Bearer of triumphant Christianity

Essay on the life and work of Hieromartyr Hilarion (Trinity), Archbishop of Verei There are bearers of the triumphant on earth Christianity, always joyful, always with Easter chants on your lips, and their face is like the face of an angel. Hieromartyr Hilarion (Trinity) What is theology? Knowledge of God is an experimental science. Only the pure in heart will see God, and therefore the true theology must be piety. Among the host of saints of the Russian Orthodox Church, who testified to fidelity to Christ during the most severe persecutions of the 20th century, the bright and majestic figure of the Hieromartyr Hilarion (Troitsky), Archbishop of Vereya, stands out. An outstanding theologian, spiritual writer of the patristic direction, professor at the Moscow Theological Academy in the 1910s; an associate of Patriarch Tikhon, a courageous fighter against renovationism, a famous preacher in the early 20s, and finally, a prisoner of Solovki from 1923 to 1929 - these are the main stages in the life of Hieromartyr Hilarion. The saint’s strictly Orthodox theological creativity, rooted in his own spiritual experience, focused primarily on the problems of ecclesiology, testifies to his deep, organic churchliness and spiritual purity, elevated to perfection by the feat of prayer. The theology of Archbishop Hilarion and all his deeds visible to the world are nothing more than the struggle for the Church, for its holiness and unity in a very difficult historical situation. In extreme circumstances, Vladyka Hilarion remained faithful to his church position, and in the last instance, faithful to Christ. It cost him his freedom and, ultimately, his life. Bishop Hilarion lived only about forty-five years; his saintly works and scientific activities were rudely cut short. But the fact that this high spirit left earthly life so early is seen as the will of an all-good Providence. “God wanted to have this impeccably pure man as a saint and took him to Himself at the right time, leaving him to make further mistakes, sins and crimes to those who were capable of this before,” writes one of the biographers of Bishop Hilarion 1. The Russian Orthodox Church has now recognized the holiness of Archbishop Hilarion, and at its Local Council in 2000 he was canonized for church-wide veneration. The future Archbishop Hilarion, in the world Vladimir Alekseevich Troitsky, was born on September 13, 1886 in the village of Lipitsy, Kashira district, Tula province. His father, a village priest, had five children - three sons and two daughters. The bishop's grandfather, Father Peter, enjoyed enormous authority among his parishioners due to his love and education. The children of Father Alexy Troitsky lost their mother early. The deceased mother's unmarried sister Nadezhda, a parish school teacher, took care of their upbringing. She often took the future bishop with her to classes, thanks to which he himself gradually mastered reading and writing. From the age of five he sang in the choir and read the hours and six psalms; the elements of the Slavic language became native to him. The younger brothers of Vladimir Troitsky, Dimitry and Alexy, subsequently also accepted the priesthood; Demetrius accepted the episcopal rank (his monastic name was Daniel) 2, and Alexy took the place of his deceased father. Later, like Vladyka Hilarion, he also became a victim of persecution: he was sent to a logging site, where he was crushed by a tree... The childhood of Vladimir Troitsky is marked by an episode containing, as it were, a hint of his vocation. At the age of five, he heard about the genius Lomonosov and decided to imitate him. Having made an agreement with his three-year-old brother, Dimitri, he left home with him: the children went on foot to Moscow to “study”. Of course, they were returned home, but the thirst for knowledge that flared up almost in infancy, then transformed into a desire for the highest truth, was an integral feature of Bishop Hilarion throughout his life. His family and small homeland are of great importance in a person’s life. This is the environment in which the initial - most important - stage of the formation of the human soul takes place, and an invisible spiritual connection with it is preserved in a person forever. The foundations of the worldview of the future Saint Hilarion were laid in the Orthodox family, in close proximity to natural life, sanctified by the passage of church time. It is noteworthy that even some of the Bishop’s theological ideas are closely related to childhood intuitions, for example, with a deep closeness to his mother in the earliest years of his life. He speaks about this closeness with confessional frankness in his “Letters about the West”: “Mother... I don’t know another word in the lexicon that would shock a person so much, that would so touch the deepest layers of our being. A person has a special connection with his mother. This connection undoubtedly lies in the mystical depths of our nature. I lost my mother almost twenty years ago. At that time I felt my orphanhood, so to speak, practically, in the everyday sense, and now sometimes I painfully feel my orphanhood mystically. I so want to see and love the mother who gave birth to me!” 3 And immediately in the text, following this extremely personal confession, there are theological considerations about the Mother of God, organically connected with the central idea of ​​the bishop’s theology - the idea of ​​the Church as a new humanity. “The Most Holy Theotokos is our common Mother, because She gave birth to the “New Adam” and the “new humanity” came from Her” - this conclusion of the Bishop goes back to his childhood perception of his mother. He did not study Mariology specifically; however, discussing in “Letters about the West” about the virginity and motherhood of the Mother of God, the author comes to an original and daring thesis: “If Christ lives in us, His Mother also lives in us. But This Mother must be a Virgin” 4. If Archimandrite Hilarion had developed this position, perhaps we would have had an alternative to sophiological constructions - a strictly Orthodox Mariology that would at the same time satisfy modern aspirations. Another most important childhood experience of the future saint, which also affected his worldview and theology, was associated with the contemplation of nature. Those places in central Russia where Vladimir Troitsky grew up are marked by a peculiar, dim beauty. “Letters about the West” truly includes a hymn to the author’s small homeland: “Wide and spacious are you, dear country! You are poor in external effects, but rich in the inner beauties of the spirit! ...God's churches with bell towers look in the mirror of Russian rivers. Since childhood, I, my dear friend, have become accustomed to seeing just such a picture in my homeland, on the banks of my native Oka. You used to come home for Easter. You will go out to the river. It overflowed for several miles and flooded the entire plain. And you hear across the water from all sides the joyful Easter pealing in honor of the risen Christ: both from our Tula shore and from the Moscow shore the ringing is heard, as if two churches, two dioceses are merging in one solemn hymn. Nature comes to life, and the humble people celebrate the Feast of the Resurrection. You used to hear the Easter bell rushing over the river, as if waves of new life were pouring into your soul, tears were welling up in your eyes. You stand for a long time and silently, enchanted...” 5 Natural, innate patriotism, “strange” Lermontov or Tyutchev love for the native land is the basis of the ideological Slavophilism and patristic “Byzantinism” of the ruler. Childhood impressions helped him resist without any effort the temptations of Western culture and Western theology: a European-educated man, he constantly encountered the West. But there is also a more subtle influence here. What, if not the image of nature transformed, restored to its heavenly state, appeared before the inner gaze of the future saint on such Easter days? However, the intuition of a “new”, cleansed from sin, reborn creature is precisely the nerve of his ecclesiology, to which similar childhood and youthful impressions contributed... And a final remark in connection with the last quote. One of the Bishop’s favorite ideas was church unity. And she, too, as if in embryo, is present in the small native universe he contemplates, transformed by the sacrament of Easter: as unity - in the Easter ringing - of the Tula and Moscow dioceses... Study at the Moscow Theological Academy Archbishop Hilarion, one of the greatest representatives of Russian academic theology of the 20th century, received the most thorough spiritual education. In 1906, having graduated with honors from the Tula Seminary, Vladimir Troitsky entered the Moscow Theological Academy (hereinafter referred to as MDA). In 1910, he graduated from the academy with a candidate of theology degree and was retained as a professorial fellow. In 1913, he defended his master's thesis - it was already published in 1912 as the monograph “Essays on the History of the Dogma of the Church.” Vladimir Troitsky, while still a student, began to conduct scientific work, his student works received awards, and for his dissertation he received the Moscow Metropolitan Macarius Prize for 1912–1913. In the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, the future archbishop was truly at home. Prayer in the Trinity Cathedral at the tomb of St. Sergius and studies in the academic library harmoniously complemented each other, feeding his spirit and intellect. Vladimir Alekseevich’s love for the academy and science was even somewhat passionate, and when he was tonsured in 1913, he experienced this as a serious sin. From the then rector of the academy, Bishop Theodore (Pozdeevsky), he, who had already become an assistant professor, received wise instruction that day (he was tonsured). “I know and don’t want to hide now what your sacrifice is to Christ,” said Bishop Theodore. “You were tempted and, perhaps, now you are still tempted by love for the school that you serve, and you are afraid that monasticism will deprive you of this school.” But what is an academy without Christ?! This is an empty place and a dead house” 6. And then Bishop Theodore speaks about the mysterious spiritual law: “The hermits who rejected... worldly learning... out of obedience and love, they enriched the Church of Christ and the world with spiritual wisdom and countless writings as an invaluable treasure of all spiritual wisdom and theological science. And not only you and I, but entire generations... will draw from there the wealth of wisdom." 