On the lives of saints in relation to Russian folk life

His Eminence Philaret in “History of the Russian Church” writes that “after the teachings of Metropolitan Photius, we do not see a single experience of living church preaching in the north. Little by little, even the certainty arose that living preaching was the preaching of heresy. Instead, it was considered sufficient to read the statutory readings from the ancient teachers. But the statutory readings... for ancient times and for another country could not resolve all the doubts of modern times and the Russian land. The best people then felt the lack of living instructions and tried to make up for them with other forms of teachings” 1. From these words it should be concluded that sermons in Rus' since the time of Metropolitan. Photius was not that the composition of sermons was avoided as heresy, that the spiritual needs of the Russian people remained unsatisfied and that the best people then tried to make up for the lack of living instructions with other forms of teaching. Upon closer examination of the matter, it turns out that Eminence Philaret based his opinion on the words of foreigners - Ulfeld, Herberstein and Guagnini, of whom the first said that “sermons are never preached in Russia” 2, and the latter said that “there are no preachers in Russia” 3. Reviews of this kind by Joseph Volotsky, Ivan Bersen and Prince Kurbsky are also known. So. But the testimony of foreigners who visited Russia at that time could relate mainly to the sermon of the court, the sermon of Russian high priests close to the sovereigns. And St. Joseph Volotsky explains the inattention of Metropolitan. Gerontius’ approach to his work was due to his attitude towards the power of the sovereign - “he was afraid of the sovereign” 4. Ivan Bersen, who said that no instructive word was heard from Metropolitan Daniel, adds that he “does not grieve the sovereign about anyone, and the former saints grieved the sovereign about all people” 5 . Prince Kurbsky speaks directly about the court sermon, and laments that Russian shepherds do not give instructions to the kings, but indulge them. A remarkable and eloquent review of the modern preaching of Prince Kurbsky was published in August. book in Pravosl. Interlocution." for 1863. From all this evidence, it is clear only that from the time of the election of Russian metropolitans for the Russian Church, court preaching, due to the circumstances of the election and other reasons, fell silent. “If a zealot for God appears somewhere with a right word, then such people,” according to Kurbsky, “like villains, are condemned by the authorities and, after many tortures, are given up to a terrible death.” It is known that in response to the bold sermon of St. Metropolitan Philip the Terrible replied: “One thing, honest father, I tell you: be silent... leave this rank” 6. It is also known that before the death of St. Philip, many metropolitans were removed from the throne and imprisoned in the monastery - and after his death, persecution befell many hierarchs, abbots and priests; according to Kurbsky, the Terrible killed the Archbishop of the great Novo-Gorod Pimen... “he ordered to drown him in the river”; and he ordered another archbishop, Leonidas, to be sewn up in a bearskin and hunted down by dogs 7 . In such a cramped situation, preaching in general, especially at court, naturally had to weaken and sometimes fall silent, although it was not completely destroyed, as can be seen from the history of the metropolitans: Gerontius, Herman, Varlaam, who spoke directly to the kings and suffered for their courage. And when the words of the saints at court fell silent, then they were heard from the depths of the forests, deserts and outskirts of the state. These are the messages to the great princes Philotheus, abbot of the Pskov Eleozarov monastery 8, Kirill Belozersky 9 and Joseph Volotsky 10. The northern region of Russia from Lake Ladoga to the White Sea itself was filled with monasteries in which these preachers settled. But more often than not, Russian preaching, understood in a narrow sense, and persecuted, as we have seen, changed its form and, under the cover of the “lives of the saints,” was directed against the same shortcomings in modern life, against which they were not allowed to speak directly, openly, freely. Of course, here the power of the word could be lost, but its meaning was always clear, and if people loved to listen and read the “lives of the saints” - evidence of which is their amazing prevalence in the lists - then one should conclude that they achieved their goal. “The Lives of the Saints,” or words of praise to the saints, had, as is known, an enormous literature, which at one time eclipsed in its numbers all other monuments of spiritual writing. There