21-го числа

Rev. Maximus the Confessor St. Rev. Maxim the Confessor A native of Constantinople, secretary of Emperor Heraclius, Maximus, avoiding communication with the Monothelite heretics, retired to Chrysopolis (now Scutari) in 634, became a monk and served as abbot at the monastery there. In 639, he arrived in Africa, in Carthage, and convinced the local bishops to pronounce a conciliar condemnation of heresy. Then he moved to Rome (645) and participated in the actions of the Lateran Council (646), convened by Pope Martin to condemn heretical “examples of faith.” Emperor Constance finally ordered to seize him by military force (655) in Rome and present him to Constantinople. Here, as an adamant believer in Orthodoxy, he was tortured in prison, beaten with ox sinews, and finally his tongue and hand were cut off. In 657, exiled to the Caucasus, to Mingrelia, he died there five years later (August 13, 662). Many works left from him are useful for the Church. During the time of the pagan kings, the lives of Christians were often endangered due to personal accounts, as we see from the example of St. Agnia. Thirteen-year-old Agnia, a Roman, returning home from a girls' school, attracted the attention of the son of the mayor of Rome; he met her parents, began sending gifts and, finally, asked her consent to the marriage. But the girl replied that she dedicated her virginity to God. The young man's father considered it dishonorable to refuse his son and decided to judge her for dishonoring the gods; For this purpose, he demanded that she devote herself to the goddess Vesta (to be a vestal virgin, to maintain an unquenchable fire in the church in honor of Vesta). Since the saint declared herself a Christian and exposed the vanity of idols, the mayor subjected her to scourging and, finally, at the insistence of the priests, she was pierced in the throat with a sword. Her parents took her body and buried her on their estate near the city, where believers gathered in a church built for prayer. Her blessed death followed in 304. † Memory of Rev. Maxim Grek The Monk Maximus, a Greek by birth, in his great exploits belongs entirely to St. The Russian Church, for which he remains a lamp for his writings 224. Having received his primary education in his homeland in the city of Arte, where his father was a noble dignitary, Maxim, out of love for science, traveled around Europe: in Paris with the famous Greek John Laskar, then in Florence and Venice he studied literary sciences, history, philosophy, theology; thoroughly learned the languages ​​Latin and ancient Greek, became acquainted with the languages ​​French and Italian. Upon returning to his fatherland, he entered Mount Athos and here in the Vatopedi monastery he accepted monasticism. When Grand Duke Vasily Ivanovich, wanting to sort out a collection of Greek manuscripts in his library and see others in translation, asked the Sultan and the Athonite authorities to send him a Greek scholar, they pointed to Maxim as the person most capable of fulfilling the wishes of the Grand Duke 225. Maxim did not want to part with St. the mountain and its silence, but, obeying the will of the Athos elders, he went to Russia in 1516; On the way, he used the time of an accidental stay in Perekop to become acquainted with the Russian language and at the beginning of 1518 he arrived in Moscow. Here he was received kindly and was ordered to live in the Chudov Monastery, at the expense of the Grand Duke. The treasures of Greek learning that Maxim saw in the Moscow library delighted him: there were many works that had not been translated into the Slavic language. For the first time, he was assigned to translate the interpretation into the Psalter. To help him, who was little familiar with the Slavic language, translators from Latin were given, Dimitri Gerasimov and Vlasiy, and for writing, the monks of the Sergius Lavra Silouan and Mikhail Medovartsov. After a year and 5 months, the translation of the explanatory Psalter was completely completed. Maxim was showered with favors and left for new works. By the will of Metropolitan Varlaam and at his expense, he translated (in 1519) an interpretation of the book of the Acts of the Apostles. He was also instructed to revise the Slavic liturgical books. By the will of the Grand Duke, Maxim began to correct the translation of the triodion, still with the assistance of translators; then he revised other church service books. There were gross errors, which the well-versed Maxim found in our church books, and fueled, as he said, by Divine jealousy, he cleared away the tares with both hands. Because of this jealousy, he expressed harsh reviews of what he saw in books. But what he saw, few saw, and a blind passion for antiquity took his reviews as an insult to the shrine. At first the murmur was secret. Metropolitan Varlaam, from whom permission was sought for important changes in the ancient books, understood the reverend. Maxima; the Grand Duke distinguished him with his love. And slander did not dare to openly rebel against Maxim. His advice was used in the affairs of the Church and the state, distinguishing him as an intelligent and educated man, a fiery monk