7 Bishop Theodore pointed out to his younger brother and colleague, in essence, that theology that comes from experience is especially valuable - the experience of hidden spiritual life, monastic inner work. However, Vladimir Troitsky himself was convinced of this even during his student years. While in his fourth year, on the day of celebrating the 95th anniversary of the academy, he delivered a “Word”, in which he expressed his view on the essence of theology; He followed this attitude all his life. “What is theology? - asks the young speaker. – For many it is only knowledge of theological truths, but not knowledge of God. Knowledge of God is an experimental science. Only the pure in heart will see God, and therefore true theology must be piety” 8. Scientific activity was justified in his eyes only on the condition that it was inseparable from grace-filled church life. During the period from 1906 to 1913, Vladimir Alekseevich visited abroad twice. These trips were an academic reward for him as a particularly outstanding student. They broadened the young man’s horizons and had a noticeable impact on his worldview, so they deserve special attention. Troitsky’s first trip, with a group of teachers and students of the MDA, took place in the summer of 1908. The route passed mainly through the Christian East; Vladimir Alekseevich dedicated a book of vivid essays “From the Academy to Athos” to the trip. This book is something like a travel diary, in which sketches testifying to the author’s keen insight are interspersed with long digressions of a historical and church-journalistic nature. On this trip through Little Russia, Bulgaria, and Serbia, Vladimir Troitsky first met the world of the southern Slavs, with whom he was familiar from books. The Slavic idea - the idea of ​​a single Slavic universe - turned out to be deeply consonant with his soul. He laments that in life this idea is present only in a single divine service. The Slavophil views of Bishop Hilarion are sometimes traced back to A. S. Khomyakov. However, it is more legitimate to bring these two thinkers together on the issue of the unity of the Church. In historiosophical terms, Troitsky is, perhaps, the heir to Slavophilism already in the second half of the 19th century: its most prominent exponent, K. N. Leontyev, is more accurately considered a Byzantine than a Slavophile. It seems that Byzantineism in the broad sense, extending from the field of historiosophy to the sphere of theology, is an important feature of the worldview of Bishop Hilarion. When visiting Constantinople in 1908 (primarily the Church of Hagia Sophia), the Byzantine idea, gradually forming in the mind of a theological student, lost its bookish character and acquired concrete historical flesh. Several essays in the book “From the Academy to Athos” are dedicated specifically to her. The author very clearly describes the then Constantinople, then outlines the history of Byzantium from its rise to its fall and discusses the significance of the Byzantine ideal for Russia. “The most important feature of Byzantineism,” writes Troitsky, “is the penetration of all life with religious principles and interests; this is a wondrous combination of the Heavenly and the earthly, this is true God-manhood” 9. Here we see the ideal of the unity of churchliness and life, characteristic of Bishop Hilarion. According to the author of the essay “Along the Bosphorus,” the Russians took only good things from Byzantium, but now the covenants of Byzantium have been lost: “Undivided service to God with one’s entire life has long been absent from the majority of modern Russian people. The Christian faith has ceased to be life, but occupies only a small corner of life” 10. Vladimir Alekseevich Troitsky is close to the Byzantine idea of ​​the symphony; from the submitted student essay and right up to the speech at the Council of 1917, a motif runs through his writings associated with the image of a high, friendly couple - Patriarch Nikon and Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, who at some happy historical moment managed to implement this idea in Russia. In a number of works, V. A. Troitsky mentions the empty patriarchal place in the Moscow Assumption Cathedral: a passionate dream of restoring the patriarchate in the Russian Church apparently possessed him from an early age... And here is his conclusion in connection with the Byzantine idea. We “lost Byzantium, that’s why everything became bad for us,” however, “the ideal of Byzantium will forever be dear to an Orthodox person. Isn’t it our salvation even in the midst of all modern troubles?” 11 The “Byzantine” mentality brings Bishop Hilarion closer to his contemporaries such as Archpriest Georgy Florovsky and A.V. Kartashev. Vladimir Alekseevich undertook another trip, apparently alone, in 1912. He visited Germany, Switzerland, France, the Czech Republic, and Poland. He presented his impressions of Germany and Switzerland in detail in his Letters on the West. A man of European knowledge, he experienced his encounter with the West directly, sometimes even as a child: he was, for example, enchanted by the spectacle of illumination at the Rhine Falls near Schaffhausen (essay “On the Rhine”). Vladimir Troitsky pays tribute of admiration to the majestic beauty of the nature of Central Europe, the great works of Western art, and finally, the achievements of civilization. Thus, he, a strictly Orthodox thinker, gives the highest assessment to Raphael’s “Sistine Madonna,” seeing in it the purest expression of both virginity and motherhood. Comparison of the essay by V. A. Troitsky with the famous essay by Fr. Sergius Bulgakov’s “Two Meetings,” also dedicated to a visit to the Dresden Gallery, reveals a paradox: the freethinking theologian Bulgakov ultimately comes to a negative assessment of Raphael’s painting, contrasting it with a Russian icon. All this suggests that Troitsky’s view of Western realities was devoid of bias. So criticism, or rather, his rejection of the West in its very noumenal foundations, testifies to one thing - his deep sensitivity to any falsehood in spiritual life, a clear feeling of the inferiority of the Christian ideal in the West in comparison with the Orthodox Church: the rationalism of scholasticism and the dreaminess of Catholic mysticism are bad because they cover up the Divine reality with their constructions and images. The theological struggle of Bishop Hilarion with Western science was subsequently waged against an all too human approach to the problems of ecclesiology, Christology and soteriology, and was waged from the position of a realistic – patristic view of Christ and the Church. Traveling around Europe, V. A. Troitsky collected, so to speak, visual material for his future theoretical work. In another essay in Letters on the West, Vladimir Alekseevich reveals himself as a great lover of the worship of the Orthodox Church. He polemicizes with those who talk about the antiquity of the Orthodox Typikon. The reasoning of the author of “Letters on the West” in defense of the Charter of the Orthodox Church allows us to see in him a future passionate fighter against the renovationists of the 1920s. “The Typikon unites us with the entire universal Church, with all its centuries” 12, through the service we unite with the mystical Body of the universal Church. The point here is not just external aesthetics: what is important to Trinity again is the ontological essence of the Orthodox service, in relation to which the thoughtfulness of church texts and the prayerfulness of ancient chants are only a means and a symbol. The West ontologically “broke the living connection with entire centuries of the ancient Church” 13, and this is its tragedy. The author of “Letters on the West” ultimately comes to this conclusion—essentially about the lack of grace and deep godlessness of the Western Church and the Western world. Theological creativity of V. A. Troitsky. Dissertation “Essays on the history of the dogma of the Church” From the very beginning of his studies at the academy, Vladimir Troitsky was formed as a scholar-theologian. And when he graduated from the academy in 1910, he was left with it for scientific work and teaching. Throughout the entire period of his scientific activity, V. A. Troitsky essentially developed one problem - the problem of the Church. What is the Church? It was this question that Vladyka answered with his works and his life. Trinity's ecclesiology is based on the Holy Scriptures and the teachings of the Holy Fathers; in his works it is inseparable from Christology and soteriology. The experience of the grace-filled church life, the feeling of the saving reality of the Church, its elevation above the transitory natural and social existence became the basis of his theological convictions. The dogma in his writings is based on his own spiritual experience as a member of the Church. The patristic provisions with which he reinforces his concepts are perceived from within; Trinity's works therefore belong to the patristic line in theology of the first decades of the 20th century. The mysticism of V. A. Troitsky (let us use this word to denote his experience of the reality of the Spirit) was not associated with an attitude toward solitary, hermit contemplation. He was extremely close to the idea of ​​the Church as a “union of love” - as an organism, a mystical Body, the members of which are united by a common grace-filled life, the name of which is love. The intuition of church universal unity is one of the most important for the ecclesiology of V. A. Troitsky. Partly connected with it is his uncompromising criticism of Catholicism (as well as Protestantism): Trinity interprets the church schism of the 11th century as the fall of Rome from the fullness of the one universal Church and considers this moment the beginning of the false spiritual path of Western culture. The genres of Bishop Hilarion’s works are diverse. This is a theological treatise (dissertation and accompanying works), a scholarly theological polemical review of a book or dissertation, a theological article or essay, an art history essay, and finally, travel notes. Vladyka conducted a great deal of correspondence, especially in the last period of his life; He also uses the genre of a letter or message to reveal his basic theological ideas (“The Unity of the Ideal of Christ,” “The Unity of the Church and the World Conference of Christianity,” “Letters about the West,” etc.). V. A. Troitsky writes extremely clearly, simply, his style is marked by an emphasis on the spoken word: Troitsky is associated with the glory of a brilliant preacher, lecturer, teacher, public polemicist (debates at the MDA, later at the Polytechnic Museum). Without exception, all of his works are distinguished by deep insight, adequately conveying to the modern reader the main thing that lived his soul - the intuition of the Church. The sublime simplicity of V. A. Troitsky’s personality, evident in his writings, was named by Bishop Theodore in his speech at his tonsure as his main feature. “Your soul, bearing the stamp of lofty wisdom about Christ’s truth, lovingly accepted into itself the “simplicity that is about Christ”” 14 - these words are fully applicable to the theological work of V.A. Trinity, marked by both “high wisdom” and “simplicity”. Among the early (pre-dissertation) works of Vladimir Troitsky, a small article “The Trinity of Divinity and the Unity of Humanity” (published in 1912) stands out. The main idea of ​​his theology - the idea of ​​the Church as a unity - is worked out here with particular depth, which prompts us to consider this work as the key to his later works. In this article, V. A. Troitsky, on the basis of the Gospel and the works of the Holy Fathers, substantiates that church unity has as its Divine prototype the unity of the Persons of the Most Holy Trinity. V. Troitsky complements the image of the Church as a single Body, dating back to the Apostle Paul, with the thought of St. Gregory of Nyssa about the Church as a single human nature reborn through the Incarnation and discusses the possibility of talking about the consubstantiality of the members of the Church in the likeness of the consubstantiality of the Persons of the Holy Trinity. V.A. Trinity brilliantly masters patristic terminology (for example, the relationship between the terms “nature”, or “nature”, and “essence” is very subtle when it comes to Trinitarian dogma). Here, as in his other works, he, an excellent expert on ancient languages, uses philological analysis as a tool for penetrating patristic thought. Decisive for Trinity is the point of view of St. Cyril of Alexandria, who believed that people in the Church still do not reach the identity of essence that distinguishes the Persons of the Holy Trinity. The Holy Trinity is a unity of a higher order than the Church, the Russian scientist concludes. The current historian of Russian thought is prompted to compare the ecclesiology of V. A. Troitsky with the doctrine of the Church, which arose simultaneously within the same walls of the MDA - with the concept of the priest Pavel Florensky, set out in his master's thesis and published as the famous book “The Pillar and Ground of