were many reasons for such a huge appearance of the lives of saints. On the one hand, the emergence of many legends about the life and exploits of Russian saints was facilitated by the religious revival in the Russian people, which strongly awakened in them since the end of the Tatar yoke 11 . At this time, many became monks due to persecution and many died a martyr’s death from the Tatars. In the XV and XVI centuries. The relics of the teacher were discovered. Sergius of Radonezh and St. Metropolitan Alexy; during Met. Macarius recognized as saints: Jonah, Metropolitan. Moscow, John of Novgorod, Paphnutius Borovsky, Nikon - a disciple of St. Sergius, Macarius Kalyazinsky, Mikhail Klopsky, Zosima and Savvaty Solovetsky, Pavel Obnorsky, Dionysius Glushitsky, Alexander Svirsky, Maxim the Fool-for-Christ, Prince Constantine with his sons Mikhail and Theodore, Peter and Fevronia, Arseny of Tverskoy, Procopius of Ustyug and many others canonized at this time 12. Local legends circulated among the people about all these saints, which were then collected and written down. This is how the lives of the saints were compiled, which were included in the prologues and read in churches for the edification of the people. After the fall of Constantinople and the Council of Florence, Russian religious consciousness found strong support for itself in the multiplication of Russian ascetics and the increase in the number of saints. With each canonization, the Russians saw new proof of the superiority of their faith over all other Christian faiths; Each new holiday established in honor of one or another Russian saint evoked praise among Russians for the saint and at the same time for the Russian land, which raised such an ascetic. “This is Russian praise of the Russian land, especially praise of the Universe” - we read reviews about saints in their lives, for example, in the life of St. Sergius 13, Dmitry Prilutsky 14, Dionysius Glushitsky 15 and others. But there was also, so to speak, a political reason for the special spread of the lives of the saints - during the strengthening of Moscow, which wanted and tried to unite Rus' in all respects, to smooth out and destroy local historical traditions that more or less violated the connection with the new capital. Then, naturally, each locality of the Russian kingdom began to value its sacred traditions and defend them. For this reason, the Russians began to especially value their local pious ascetics, and the princes were angry, as can be seen from the life of St. Paphnutia, if they settled on foreign land 16. After the death and discovery of the relics of St. hermits, the Russians valued their shrine and saw in them their representatives before the throne of God. The residents of Vologda considered St. Demetrius of Prilutsky, Novgorodians - St. John, etc. There was a time when every locality of the Russian land wanted to declare its heavenly guardian, whom the neighboring regions had to respect. So “Moscow blesses its own - Peter, Alexy, Jonah and Philip; Pskov and Novgorod blessed Barlaamia and Michael the holy fool; Smolensk - Prince Theodore; Rostov blessed Leontius, Ignatius, Isaiah, Vassian and Ephraim; Every country enjoys its own blessings. And we, Procopius of Ustyug, bless you, the northern country along the Dvina River... Solovetsky Island and the entire seaside bless Savvaty and Zosima” 17. Describing the lives of saints was then the best way to establish local traditions, especially at a time when, in the fight against Moscow, there was no means left to defend one’s independence other than literary and religious authority. Thus, where they valued their freedom most of all, as, for example, in the Novgorod region, there, first of all, attention was paid to compiling the lives of saints, who, together with sacred legends about the Novgorod shrine, back in the 15th century. were collected by Archbishop Euthymius - for the edification of the people. “Such a solemn restoration of sacred antiquity... was, as Mr. writes. Buslaev 18, a new, unprecedented thing - after the Kyiv Patericon, which, however, has a more private, ascetic interest.” The patriotic feat of Archbishop Euthymius is very remarkable in the history of the development of spiritual and literary ideas - in that era when Novgorod in the fight against Moscow had no other means left except the authority of sacred traditions, of which Moscow was still poor at that time. Archbishop Macarius worked especially hard in collecting local traditions and tales about saints. Moscow followed Macarius' example. Pachomius Logofet, who moved from Novgorod to the Lavra of St. Sergius of Radonezh, the first to compose services for the opening of the relics of St. Peter and the life of St. Alexy the Metropolitan. Metropolitan Macarius, transferred to