Saint Demetrius of Rostov

Saint Demetrius, Metropolitan of Rostov; born in 1651 in Little Russia, in the city of Makarov. His father, Savva Tuptalo, was a regimental centurion who accepted citizenship of the Moscow Tsar. Originally St. Dim. who bore the name Daniel in the world, studied at home, and then entered the Kyiv Brotherhood School, when the famous Ioanniky Golyatovsky was the rector there. Poor in health, with a penchant for a quiet, contemplative life, St. Demetrius, while still a young man, became a monk in June 1668 at the Cyril Monastery. The young man's talents soon attracted attention. In March 1669 he was ordained (by Metropolitan Joseph Tukalsky) as a hierodeacon, and in 1675 he was summoned to Chernigov by Bishop. Lazar Baranovich ordained him as a hieromonk in May and appointed him as a preacher at the cathedral of the Dormition. cathedral From here he traveled to Lithuania (in 1677), where he became friends with Bishop. Belorussky Vasilyevich, a zealot of Orthodoxy; traveled to Vilna, was in Slutsk, worked in the Brotherhood Monastery there in preaching the word of God, and managed to gain fame for his preaching talents, so that many worldly and spiritual authorities began to invite him to their place. Slutsk returned to Little Russia after the death of its creator. mon. Skachkevich and settled in a monastery in Baturyn. During his trip to Lithuania, he had the opportunity to get acquainted with Polish life, language, and Roman Catholicism, and in Baturin the opportunity opened up to become more familiar with the customs of the Great Russians and representatives of the Moscow government. This circumstance deserves attention, because Saint Demetrius was brought up in an era when there were the most unclear relations between Moscow and Little Russia. In church terms, Moscow was drawn to itself, and Little Russia sought to defend its independence, recognizing the dignity of having withstood the centuries-long struggle for faith and achieved a significant degree of enlightenment. The views common to the Little Russians in this regard should have been instilled in St. Dim., a trip to Lithuania could arouse in him sympathy for Moscow, which was far ahead of its neighbor in terms of religious tolerance. In Baturin, in addition to the people, representatives of the authorities, both secular and spiritual, drew attention to the gifted preacher. In 1681 Bishop of Chernigov elevated him to abbot of the Maksanovsky monastery, and then in 1682 transferred to hegumen of the Baturinsky monastery. But in 1683 he himself left the abbess and moved to the Kiev Pechersk Lavra; there was a rich library here, archim. Varlaam Yasinsky, a scientist who loved scientific studies, everything here contributed to scientific work. Since 1684, Saint Demetrius began here his many years of work - the compilation of the Four Menaions. Having devoted himself to this work, he wanted to completely remove himself from any difficult duties that could distract him, but the Baturyn clergy, together with the hetman, convinced him to take on the abbotship of the Baturyn monastery for the second time. However, in 1692 he managed to leave the abbess “for the peace of writing the lives of the saints” and move to Kyiv. Then he was successively abbot in the Glukhovsky monastery, Kirillovsky, and from here he was transferred as an archimandrite to the Yeletsky monastery in Chernigov. In 1700, the department of Metropolitan of Siberia (Tobolsk) became vacant and Dimitri was summoned to Moscow. Here he greeted Peter, and with a speech upon his return from the Trinity Monastery, he was appointed to the vacant see. However, he did not go there at first due to various circumstances, and then Peter I, listening to his complaints about poor health, for which the Siberian climate was harsh, and also in view of his unfinished work (Dem. spoke about this to the tsar during his visit), appointed him metropolitan in Rostov. The consecration to metropolitan took place in Moscow on March 23, 1701. He arrived at the place of his new ministry in 1703; here a completely different, new activity awaited him; I had to take into account administrative concerns. A little earlier, the monastic order was restored, to whose jurisdiction the management of church and monastery property, supervision of monks, parishes, almshouses, schools, etc. was transferred. Such interference of secular authorities in the life of the clergy, of course, was embarrassing for the spiritual authorities and, due to abuses and rudeness of morals, created a lot of difficulties. Saint Demetrius himself complained about the difficult situation and even spoke about the diminishment of the church “from external persecutors.” In addition, for the first time finding himself