10. P. 67. See: Freeze G. L. “Going to the Intelligentsia”: The Church and Its Urban Mission in Post-Reform Russia // Between Tsar and People: Educated Society and the Quest for Public Identity in Late Imperial Russia. Princeton, 1991, pp. 215–232. Cm.: Pope B. C. Immaculate and Powerful. P 174–716; Douglas A. The Feminization of American Culture. N.Y., 1977. P. 6–13. Makushinsky A. Memories of the former singer of the Kronstadt St. Andrew’s Cathedral // Fiftieth Anniversary. P. 42. Memoirs of a priest. V. Ilyinsky // Saint John of Kronstadt in the memoirs of his contemporaries. P. 113. Albitsky P., prot. O. John of Kronstadt, as a shepherd and public figure // Pastor's Wreath. P. 92. See: Fülöp-Miller R. Raspoutine et les femmes. Paris, 1928. P. 320. See lectures in Sofia in 1927–1928. Protopresbyter G.I. Shavelsky in the book: Orthodox Pastoring. St. Petersburg, 1996. pp. 510–515; Konstantin, archimandrite. What does holiness call us to? John of Kronstadt // Konstantin, archimandrite. Miracle of Russian history. Sat. articles revealing the providential significance of Historical Russia. Jordanville, N.Y., 1970, pp. 224–233. The spiritual connection between the righteous father John of Kronstadt and the elder Barsanuphius // Kontsevich Ya. M. Optina Pustyn and its time. Jordanville, N.Y., 1970; repr. M., 1995. pp. 359–365. See: St. John of Kronstadt Memorial Fund, Inc., Financial Statement 1995 P. 2. Meyendorff J. St. Gregory Palamas and Orthodox Spirituality. Crestwood, N.Y., 1974, pp. 168–170; Florovsky G.V. Paths of Russian theology. Paris, 1937. pp. 400–401; 432. Averky, Archbishop. Father John of Kronstadt, as a Prophet of God, sent to Russia for admonition. Jordanville, N.Y., 1963; See also: Sursky I.K. Father John of Kronstadt. T. 2. pp. 335–344. Sursky I.K. Father John of Kronstadt. T. 2. P. 220. In the book: Konstantin, archimandrite. Miracle of Russian history. See the chapter “What Holiness Calls Us to Fr. John." pp. 232–233; "Memory of St. righteous Fr. John of Kronstadt, what is he calling us to?” (IBFIS-POIK, No. 15 [1967]). pp. 234–235; Father John of Kronstadt (IBFIS-POIK. No. 8 [1961]). pp. 314–315. St. John of Kronstadt: Life, Service, and Akathist Hymn. Liberty, Tenn. P. 45; Sursky I.K. Father John of Kronstadt. T. 2. pp. 337–338 Translation from the book: St. John of Kronstadt. pp. 43–45; italics mine. For the text of the troparion, see p. 15–16. Father John is not the only saint “translated” in geographical and temporal aspects. A similar brochure about St. Xenia was first published in Shanghai, China, in 1948; in Jordanville, New York, in 1964 and 1971; in Canada, in 1986; and, finally, in St. Petersburg after 1988 (Servant of God Blessed Ksenia / Ed. Chechuga S. D. SPb., b. g.). The Dream of John of Kronstadt was distributed by hand in the 1920s and 1930s; reprinted in the book: Grad-Kitezh 2. 1992. No. 7. pp. 12–14. Tsimbal G.K. Manifesto of Orthodox Christians, op. in the book: Moskalenko A. Ideology and activities of Christian sects. Novosibirsk, 1978. P. 288. Information about his relics is contradictory. See: GARF SPb. F. 1001. D. 46 (correspondence regarding the monastery on Karpovka; November 21, 1923 - October 20, 1926), especially pp. 1–32, 39–54. Letter to IBFIS-POIK. No. 10 (October 1963). P. 49. Quote from the book: In honor of the dear priest Father John of Kronstadt, memories of eyewitnesses. M., 1995. P. 5–10. Life, exploits, miracles and prophecies of St. rights, our father John of Kronstadt the Wonderworker / Comp. Archim. Panteleimon. Jordanville, N.Y., 1976, pp. 183–208. On the cult of sources, see: Jones F. The Holy Wells of Wales. Cardiff, 1954. See also the discussion of the issue in the book: Panchenko A. A. Studies in the field of folk Orthodoxy. Village shrines of north-west Russia. St. Petersburg, 1998. pp. 40–45, 61–65, 113–123. Life, exploits and miracles. P. 201; Panchenko A. A. Research. P. 77. See the study of signs and signs of the NEP