Moscow, began collecting new local legends here, and his “Cheti-Minea” here went through a new edition, where, along with praises for the newly-minted Russian saints, praise is given mainly to Moscow, as the mother of Russian cities. Hence Moscow, jealously looking at the ancient glory of Novgorod, did not want to recognize the general and all-Russian authority for the holiness of the Novgorod princes, who to this day enjoy only local honor. John III did not want to honor the teacher. Varlaam Khutynsky. In turn, the Novgorodians began to honor the teacher. Sergius only under Vasily the Dark. To St. Joseph of Volokolamsk was not respected by the famous ascetics - Nil Sorsky and Vassian Patrikeev (see “Collected Condemnation of Daniel”). Lamentation of Perm for St. Stephen the Great, written by Stephen's companion and disciple of St. Sergius, Epiphanius, proves the same thing. “When those who were with St. Stefan returned from Moscow to Perm with his sacristy, books and other things, Epiphanius narrates, then everyone began to cry out: “Woe to us, brothers... we have become a reproach to our neighbors - foreigners - the Lopi, Vogulichs, Yugras and Pinegas... Why did Moscow offend us? She has a metropolitan and hierarchs, but we had one bishop, and she took him to her, - and Now we don’t even have a bishop’s coffin.”19 We do not undertake to determine with accuracy the number of lives of saints written at that time in different places of the Russian land - due to the lack of bibliographic and archaeological research. What is certain is that the Lives were compiled at a time when a strong demand from religious feeling evoked a complete and clear explanation of the truths of faith and the rules of Christian morality - in connection with the demands of the century and Russian people's life. Lives were written both inside Russia, and on its outskirts, and abroad, and on Mount Athos. All this proves that the biographies of Russian saints, serving as an expression of Russian religious consciousness, haunted the local sacred traditions of the Russian people, and therefore in the 15th and 16th centuries. were especially widespread compared to other monuments of Russian spiritual literature. But what historical significance did they have for Russian folk life? A question that deserves thorough research. It was said above that Russian preaching, in order to more freely and unimpededly point out the vices of modern life, had to necessarily, for the reasons stated above, be expressed in the form of legends and lives of saints. Thus, in the lives of saints, under the guise of praise to the saint, views were often expressed that could not, for well-known reasons, be expressed openly; and when the Russian archpastors could not directly expose the prevailing vice on their own behalf, fearing persecution from the authorities or the environment, then they usually used the lives of the saints, which they read in church and their lists were distributed among the people. The identity of the preacher-accuser in this case was lost by itself; denunciations of this kind were not too harsh; but the goal was fully achieved. True, with new editions of the lives of saints, they usually tried to smooth out the outstanding and harsh features directed against the gross vices of modern life; but these alterations of their previous editions did not completely erase the character of the latter. It was difficult to connect the new views with the old views, and often one expression left was reminiscent of the thoughts of the first compiler. It is possible to analyze all these editions of different times, to show historically their differences among themselves and their prevalence, judging by the lists; but this work requires many years of intensive study, and at the present time, with a lack of bibliographic research, it can hardly be studied by one person. Then, according to these changing editions of the lives of the saints, it would be possible to trace most of all the activities of spiritual shepherds to establish autocratic power in the state. The power of the sovereign followed and developed the power of appanage princes. When the Moscow appanage princes tried to strengthen their control over the entire Russian land, destroy the appanages and form one great reign, then many appanage princes had the same thoughts, they themselves wanted to rule over Moscow and over all of Russia. The struggle between the princes was inevitable. At this time, the appanage princes tried with all their might to attract famous ascetics and connect local historical traditions with the local shrine, and thereby wanted to show their importance and strength. In the biography of St. Dionysius of Glushitsky we read that when the monk, having settled near Lake Kubenskoye, wanted to build a monastery