Truth” 15. Of particular interest is the comparison of Troitsky’s view with sophiology in general - and this is the main and fundamental difference between the two approaches. For Trinity, the Church is a “natural”, in the limit “essential”, but not a personal unity; The Church Body (the image of the Apostle Paul) Trinity, by no means inclined to myth-making, does not hypostasize: church unity is neither Christ nor any other person. It is precisely because of this multi-hypostasis of the church community that the opportunity arises to compare it with the Divine trinity. As for sophiologists, they, sharing those patristic ideas on which V. A. Troitsky relies, make another mental and at the same time mythologizing move. Following V. Solovyov (who, in turn, was guided in the interpretation of his own visionary experience by some Western occult-gnostic teachings), they, not wanting to dwell on the idea of ​​the Church as a multi-hypostatic unity, make the arbitrary assumption that the Church is also a special single personality. The idea of ​​the Church-Sophia, which reached full theological revelation in the system of Fr. Sergius Bulgakov, has a mythological nature and goes beyond the boundaries of patristic theology. Equally mythological is Adam-Kadmon, the image of the all-man from Kabbalah, which Bulgakov actively uses, in particular, to substantiate his dogma about the Church. The ecclesiology of V. A. Troitsky, unlike sophiology, is devoid of any mythological elements. A supporter of strict Orthodoxy, he remains within the boundaries of patristic thought, feeds on its meanings and follows its methods. By the end of 1912, V. A. Troitsky completed his master's thesis. It was published as a book of 559 pages entitled “Essays on the History of the Dogma of the Church.” In November, the dissertation received positive reviews from opponents - academy professors S. S. Glagolev and M. D. Muretov; On December 11, a defense took place, which, according to academic tradition, took the form of a debate. Vladimir Alekseevich was not satisfied with him, since his work, indisputable in its scientific merit, did not receive significant objections. A supporter of patristic ecclesiology, the author of the dissertation, using the historical method, defends in it the truly ontological Orthodox teaching about the Church as the holy mystical Body of the New Adam, defends it in polemics with Catholic jurisprudence and the false, in practice leading to the opposite result, spiritualism of Protestant theologians. The work of V. A. Troitsky is truly a treasury of deep theological meanings. Leaving the reader of this book to think through them on their own, we will dwell here only on the most fundamental of them, which are the supporting points of the “plot” of the dissertation. The work of V. A. Troitsky consists of six large sections. The dogma of the Church, as stated in the introduction to the dissertation, can be called church self-consciousness. And the Church made its way to this self-awareness in the intense struggle against heresies that was waged during the first centuries of the existence of Christianity. The purpose of the author of the dissertation is to identify the dogmatic results of patristic polemics with Judeo-Christianity, Gnosticism, Montanism, Novatianism and Donatism. The ancient polemic, according to V. A. Troitsky, has clear parallels with the modern struggle for the Church in Orthodox theology. Therefore, the course of reasoning in the dissertation is carried out, as it were, on two levels: while discussing, first of all, the dispute between the holy fathers and heretics and schismatics, V. A. Troitsky himself simultaneously questions the ideas about the early Christian Church of Catholic and Protestant scientists. The first section of the dissertation, “The New Testament Teaching on the Church,” reveals the intuition of the Church that runs through all the works of the Hieromartyr Hilarion (in this chapter it is substantiated by New Testament ideas). Christianity, the author claims, is not a doctrine, but “a life in which individual personalities are so united with each other that their unity can be likened to the essential unity of the Persons of the Holy Trinity” 16. This living unity is the Church. Its basis is love, but in order for people to enter into such a “union of love,” a change in human nature itself is required. The revival of fallen man and the creation of the Church is the main result of the incarnation of the Son of God. The Church is the unearthly Kingdom of God. Life in the Church is a grace-filled, supernatural life. Such a truly new life is possible because the Church is permeated by the Spirit of God: “In the Church, the living Holy Spirit gives the member of the Church the strength to be a new creature, to be guided in his life by love” 17. And such a Church can only be one: this is indicated by both the image of a tree from the Gospel of John and the Apostle Paul’s idea of ​​the Church as the Body of Christ. This section has a mainly positive, affirming character, and only a small place in it is occupied by polemics with Protestants: V. A. Troitsky defends the idea of ​​​​the fundamental unity of not only the invisible, but also the earthly Church. The second section (“The Concept of the Church in the Anti-Jewish Polemics of the First Two Centuries”) shows how church writers, challenging the views of the Judaizing sects (Ebionites and Nazarenes), came to the doctrine of the Church as a new and holy people. Special merit here belongs to Saint Irenaeus of Lyons. The works of the apostles and early fathers are studied by V. A. Troitsky in this chapter precisely in connection with the concept of the Church as the new Israel, which in the destinies of the world replaced the Israel of the Old Testament. In the third section of his research (“The Doctrine of the Church of Anti-Gnostic Writers”), the dissertation student asks the question: what aspects of the dogma of the Church were identified in the polemics with the Gnostic heresy? The Gnostics interpreted the Holy Scriptures in the spirit of their worldview, formed under the influence of Eastern cults, drawing on many mythological ideas. The fight against Gnosticism therefore required, first of all, the determination of the canon of the books of the Holy Scriptures of the New Testament and the establishment of the principles of church exegesis. In connection with this struggle, V. A. Troitsky examines in detail the corresponding works of Saint Irenaeus and Tertullian. In opposition to Gnosticism, a criterion for the interpretation of Scripture was established: it was based on “the principle of tradition and the authority of the Church” 18. By “tradition” we mean the Apostolic Tradition: church writers did not recognize the “secret tradition” that the Gnostics were guided by. The second problem that intersects with the question of Tradition is the problem of the hierarchical structure of the Church. The guardians of the truth, according to the fathers, were the bishops; the sign of the true Church is a successive episcopate. In a thorough polemic with the Protestant school of A. Richl, V. A. Troitsky defends the Orthodox idea of ​​​​the apostolic origin of episcopal power: Protestants believed that in the ancient Church there was a long confrontation between charismatics and bishops, which ended with the victory of the bishops only at the end of the 2nd century. V. A. Troitsky also objects to those Catholic scholars who, substantiating the idea of ​​papal primacy, equate episcopal ministry with apostolic ministry. The dissertation author also pays a lot of attention to the original structure of the Church: he needs this in connection with thinking about church unity so dear to his heart. The idea of ​​unity has been inherent in the Church from the very beginning, he insists. The existence of separate communities in the ancient Church should not be misleading (as is the case with Protestants): even in the time of the Apostle Paul, such close ties were established between them that it is quite possible to speak of real church unity already existing then. Next (section four - “The Doctrine of the Holiness of the Church and the fight against Montanism”), the theologian moves on to the era of disciplinary disputes in the Church; It was in them that it was understood what should not be understood by the holiness of the Church. The Church itself is holy - this is a gospel postulate, but what requirements are imposed on its members? Within the confines of earthly life, complete perfection to which Christ called people is obviously unattainable; Christians are not perfect, but “morally improving” 19 through repentance. The society of such people is the church body. And here the difficult question arises about what meaning the provision on the holiness of the Church makes if its members are at different stages of the path to the ideal. This question was initially of a practical nature and concerned penitential discipline. The Holy Fathers and church writers gave a whole range of answers to it; representing this multitude of opinions, V.A. Trinity, as it were, is paving the royal – Orthodox – path in it. In the second and especially in the third centuries, we encountered situations where it was not clear whether the severity of the sin of a repentant person was compatible with the idea of ​​holiness of the Church. The impetus for a dogmatic discussion of this problem was given by Montanism with its claim to a new revelation - the revelation of the Paraclete through Montanus and his disciples. The Montanists considered themselves “spiritual” people, calling other Christians “psychics” - spiritual; from the doctrine of the Paraclete they derived the idea of ​​the Church as a holy society of spiritual people. This resulted in the strict demands of the Montanists regarding church discipline: they allowed repentance only for light sins. It was around this issue that Tertullian, who joined the Montanists, had a polemic with the Roman bishop Saint Callistus. It was a struggle between two views on the Church. V. A. Troitsky writes that Tertullian thought of the Church as “a community of saints and saved”, St. Callistus – as a society of “those who are saved and sanctified” 20. Also in this chapter, V. A. Troitsky turns to the understanding of the holiness of the Church in the East. In the works of Clement of Alexandria and Origen, the problem was removed from the legal plane. According to Clement, sin is a corruption of human nature, its illness, and according to Origen, the Church is not a society of perfect saints, but “a physician for humanity sick with sin” 21. Thus, in his discussion of ancient disputes about the Church, the author of the “Essays...” gradually reaches the middle of the 3rd century, when the dogma about the Church first received full expression. This is associated with the name of St. Cyprian of Carthage, whose teaching on the Church forms the fifth section of the dissertation. At that time, there was a need to discuss the problem of church unity. She was very close to the saint, and he dedicated his treatise “On the Unity of the Catholic Church” to her. Here the signs of church unity are highlighted - community of faith, prayer, unity of love; There can be no salvation outside the Church, and the one who is outside the Church is not a Christian, St. Cyprian believed. Later, relying precisely on the thoughts of St. Cyprian, Archimandrite Hilarion will write one of his brightest works - the treatise “There is no Christianity without the Church” (1915), the meaning of which is, in essence, the same as that embedded in the famous phrase of St. Cyprian: “He can no longer have God as a Father who does not have the Church as a mother” 22. Saint Cyprian, together with Saint Irenaeus, are the fathers of the Church, whose ideas are especially clearly present in the works of Bishop Hilarion. And it is noteworthy that the Carthaginian saint’s idea of ​​the