period in the book: Viola L. Peasant Rebels Under Stalin. N.Y., 1996. P. 53–55. Life, exploits, miracles. pp. 198–200. Right there. pp. 201–202. Soviet stories of retribution not related to Fr. John, see in the book: Panchenko A. A. Research. pp. 124–126. Some of them are collected in the book: Russia before the Second Coming: materials for an essay on Russian eschatology. Sergiev Posad, 1993. Life, exploits, miracles. pp. 203–204. Bulgakov M. The Master and Margarita. Frankfurt M., 1969. P. 78. Some argue that in the novel, the Griboedov house, where the Soviet writers’ organization took refuge, is a parody of the House of Diligence of Fr. John. See: Sokolov B. Bulgakov's Encyclopedia. M., 1996. P. 193. Nikolsky N. M. History of the Russian Church. P. 462; Krasnikov N.P. Social and ethical views of Russian Orthodoxy in the 20th century. Kyiv, 1988. P. 30; Orthodoxy: an atheist's dictionary / Comp. N. S. Gordienko. M., 1988. pp. 94–95. The most notable example is the apocryphal “Vision of Father John of Kronstadt,” which was distributed by hand in the 1920s and 1930s. (Institute of History of the USSR Academy of Sciences, F. Tambov exp. 1959, D. 53. L. 54) and reprinted. See: Our contemporary. 1991. No. 9. P. 42–49; Orthodox Rus'. No. 517 (October 15 [October 28], 1952). pp. 2–5. Lurin A. Ioannites // Atheist. 5, No. 668 (February 12, 1939). S. 2. See: Protocol of inquiry of the bailiff of the Usman district about the propaganda of the teachings of the Johannites among the peasants of the village of Zavalnoye // Questions of the history of religion and atheism. 9. M., 1961. P. 110. Moskalenko A. Ideology and activities of Christian sects. pp. 287, 304. Bishop John of San Francisco was canonized by the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad in 1994. Orthodoxy: an atheist's dictionary. P. 95. Clay E. Orthodox Missionaries and Orthodox Heretics in Russia, 1886–1917 // Religion in the Soviet Union / Kolarz W. L., 1961. P. 346–368; Lane C. Christian Religion in the Soviet Union: A sociological study. Albany, 1978, pp. 80–81; Pospielovsky D. Soviet Studies on the Church and the Believer’s Response to Atheism. Vol. 3: A History of Soviet Atheism in Theory and Practice, and the Believer. L., 1988. P. 205–206. Service to Father John // Holy Righteous John, Wonderworker of Kronstadt. St. Petersburg, 1997. P. 96; italics mine. Simakov N.K. Orthodox Church. Modern heresies and sects in Russia. 2nd ed. St. Petersburg, 1995. pp. 237–238. In honor of dear father. P. 3. In the 1990s. a rare exception was the late Metropolitan of St. Petersburg and Ladoga John (Snychev). Gordienko N. S. Who is John of Kronstadt. St. Petersburg, 1991. For documents in favor of reburial, see: GARF St. Petersburg. F. 1001. Op. 9. D. 46. L. 1–12 (correspondence regarding the closure of the monastery on Karpovka). For opposite statements, see the book: Historical cemeteries of St. Petersburg / Comp. A. B. Kobak, Yu. M. Piryutko. St. Petersburg, 1993. P. 537; Shkarovsky M.V. St. John's Stavropegial Convent: History of the monastery. St. Petersburg, 1998, pp. 144–150. About the association with St. Petersburg, see: Prayers to the saints especially revered in the city of St. Peter. L., 1991; The prayer service performed on the anniversary of his death is described in the book: Augustine. Orthodox Petersburg. P. 64; and the songs of praise are in the book: Holy Righteous John of Kronstadt, the Wonderworker. P. 98. See the study of the iconographic categories of doctor, singer, poet, warrior and good musician in the book: Didron M. Manuel d’iconographie Chrétienne Grecque et Latine. Paris, 1844. P. 311, 320, 322–323, 339. November 1, 1991 Lecture given in St. Petersburg at the presentation of the film “Father” (Selicheva, 1991). About attacks and beatings, see: Sursky I.K. Father John of Kronstadt. T. 1. pp. 122–123. Life of Saint Righteous John. P. 64. Bolshakov N. Ya. Source of living water. pp. 148–188, 350–395, 799.