in close proximity to the folk life of Moscow Rus', he had to be amazed at the rudeness of the morals of both the masses and their shepherds. The latter were striking in their ignorance; the priests showed disrespect to the saints, abused the secret of confession, were attentive to the rich, were completely careless and even despised the poor, etc. St. Demetrius zealously set about correcting them: he sent out district messages, gave instructions, explained the requirements of duty, and spoke teachings for the people at every service. But his main concern was school. He demanded that priests send their children to study; the teaching was free, and the poor were even given bread. The number of students with him reached up to 200. Demetrius himself delved into the life of his brainchild, often visited him, in the absence of a teacher, he taught, listened to the students’ answers and explained the Holy Scriptures to them; he confessed himself and received communion himself. The rules at school were generally Kyiv. The languages ​​taught were Greek and Latin; the teachers were Little Russians; On holidays, students made speeches and acted out theatrical plays and dialogues. But, taking the forms of the scholastic school, St. Dim. The scholastic did not instill in himself the spirit. On the contrary, his school had the character of family simplicity, caring and complacency. The treatment of the students was generally gentle. Undoubtedly, such introductions as theatrical art were new to Moscow. On this basis, the accusation of the saint even matured when he used old bishop’s vestments for costumes. True, his enemy Voeikov accused him and pointed out the guilt that these vestments were government property. The saint ruled the Rostov flock for 7 years, all the time justifying his words with which he greeted the flock upon entering Rostov: “I did not come to please myself, but to admonish the disorderly, to console the faint-hearted, to intercede for the weak..., to love the good, to punish the evil with mercy, to care for the benefit of all, to carefully seek salvation for all, to pray for all.” St. died Demetrius October 28, 1709 In the evening, having dismissed the ministers, he went to a special cell for prayer, and so in a prayerful position on his knees they found him dead in the morning. The burial was performed by his friend, Stefan Yavorsky, who honored the memory of the deceased with a funeral oration and composed a funeral inscription. There was no property left after him, since he used the remainder of his meager funds for charity; in his will he asked to be buried at no cost. His extensive library, consisting of Greek, Latin, Polish and Slavic books, handwritten and printed, was sent by Stefan Yavorsky to Moscow, to the Patriarchal Library. In 1752, his incorruptible relics were found and the Russian Church ranked him among the holy saints of God. His memory is honored on September 21. On the silver shrine where the holy relics are placed, an inscription written by Lomonosov is carved. The most important literary work of the saint, which constituted his main glory, is represented by the Chetii-Minea. He worked on them for many years, not leaving his work no matter the changes in his personal destiny. More than once even he refused to accept this or that proposed position, solely for the purpose of devoting himself to his work, although he never managed to achieve complete solitude. The Cheti-Minei do not represent a scientific work in the strict sense; this is a collection of tales about the lives and exploits of holy people for the edification of believers, arranged in chronological order by the numbers and months of the year. The presentation also includes explanations of various subjects of faith and church history. When compiling the Chety-Menya, Saint Demetrius had at hand the Moscow Menaion of Metropolitan Macarius and various Greek and Latin sources, as well as Russian legends; He had at his fingertips the “Acta Sanctorum” of the Bollandists and others (indicative source, see “St. Demetrius of Rostov,” M. 1849). The idea of ​​compiling detailed and thorough “lives of the saints” in the South Russian church has been around for a long time and its implementation was taken up more than once before St. Dimitri. But with St. Dim. Finally, a plan was developed in the Kiev-Pechersk Lavra and the council of elders under the leadership of Varlaam Yasinsky entrusted its implementation to St. Demetrius (in 1684) Metropolitan was soon interested in this work. Gideon and Hetm. Samoilovich, thanks to whose assistance the Moscow Chetyi-Minea were delivered to Kyiv. But Moscow’s attitude towards Little Russia at that time was far from sincere. In Moscow there was a dispute about transubstantiation