Fraternal cause in Orthodox Russia

The zeal for raising religious and moral consciousness in our society, which has recently caused fighters for Orthodoxy not only among clergy, but even among secular people, to undertake a journalistic feat, naturally gave rise to the idea of ​​calling for help from the church. In view of the apparent lack of fruitfulness of the isolated activities of the clergy, hierarchy and government and in view of the apparent strengthening of anti-religious and anti-church elements, it is very consistent to come to the idea of ​​appealing to the entire society of the church, to its lay members and inviting them to join together in order to stand for the faith with a common life and common strength - to defend it from the outside and affirm it within themselves. This step is natural in itself and in general, in relation to the Orthodox Russian Church in particular, finds for itself a very strong historical justification. Unforgettable in the history of the Orthodox Church, the Western and Southwestern brotherhoods for centuries, with insignificant material resources, under extremely bad political conditions, endured a terrible struggle with Latinism and in particular with the Jesuits, naturally appear to modern zealots of the Church and the Orthodox faith with an aura of heroes who do not inspire any other attitude towards themselves other than the dignity possible for them. – Moreover, the call for general action was not only encouraged, but even directly came from the hierarchy and the government: back in the seventies, the government issued regulations on parish trustees and rules on church brotherhoods (1864), expressing the desire that both of them would find the widest possible application. So, we need to open up guardianships and brotherhoods as much as possible! Here is the first thing that is now very persistently proclaimed by the zealots of the church: this position is revealed and defended by the three brochures presented in the title of this article. With sincere sympathy and the desire for success in the fraternal cause, Mr. Papkov’s rather voluminous brochure has been compiled. The author deals with the actual brotherhoods that currently exist, but tries to put them in connection with the famous Western brotherhoods, for which purpose he makes a mention of them at the beginning. “Especially important,” he says, “Orthodox church brotherhoods acquired in that era when the entire Orthodox society of Western Rus' had to strain every effort to defend its faith, church and people from the violent persecutions instituted by the Latins, who, after the final subjugation of the region to the Polish crown, sought to convert the Orthodox population into a union. The sad story of the establishment of union in Western Rus' is all too well known. Modern chronicles testify to a whole series of violence and desecrations to which the Orthodox were subjected: their churches were sealed and rented out to Jews or turned into taverns, stables, barns; church property was plundered, Orthodox priests were expelled from parishes, thrown into prison as rebels, tortured, and deprived of their lives; high and low officials of Russian origin were forcibly removed from the places they occupied, landowners were expelled from their estates, which were seized by the Latins and Uniates, the people were deprived of their essential civil rights, were subject to taxes that completely exhausted them, lived without the blessing of marriages, in lasciviousness, infants died without baptism, the dead were abandoned without burial... In this dark era of persecution of everything Russian and Orthodox, in an era when weak people from the highest nobles and even the highest hierarchy began to betray their faith and nationality, the Orthodox brotherhoods found themselves at the height of their calling. Frequent correspondence and communication began between the brotherhoods, they consoled and encouraged each other in disasters and misfortunes, giving advice and instructions; some brothers from the Russian nobility became the heads of a commendable fraternal movement... In particular, the Vilna Brotherhood showed extraordinary activity: it sent messages throughout Lithuania to various brotherhoods and other zealots of Orthodoxy, established relations with the Cossacks, convened congresses of Orthodox Christians in Vilna, forced fraternal preachers to publicly defend the righteousness of their cause, achieved the restoration of the highest hierarchy for the western region, published works in defense of their rights, in a word, was the main support for Western Orthodoxy and a powerful engine of historical Western Russian life.” “But gradually circumstances changed for the better: Little Russia went to Russia, Poland was declining; in the 18th century, the western region was annexed to Russia. Along with these events, a national feeling awakened more and more among the Western Russian people, and when powerful