Church as a “gracious oasis” around which stretches a barren desert, which arose in an era when the Church was still an island in the middle of the pagan world, became more and more modern at the beginning of the 20th century... In connection with the clarification of the dogma about the Church in the fight against Donatism, V. A. Troitsky turns to the theology of the 4th century. During the Diocletian persecution, many bishops fell away from the Church, and on the question of whether those guilty of apostasy could perform the Sacraments, a schism occurred in Africa, known as the Donatist. The personal unworthiness of a bishop deprives the entire Church of grace, the Donatists argued. Optatus of Milevia spoke out against them, who taught about “the independence of the sanctifying power of the Sacraments from the moral qualities of their performers” 23 . The Church possesses the sanctifying gifts of the Spirit regardless of the dignity of hierarchical persons - “The Sacraments are holy in themselves, and not from people” 24. Optatus' ideas were developed by St. Augustine. Believing, on the basis of his conviction in predestination, that a sinner, in particular a vicious clergyman, should not be excommunicated from the Church, Augustine gave a definition of her holiness that does not contradict her inevitable earthly state. This definition is: “The Church is holy in her Sacraments” 25. Augustine recognized the validity of baptism and other sacraments among the Donatists and other schismatics. But they, he reasoned, seem to steal the Sacrament from the Church, and it does not bring them saving grace, for “outside the Church all Sacraments are useless” 26 . Schismatics do not have love, said Augustine, because they have alienated themselves from their brothers in the Church - this is their main sin. So, only Augustine and Optatus “clearly and definitely formulated the doctrine of the holiness of the Church as the sanctity of the Sacraments” 27 . And here is another formula of V. A. Troitsky, concerning the results of the theology of the 4th century; in it the Russian scientist expressed, perhaps, his deepest intuitions: “The Church is such a spiritual union in which only sanctifying means are valid. The basis of this union is not only external affiliation to it and not recognition of church teaching, but the moral unity of all members in love: outside the Church - outside love and vice versa” 28. Blessed Augustine, who put forward a very bold and informal principle of true churchliness - love, is the third of the ancient church teachers, under the influence of whose ideas the ecclesiology of Archbishop Hilarion was formed. V. A. Troitsky’s dissertation has not lost its significance to this day. Nowadays the question of church unity is being raised very sharply; the ideas of V. A. Troitsky, expressed when the ecumenical movement was just emerging, must certainly be taken into account when developing the right solution to this most complex problem of “practical” ecclesiology. Teaching at the Moscow Theological Academy At the beginning of the 20th century, the Trinity-Sergius Lavra and the Moscow Theological Academy located within its walls represented a completely unique phenomenon: here an unprecedented unity of humanities and religious life arose. It was there that a whole galaxy of outstanding theologians flourished, and the origins of religious philosophy of the 20th century are hidden in the Lavra atmosphere. The soul of Vladimir Troitsky was truly at home in this place: churchliness combined with science from childhood seemed to him to be his life ideal. Simultaneously with the awarding of the Master of Theology degree to V. A. Troitsky, he was confirmed as an associate professor at the Academy in the first department of the New Testament (January 16, 1913); from May 30, 1913, V. A. Troitsky became an inspector of the academy, and from November 5, 1913, its extraordinary professor. Since 1909, the rector of the academy was Bishop Theodore (Pozdeevsky), a defender of the strictest patristic principle in theology, and an ascetic in life. The rector's supporters represented the "monastic" party in the academy; a number of theologians adhered to a secular-liberal style, the most prominent exponent of which was Professor M. M. Tareev. In his structure, Archimandrite Hilarion gravitated towards the first direction, but in essence he always stood above various trends and parties. Enjoying universal love and respect, he was considered one of the academic “pillars”. When, after February 1917, the general liberalization of life began and Bishop Theodore was removed from the rector's post, the first candidate for this post was Archimandrite Hilarion; The scientist was prevented from occupying him by his same “otherworldliness.” As a figure in the Russian theological school - lecturer, teacher, researcher - V. A. Troitsky from the very beginning led the line of strict ecclesiastical spiritual education. At the beginning of the 20th century, secular tendencies intensified in the academy, and even in his student years, Vladimir Alekseevich felt this as a disadvantage. This feeling came to full awareness when visiting the Greek theological school on the island of Halki near Constantinople in 1908: its monastic way of life delighted V. A. Troitsky. And in his first program lecture, delivered from the academic department in 1911, Troitsky declared: “Our school is a church school. In the light of the New Testament, we must realize all our activities and place them on our shoulders in no other way than church obedience” 29. Likewise, theological science should be thought of as “ancilla Ecclesiae” 30. And in the introductory lecture before the start of the school year (September 11, 1913), Troitsky concretized this statement, developing the idea of ​​theology as an experimental science, the soil of which is church life: “Outside church life, theological science has no meaning” 31. Theology is an experimental knowledge of God, and not a purely rational manipulation of categories; The path to theology is the purification of the heart, and it was precisely this that was followed by the Eastern ascetic fathers. In his theological principles, Archimandrite Hilarion obviously adheres to the academic line represented by the names of Bishops Anthony (Khrapovitsky) and Theodore (Pozdeevsky). Opinions about the experimental nature of theology were held somewhat later by Archimandrite Cyprian (Kern), Archpriest Georgy Florovsky, Prof. V. N. Lossky, as well as representatives of the next generation of Russian emigrant theologians: Archbishop Vasily (Krivoshein) and partly Archpriest Alexander Shmeman. “Back to the Church” – to the liturgy, to the patristic heritage – this is how one could call this theological pathos. Professor Troitsky's lectures on the course of the Holy Scriptures of the New Testament aroused the most enthusiastic attitude of listeners, partly due to their vitality and connection with modernity. Giving lectures was the most urgent matter for Archimandrite Hilarion - the fight for the Church, hence their journalistic and polemical attitude. The very appearance of the lecturer attracted hearts to him: the future archbishop had “the strong appearance of a purely Russian man, downright a hero, inspired by a deep intellect and a pure, noble soul” 32 . He beneficially influenced his students with his very personality, its integrity; “this brave, exceptionally talented man perceived everything creatively” 33. In life, he was the bearer of the church principle of love, which he substantiated in his scientific works. Numerous responsibilities made the life of Archimandrite Hilarion extremely stressful in 1913–1917 and even relegated his beloved science to the background. Lectures, exams, reviewing essays and dissertations, services and sermons absorbed all his time. Troitsky’s participation in scientific debates, which became real scientific duels, was very striking. And as a reviewer (from 1912 to 1915, Troitsky gave reviews on 23 candidate’s essays, one master’s dissertation and one doctoral dissertation), he always got to the very essence of the issue being discussed, often not at all close to him, and gave an accurate and adequate assessment of the work being reviewed. Probably the most interesting case is his review of the master's thesis of Father Dimitry Lebedev - Troitsky's review was published in a separate publication 34. The dissertation was devoted to a very special and even exotic issue related to the problem of Easter; in his review, Troitsky appears as an expert in the theological, historical and mathematical aspects of this problem. At the same time, the reviewer does not allow himself to be carried away by the partly pseudoscientific pathos of the dissertation enthusiast, Mozhaisk priest Dimitry Lebedev. Sometimes a spark of very subtle and kind humor flashes in the review. This kind of feedback could not but benefit dissertation candidates. Archimandrite Hilarion was associated with the academy until May 1920, the time of his ordination as Bishop of Verei. His greatest activity in it occurred in the years 1913–1917. Trinity's participation in the Local Council of the Russian Church in 1917–1918 distracted him from academic activities. This moment in the history of the academy is associated with the following incident. During the Council, some of the academy professors were against the restoration of the patriarchate. Having learned about this, Archimandrite Hilarion, who was in Moscow, urgently came to the academy (this was at the end of October 1917) and that same evening gave a lecture there on the topic: “Is it necessary to restore the patriarchate in the Russian Church?” “Most of the professors and all the students gathered for the lecture; it lasted about three hours,” recalls an eyewitness. “Of course, it was read as brilliantly as only Archimandrite Hilarion could do: the restoration of the patriarchate in Russia was his cherished desire, as if the meaning of his life” 35. In his lecture, Troitsky prophetically presented a completely new image of the Russian patriarch: “Now the time is coming,” he said, “that the patriarchal crown will not be a royal crown, but rather the crown of a martyr and confessor, who will selflessly guide the ship of the Church in its voyage across the stormy waves of the sea of ​​life.”36 The academy did not have long to exist. During the Great Lent of 1919, the relics of St. Sergius were uncovered, and in the summer the academy was closed. However, in the fall she was transferred to Moscow. Archimandrite Hilarion, its vice-rector, became a member of the commission called for organizational work. Classes in the 1919/20 academic year were held in different premises in Moscow. On April 21, 1920, Vice-Rector Archimandrite Hilarion was relieved of his academic position. He recalled the 37 years he spent within the walls of the Lavra as the best time of his life. Monasticism, as a person’s solitary presence before God, is associated with the deepest and most intimate aspect of a person’s existence. There are people who, from birth, are destined to serve directly to God and are fenced off from the world as if by an invisible wall. Such a person was Vladimir Troitsky. He had no doubt about his monastic calling, which was by no means obvious to those around him: his spiritual talent and external beauty, cheerfulness and sociability could be misleading about his internal structure and corresponding life attitudes. What was this dispensation like, what can be said about the main features of the “inner man” of Vladimir Alekseevich in connection with his coming to monasticism? The main of these traits was exceptional innate spiritual purity, the surest sign of which was the natural and joyful pursuit of virtue along with suffering from sin, which is inevitable for every person. Descriptions of corresponding experiences are very common in Troitsky’s works, and it is obvious that we are talking about his