here and sent to the local prince to ask workers to help clear the place by cutting down the forest, “having heard the Christ-loving prince, he rejoiced in his heart, as if God wanted to build a most pure monastery near his power,” and willingly fulfilled the request of St. Dionysius 20. The anger of Prince Vasily Yaroslavich towards St. is also known. Paphnutius, when he moved away from Borovsk to the land of the neighboring region 21. With the strengthening of the power of the Moscow sovereigns, not without reason, in many words of praise to the ancient holy Russian princes, the ancient Roman Caesars and emperors began to be listed in detail, their exploits and merits began to be revealed, and the Russian sovereigns were compared with them. During the time of Tsar the Terrible, especially many words of praise were composed and redone for the Russian holy princes. In all of them the thought and desire is expressed - to elevate the importance of Moscow and show that the Russian tsars are in no way lower than the ancient sovereigns and the idea is visible that they are higher than all appanage princes. In the life of St. Princess Olga 22, redone during the Terrible, added that the rod erected in the village of Gruzin by St. Apostle Andrew the First-Called, “imagine an autocratic royal scepter rule in Rus'.” While caring about the establishment of autocratic power in the Russian kingdom, the truth was not forgotten. But the truth had to be preached first of all to the princes and boyars. The clergy, as is known, was greatly constrained in such activities: the same Tsar the Terrible, who begged not to spare his vices, said in response to the truthful speech of St. Philippa: “Be quiet.” Some shepherds actually fell silent, fearing the terrible word. But instead of an accusatory word from the lips of the metropolitans, a sermon about truth appeared at that time in one instructive sermon about the capture of Constantinople, which was very widespread in Rus'. The main reason for the fall of Constantinople is considered to be the lack of truth in this city: “The Greeks abused the righteous judgment, but condemned innocent people for bribes.” For this reason, Mohammed captivated them and ordered them to put aside covetousness, and ordered them to flay the skins of unjust judges. The harm from the weakening sense of legality and personal honor for the state is perfectly described in the lives of the saints of that time, princes and boyars. “The Lives of the Saints,” replacing the lack of Russian preaching, understood in a narrow sense, and at the same time serving the benefit of the people, was at all times the most understandable and favorite reading for them. For our pious ancestors, they constituted, one might say, almost the only reading, and they owed their piety and religiosity to this reading. On the days of remembrance of the saints, writes the compiler of the “much-worded epistle”, monk Zinovy ​​Otensky, to Western Russian Christians, people gathered in church “to be consoled and earnestly strive by reading their lives and for the sake of praise of their exploits and passions” 23. The Russian people, especially in former times, traveled in large numbers to the relics of St. pleasers; Russian monasteries were filled with many wanderers; Here they were treated to a meal and during the service and at the meal the lives of the celebrated saints were read to them for their edification. Reading lives then was the only sermon to the people when they came to church. Through this reading, a religious feeling, a consciousness of the superiority of their faith over all Christian faiths, the memory of folk traditions dear to them, and a desire to live in a Christian, Orthodox manner were supported and cultivated in Russians. Here they found Orthodox dogma and Christian practice, and even polemics of the Orthodox Church; here they learned lessons in godly Christian living. It is remarkable that no other kind of sermon could affect the Russians as strongly as the “lives of the saints” affected them. The Russian people are rich in moral forces, but until now these forces remain undeveloped; he cannot yet grasp with his mind and assimilate to himself the deep Christian truths conveyed to him in a dry and condensed form; such speeches and instructions are boring and incomprehensible to him; he needs figurative ideas and examples; he will understand these living proofs, taken from Russian life, and assimilate their instructions. All this, in the best possible way, was satisfied by the lives of the saints, which offered living examples from the life of Russian people, a life understandable and dear to every Russian. The latter was very well understood by the writers of hagiographies, who, in describing the life of the saint, did not omit a single incident, so