help from Russia of the same faith came, the Orthodox faith in the western region came under the protection of the Russian state. It is very natural that in the 18th century. The activities of the brotherhoods, which had rendered great service to Orthodoxy, began to weaken. Brotherhoods in big cities are gradually disappearing... Only brotherhoods that operated in the wilderness - in towns and villages - have survived centuries and taken deep roots in the consciousness and morals of the people, and remain in large numbers to this day.” “In the early 60s of this century, when Latin-Polish propaganda again temporarily and artificially intensified in the western provinces, church Orthodox brotherhoods in this region began to resume their fruitful activities and began to attract the sympathy and donations of not only local residents, but also Orthodox people throughout Russia. This sympathy was expressed not only by joining the Western Russian brotherhoods, but also by the desire expressed in different places in Russia to see similar institutions in the Great Russian provinces, where they could be useful both for protecting the people from the split of the Old Believers and various false teachings, and for enlightening the Russian people, called with liberation from serfdom to a new free life” (pp. 6–9). By January 1, 1893, there were 150 brotherhoods in 49 provinces of European Russia, 9 in the Caucasus and Asian Russia, and a total of 159 brotherhoods (pp. 11–12). “So inconspicuously and modestly,” notes Mr. Papkov, “with relatively little assistance from the government, this social force grew on Russian soil, developed by life itself and called upon to promote the Orthodox Church and protect the Russian people.” (page 49). It is difficult to understand what the author actually represents here under the name of the Orthodox Church, isolating brotherhoods into some kind of “social force” that helps or “promotes” the church. After all, these brotherhoods, of course, are in the church and are the essence of the church itself, and they grew, of course, under the influence of the church - within it itself, as the fruit of faith in God and love for God and neighbors. Or really, otherwise how should the matter be presented? How this social force has shown and is showing its activity is discussed in great detail in Chapter 1: a general overview of the activities of the brotherhoods and their organization. The author divides the tasks pursued by brotherhoods into the following general ones: religious and educational, divided into the education of a) children and b) adults, missionary, which is divided into a) anti-schism and anti-sectarian, b) education and conversion to the faith of people of other faiths; charitable, carried out a) by establishing various kinds of charitable institutions, b) by providing material assistance to the poor, the orphaned, the infirm and the wretched, as well as in particular to the poor students of theological schools; church-charity, which consists of caring a) about the splendor of churches, building them, helping the poor clergy, maintaining cemeteries in order, etc. and b) caring about the splendor of performing Divine services in churches (harmonious singing and intelligible reading) (p. 51). According to Mr. Pankov, the most fruitful of these branches of activity turns out to be the spiritual and educational activities of brotherhoods precisely in the dissemination and assistance of church schools (parochial and literacy schools). Thus, in 18 provinces, the brotherhoods were in charge of all diocesan schools together with the diocesan school councils, and in some even alone they bear the responsibilities of the latter. Many of the brotherhoods (39 in number) maintain and support these schools at their own expense (pp. 62–63), others maintain and support various lower secondary public schools and colleges (64–65). It is difficult, of course, to imagine what the activities of the first kind consist of and how great the services of the brotherhoods are in this regard, but as for the material support they provide to church schools, it must be admitted that it is not particularly significant. So, out of 39 brotherhoods in 1890, only two (St. Sophia - Novgorod Diocese and St. Demetrius - Yaroslavskaya) provided significant assistance: the first in the amount of 8050 rubles, the second -7430 rubles, the rest in 2000, 1000, hundreds and even tens of rubles (for example, Petropavlovskoye of the Lithuanian diocese - 36 rubles, Alexandrovskoye - of the Kishinev diocese - 24 rubles), so the total amount of donations of these 39 fraternities for 204 schools per year for only 27,669 rubles. The brotherhoods then take part in the education of adults, assisting priests in arranging and organizing extra-liturgical interviews, reading libraries and public readings. What is this participation expressed in? G. Papkov points to the following events of the most prominent brotherhoods: 1) The