and the Little Russian clergy was suspected of being in favor of the “Latin part”. Patriarch Joachim demanded recognition of Moscow Orthodoxy, and therefore sent an ultimatum to Bishop. Laz. Baranovich, did not give the Lavra printing privileges and other suspicions. In connection with this incredulity, it is also worth the fact that in 1688 Moscow. The Chetii-Minei were demanded back. But by this time - in 1689 - the first part of the “Lives” had already been completed (Sept., Oct., November). At the same time, St. Dmitry got the opportunity to be in Moscow (in Mazepa’s retinue), where he introduced himself to the sovereigns and the patriarch. The people of Kiev visited the latter very often during their stay in Moscow, talked with him, and, leaving, St. Dim. received his blessing to continue the work he had begun. And the new patriarch Adrian even tried in every possible way to encourage him to work “for the whole year”; twice sent him a blessing and a letter in which he praised his godly work (1690). By 1695 the second part was completed (Dec., Jan., Feb.), and in 1700 the third (March, Apr., May). The last 4th (June, July, Aug.) St. Dmitry had to finish in Rostov; its printing began in 1705, that is, three years after he assumed archpastoral duties. Thus, to complete his work, which remains to this day one of the best readings for pious readers, St. Dim. used for more than 20 years. But this many years of work is not the only one. Besides him, St. Dimitri owns many others. These are: “Cell Chronicle”; not finished; compiled on the basis of extensive study of the Bible, church fathers and teachers, Byzantine chroniclers and modern church writers. The main goal was to provide a coherent account of the events of biblical history, such that it could serve moral and instructive purposes. Bookish people, the author modestly explains the reason that prompted him to do this work, know all this; There are quite a few works of this kind in foreign languages, and even in our Slavic there are handwritten chronographs: there is no need to add a few grains to filled granaries, just like pouring a few drops of water into large rivers. And he, St. Demetrius writes this chronicle not for teaching others, but only for his own cell reading, “if it goes into the hands of other book readers, and if it pleases anyone, let the name of the Lord be glorified.” However, there was another motivation here, which the author speaks of in a letter to Stefan Yavorsky: “I remember that in our Little Russian side it is difficult to find the Bible of Slavs, there are very few places where they are found and hardly anyone can buy them, and rarely does anyone from the clergy know the order of the biblical stories, what happened when. And for this purpose I wanted... to briefly teach biblical history to those who keep it in a book that is not too great and moderate, so that everyone can buy it inexpensively and conveniently learn about all the stories in the Bible, as they go in order.” There was also a slightly different goal here, about which he wrote to the same friend. This work, he wrote, probably few people will like; it mixes: history “and some kind of interpretation from Cornelius and other books”, “some moral teaching, especially in the first and second thousand years, where there are few stories.” He did this with the intention of giving a book with passages and notes, so that it could sometimes be useful for preaching. - While touring the diocese, according to the duties of the archpastor, St. Dmitry could not help but focus on the schismatics, of whom there were many in Yaroslavl; There he always stayed for a significant period of time and “taught with the help of God... But since words from the mouth go more to the wind than to the heart, for this reason he abandoned all the work related to chronicles, he decided to write a special book against schismatic teachers. God will not bother you about chronicles, but if you keep silent about this, God will exhaust you.” The fruit of his labors was the “Investigation (examination) of the schismatic Bryn faith,” which was distributed throughout the diocese during the district message. When starting this work, he stipulates that given the existence of such books as “The Rod of Government” and “Spiritual Advent”, there is no need for others, but he does not know whether the named works are in his diocese, because “the hated schismatic hand destroys them”; Meanwhile, when a wolf attacks the flock, the shepherd must not be obsessed with sleep. Saint Demetrius is greatly indignant that such ignorant people act as preachers; they didn't bother to learn anything. The tone of “The Search” is quite harsh, although this harshness is far from resembling the almost hostility with