in love for truth and faith. He was a zealous intercessor for nobles who fell out of favor with the prince, and the prince was attentive to his requests. Full of jealousy for St. faith, he gave advice to the Council of Fathers to take strict measures against the Jew Isaac. He advised Metropolitan Varlaam to revise the Slavic collection of church rules, and he himself began to translate the “Vlastarev Syntagma” of laws - from the ancient Moscow manuscript. At the end of 1521, the truthful and reasonable Varlaam left the department, and Daniel took his place (in February 1522). The new metropolitan loved books, but only Slavic ones; loved to engage in matters of faith, but not so much as types of passions. Blessed Maxim soon realized that he could not work for the truth with the same freedom and peace: with love for the truth, he turned to new subjects of activity. The pope, weakened in the west by Luther, was very concerned about extending his power in the northeast. His legate Nikolai Schonberg was being cunning in Moscow. The German “to other deceits” also added that he secretly put into use (in 1520) the word: “about the union of the Russians and Latins.” Maxim received Schonberg’s essay “On the Beginning of the Turks,” written with views of papism in defense of astrological fate. Schonberg managed to seduce the boyar Feodor Karpov, he also swayed others; Especially the thoughts about fortune, spread by Schonberg, made an impression on the superstitious people and even found a defender in some former abbot. Maxim rebelled against the crafty German and wrote up to 15 works against him, pursuing his machinations on all paths. At the same time he wrote against the Mohammedans and pagans. These works of the saint’s jealousy temporarily protected Maxim from the malice of the ignorance that was irritated against him, since they were not contrary to the spirit of the time. But between his works, there is not a single one visible that he would undertake personally for Metropolitan Daniel. By 1523, he completed translations of the interpretation of St. Chrysostom on the Gospels of Matthew and John, but this was the end of the work begun under Metropolitan Varlaam. Daniel wanted Maxim to translate the church history of Theodoret. The judicious Maxim imagined that this work, according to the letters of Arius and Nestorius contained in it, could be harmful “for simplicity.” Daniel took Maxim’s answer as unforgivable disobedience and remained very annoyed. Not only did he not bring Maxim closer to him, but, as can be seen from the consequences, he was very dissatisfied with him for the correction of the books that was carried out under Varlaam. The Grand Duke continued to be favorable to Maxim. Taking advantage of this love, Maxim freely exposed the vices in the nobles, in the clergy, and in the people. He wrote that it is indecent, unprofitable, and very dangerous for monks to own real estate. The latter greatly offended Daniel and others like him. In 1524, Grand Duke Vasily decided to divorce his virtuous but barren wife Solomonia and enter into a new marriage with Elena in order to have an heir. M. Daniel approved of the means to the end. But those who did not want to please people more than God freely pointed out to the Grand Duke the decision of the Savior. Such was the elder Vassian, a descendant of the princes of Lithuania and a relative of Vasily. Straightforward Maxim had the same thoughts. He proposed to the Grand Duke an essay on paper that began with a condemnation of carnal knowledge. “Recognize him as a true king and autocrat,” Maxim wrote to Vasily, who rules his subjects according to truth and law, and tries to overcome dumb lusts and passions in himself... Whoever is conquered by them as an insult to meaning is not an animated image of the Lord of Heaven, but a dumb animal in the form of a man.” Grand Duke Vasily in other cases did not like contradictions to his will. Now he decided to show that those who disagreed with his wishes were guilty. And now they will take revenge on Maxim for daring to judge and condemn the Russian! At the beginning of February 1525, Maxim was thrown in shackles into the dungeon of the Simonov monastery. First of all, they tried to confuse him in the case of the two boyars guilty, revealing that they had intercourse with Maxim. Maxim did not hide the fact that they visited him for conversations; did not hide either what they said or what he told them; Complaining about innovations, they said: “a country that changes its customs does not last long.” Maxim responded to this: “a country that violates the commandments of God must expect execution from God; and earthly and royal sovereigns change customs according to the needs of the state.” Not having time to accuse Maxim in this case, they turned to church matters. Either in the prince's palace or in the metropolitan's chambers, Maxim was showered with accusations of damaging books, which was offensive to the faith 226. It was considered sufficient to include one of Maxim’s crimes on the court list; in his triodion he wrote about the sitting of the Son with the Father: “thou art seated, sitting.” Maxim sincerely admitted this was a mistake