Vologda Brotherhood (of the All-Merciful Savior) had supervision (?) over the conduct of extra-liturgical interviews and readings in the diocese, taking care of their opening in those churches in which they were not yet open and directing their correct conduct in those churches in which they existed. In addition (and this, of course, is more important!) to assist in conducting these interviews and readings, the brotherhood sent books, brochures and leaflets to churches, and supplied the poor churches free of charge.” This is undoubtedly Dov. prominent activity. But then the author provides the following examples: “The Volyn Vladimir-Vasiliev Brotherhood has issued rules for non-liturgical interviews. The Voronezh Brotherhood (St. Mitrofan and Tikhon) sent out special programs developed by the brotherhood council for conducting extra-liturgical interviews to all parish churches. The Perm Brotherhood (St. Stephen) ... compiled guidelines for them and indicated the manuals for those conducting these conversations. The Smolensk Brotherhood (St. Abraham) made an order that the priests enter the time, the subject of the interviews, and their notes into the journals kept specifically for this purpose; The priests report extracts from these journals to the brotherhood council. The Stavropol Brotherhood (of St. Andrew) established a general commission under the Council to consider extra-liturgical conversations and teachings of parish priests.” Having presented these examples, G. Papkov notes: “Many (! only 6!) brotherhoods understand so seriously their responsibilities in the development of extra-liturgical interviews and readings in Orthodox parishes and devote a lot of time and labor to the correct organization of this matter” (p. 70). “Of the total number of fraternities - Gov. G. Papkov - the fourth part devotes its energies to the peaceful struggle against schism and sectarianism, and some, with them, to enlightening foreigners with the light of the Gospel.” The task is lofty, involuntarily attracting sympathy, especially since in this regard the assistance of the broad members of the church to the hierarchy and government is most necessary, just as the very title of a Christian cannot be manifested in anything so characteristically as in the peaceful dissemination of the true light of Christ. “It is now recognized - Mr. Papkov quite rightly notes that the schism is almost a “common disease” that must be healed by common forces, and that it still holds strong because, except for the clergy, all other classes are rather indifferent and cold to its position; it can only be shaken by the united efforts of all the true children of the Orthodox Church” (p. 92). The first place here should be given to the Kazan Brotherhood of St. Gurias, spreading its educational influence throughout the entire Volga-Kama region. The main spiritual force through which this beneficial and powerful influence is exercised lies here in the seriously organized school education of foreigners and the translation of St. Scriptures and liturgical books in foreign languages. The teaching of God's law is carried out in the natural languages ​​of foreigners, among whom there are schools. The center of all the schools of the fraternity is the baptized Tatar school in Kazan, which bears the characteristic name “central”, because from it, as from the center, all other fraternal schools branched out in the form of radii, borrowing from this school their teachers and teachers and continued in the remote areas of the region the missionary activity that the central school conducts. All schools including the central one 117; of which 58 were Christian Tatar, 42 Chuvash, 4 Cheremis, 6 Votyak, 1 Mordovian and 6 Russian. All students in these schools were 3488, of which 2929 were foreigners (Tatars, Chuvash, Cheremis, Votyaks, Mordvins)... It would be appropriate to say here that education among baptized Tatars and other foreigners began very recently; without exaggeration it can be said that before the opening of the brotherhood of St. Gurias and before the publication of liturgical books in foreign languages ​​by the translation commission, all these foreigners remained outside the influence of school and teaching. The opening of divine services in foreign languages ​​was an epoch in the life of baptized foreigners” (p. 94). Similar in nature and method of action is the Vyatka Brotherhood of St. Nicholas the Wonderworker, which set itself the goal of “peaceful struggle against schism, rapprochement and unification with the Orthodox Church of its once Orthodox children who separated from it, calling themselves Old Believers, through clarification through school teaching and peaceful conversations of those misunderstandings and incorrect opinions that caused their separation from church communion.” The Brotherhood also operates through schools; there are currently 33; at the school in the city of Vyatka, “adult peasants study the history of the