own existential experience. “Life and personal development in the Church brings with it happiness and bliss. This happiness and bliss is not presented as an external reward, but is, as it were, an internal and indispensable consequence of perfection itself, for we affirm the identity of virtue and bliss” 38, “Virtue itself is bliss, and sin is suffering” 39; “Just as sin is inextricably linked with its consequence - suffering, so bliss is connected with virtue” 40 - in such confessions the purity and holiness of God’s chosen one is attested. Thanks to such a special innate spiritual purity, Vladimir Troitsky did not fall under the gross temptations of the world. His monasticism, and his asceticism in general, were quite unique: he did not need to completely isolate himself from the outside world. The reader of his travel essays is struck by the keen observation of their author, the ability to immerse his whole being in the life of a foreign country. But from contemplation—and sometimes rapture—of creation, he somehow very naturally and almost imperceptibly moved on to glorifying the Creator. Deep religiosity seemed to not allow him to linger on the visible and carried him through it. The beauty of the visible world was for him a reflection of Divine perfection; ugliness, sin, and ugliness could not defile his beautiful soul, although meeting them caused her suffering. The ruler’s natural gaiety was combined with innate spiritual purity. From his own experience, he wrote the following lines, for example: “There are on earth bearers of triumphant Christianity, always joyful, always with Easter chants on their lips, and their face is like the face of an Angel” 41. Spiritual joy seemed to overwhelm him at times. It was present even in his theological polemical works; Vladyka preserved it even in the most difficult conditions of the Solovetsky camp. At the same time, he “taught” this joy to those who were not gifted with it: “Hilarion loved to say that as much as a Christian should be aware of his sins and grieve for them, he should rejoice at the infinite mercy and goodness of God and never doubt or despair about his life’s feat,” writes Volkov 42 . This penchant for otherworldly fun of the still young ruler makes us remember the Venerable Seraphim of Sarov 43 . Some people come to monasticism after going through the abyss of sinful experience: having experienced the horror of the terrible reality of the “abyss of sin,” they enter the path of repentance. The path to monasticism of Vladimir Trinity was different. An impeccable person in life, who had a special desire for perfection, he could spiritually elevate and sanctify his personality only by completely dedicating himself to God. Choosing the monastic path was almost natural for him; he did not strive for any special feats: asceticism was his usual state. It was difficult for such a person to imagine that some Christian could have a different internal structure. And here his work “The Unity of the Ideal of Christ” is noteworthy, in which he seems not to want to see the difference between monastic and secular life attitudes... The bishop wrote about his tonsure at the Paraclete monastery in 1915: “I think that I will never have to experience such joy in my life as I experienced on March 28, 1913. This joy did not go away with the end of the ceremony. I was full of joy for two whole months. Only what happened in my fate on May 30 and what I learned about on the 31st drives my joy away from me for a long time, but even this sad circumstance did not completely drive joy from my heart.”44 On May 30, Troitsky was appointed inspector of the academy; one must assume that it was not easy for him, a scientist and prayer book, to come to terms with the administrative responsibilities that fell upon him. On April 11, 1913, on Maundy Thursday, monk Hilarion (Troitsky) was ordained hierodeacon. Daily service began, bringing him new joy. Father Hilarion experienced Easter of 1913 especially deeply; he later recalled that he was reading the Gospel in Arabic that Easter night. On June 2, Father Hilarion was ordained hieromonk, and on July 5 he was elevated to the rank of archimandrite. Without exaggeration, we can say that the celebration of the liturgy was the center of the bishop’s life. This is how S. Volkov describes his service: “Hilarion performed the service majestically and beautifully. There was something sublime, light and beautiful in his reading of the Gospel, uttering exclamations and prayers in a sonorous and booming voice that powerfully filled the entire space of the vast academic church. It resounded just as loudly in the Assumption Cathedral of our Lavra and in the Cathedral of Christ the Savior in Moscow. <...> He devoted himself to worship with all his soul, with his whole being, as the main work of life” 45. The bishop placed the beauty of worship above all earthly beauty; Like few others, he knew how to live the meanings of liturgical texts and be imbued with the mood of ancient melodies. Theological works of Archimandrite Hilarion 1914–1916 In the person of Bishop Hilarion (Troitsky) we have a bright church writer of the 20th century - theologian, publicist, essayist, historian. In total, he has authored about 90 published works. Giving a general description of Troitsky as a writer, the most important thing that must be immediately said in connection with the writings of Father Hilarion of 1914–1916 (after defending his dissertation) is to note the patristic nature of all the ideas expressed in them. In his writings, Hieromartyr Hilarion reveals the conciliar church truth, doing this completely naturally and organically, because his whole life completely merged with the life of the church. That is why, speaking about things known and generally significant, Father Hilarion knew how to present them in his own way and in a new light. Without exception, all the works of Hieromartyr Hilarion are devoted to the problem of the Church. And in almost all articles and speeches there is an invariable semantic core that corresponds to his main ecclesiastical intuition: this is the idea of ​​the Church as the new life that the incarnate Christ gave to His people, making this people His mystical Body - the Body of the New Adam. Around this core, reasoning is built that corresponds to this or that specific issue. There is always a polemical aspect in the works of Father Hilarion. With the outbreak of the war, his anti-Western polemics intensified; Having lost its theoretical character, it became actual journalistic. On September 3, 1914, in the assembly hall of the MDA, Archimandrite Hilarion delivered a speech on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of the academy; it was published under the title Progress and Transformation. In it, the author states that the basis of the military confrontation between Russia and Germany is the opposition of two spiritual ideals and corresponding types of culture. The ideal of Germany and Western Europe in general is progress, which inevitably leads to war, since it is based on the struggle for existence. The ideal of the “Russian conscience” is “not progress, but transformation,” and therefore, in its innermost depths, the Russian person is directed “not forward, but upward, to Heaven, to God” 46. This ideal defines the spirit of the Slavs, and in particular all aspects of Russian culture that are of a religious nature. A year later, Archimandrite Hilarion again gives a speech to students, where he talks about the duty of Russian theologians to also take part in the war - of course, the war of ideas. He traces the history of foreign dominance in ecclesiastical scholarship since the 16th century, concluding: “The scholastic fortress is our academic sector of the common front” 47 . The constant polemical theme of Hieromartyr Hilarion - the opposition in ecclesiology between the realistic approach of the holy fathers and Western jurisprudence with its conditional categories of “satisfaction” and “merit” - is here transferred to the topical plane. Also, under the influence of the military atmosphere, the historiosophical work “Sin against the Church (thoughts about the Russian intelligentsia)” (1916) was written. In it, in a Slavophile vein, the author speaks about the “spiritual duality” of the Russian land: “Russian people,” Archimandrite Hilarion recalls the words of K. Aksakov, “were divided into the “public” and the “people,” the reason for which was the reforms of Peter I. The essence of this fatal break is the falling away from the Church of the Russian educated society under the influence of the West.” In addition to this work, as well as “Letters on the West” (1915), the treatise “The Unity of the Church and the World Conference of Christianity” is devoted to criticism of Western religious life. It talks about a complete gap between the Eastern Church and Western confessions, which has reached the last depths of existence, initially caused by the fall of Rome from the universal Church in 1054. The unity of the Church was always thought of by the Bishop only as the joining of Catholics to Orthodoxy through repentance. Of the works of Father Hilarion between 1914 and 1916, three can be particularly highlighted: they are considered to be the masterpieces of the theologian-writer. Firstly, this is the treatise “There is no Christianity without the Church” - perhaps his most inspired work. It challenges the concept of “mere Christianity,” which was just beginning to come into force—Christianity without denominational specifics. But Christianity is not a teaching like Nietzscheanism or neo-Kantianism, writes Father Hilarion; outside the Church it can only be a dream or a collection of impossible moral precepts. Impossible - since the strength to follow Christ’s commandments is given in the Church; It is the creation of the Church that is the main work of Christ on earth, as the Bishop never tired of repeating. The treatise “Holy Scripture and the Church” (apparently written at the beginning of 1914) is very interesting and in places daring in thought. Father Hilarion mentally starts here from the fact that Christ did not write anything. This means that His work is different from the work of philosophers and teachers who left their written works to posterity. It is not teaching that is at the center of His mission: “In the sense of teaching, the New Testament does not give anything new in essence, completely new” 48. A strong statement from a New Testament specialist! Christ came to earth not as a Teacher, but as a Savior, for the sake of the revival of human nature in the Church, writes Father Hilarion. The Church arose before Scripture, the latter was already created in the Church. Very beautifully and naturally, polemicizing against Protestantism, which fetishizes Scripture, Father Hilarion comes to the thesis: “Holy Scripture is one of the aspects of the common grace-filled church life, and outside the Church there is no Holy Scripture in the true sense of the word” 49 . From this follows the main hermeneutic principle of Father Hilarion - reliance on church tradition when interpreting the Bible. It is polemically directed against the subjective arbitrariness that is inevitable under the Protestant attitude, which provides freedom of interpretation of Scripture to each individual person. And the very concept of “sacred” has meaning only in the Church, because outside of it the Bible turns out to be a literary monument, while the Holy Scripture ceases to exist. The author’s conclusion is very precise and strict, and cannot be shaken by any achievements of biblical criticism: they are simply on a completely different plane, having as their object the profane (non-canonical) ancient text, but not the Holy Scripture. Finally, let us mention one more work of Father Hilarion of this period, entitled “The Cornerstone of the Church (Matthew 16:13–18).” It builds a system of arguments against the Catholic idea of ​​the special