and, in apology, pointed to his then ignorance of the Russian language. In the judgment list they did not record either recognition of the mistake or an apology, but recorded that, according to Maxim, there is no difference between “sede and sedel” - both are past tense 227. They hastened to pronounce the verdict: Maxim is a heretic, spoiling books. The Grand Duke, for his part, declared Maxim guilty of the fact that he and another Svyatogorsk monk Savva corresponded with ours and incited the Sultan to war against the Grand Duke 228. It is clear that this is as true as the fact that Maxim is a heretic. But Maxim was captured and taken out of Moscow so secretly that for a long time in Moscow they did not know whether he was alive? The confessor of truth was sent in chains to Volokolamsk prison; here, from the smoke and stench, from shackles and beatings, from time to time he came to the point of death, but here the angel who appeared to him said: “Be patient, old man! With these torments you will be delivered from eternal torment.” Vassian, Savva, Silouan, Medovartsov were sent to monasteries and taken into custody. Within the walls of the Volokolamsk prison, Maxim wrote with charcoal a canon to the Comforter Spirit, which is still sung by the church. Six years later (in 1531), they again demanded Maxim to appear before the spiritual court in Moscow. This is because in Moscow the best people began to speak for Maxim and against Daniel, and Maxim himself did not admit himself guilty of anything when they exhorted him to repent in the monastery. It was necessary to justify oneself in cruelties with Maxim. With this goal in mind, they removed from Maxim’s books everything that could be brought against him; Now they have succeeded in the fact that even Medovartsev spoke against Maxim. But even according to the court list, errors in the amendments turn out to be either errors of the scribes or errors of ignorance of the Russian language. Now they interrogated about the translation of the Metaphrast Life of the Mother of God and tried to convict Maxim of the fact that the mistakes made here were previously defended by Maxim. But Maxim replied that Medovartsov was not speaking according to his conscience. They pointed out in the triodion the amendments to the doxologies; “That was what Metropolitan Varlaam wanted,” answered Maxim. There was an error in the rule book, revised by Maxim. Maxim recognized it as a scribe's mistake. They said again: why did you correct “sedel thou” instead of “sede”? And they wrote down his answer in the same form. In Russian books it is written: “and in the true Holy Spirit,” but why did you atone for the true one? Maxim replied that he himself did not cross out, and Medovartsov said that, according to Maxim, this word does not exist in Greek. Protodeacon Chushka, Archpriest Afanasy and priest Vasily wrote in their denunciation that Maxim blasphemed all Russian books, that, according to him, in Russia there is no Gospel, no Apostle, no Psalter, no statutes. But obviously these people speak against themselves, exposing their ignorance and anger. Maxim, according to his confession, said that in Russia books were spoiled either by scribes or by translators, and therefore they need to be corrected and translated 229 . In conclusion, Blessed Maxim prostrated himself three times before the cathedral, begging for mercy for the sake of God's mercy, for the sake of human weaknesses - with tears he asked to forgive him the mistakes, if any, he had made in his books. Maxim was left after this trial under church ban; but it was no small relief for him that he was sent to Tver, under the supervision of the good-natured Bishop Akaki. Akaki received him graciously and treated him kindly - he even invited him to his meal. It was especially pleasant for Maxim that he could now read books and write. In 1532, he wrote for himself “thoughts with which a sorrowful monk, shut up in prison, consoled himself and strengthened himself in patience.” After the death of Grand Duke Vasily (1534), the monk decided to give public justification for the guilt leveled against him. In the “Confession of Faith” he proposed his belief, which was completely Orthodox; then he showed that it was not the books that he corrected that were filled with heretical and foolish words, but those that his opponents considered sacred. “My witness,” he wrote, “is our Lord Jesus Christ, the true God; “I have many iniquities, but I do not know of any blasphemy against the holy Christian faith.” About those who called him an enemy of Russia, he said: “May the Lord not count it as a grave sin against them!” In conclusion, he begged to be released to Athos, representing that the trial of him belonged to the patriarch. But his fate did not change. The seditious boyars who ruled Russia during John’s childhood were busy strangling each other. Maxim even lost the condescension of Akaki. On the occasion of the fire that destroyed (in 1537) the magnificent church built by Akakiy in Tver, Maxim spoke the truth about Akakiy and the inhabitants of Tver, and Akaniy was very angry with Maxim. Helena died in 1538; and at the beginning of 1539 Daniel was sent to