which denunciations of schismatics were generally written at that time: in St. Dim. one can hear the indignation of a pious person at the follies that are committed in the ignorant environment of the schism. This work was completed in March 1709, but was published after the author’s death, in 1745. In addition, St. Demetrius of Rostov tried to collect historical information about his diocese; worked on compiling a chronicle, or chronograph, about the beginning of the Slavic people (unpublished, in the library of the Kharkov Spiritual Seminary, lists in the St. Petersburg Academician). His: “The Irrigated Fleece” or the legend of the miracles of the Chernigov Ilyin Icon of the Mother of God; “Discourse on the image of God and likeness in man”; “Diaries”, i.e. daily notes (written in Belarusian, translated into Russian); “Catalog of Russian Metropolitans”; “A short martyrology, stopped at one month of September”; then - various short instructions and prayers, pastoral messages, spiritual chants; reflections on the sufferings of Christ, on communion, on transubstantiation, and many others. etc. Finally, Saint Demetrius of Rostov was a zealous preacher of the word of God. He began preaching very early and then already attracted many listeners. He did not give up preaching in subsequent years, and during the years of his pastorate he hardly performed a service without teaching. In the first sermons one can still see the influence of the scholastic school, but over time the artificiality gradually disappears, although it cannot be said that he was completely freed from the techniques firmly acquired during his school years. But everywhere one can see one desire to make people better, kinder. The preacher’s favorite theme is “love is above all.” As a preacher, St. Demetrius was a faithful successor to the ancient shepherds of the Russian Church. He almost did not touch on political topics, of which there were so many in his time, although on occasion he expressed his views on this or that event. At the same time, he was not shy in his denunciations. Thus, he denounced “wrathful rage,” drunkenness, disrespect for saints and other vices, obviously referring to Peter I and the customs he introduced. In one sermon in 1708, he said: Bacchus “but only to the Greeks, but, as I see, even to ours who say to be Orthodox Christians, we do not dislike that god... Not observing fasts is not a sin; drinking day and night is humanity; to be in revelry is friendship, but after death they tell the soul where to go - that’s a fable.” “Bacchus, the gluttonous god, speaks with his disciple Mart. Luther: it is necessary not to fast in the regiments, and to eat meat during fasting, so that the regimental people in the army are strong, strong in battle, and do not weaken in battle, from fasting and abstinence. But he was far from being an opponent of new reforms. He fully sympathized with them, as a good undertaking for the benefit of the fatherland. “I praise,” he says, the good custom of modern times” of sending young people abroad for science, “from across the seas the wise ones return... because it is not enough to learn that wisdom while sitting at home, but you also need to visit foreign countries.” Gorsky, “St. Demetrius of Rostov" M. 1849. I. Shlyapkin, "St. Dimitri Rostovsky and his time" Sibirsk. 1891 Pypin, “Ist. r. lit. ed. 1902, vol. II. Saint Demetrius of Rostov as a fighter against schism – The main monument to the activities of St. Demetrius against the schism is his famous polemical work: “Search for the schismatic Bryn faith.” This book was published for the first time in 1745, after preliminary consideration by Archbishop Platon of Krutitsky, then a synodal member; but in lists it was distributed throughout the Rostov diocese during the author’s lifetime. In terms of content, “The Search” consists of three parts: in the first, it is proven that “the faith of the schismatics is not right,” in the second, that “their teaching is harmful to the soul,” and in the third, that “their deeds are not pleasing to God.” Thus, here are indicated: the reasons for the appearance of the schism, its various ramifications, the main points of the teaching, with an analysis of the foundations of the latter, and also the moral and everyday life of the schismatics is depicted. In general, “Search” is the best polemical work of its time, which was published several times in the 19th century. In the “Catalogue” of the schismatic bibliographer Pavel Lyubotsytny there is listed the work of a certain Grigory Yakovlev, a mentor of the Fedoseyevskaya community in Astrakhan, who died in 1757 - “a clear and striking, flaming denunciation against the book “Investigation” with the spirit of piety and conviction.” Among the manuscripts