as not to derive Christian instruction from it. Thus, calling to honor the memory of the saint, they convinced their listeners and readers to imitate him in their lives and for a long time loved to dwell on these examples from the life of the saint, which related to issues of time, in order to praise the virtues of the saint to strike the shortcomings of modern society and thereby call listeners to correction. The description of the life of a strict ascetic always provided an opportunity to praise non-covetousness, as was done in the word of St. Zenobius. Zosima and Savvtii 24, Kirill Belozersky 25, etc. The description of the life of a holy prince or monk, who came from a princely or boyar family, gave the compiler an opportunity to talk about the insignificance of external worldly glory before heavenly glory, about the good upbringing of children - as a reproach to the upbringing of Tsar the Terrible. This is what was done in the lives of St. Alexander Nevsky, Dmitry Prilutsky and others. Description of the life of St. The prince provided a reason to expose the self-will of the boyars, for example, in the lives of Alexander Nevsky and Mikhail Klopsky, about the responsibilities of the Grand Duke to the Church and the state. In the descriptions of the exploits of the saints, there were even such instructions that we do not find in other written monuments, for example, the question of education, which occupies so much of our time! One should become acquainted with the lives of saints or the “Chet-Minea” from childhood, with a certain prudent guidance on the part of educators. It is known that in childhood we all love stories about the lives of extraordinary people, especially tales about the extraordinary and wonderful. Therefore, many modern teachers advise letting children read fairy tales and fables. Instead of fables, we would, on the contrary, advise fathers and mothers to purchase “The Lives of the Saints” in the Russian translation for their children’s initial reading, where children could early become visually acquainted with the world of truly extraordinary people - the saints of God. Information about the saints, assimilated by the memory and perceived by the tender heart of a child, can no longer be torn from the soul by any doubts that are natural to a person at a time when his developing mind begins to be critical of acquired knowledge. For someone who, with prudent guidance, became well acquainted with the Chet-Mineas in childhood, his doubts about the legends about the saints will be only steps along which he will come to deep faith in all their wonderful deeds and in the extraordinary manifestation in them and through them of the almighty power and wisdom of God. Our zemstvos are very concerned about public real schools 26; we look at their undertakings with understandable prejudice, knowing from experience that nothing is easier to abuse than the natural sciences: familiar with them, but not initiated into their mystery, before which the most far-sighted minds stopped, is usually blown by every wind of teaching, and where everyone bows before the greatness and wisdom of the Creator and Provider of the universe, he sees no place for God and Providence, learns to reject miracles saints, appearances of spirits, etc., etc. Everyone knows how stubbornly in our time natural science, developed on non-Orthodox soil, persists in the deeds and miracles of the saints of God and in the manifestations of spirits. Against this unbelief, we will say: that the biblical saints were also extraordinary ascetics, and the Lord commanded those seeking the Kingdom of Heaven to go to Him along a narrow and sorrowful path, to follow the path of self-sacrifice and the cross. The Savior clearly predicted about the miracles of the saints that those who believe in Him will give birth to demons in His name; tongues will speak new things; They will take the serpent: even if they drink mortally, it will not harm them; They will lay them on sick hands, and they will be healthy (Mark 16:17-18) As for the holy angels, we know that they appeared to pious people in the Old Testament; in the New Testament, heaven became open to men, and the Lord promised those who believe in Him a vision of angels ascending and descending to earth (John 1:51). In the Gospel and the Acts of St. The apostles depict many of these manifestations of the spirits of light before the eyes of the saints. Is it surprising if the saints are now rewarded with the sight of angels? If an angel appeared to our Lord and Savior Himself at the hour of Gethsemane prayer, strengthening Him, then all the more necessary are reinforcements from the heavenly world for the selfless crusaders - the saints of God. Through feats of fasting and self-sacrifice they refine their flesh and through