prison. Maxim considered it a duty of conscience to reconcile the conscience of the exile with himself. Having learned that Daniel had the same dislike towards him, he asked in the name of the Heavenly Father to leave the enmity and spoke with deep humility about his innocence. After that, he wrote an answer to the new metropolitan “about correcting books,” and to the boyars another answer “about correcting Russian books.” The freedom of spirit was still the same in him now. “God is witness for me, unworthy before you faithful; I am not writing to you out of hypocrisy, as if I wanted to flatter you or wanted to get relief from you in the temporary sorrow that has been on me for 19 years.” Blessed Metropolitan Joasaph consoled the sufferer; with his blessing, he could now partake of St. sacraments and going to church. This was at the end of 1541. In 1545, the Eastern patriarchs asked Tsar John to release Maxim to Athos. Maxim himself begged for the same thing in a letter. But the suspicious politics of the time were not in the habit of complying with such requests. In 1551, Trinity Abbot Artemy and the virtuous boyars begged the Tsar to release Maxim from Tver imprisonment, and Maxim, peacefully received in Moscow, entered the Sergius Lavra with honor. The sufferer was already exhausted by the severity of prison life; but his mind was clear. At the request of his disciple Nil, the former prince Kurlyatev, he translated the Psalter from Greek. The monk reached the age of seventy. His spirit, purified by the fire of sorrow and suffering, now began to see far away. In 1553, Tsar John visited the cell of the holy elder, listened to his instructions and announced to him his intention to travel to the Cyril monastery, in gratitude for his healing from illness. The elder said: “Your vow, king, does not agree with sound reasoning. The widows and orphans of those killed near Kazan are shedding tears, waiting for your help; gather them under your royal roof, and then all the saints will rejoice over you and pray for you. God and the saints hear us not out of place, but according to our good will.” The king did not want to cancel his intention. And St. The elder asked the nobles to tell the king from him: “If you do not listen to me, who advises you according to the will of God, you neglect the blood of those killed by the filthy, then know that your son will die.” The king did not listen, and the saint’s prophecy was fulfilled. The following year, the tsar invited the God-wise Elder to a council against Matvey Bashkin. The holy elder replied that his decrepitude did not allow him to be in Moscow. The Tsar, in a letter to Maxim, explaining the reason why he was inviting bishops and the best monks to Moscow, wrote: “I so wanted to send for you, so that you would be a champion of Orthodoxy, following the example of the first God-bearing fathers, so that the heavenly abodes would receive you too, like the ancient zealots of piety, whose names are known to you. So, be their collaborator, increase the talent given to you by God, send a response to the current wickedness. I can hear that you are offended and think that we sent you to count you among Matvey’s community members. No, we do not consider the right with the wrong. Leave all doubt and, using the talent given to you, send us an answer to this message.” The monk sent his essay on the veneration of holy icons. In 1556, after fifty years of labor and suffering, the monk died on January 21. In 1651, two miracles happened one after another over the grave of St. Maxima. The villager casually sat down on the saint’s gravestone and was suddenly thrown off it, so that his whole body relaxed. Having come to his senses, he crawled to the grave in repentance and, when the requiem service was served, he was healed. It was the same with the novice; The monk appeared to the latter in a dream and menacingly denounced his insolence. At the end of the 17th century, the name of St. Maxim was written in the calendar. Saint Plato built a shrine and a chapel over the tomb of the sufferer of truth and righteousness 230. Of the numerous writings of the great sufferer of truth, the “answer on the correction of books” 231 is especially precious for the Orthodox Church. Having proved with examples that numerous errors were included in the Slavic books, and some of them so changed the exact appearance of the originals that they expose heretical thoughts in their words, contrary to St. faith, St. Maxim says: “What will those who so groundlessly slander me, calling me a molester of St. say to this? scriptures and condemning me for your justification? Do I spoil books when I correctly correct not the sacred scriptures, but what constitutes a disapproving error in them, made through misunderstanding, oversight, the forgetfulness of the ancient translators, or the ignorance and negligence of the translators? Let them stop slandering their neighbor, who works for the glory of God and for the benefit of every reasonable and faithful brother.” Opponents will say: “Are you insulting the great miracle workers who have long been famous in the Russian land with your deeds? With these sacred books they pleased God and after