primacy of St. Peter the Apostle among the other apostles; Catholics find the basis for their opinion in a well-known passage in the Gospel of Matthew (16:13–18). How should we understand the words of Christ, according to which Peter is the rock on which the Church of Christ is built? According to the interpretation of Father Hilarion, the meaning of Christ’s phrase is this: your name can be a metaphorical designation of the truth revealed to you. This truth is the cornerstone of the Church - the truth of the Incarnation, but by no means the personality of Peter who expressed it. Peter himself, the author continues, speaks of Christ as if he were a stone (see: Acts 4:11); The Lord Himself also attributed the prophecy of Psalm 117 about the stone to Himself (see: Matt. 21:44; Mark 12:10–11). A number of passages of Holy Scripture indicate that the main idea for the New Testament is the idea of ​​Christ as the cornerstone of the Church. And so Father Hilarion concludes: “Not an idea, not a truth, but the very fact of the incarnation of the Son of God is the rock on which the Church is built” 50. In what was said by the Evangelist Matthew (see: 16.13–18) he saw another confirmation of the main position of his ecclesiology. PARTICIPATION IN THE CATHEDRAL OF 1917–1918 There was something in the personality of Father Hilarion that did not allow him to be confined to the circle of activities of a “learned monk.” Father Hilarion had not only a monastic, but also a hierarchical calling. He entered the path of higher church and public service in 1917 - by the fact of his participation in the Church Council. The All-Russian Church Council opened on August 15, 1917, on the day of the Dormition of the Mother of God. On August 27, members of the Council arrived by special train for a pilgrimage to the Trinity-Sergius Lavra. During the liturgy in Trinity Church, Archimandrite Hilarion delivered an inspired word. He said that the triumph of Orthodoxy is now taking place, in which those millions of Russian people who have prayed in this wonderful church for centuries are invisibly participating. To the Council, Father Hilarion brought the idea of ​​​​restoring the patriarchate in the Russian Church. When he was a student, he was fascinated by the Byzantine ideal - as follows from the essays “From the Academy to Athos,” the patriarchate then appeared to him in the guise of a Byzantine symphony. In 1917, he was inspired by a completely different image of the Russian patriarch - the patriarch-confessor, martyr. For Archimandrite Hilarion, the restoration of the patriarchate meant, first of all, the liberation of the Church from the oppression of the state. The talk now was about uniting all church forces around a new center - the personality of the patriarch. On October 23, Archimandrite Hilarion delivered a speech at the Council entitled “Why is it necessary to restore the patriarchate?” Constructed strictly academically, it sounded with passionate conviction. Father Hilarion based it on the idea that “the patriarchate is the fundamental law of the supreme government of each Local Church,” 51 so that if we do not want to break with the age-old church tradition, we do not have the right to reject the patriarchate. It must be said that at the Council there was an intense struggle over this issue: church liberals were afraid of monarchism in the Church. Answering such doubts in his speech, Father Hilarion said that the existence of the First Hierarch in the Church does not contradict the beginning of conciliarity, but complements it... It seems that the fact that the choice of the Council was ultimately carried out in favor of the patriarchate (which happened on October 30) was a considerable merit of Archimandrite Hilarion. On November 5, 1917, the elder of the Zosima Hermitage, Hieroschemamonk Alexy, in the Cathedral of Christ the Savior, took out from the ark, which stood in front of the Vladimir Icon of the Mother of God, a lot with the name of the newly elected Patriarch of All-Russia Tikhon. One of the main assistants and associates of the patriarch in these most difficult years for the Church was Father Hilarion. ACTIVITIES 1918–1923 Already in connection with his participation in the activities of the Council of 1917–1918, the life of Father Hilarion gradually moved from Sergiev Posad to Moscow. The first wave of persecution of the Church occurred in 1918, but it was not immediately that church leaders realized that the goal of the new government was the most merciless and systematic destruction of the Church, that the spiritual edge of the revolution was directed precisely against the Church. Patriarch Tikhon was faced with the most difficult task of preserving the small island of the Church in the midst of a raging disaster. The need arose to come into contact with the enemy in power, and Father Hilarion became the mediator between the patriarch and the state on whom His Holiness Tikhon could always reliably rely. Archimandrite Hilarion occupied the position of “secretary and chief consultant on theological issues” 52 under the patriarch, which in reality was the role of a person always under enemy attack: in all contacts with the Soviet government, Archimandrite Hilarion overshadowed the patriarch. The fate of the bishop here turned out to be similar to the fate of the patriarch's cell attendant Yakov Polozov, who died at the hands of a hired killer turned against the patriarch: Archimandrite Hilarion became a victim of the authorities' revenge, again on the patriarch... In March 1919, Father Hilarion was arrested and imprisoned in Butyrka prison. He himself did not understand the reasons for the arrest: apparently, his closeness to the patriarch had an effect. Father Hilarion endured his two-month imprisonment with spiritual cheerfulness and did not stop joking in his letters to the outside world. After his release, Father Hilarion settled in Moscow with his friend at the academy and fellow countryman Father Vladimir Strakhov, who served on Sretenka in the Church of the Holy Trinity in Listy. And on May 20, 1920, Patriarch Tikhon consecrated Archimandrite Hilarion as Bishop of Vereisky, vicar of the Moscow diocese. The consecration took place on the day of remembrance of the holy martyr Patriarch Hermogenes. In his speech, Patriarch Tikhon especially noted this coincidence, predicting the newly installed bishop a confessional crown for firmness in the faith. The bishop responded to the patriarch’s word with a wonderful, heartfelt speech, which expressed his deep understanding of both the current state of the Church and his own destiny. He entered the episcopal path with full awareness of what awaited him - with a readiness for martyrdom and with the feeling that God's Providence was directing him to this. Very accurately and at the same time with prophetic depth, the bishop presented the historical situation of that time: “When the old world is destroyed to the ground in order to build a new fantastic world only on its ruins, when very many of human affairs turned out to be built on shifting sand, when many fell (see: 2 Kings 1:25-27) - the solid foundation of God (2 Tim. 2:19), the Church of God stands unshakable, only adorned, like scarlet and fine linen, with the blood of new martyrs. What we knew from church history, what we read about from the ancients, we now see with our own eyes: the Church wins when it is harmed. Among the winds of false teachings, among the muddy, furious waves of anger, lies and slander of frantic enemies, the Church stands like a rock, that Russian Orthodox Church, about which they so loved to repeat recently that it is in paralysis, that it is held together only by the police force of the state. But the forces of the state turned against the Church, and our Church gave more martyrs and confessors than traitors and traitors” 53. One remembers the mood of the martyrs of the first centuries of Christianity when one reads this heartfelt document today: “May the merciful Lord accept my soul,” said Bishop Hilarion, “this small mite, swept into the treasury of the Church, to be used for good. The will of the Lord be done..." After accepting the episcopal rank, the bishop’s life became connected with the Sretensky Monastery: there is information that he was appointed its abbot. Since the authorities seized most of the monastery premises, and the bishop had nowhere to settle in the monastery, he still lived with Father Vladimir at the Trinity Church in Listy. The saint's time was filled with intense activity; he was almost never at home. “It’s been a year since I’ve been in my new position,” he says in a letter dated May 7, 1921. – During the year, 142 masses were served, more than 142 all-night vigils, about 330 sermons (excluding two months of illness). After all, it’s like having one and a half hundred holidays a year.” Vladyka often participated in services at the Sretensky Monastery as a simple monk: he sang and read on the left choir, and often he, the owner of a wonderful tenor, was entrusted with solo chants. People went specifically to the Sretensky Monastery to listen to Bishop Hilarion. The love of the church people for him increased, and his fame also increased: the names “Ilarion the Great” and “the new Chrysostom” were assigned to him. But during these years the saint himself lived with the constant expectation of arrest. And indeed, in 1920 (or 1921) the bishop was arrested and spent some time in prison. The reason for the arrest was the disorder during the monastery's patronal feast: the Vladimir Icon of the Mother of God was brought from the Tretyakov Gallery to the monastery, and the cliques made a noise around it... And in 1922, a wave of repressions swept across the country in connection with the confiscation of church valuables, which led to popular unrest. On the list of “enemies of the people” the first name was Patriarch Tikhon, followed by dozens of names of bishops and priests. In April, the Patriarch was arrested, and even earlier, on March 22, Bishop Hilarion was under arrest... At the end of June, Bishop Hilarion was exiled from Moscow to Arkhangelsk for a year. From there the Bishop writes to Sergiev Posad to his spiritual daughter; from these letters (found in his investigative file) we learn about his life there. In exile, the bishop sees “the obvious mercy of God”: it provided him with the opportunity to be in a calm environment and engage in science. Of particular concern to him is the church turmoil - the expansion of the renovation movement. “As for the church unrest,” the bishop writes on July 22/August 4, “I see nothing in it except stupidity and ugliness. There will be a lot of evil from these figures. And many will have to suffer from them... I think that in my personal life, my current situation is only the beginning of the disease. Probably, many years will pass in imprisonment, wandering everywhere, in need and deprivation. But, knowing church history, without being at all embarrassed, I choose to suffer with the people of God rather than be called the son of Pharaoh’s daughter.” The ruler followed this attitude in all cases when the authorities, in alliance with the Renovationists, tried to win him over to their side through bribery and threats. This intransigence cost him his life. In 1923, mortal danger loomed over the Church. The authorities acted both from the outside and from the inside - using the forces of renovation. In May, a pseudo-renovation council took place, at which Patriarch Tikhon was deprived of the patriarchal rank and monasticism. In addition, decisions were made that undermined the canonical and liturgical order of the Church, along with a decree on the closure of monasteries. In parallel to this, the authorities carried out measures that practically outlawed the Patriarchal Church: they wanted to put an end to “Tikhonism” forever... In the face of this threat, Patriarch Tikhon made a sacrificial decision for himself. On June 27, news appeared in