unceasing prayer they perfect their higher vision, open to the heavenly world. The property of the spirits of darkness is also known: in the struggle with extraordinary people, they use extraordinary efforts to deceive them and often tempt them directly, as the devil once tempted Christ. But whether the lives of the saints have historical accuracy, especially in the details of their lives and exploits, is a question of historical criticism. It is known that in the absence of strictly scientific Christian criticism, apocryphal tales about various biblical events and persons began to appear early in Rus'. These apocrypha either passed to us from the east through Bulgaria, or were compiled here in Russia and issued under the name of the works of St. fathers, as Kurbsky testifies, “are conveniently accepted by the simple and unlearned.” They were even studied by many archpastors of the Russian land, for example, Gennady of Novgorod believed in the Six-winged and in the book of Enoch the righteous 27, Metropolitan Macarius placed apocryphal tales about Babylon in his chety-menaion under the 17th. December; The Monk Maxim the Greek believed the legend about the head of Adam and her burial on Calvary 28, although he himself wrote many letters to Nikolai Nemchin and the boyars he seduced - Karpov and Munekhin - against the doctrine of fate and fortune 29. These apocrypha were read in churches along with the lives of saints, for example, the word about the 12 Fridays, Joseph's lament over the tomb of Rachel, a prayer for constipation of water, etc. Meanwhile, during the time of Ivan the Terrible, who himself recognized the teachings of Luther as being closer to the truth than the teachings of the Catholics, 30 the free spirit of the Lutheran doctrine, which introduced its concepts into the religious life of many Russians, was met with their desire to evaluate the legends and decrees of their Church. This circumstance increased the success of the heretics, whose fanaticism reached the point that some of them began to destroy icons and crosses “and throw them into unclean places, some with their teeth biting, like psychic demons, others crushingly, others throwing them into fire” 31 . All this, together with ritual deviations, caused the hundred-domed council, which published a well-known index of renounced books, much expanded in comparison with the previous ones. From that time on, historical criticism of the lives of saints began to come into its own more and more and to cleanse the Church of superficial legends. St. Demetrius of Rostov, having spent a long time analyzing the huge menaia of Metropolitan Macarius, included in his chety-menaia only those saints of the first seven centuries about whom ancient church historians narrated - Eusebius, Pamphilus, Socrates, Sozomen, Evagrius, Rufinus, etc., as well as St. fathers - Athanasius and Basil the Great, Gregory the Theologian, Gregory of Nyssa, Sophronius, Patriarch of Jerusalem, Gregory Dvoeslov, Theodoret of Cyrus, Ephraim the Syrian, John Climacus, etc. For subsequent centuries, St. Demetrius used the works of St. John of Damascus, St. Joseph and Theodore the Studites, Joseph the Hymnographer, Theophanes the Inscribed, Nicephorus Callistus, Simeon Metaphrastus and others. The Lavsaik of Palladius of Eleonopolis, the Spiritual Meadow of John Moschos, ancient Russian prologues and patericons were also at his disposal. Wisely using all the above material, St. Demetrius, in addition to a general study of the source in the stories about the saints, noted in the lives themselves on the sides where exactly what was taken from. The sources from which St. borrowed. Demetrius's lives of the saints, for the most part, have now been translated into Russian and therefore can easily be verified by anyone, the historical truth in them. Let us read, for example, the history of the God-lover Theodoret of Cyrus, St. Gregory, Pope of Rome, the book of Palladius to Lausus about the saints, the Spiritual Meadow, the acts of the cathedrals and the katha of the martyrs - all this has been translated into Russian and is not difficult to find in various spiritual journals - and we cannot, without deliberately rejecting the truth, suspect the sources of the “chet-menya” of St. Dimitri. As for the Russian saints, it is even more convenient to trace the historical accuracy of their biographies. Let us take, for example, several lives written during the Mongol period, when enlightenment in Rus' naturally weakened; finding less sympathy among the people who were in poverty under a heavy yoke. Many historical works of that time have survived. We will omit the chronicles that were still being continued then in Moscow, Novgorod and Pskov by pious monks and move on to the lives of the saints. Here we will find the lives