schism and sources for exposing schismatic errors, and practically become familiar with old printed books; At the same time, students are taught concepts about the most important events in the earthly life of Jesus Christ, remembered and depicted in the divine liturgy, about the most important events from sacred history, in particular about the seven ecumenical councils. (It would be very necessary to teach this in other church schools) - and the foundations of the Orthodox catechism. At the end of the course, the best students of the fraternal school are sent to teach in anti-schism schools opened by the fraternity in the villages, where students learn reading, writing, arithmetic, prayers, the sacred history of the Old and New Testaments, an explanation of the liturgy and, using a “short guide to interviews with Old Believers, they become familiar with ways to refute the errors of the Old Believers. In all 33 fraternity schools, 666 persons of both sexes were enrolled in 1890. Since 1891, a women's department (12 students) was opened at the Vyatka school (p. 93). Following the example of these brotherhoods, the Saratov Brotherhood of the Holy Cross also operates, which, in the likeness of the Vyatka school, established the anti-schism Cyril Methodius school, which studies the history of the schism and the methods of exposing it, and the Orenburg Brotherhood of the Archangel Michael, which, like the Kazan Brotherhood of St. Gurias, decided its main goal is to enlighten the masses of foreigners inhabiting the region with the Gospel light. many Orenburg region. Many thousands of Kirghiz, not yet enlightened by the light of the Gospel teaching, still roam in the vast Orenburg steppes. In wooded places, the Bashkirs still vegetate in the darkness of false beliefs. Both profess Islam that is distorted and supplemented with various superstitions and fables. In addition, the Orenburg region is also inhabited by the Chuvash, Mordovians, Nagaibaks and other tribes who do not have a true concept of God. Among them, one can still see direct traces of idolatry in the form of various idols - fetishes, which they honor. To educate these foreigners, as well as to support the baptized, the brotherhood established foreign schools. The brotherhood has 11 schools (232 students) located among the non-Russian population under the full management and full maintenance of the brotherhood. A distinctive feature of all these schools is that foreign teachers teach literacy and basic concepts of the Christian faith in their native language, and then move on to studying school subjects in Russian” (p. 99). Other brotherhoods, primarily pursuing the fight against schism and rationalistic sects, act mainly by the following means: they select places for opening missionary interviews, support diocesan and district missionaries and their assistants, establish positions of permanent fraternal missionaries with fraternal sums and organize regular traveling missions from them. Many brotherhoods are engaged in a thorough study of sectarian teachings and lifestyles of sectarians and publishing activities. Of the latter, the Moscow Brotherhood of St. Peter is distinguished by its special activities. In addition to the publications of its permanent organ - the Fraternal Word, the Brotherhood, during its 18-year existence, published a lot of works exposing the untruths of the schism... In 1890, the Brotherhood printed 12 books and leaflets with anti-schism content in the amount of 6,020 copies and in addition distributed books in the amount of 39,600 copies. In 1891, the Brotherhood published: 1) Stoglav according to the Khludovsky list of the 16th century, 2) Shield of Faith, 3) Works of A. Paul. In addition, 8 previously published brochures have been printed in a new edition. During the same year, 36,498 copies of various publications about the schism were distributed. – In 1892, the Brotherhood printed 120,000 copies. various works directed against the schism. From the book reserves, the brotherhood sold 26,829 copies of books during the same year, in addition to those distributed free of charge. (page 96). Brotherhood members sometimes form “congresses to discuss anti-sectarian activities. G. Papkov attaches especially great importance to these congresses: according to him, “the further success of fraternal affairs in Russia will depend a lot on such congresses (diocesan or district) for the discussion by the combined forces of representatives of different brotherhoods of common issues that are maturing every year as fraternal activities develop (p. 101). Such is the educational activity of the brotherhoods! All life's need and its fruitfulness can arouse in every Orthodox Russian person - one feeling - an ardent desire for further prosperity. The charitable activities of the fraternities are no less attractive, especially since “almost half of them” devote their energies to it. There is no need to list all types of fraternal