the central newspapers about the release from custody of “Citizen Belavin” - due to the fact that he, having admitted everything he was accused of, declared that from now on he was “not an enemy of Soviet power.” The atheists believed that the authority of the patriarch among the people had already fallen; they were deeply mistaken. Immediately after the release of the patriarch, a powerful movement began among the church people aimed at rallying around him - that person who visibly represents church unity. A mass departure from Renovationism began, thousands of acts of repentance were performed by those priests and bishops who, in these troubled times, for various reasons, fell into the Renovationist schism. Renovationism was doomed, but the Church had a huge job to do related to the return of people to Orthodoxy. At this moment, Bishop Hilarion (Troitsky), who had already returned from exile, became the right hand of Patriarch Tikhon. It was in 1923 that he was elevated to the rank of archbishop. In these new conditions, the Church could act only by constantly emphasizing its loyalty to the state. In August 1923, an appeal signed by Patriarch Tikhon and a group of senior hierarchs, among whom was Bishop Hilarion, appeared in the press. Extremely brief and officially drawn up, it boiled down to the statement that the Russian Orthodox Church has nothing in common with the counter-revolution” 54. Relying on this thesis in his mediation mission, Bishop Hilarion managed to get the authorities to soften their church policy. The bishop’s activities directed against renovationism were varied. Participating in all the services of the patriarch, he invariably delivered fiery sermons during them. Their content was the most relevant: the Bishop said that no “living churchism” would be possible if the shepherds of the Church themselves strive to demonstrate Christ’s ideal to the people 55. Vladyka quickly restored the church organization in Moscow. He developed a rite of repentance and himself accepted confession from hundreds of priests, monks and laity who were crossing over from the Renovationist schism. Entire parishes joined the Patriarchal Church, and in early July the consecration of churches began. Vladyka Hilarion personally consecrated the Cathedral of the Sretensky Monastery with a great rite, which was transferred to the patriarch from one of the renovationist leaders, Antonin Granovsky. Bishop Hilarion had to participate in reports and famous debates at the Polytechnic Museum. On August 17, 1923, he gave a lecture there “Tikhonovites and Renovationists. What separates them? And soon, on September 4, a debate took place in the museum on the topic “Renovation Cathedral of 1923.” The Bishop compared this “council” with the “robber” - the second Council of Ephesus, and his report was warmly supported by the audience, while the archbishop’s opponents, defenders of renovationism, were greeted with noise, so that they could barely speak... “Who are the enemies of the Church?” – this was the topic of the debate on October 13. On that day, the prominent leader of renovationism, Alexander Vvedensky, spoke out against Archbishop Hilarion. The latter stated that Patriarch Tikhon was opposed to famine relief in 1921–1922, after which a storm of protests arose in the hall. The Bishop exposed the Renovationist lies and fearlessly testified to the facts of direct cooperation between the Renovationists and the persecutors of the Church. And the very next day the authorities staged a debate in the museum entitled “Why Tikhon and Hilarion are enemies of the Church” 56... In relation to his opponents in the debates, these “co-questioners of this century,” Bishop Hilarion was on a completely different existential plane: the archbishop contrasted the demagoguery and “crafty words” of the supporters of renovationism with an unshakable stand in church truth, and this had an unfailing and profound effect on his listeners. In November 1923, Patriarch Tikhon was suddenly summoned to the GPU in Lubyanka, they spoke to him in the spirit of an ultimatum. They demanded that His Holiness immediately develop a declaration of reconciliation with the Renovationist Archbishop Evdokim (Meshchersky), on whom the authorities at that moment were counting: this is how they wanted to disintegrate the Church from within... However, the Patriarch refused in the most decisive manner to act against his conscience. The notorious Tuchkov, who was talking with the patriarch, was amazed and changed his tone, politely saying goodbye to the patriarch. But a few days later, Archbishop Hilarion was arrested, on whom Tuchkov placed the main responsibility for the failure of his policy. Vladyka was sentenced to three years in the Solovetsky concentration camps: he was accused of “spreading false rumors and agitation against Soviet power under a religious flag.” On January 1, 1924, he was brought to a transit point on Popov Island, and in June he was sent to Solovki. On the shore of the White Sea Bay, together with other prisoners from the clergy, he worked as a net maker and fisherman, was a forester, living in the Varvarinskaya chapel, as a watchman lived in the Filippovskaya Hermitage. According to eyewitnesses, even in the camp the bishop was not left with vigor and spiritual joy: it was not for nothing that he loved to remember that his name, “Ilarion,” means “cheerful.” One should not, however, be mistaken about the nature of such a state: it had a supernatural, grace-filled, and in no way direct character. “You have to be in this environment at least for a little while, but you can’t describe it that way. This is Satan himself in person,” this is how the bishop assessed the atmosphere of the places of detention. Therefore, phrases from his letters from Solovki such as “I live quietly and safely” (letter dated November 25, 1928) should not be misunderstood... In prison, the bishop remained an internally free person. “The charming spirit of non-covetousness” (M. Polsky) made it possible not to notice deprivations, to forgive criminals who stole his things; if they asked him for something, he gave it without hesitation. The Bishop’s attitude towards those around him was amazing. His social circle included not only bishops and professors: it seemed that the external state of another person was generally unimportant to him. He also talked as equals with those who belonged to the underworld; there was nothing ostentatious in such respect, since behind it stood the feeling inherent in Bishop Hilarion of the highest ontological equality of people - their equality before God. People responded to his love with sincere respect and love. Quite unwittingly, the ruler positioned himself in such a way that legends began to be created around him on Solovki. We know about them thanks to the semi-documentary and semi-fictional essays of B. Shiryaev, who was also a former Solovetsky prisoner. These essays made up the book “The Unquenchable Lamp”; Vladyka Hilarion is given many pages in it. Truth and fiction in the legends about the ruler were sometimes mixed to the point of inseparability. Hilarion was spoken of as the guardian and locum tenens of the patriarchal throne, in connection with which there allegedly existed a secret will of Patriarch Tikhon; claimed that the GPU offered him to lead the “living Church”, which was refused; There was a story about how the bishop sailed on a boat in the sea during a storm to save the evil guard Sukhov, who later repented and turned to Christ... The last story, however, Shiryaev conveys as a real event. In the camp, the bishop continued his activities in leading the Church. After the death of Patriarch Tikhon (April 7, 1925), the most acute problem was the legalization of the Church under the conditions of the stabilized Soviet regime. Is it possible for the Church and state power to coexist, despite the opposition and incompatibility of their spiritual principles? It was Bishop Hilarion (Troitsky) who laid the foundations of that “royal” path, which was called upon to lead the Church out of a truly tragic situation. He compiled a note (it is known as “Notes of Archbishop Hilarion” 57), in which he stated: the position of the Church in any earthly society is “complete non-involvement and non-solidarity with all political unreliable (in relation to the authorities - N.B.) tendencies 58. The Bishop, on the one hand, followed the line of church policy that Patriarch Tikhon chose; on the other hand, Hieromartyr Hilarion remained faithful to his ecclesiology, translating it into a practical channel: the Church as the Body of Christ, having its focus in the Eucharist, is highly elevated above any political situation, and there is no need for it to interfere in the struggle of political forces. The Bishop’s “note” gave the tone to the so-called “Memorial Note of the Solovetsky Bishops” dated May 27 (June 9), 1925 59 . The latter expressed the opinion of a large group of episcopates that found themselves on Solovki and represented, as it were, a small church council. “The Church would like only the complete and consistent implementation of the law on the separation of Church and state” 60 - this was precisely the call of the Solovki bishops to those in power. The authors of the “Memorandum” declare systematic persecution of the Church in the Soviet Union and denounce the lies of the Renovationists who claim that nothing of the kind actually exists. It says very specifically about the church position: the Church “should not criticize or censure the civil measures of the government, but it also follows from this that it should not approve of them” 61 . It must be said that the main meaning of the “Memoir” (and therefore the “Memoir of Archbishop Hilarion”) was preserved in the draft Declaration of Metropolitan Sergius of May 28/June 10, 1926 62 . The message of Metropolitan Sergius of June 16/29, 1927 was clearly marked by the intervention of Soviet censorship 63 . At the end of the summer of 1925, Bishop Hilarion was suddenly transferred from Solovki to the Yaroslavl prison. Here he enjoyed great benefits, he could read and study. According to eyewitnesses, in prison he wrote many thick notebooks, which he handed over to his friends when he was released. Such a move of the bishop was undertaken in order to try to persuade him to join the new schism, which was headed by Archbishop Gregory of Yekaterinburg, who sought to bypass the canons to seize the highest power in the Church. The GPU wanted to reinforce the schism with the authority of Archbishop Hilarion (Troitsky), and to cast a stain on him. In a conversation with a GPU agent, the bishop resolutely refused the offer. “I’d rather rot in prison, but I won’t change my direction,” he said to his fellow prisoner in the Yaroslavl prison, Bishop Gervasius 64 . Indeed, a year later he was given a new three-year term. The basis for this was the “disclosure” by the ruler of his conversation with the agent. In the spring of 1926, the archbishop again found himself in Solovki. This year, an Easter service was held in the camp - for the first and last time. The service was led by Bishop Hilarion (Troitsky). Otherwise, information about that Easter night is contradictory. In Shiryaev’s “The Unquenchable Lamp” it is said that the celebration of Easter took place in the cemetery church and was very magnificent, since it was approved by the camp authorities. And according to the testimony of priest Pavel Chekhranov, the service took place secretly and not in the church, but in an unfinished bakery 65. Apparently, Shiryaev romantically embellished this event, but the coincidence of the two testimonies as far as the bishop is concerned gives another stroke to the picture of the universal respect that surrounded the ruler in the camp. The wording of the Message of Metropolitan Sergius caused a new wave of church confusion; apparently, Bishop Hilarion’s attitude towards him was also difficult. However, he ultimately takes the side of Metropolitan Sergius and his Synod, and also keeps others from deviating into a new schism. “In November 1927, some of the Solovetsky bishops began to hesitate in connection with the Josephite schism,” recalled Metropolitan Manuel (Lemeshevsky), a fellow prisoner of the bishop. – Archbishop Hilarion managed to gather up to fifteen bishops in the cell of Archimandrite Theophan, where everyone unanimously decided to remain faithful to the Orthodox Church, headed by Metropolitan Sergius. “No schism!” Archbishop Hilarion proclaimed. “No matter what they tell us, we will look at it as a provocation!” 