of our saints - Isaiah of Rostov, Cyril of Turov and Stephen of Perm, Peter and Alexy, Metropolitans of Moscow, as well as the lives of our hermits - Sergius of Radonezh and Demetrius of Prilutsk, and consider some of them. Life of St. Stephen of Perm was originally written shortly after his death (1396) by his former comrade in the Rostov Gregory Monastery, the monk Epiphanius the Wise. This biography is on many lists. That Epiphanius personally knew the saint of Perm, had the opportunity to talk with him later in the Trinity-Sergius Monastery and diligently collected information about his life and works, we have evidence of all this in the story itself, from which the “life of our father Stephen, Bishop of Perm,” placed in the chety-menaion of St. Demetrius of Rostov on April 26. In chronicles and historical books there is a lot of fragmentary information about the Apostle of Perm, which serves as confirmation of the authenticity of Epiphanius’ story. In our time, the life and teaching of St. Stefan was critically investigated by Mr. Shestakov and published in the “Scientific Notes” of Kazan University for 1868. Life of St. Peter, Metropolitan of Moscow, written by St. Prokhor, Bishop of Rostov (1327). This legend about the great saint of a contemporary and eyewitness is brief, simple and artless. It was found by the Right Reverend Macarius in the Novgorod Sophia. library of the 16th century and published by him in the “Spiritual Messenger” for 1862 in materials for the history of the Russian Church 32. Metropolitan Cyprian subsequently wrote a more complete life of St. Peter, placed in full in the Degree Book 33; In addition to the life of the saint, he mentions some of his miracles after death and his canonization, and finally tells how he himself received miraculous help from the saint of God. The story of St. Cypriana, with the then usual verbosity and rhetoric, breathes sincerity 34. Life of St. Alexy, Metropolitan of Kyiv, written by Archimandrite Pitirim, who was later Bishop of Perm. It was published in “Materials for the History of the Russian Church” 35 and is distinguished by its simplicity of presentation and sincerity of the story. This life ends with a story about the death and burial of St. Alexy, but does not mention the discovery of his relics, which took place in 1439; therefore, it was written before their discovery. The Life of St. Sergius of Radonezh was compiled by his disciple and spiritual father, Epiphanius, the same one who previously wrote the Life of St. Stefan of Perm. In the preface to it, Epiphanius writes that he began collecting information about the monk a year or two after his death (1392) and for 20 years wrote it down in scrolls and notebooks without order; that later he decided to write the life of St. the elder, 26 years after his death, therefore, in 1418. When compiling his life, the author wrote what he saw with his own eyes and heard from the lips of Sergius himself, his older brother Stefan and other elders - eyewitnesses of the saint of God. In addition to the life of St. Sergius, Epiphanius wrote a word of praise for him, which was probably read to the brethren on the day of his death and which depicts lamentation over his tomb. The life of the Venerable Demetrius of Prilutsky, the Vologda miracle worker, was written by one of his successors as abbot, Macarius, who writes that he heard the testimony of the Venerable Demetrius from the lips of his blessed disciple Pachomius, who was the first abbot of the Prilutsky Monastery after him. This life was read before the entire church on the days of the saint’s memory; its end is composed in the form of an akathist, with frequent repetitions of the word rejoice. Stories and legends about the pious princes of that time about St. Alexander Nevsky 36, about St. Dovmont of Pskov 37, about Demetrius Donskoy 38, about Peter, Tsarevich of Ordynsky 39, and about St. Mikhail Chernigovsky 40, everyone is known in the press. We deliberately focused on some of the lives of St. Russian saints to point out the historical reliability of their sources, which each of us can have at hand. It is known that the lives of Russian saints after Demetrius of Rostov were critically analyzed by Muravyov and especially by the Reverend Philaret of Chernigov and published by month of the year, indicating the sources themselves. Anyone who is not satisfied with all this is a Lutheran, not an Orthodox Christian. Luther’s followers, having accepted the main position of their teacher that there is no and cannot be internal sanctification, could naturally reject faith in all the exploits of the saints and began to look at them as a manifestation of imaginary religious fanaticism: “in ourselves we do not see internal change from actions from above, it does not exist in anyone; There