of the Rumyantsev Museum there is also a schismatic denunciation of the “Search” of the same 18th century, compiled in Siberia; The monument is notable for being painted on birch bark. As can be seen from the “Pomeranian Answers” ​​and from the “Questions of Nicodemus”, most of all the schismatics object to the chapters of “The Search” about the four-pointed cross and the name Jesus. In addition, it should be noted that some chapters of this book could be directed specifically against sectarians of a mystical and rationalistic nature - the Khlysty and the later Molokans, but not against the schismatic Old Believers. The fact that St. Demetrius wrote such an extensive special essay against the schism, which is explained by the urgent needs and urgent needs of the then Rostov region. The seed of schism was planted here a long time ago and by the beginning of the 18th century it had already taken root very strongly. Back in 1657, under the Rostov Metropolitan Jonah, the townspeople from Rostov Sila Bogdanov, and his students Feodor Galitsyn and Alexey Shaldov were exiled - “for corruption of the church charter” - to the Kandalazhsky monastery, the same Sila, Theodore and Alexey, whom “Russian Grapes” did not fail to praise. In the last quarter of the 17th century, the famous Poshekhonye, ​​then a vast wooded volost in Romanovsky district, and Romanov himself gave shelter to the schism. It is enough to name such figures of self-destruction as Polikarp Petrov, originally from Romanov, a man who grew old in the service of the schism and for his sake “all red despised and was homeless,” then the Poshekhon priest Semyon, a desperate schism-teacher, and finally, the clerk from Romanov Ivan Grigoriev, who towered above the crowd with his clerk’s pen. The particular strengthening of the schism in the Rostov region is explained by its proximity to the famous Kerzhenets, which at the end of the 17th century and the beginning of the 18th was the main center of the schism. From the “Tale” of Hieroschemamonk John, the founder of the Sarov Hermitage, and from the “Reproof against schismatics” by Vasily Florov, it is clear that the two named areas were in very lively communication with each other. Rostovites, coming to Kerzhenets, organized special talks here, as, for example, Feodor Rostovets did. In turn, the Kerzhen hermits often traveled to both Rostov and Yaroslavl, and found “all kinds of peace” there, as, for example, with Feodor Petrov, the mentor of the Bespopovites in Yaroslavl. Kerzhenets, of course, is also under the name of those “Bryn forests”, which are generally referred to in “The Search” as the main place of residence of schismatics and the main breeding ground for schism. For the reasons stated above, by the time Saint Demetrius arrived in Rostov, the schism in the Rostov region had reached such strength and prevalence that it threatened Orthodoxy with serious danger. We find repeated evidence of this in the writings of St. himself. Dim. “The Bryn desert breathes its malice against the Church of God, like fire,” we read, for example, in “The Search,” “roars blasphemies like a lion, grazes selflessly, without shepherds, lawlessly, like a goat; and like the serpent, seen in the Apocalypse, with his trunk he tore away a third of the stars of heaven and threw me to the ground: the Bryn desert has its serpent-like tails, teachers, I say, serpent-like, sending them into cities and villages, tearing away from the church sky, like stars, the souls of Orthodox people, and I plunge into my abyss.” In view of such a danger from schism, Saint Demetrius did not limit his pastoral feat to written polemics alone. According to the author’s thoughts, expressed in the preface to “The Search,” the latter was written with the goal of bringing some sense into the schismatics themselves as much as possible, and most importantly, to give the Rostov clergy a proper understanding of the schism and provide them with a reliable weapon against this enemy. On the other hand, the saint wanted to replace the oral sermon about the schism with a book and thus make up for what it could not do: “oral conversation, as he put it, is only heard nearby, but what is given to the scriptures also happens to the ends of the universe.” But Saint Dim led. and oral preaching against the schism, either from the church pulpit, or privately in home conversations with schismatics, when there was opportunity. Examples of his church teachings include: “A Word on Faith and the Four-Pointed Cross”, “A Word on the Elevation of an Honest and Life-Giving Cross”, “A Word to the Common People”. In his sermons against the schism, St. Dim. is as wonderful a preacher as he was in general, both in terms of their content, and even more so in terms of