66 The bishop spent a lot of effort persuading Bishop Victor (Ostrovidov) not to join the Josephites; The fallacy of the split in the then situation was justified by him in a number of letters of 1928. The interests of church unity, the awareness that without legalization the earthly existence of the Church appears to be hanging by a thread, that the choice of an eschatological exit from history is unacceptable for Metropolitan Sergius - these, and perhaps other arguments, prompted Bishop Hilarion to voluntarily agree with the position of Metropolitan. Sergius. In the fall of 1929, the Bishop’s official term of imprisonment was ending. However, the authorities were not going to release him: adding more and more sentences to him, they hoped to wear him down to the limit of his strength. On October 14, 1929, at a special meeting at the OGPU collegium, the bishop was again sentenced to three years. This time it was decided to send him to settle in Central Asia. The saint was transported in stages - from one transit prison to another. On the way, he contracted typhus. Without his belongings (he was immediately robbed on the way), in nothing but rags, infested with insects, in typhoid heat, he was brought to Leningrad and placed in prison, where he was to spend a month. This happened on the day of the Entry of the Most Holy Theotokos into the church. His condition worsened day by day. On December 6, with a body temperature of 41°, he walked, exhausted, and moved to the hospital named after. Dr. Haas. Then the Leningrad Metropolitan Seraphim (Chichagov) took an active part in the fate of the bishop, but it was no longer possible to help the sufferer. The disease crisis occurred on December 15; the bishop was conscious and even wrote a letter to freedom. Suddenly he began to be tormented by terrible thirst, and he asked for fruit juice. But when the fruit drink arrived, delirium had already begun. In his delirium, the bishop repeated: “Now I am completely free, no one will take me.” The doctor who approached the bed heard the last words of the martyr: “How good! Now we are far from...” These were words of reconciliation with one’s fate, gratitude to God and joy from a close meeting with Him. The soul of the ruler flew to the Upper World on December 15/28, 1929 at four o’clock in the morning. ...Metropolitan Seraphim, like Joseph of Arimathea, obtained permission from the authorities to bury the bishop in accordance with his rank. A white bishop's vestment and a white miter were brought to the hospital, in which they dressed the saint. When the closest relatives saw the body of the deceased, no one recognized him: years of camps and prisons turned the bishop from a man full of energy into a gray-haired, emaciated old man... The coffin with the body was taken to the Novodevichy Convent at the Moscow Gate. A certificate of the funeral of the hieromartyr of his close friend, Archpriest Vladimir Strakhov, has been preserved. “Metropolitan Seraphim and two bishops served; the coffin stood in the middle of the church of the Novodevichy Convent. When the hours were being read, I looked at the clergy in their vestments standing on the choir, and I thought why they were standing there, and these were deacons and psalm-readers from Leningrad who had gathered to pay their last respects to the late Archbishop Hilarion. They sang very well. At first I couldn’t figure anything out, because tears were choking me when they came out to the funeral service for our dear archbishop. Four vocalists in deacon vestments stood in front of the coffin, I even thought - this is not the place for them to stand here; and suddenly they sang in bass voices: “Blessed, immaculate, walking on the path...” I was touched to the depths of my soul, as if these voices were heard from underground, and I then remembered the old Russian funeral service. It ended at four o'clock; They entered the church - it was dark, and they left - it was dark. We began to say goodbye, I bowed to the ground for all his beloved flock and asked him not to forget us at the Throne of the Lord. We lifted the coffin onto our shoulders, the remains of our good archbishop, and carried it to the cemetery of the Novodevichy Convent, and ahead were the singers who sang: “This is my God, my Helper and Patron, and I will glorify Him...” We reached the grave, placed the coffin, served the last litia, I bowed again, and began to lower our dear one into the grave. shepherd Archbishop Ambrose took the first lump of earth and was the first to throw it on the coffin, saying: “The Lord’s earth and its fulfillment, the universe and everyone living on it...” And a small mound quickly grew, and they put up a white cross with the inscription: “Archbishop Hilarion (Trinity).” And they began to disperse, leaving only us – a small group of Muscovites. We, like the myrrh-bearing women, stood at the mound and could not imagine or imagine who lay under this mound. When we returned, the bells rang so solemnly, dispersing one another; I even got angry, but what kind of celebration is this for them? What are they having fun about? And then I remembered the words of Archbishop Ambrose: “The earth is the Lord’s and the fulfillment thereof, the universe and all who live on it,” and then: “He founded food on the seas, and prepared food on the rivers. Who will ascend to the mountain of the Lord? Or who will stand in His holy place? Whoever is innocent by hand and pure in heart, who has not sworn to his sincere flattery, will receive a blessing from the Lord and mercy from God and our Savior.” This is what the bells were celebrating. Archbishop Hilarion was such that he never flattered his neighbor, which means he accepted a blessing from the Lord, and it is our duty to pray for him” 67. ...Now Hieromartyr Hilarion, glorified at the anniversary Council of Bishops in 2000. 68 in the ranks of the new martyrs and confessors, prays in Heaven for the entire Orthodox Church, for Russia so beloved by him, for all those who love and honor him. And his creations take on new life, feeding the mind and soul of the interested reader. Mikhail Polsky, protopresbyter. New Russian martyrs. Jordanville, 1957. T. I. P. 133. Subsequently, Archbishop of Bryansk, died in 1934 in prison from typhus. Hilarion (Troitsky), archimandrite. Letters about the West. See 3 volumes of this publication. Theodore (Pozdeevsky), bishop. Speech at the tonsure of Vladimir Troitsky, associate professor of the Moscow Academy, as a monk of Hilarion. See p. 498–499 of this edition. V. A. Troitsky. Let there be no fears for you! See, 3 volumes of this edition. V. A. Troitsky. From the Academy to Athos. See 3 volumes of this publication. Hilarion (Troitsky), archimandrite. Letters about the West. See 3 volumes of this publication. Theodore (Pozdeevsky), bishop. See this edition, p. 496. Let us note that in the eyes of Archimandrite Hilarion, the work of Father P. Florensky was “the smartest Russian book of recent years.” See: Hilarion (Troitsky), archimandrite. Unity of Christ's ideal. // In the book: Hilarion (Troitsky), archimandrite. There is no Christianity without the Church. M.: Publication of the Sretensky Monastery, 1995. P. 117. V. A. Troitsky. Essays on the history of the dogma of the Church. See this publication. From 65. V. A. Troitsky. Essays on the history of the dogma of the Church. See this publication. P. 153. V. A. Troitsky. Essays on the history of the dogma of the Church. See this publication. P. 257. V. A. Troitsky. Essays on the history of dogma about the Church. See this publication. P. 227. V. A. Troitsky. Essays on the history of the dogma of the Church. See this publication. P. 246. V. A. Troitsky. Essays on the history of the dogma of the Church. See this publication. P. 265. V. A. Troitsky. Essays on the history of the dogma of the Church. See this publication. P. 319. V. A. Troitsky. On the churchliness of theological school and theological science. See 2 volumes of this publication. Hilarion (Troitsky), archimandrite. Science and life. See 3 volumes of this publication. Volkov S. The Last at the Trinity. M., St. Petersburg, 1995. P. 115. Hilarion (Troitsky), archimandrite. On the church use of the Easter eneakdekaetida of Anatoly of Laodicea. See 2 volumes of this publication. Volkov S. The Last at the Trinity. M., St. Petersburg, 1995. P. 119. See: Prof. prot. V. Sorokin, A. A. Bovkalo, A. K. Galkin. Spiritual education in the Russian Orthodox Church under His Holiness Patriarch Tikhon of Moscow and All Russia (1917–1925). // Bulletin of the Leningrad Theological Academy, 1990, No. 2. P. Hilarion (Troitsky), archimandrite. Letters about the West. Right there. Hilarion (Troitsky), archimandrite. Bethlehem and Golgotha. See 2 volumes of this publication. S. Volkov S. Decree op. P. 118. Archimandrite Hilarion especially revered this saint. Hilarion (Troitsky), archimandrite. Unity of Christ's ideal. See 3 volumes of this publication. Volkov S. Decree. op. P. 116. Hilarion (Troitsky), archimandrite. Progress and transformation. See 3 volumes of this publication. Hilarion (Troitsky), archimandrite. Theology and freedom of the Church (on the tasks of the liberation struggle in the field of Russian theology). See 3 volumes of this publication. Hilarion (Troitsky), archimandrite. Holy Scripture and the Church. See 2 volumes of this publication. Hilarion (Troitsky), archimandrite. Cornerstone of the Church. Matt. 16.13–18. See 2 volumes of this publication. Hilarion (Troitsky), archimandrite. Why is it necessary to restore the patriarchate? See 3 volumes of this publication. See: Levitin-Krasnov A., Shavrov V. Essays on the history of Russian church unrest. M., 1996. P. 313. Speech by Archimandrite Hilarion (Troitsky) upon his naming as bishop. From the investigative file, FSB archive. Typescript. Acts of His Holiness Patriarch Tikhon. M., 1994. P. 298. See: Levitin-Krasnov A., Shavrov V. Decree. op. P. 321. See Damascene (Orlovsky), abbot. Martyrs, confessors and devotees of piety of the Russian Orthodox Church of the 20th century. Tver, 2000. Book 4. pp. 421–425. This document was published in the emigrant newspaper “Vozrozhdenie” on August 18, 1926. See: Irinarch Stratenov. Russian church unrest 1921–1931 In the book: From the history of the Christian Church at home and abroad in the 20th century. M., 1995. S. 151, 172. Georgy Mitrofanov, priest. Russian Orthodox Church in Russia and in exile in the 1920s. St. Petersburg, 1995, pp. 118–130. Georgy Mitrofanov, priest. Russian Orthodox Church in Russia and in exile in the 1920s. St. Petersburg, 1995, pp. 130–133). Gervasy, Bishop of Kursk and Oboyan. One of the previous attempts of the Old Church members to reconcile with the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church. // Bulletin of the Holy Synod of the Orthodox Russian Church, 1927, No. 4. P. 24. Easter 1926. From the memoirs of Father Pavel Chekhranov // Moscow Church Bulletin, April 1991. No. 7 (52). P.11. Die Russishen Orthodoxen Bischofe von 1893 bis 1965. Bio-Bibliographie von Metropolit Manuil (Lemesevskij). Teil III, Erlangen, 1984. S. 214. Letter from Archpriest Vladimir Strakhov. Typescript. The memory of the Hieromartyr Hilarion is celebrated in the Sretensky Moscow Monastery twice a year: April 27/May 10 - on the day of the transfer of the relics and December 15/28 - on the day of his righteous death.