death they were glorified by miracles.” It is not I who will answer them, but let Blessed Paul admonish them. He says: “To one is given the word of wisdom by the Spirit, to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit; to another - faith by the same Spirit, to one the gift of healings by the same Spirit, to another miraculous actions; to another prophecy, to another discerning of spirits; to one the gift of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues: all this is done by one and the same Spirit, dividing power to each as He pleases” (1 Cor. 12:7-11). It is clear that all spiritual gifts are not given to one person. And I confess that, by gift from above, the saints were glorified in the Russian land. miracle workers, and that the God-bearing fathers, as they were before, are so now; and I worship them as true saints of God. But they did not accept from above either the gift of various tongues or their interpretation. Therefore, one should not be surprised if, with their greatness, the correction of the errors corrected by me passed beyond their understanding. They, according to their Apostolic humility, meekness and holiness of life, were given the gifts of healings and miracles; the other, although he is the most sinful, was given the knowledge and interpretation of tongues. And there is nothing to be surprised about here. The foreigner Jethro admonished Moses about the election of elders. Wonderful Macarius, after prayer, was not admonished by the shepherd boy about how to eat food? He also listened to the reproach: or are you an ass, abvo? Such are all sincere saints of God. They humbly seek and listen with gratitude to anyone who says something useful... The honest presbyter, for his gentleness and pure life, was awarded the grace to see an Angel standing and serving him; but was he not corrected by a deacon who came from Constantinograd? For several years, out of ignorance, he sinned, repeating the words of the Sevirov heresy under St. secrets. He asked the Angel why for so many years, standing near him, he was silent about such a sin? And I heard the answer: God has ordained that man corrects man. Thus, the most holy bishops and martyrs who were during the times of persecution were not in the least insulted or reproached by the various corrections of the saints who followed them. the writings of the Old Testament, completed by Symmachus, Theodotion, Aquila and Lucian, presbyter of Antioch, each of whom corrected what had been overlooked by previous translators 232. In another work, having shown superstitious thoughts in one Slavic work, the blessed teacher says: “Didn’t I say the truth at the very beginning, that it is a great evil not to know the inspired scriptures and to carelessly accept any scripture? If the strange sages of our recent times knew how to correctly and judiciously test the writings of the Apostles and Evangelists, they would not so quickly accept any ignorant and untestified scripture” 233. “The saying that it is necessary to preserve the confession of the Orthodox faith in its exact form” denounces those who changed something in the Creed. The monk writes: “Do not say that there is no great difference in the wisdom that you dare to undertake. You expose yourself to anathema by changing the inspired words - “from Mary”, and not “Mary”, and “by tea”, not “tea”, and the life of “the age to come”, and not “the age to come”. Vatopedi Icon of the Mother of God, glorified in the 8th century A detailed study of the life and writings of the teacher. Maxima printed in “Moskvityanin” for 1842, No. 11, pp. 45–96. Letter to to Athos and the answer of Afontsev, printed. in 5 books. Time total ist. M. 1830. Cont. Nestor (M. 1784): “the same month (in which Vorotynsky was forgiven; and he was forgiven in February 1525. Sob. gram. 1. No. 154) was with Vel. Prince's Cathedral". List from the court case: “Metropolitan (Daniil) ordered (1531) Dosifei, Bishop of Krutitsky, to ask Maxim what the punishment and councils were against Maxim and Savva. the prince is in the courtyard, in the chamber; Then, too, many councils were held by the metropolitan in his chamber, in the summer of 7033 (1525) against Maxim about those blasphemies that arrived and were exacted in the month of April and the month of May.” Read total ist. No. 9. M. 1847. Maxim’s accusers, by the will of Daniel, Chudovsky Archimandrite Jonah and Vassian Toporko, monk of Volokolamsk, who after that, Apr. 2 days 1525, was consecrated bishop of Kolomna. Synod. RKP. No. 347. Karamz. 7. pr. 331. 383. Judgment List, pp. 1–4. Maxim's confession and word will be answered. in East Plato, page 300. Judgment list, pp. 4, 5, 11. seq. approx. 107. Judgment List, page 5. 13. Months of the Sergius Lavra, pp. 3, 48. M. 1850. Here: “21 January. memory of St. Maxim the Greek." RKP. Saints: “Rev. Maxim the Greek Mount Athos reposed in l. 7064". A detailed examination of the essays of Rev. Maxim in Moskvityanin 1842 No. 11, pp. 65–96, where two are printed; in the review spirit. liter. § 130 complete list. In arr. by 2 o'clock. Ross. Metropolitan Church Plato, pp. 333–335. “To those who say that throughout the bright week the sun stood without setting.”