charity, says Mr. Papkov, in our short essay; suffice it to say that the fraternal watchful eye sees those truly in need and, to the best of its means, hastens to provide them with all possible assistance. Our brotherhoods do charity in whatever way they can: money, daily bread, clothing, free or cheap apartments, free treatment, funeral benefits, providing dowries for poor girls, organizing the breaking of fast for the poor on Easter... it’s impossible to list everything. Here we will only point out a particularly practical way of giving to the poor, chosen by one rural brotherhood of the Kostroma diocese. The brotherhood in the village of Darovatovo distributes small plots of land for free use from the 176 acres of convenient land at its disposal to poor families” (pp. 110–112). Many of the brotherhoods turn their concerns to the improvement and decoration of churches, especially in the western provinces, and to improving the external aspect of church clergy. G. Papkov counts 26 brotherhoods that provided financial assistance to the 101st church, amounting to 26,123 rubles. and also founded and supported 14 singing choirs (pp. 116–117). The venerable author ends his sketch of fraternal activity with an expression of hope for the “great future” of church brotherhoods, which is vouched for both by “the now noticeable sympathy of Orthodox society for the fraternal form of communication for works of spiritual mercy and enlightenment” (p. 122), and by the historical past of brotherhoods.” Historical information will prove - gov. he - that the current form of fraternal communication was “borne out” by the historical events of our distant past, that it arose and developed directly on church soil under the banner of the Orthodox church, for its spiritual and material needs, and in this close connection of brotherhood with the church lies all the vitality, all the strength, all the stability of fraternal institutions and activities (p. 122). At the same time, expressing the wish for the widest possible publicity of fraternal activities, the author again returns to the idea that the success of the fraternities will largely depend on strengthening the connection between them through the most frequent and lively contacts. “There is no doubt,” he says, “that broad communication between brotherhoods, a frequent exchange of thoughts on all important issues of their complex and multilateral activities, and the adoption in some cases of general uniform measures will revive the fraternal cause in Russia, will introduce an influx of new fresh forces into the brotherhood and expand the tasks assigned to ourselves by our church brotherhoods” (p. 128). Fully sharing Mr. Pankov’s sympathy for the prosperity of the fraternal cause in Russia, we must note, however, that he exaggerates and even overexaggerates both its present situation and hopes for it in the future. In fact, if we exclude individuals - as chairmen or members of fraternal councils, who are truly distinguished by their zeal for fraternal causes and pay attention to the masses of the so-called full members of fraternities, then we will have to recognize them as nothing more than a few paying 2, 3, 5 rubles. per year of membership fees and thus only limiting all their contact with the brotherhood. Our fraternity councils are forced to remind every year, often to Ven. In an intrusive manner, their only obligation to the brothers is to pay an insignificant membership fee. G. Papkov considers it necessary, among other things, to thank the members of the hierarchy and the highest secular ranks of the synodal department for their sympathetic attitude to the fraternal cause. But justice requires that it be said that the participation of these persons, as well as large civil officials in fraternal affairs, serves in most cases as the strongest motive for the smaller fraternity, which depends on them to pay membership fees: without these persons, the number of active members would hardly have the stability required for the existence of the fraternity. In most, if not everywhere and in general, existing brotherhoods got their start and strengthened on the initiative and with the participation of the “boss” and one can be sure that they are mainly maintained by them. There seems to be no reason to see in the fact of their existence any rise in religious and moral consciousness. Therefore, it is desirable that the existing brotherhoods continue their useful existence, but there is no reason to place great hopes on them: may the hand of the spiritual and secular government supporting them not weaken! In our opinion, it is more correct to judge the religious and moral mood of the present time by another zealot of fraternal causes, St. O. I. Fudel. In his brochure: Fundamentals of Church and Parish Life, he says: “A simple (is it just a simple?) Russian person is characterized primarily by two traits: firstly, a certain kind of inertia, thanks to which any novelty, no matter