are no miracles and signs with us, and there were none with others either.” This is what, unfortunately, some of us Orthodox say, and, moreover, do not want to see the stream of sanctification that does not cease in the Orthodox Church and pours out from our Lord Jesus Christ onto his faithful servants. Before our eyes, the saints Mitrophanius of Voronezh and Tikhon of Zadonsk were glorified by God, marvelous in his saints. This is the everlasting and unceasing miracle in Orthodox Christianity, which is performed with us by our Renewer and Restorer, the Lord Jesus Christ, the new Adam and the head of renewed humanity. He raises his chosen ones by his divine authority and power to a primitive state of innocence and righteousness - through the means revealed by our Savior in the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church. These chosen ones achieve sanctification through many different and extraordinary feats: seclusion, silence, pillarism, foolishness, mercilessness of earthly goods and the very life of Christ for the sake of Christ. We said above that for our pious ancestors, the “chet-menaion” constituted almost the only reading to which they owed their religiosity. The “Cheti-Menaion” also provided our former priests, many of whom did not study in schools, with religious education, in which knowledge of the dogmas of faith and rules of morality was accompanied by the warmest sympathy of the heart for them. If only our pastors, instead of abstract teachings, would more often read the “lives of the saints” in church and listen carefully to their effect on rural parishioners; Then they would be convinced by experience that even now no other sermons and teachings can influence Russian commoners as strongly as the lives of saints and words of praise to them. Who does not know that the Russian simple people are still very little developed spiritually to embrace with their minds the deep Christian truths conveyed to them in an abstract form: and therefore our wise archpastors advise priests, especially rural parishes, to read in church the “lives of the saints” instead of ordinary teachings. In the life of St. We read from Prince Jehoshaphat: “since the path leading to virtue is cruel, not as it is and sharp, and even more so than those who have not yet been attached to God, but through passionate torment and still fought; For this reason, he demands a lot, those who encourage us to come to him, both with parables, with descriptions of their lives, even those who marched before, and even more so to painlessly draw us to him and not despair to organize the processions of the sorrowful one” 41 . We, for our part, would advise zemstvo institutions, not philosophizing, but humbly conducting themselves, taking care of the establishment of higher real and normal public schools, and at the same time taking care of introducing Old Russian Orthodox principles into both existing and established schools, introducing reading from the “lives of the saints” into them, for the religious and moral education of children. Translation from Greek by Dmitry Kikot East. Rus. Churches, vol. III, p. 139–142. Editio Starzeuscis, p. II. Rer. Moscovit. comment. p. 42 T. III. Part 1 Enlightener. Kazan, 1857, p. 53. Act. exp. vol. 1, no. 172. l. 141. Life of Metropolitan Philippa. “Soul floor. Reading" 1861 June p. 146 n.d. Tale Kurbsky, vol. I, p. 162 ID. “Orthodox. Interview" 1863 March. Collection. imperial publ. bib. No. 50, l. 36–39. In one XIV century, 80 monasteries were formed in Rus'; in the first half of the 15th century. 70, while from X–XIV there were only 87 in total. See “Right. Interlocution." 1860 October, pp. 196–221. Archaeological Act. exp. T. I. No. 213 Collection new sofa bib. No. 1274 l. 275 Cheti-Minei mit. Makaria, also No. 1320 l. 75. Collection Novgor. bib. No. 1491 and 1424. From life Procopia Ustyuzhsk. XVI century Solovetsk. bib. No. 826 l. 505th. Letop. rus. liter. and ancient book VI, pp. 72, 77.. "Spiritual Vestn." 1862 March, pp. 312, 313 et al. Collection Novgor. sofa bib. No. 1424 l. 55 Collection XVI century from Novgorod. sofa bib. No. 1424 l. 385–387. Rukov. Kirillov. bib. No. 1408 l. 210. Orthodox interlocutor 1859 book 2 and 3. Hand. Novgor. sofa bib. No. 1424. For example, Moscow, Vyatka, etc. Reading in general ist. and ancient 1847 No. 8 p. 3. From a letter from Dmitry Gerasimov to clerk Munekhin. Synod. handwritten XVI century No. 569. Op. Maxima ed. Kaz. academician, Vita Johannes Basilid. Oberborn 1, p. 204. For example, see “Spirits. Vestn." 1862 p. 58. In the II team. Russian years. 1, 204. In the II team. r. years. IV. 180 Also VI, 104 Russian. ist. collection. III, 81. Orthodox interlocutor 1859 I, 356–376. Collection Novg. Soph. bib. XIV-XV centuries, No. 578 l. 192nd. Rukov. Solovets. bib. No. 210th.