their position, simple and understandable for the people. In terms of their tone, the anti-schism writings of St. Dim. Although they pay tribute to their time, the saint’s indignation is directed directly at the schismatic teachers, on the one hand, regarding their seduction of a simple-minded and gullible people, and on the other, regarding their intolerable blasphemy against the church and its sacraments and rituals. During oral interviews with schismatics, the meek character and loving heart of the saint undoubtedly manifested itself to an even greater extent and this, of course, had its good consequences. Saint Demetrius himself more than once notes in his writings about the admonitions that he had to make to those caught deviating from the church. “In response to his schismatic words, we, in humility, quite responded, with his admonition, obey the holy church and join its confession.” But this love and meekness in dealing with the erring did not weaken the defense of the interests of the church. Once, Tsarina Praskovya Feodorovna herself asked the Rostov saint to return his former place to the priest of the village of Kurb, who had been deprived of it for his devotion to the schism, but her request was not successful. “I was much annoyed by him,” Dimitri answered the queen about the named priest, “but I forgive him all of this for Christ’s sake... But I am afraid of the wrath of God on myself, even if I am a wolf in sheep’s clothing, I will let him into the flock of Christ to destroy the souls of men with schismatic teachings.” But, influencing the schism itself and introducing the clergy to the teachings of the schism through the book, St. Dim. at the same time, he took care of eliminating the very reasons for the success of schismatic propaganda among the Orthodox flock. The main one of these reasons was the sad mental and moral state of the Rostov clergy, who did not correspond to their calling, were ignorant, did not know, in the words of the saint himself, “what the order of the priesthood is, what the priestly and spiritual positions consist of, and how they should be held.” In worries about eliminating this St. Dim. addressed the priests with archpastoral messages and made certain administrative orders. In his messages, the saint tried to act not only on the minds, but also on the hearts of those to whom he wrote; he exhorted and pleaded, denounced and threatened; for obedience he invoked God's blessing, for disobedience he proclaimed God's judgment and his own archpastoral judgment. But since the worst part of the clergy remained deaf to the exhortations, then in relation to such St. Dim. resorted to administrative corrective measures. Their goal was twofold: to eliminate temptations arising from church dysfunction and the shameful life of the clergy, on the one hand, and to protect Orthodoxy from being carried away by schism, on the other. Thus, administrative orders were a direct complement to the pastoral messages. The time of St. Demetrius's pastoral activity coincided with the beginning of Peter's reforms. It is known how much the fight against the schism was complicated by the latter, and how after that the schism successfully began to spread even among those who, on church grounds, had hitherto remained in alliance with Orthodoxy. The Rostov saint had the opportunity to make an explanation on questions of this kind. So, in 1705, in the summer, one Sunday, when Dim. Walking from the liturgy, two certain Yaroslavl residents - it was in Yaroslavl - approached the bishop with the following question: “Holy Vladyka, as you command: they tell us, by decree of the sovereign, to shave our braids, and we are ready to put our heads behind our braids.” On the same day, “many citizens” gathered in the saint’s cell and there was a “rant about barber shaving,” and then St. Dim. wrote a special treatise entitled “Discourse on the Image of God and Likeness in Man,” which, by order of Peter I, was published in 1707. In 1714 and 1717, the publication was repeated, but the author himself included this treatise in his “Search” in the form of two chapters, adding here another chapter “on the mustache.” A religious view of the beard was characteristic of all Russian people of that time, which is why the protest against this reform of Peter I was universal. The beard was considered, on the one hand, the image of God in man, and on the other, a sign of Orthodoxy, and therefore of Russian nationality. Subsequently, the view of barbering as a heresy became the property of followers of the Old Believer schism. Hence the question of barber shaving became a polemical issue and the named literary work of St. Dim. took first place in polemical literature as the first and thorough experience of this kind.