how good, can only be introduced into the life of the people with a terrible struggle; secondly, herding is a quality that makes a man follow everyone, the crowd, wherever it goes (Page 6). Is Fr. Fudel made such an observation, or read it from books, at least the observation of Dov. true; but the surprising thing is that on such an observation he builds his brightest hopes for the success of the fraternal cause in Russia. O. Fudel dreams of converting all of Rus' into Orthodox brotherhoods; every church parish can and should become a brotherhood, only, according to him, it is precisely these two traits (inertia and herdism) that must be kept in mind in the matter of raising the religious and moral life of the parish” (p. 9). How will such a miracle happen?” Every church parish has, explains Fr. Fudel - “several best people, the best, of course, in religious and moral terms, in the Christian sense of the word, each of these best parishioners individually represents a certain moral force, unfortunately absorbed by the general flow (?) of the life of the entire crowd, the entire parish. Any of these best parishioners is completely dependent on this crowd in which he is lost (What kind of moral force is this?!); Each of them individually would like to arrange his life completely differently, but does not dare to separate too sharply from everyone. Submission to the general: “I am like everyone else,” or: “I follow others” - this is the very first, most difficult obstacle that a pastor encounters in his aspirations to raise the religious and moral life of his parishioners. And this obstacle is destroyed as soon as he manages to find the “best” parishioners in the general crowd, single them out and unite them around him in one common goal. (How exactly to do this is left to the freedom, understanding and tact of each shepherd; here we indicate only the general direction of this matter). The best people, singled out from the general mass and united, represent a moral force that is not diffused, not absorbed by the general flow of life, but stands outside this flow. Any of the best parishioners, seeing themselves no longer alone, but in community with others, united together by one higher idea, feels bold and can fearlessly arrange their life not according to a general template, but according to a guiding idea. And in this case, of course, he submits to the favorite principle: “I follow others,” but this submission is fruitful here, because the “whole” that the parishioner blindly follows in his life, this mass, community or community, is replaced by another “whole,” another community with a higher level of religious and moral life. This substitution is the main task of pastoral policy. A group of the best people in the parish, united together around the shepherd, constitutes this “whole”, which has the moral power to carry individuals along with it. But this is not enough. Capturing individuals with an example of good Christian life, this “whole” is the wedge that gradually enters deeper and deeper into the life of the parish, gradually separating the best elements of the parish from the worst. This is the enormous significance of the temperance societies that are now emerging and other similar societies and brotherhoods with religious and moral goals for their activities. Any such society is extremely salutary and useful for parish life” (p. 7). How about the merits of the theoretical construction of Fr. Fudel should point out its simplicity and ease: for the venerable theorist, everything is accomplished with amazing ease and simplicity. Thus, recognizing that “the duties of pastors, especially rural ones, have recently become terribly complicated” (p. 8), the author now offers a simple means to facilitate the fulfillment of these duties. The priest, he says, needs assistants who, like him, would be animated by the desire to help their neighbors and help their priest... Who can be such necessary assistants in the parish? Yes, the same “best people” that we have already spoken about above, their own best parishioners, united by the priest in the fight against vice, and in the desire to renew their lives with self-restraint and Christian improvement... Three or four such helpers are enough to start with, so that things begin to boil. And in what parish there are not three or four parishioners who are ready to immediately follow the voice of the shepherd calling them? (page 9). “Thus, uniting the best forces of the parish is the starting point for the fruitful practical work of the pastor. This united “small flock” is the core without which it is impossible to develop normal parish life, that seed which, developing and growing, can bring innumerable good consequences for the church parish and for the people's zemstvo life. “But in order for this core to be formed, no invented organization, no invented statutes are needed, what is needed, first of all, is the good desire and energy of the shepherd, who calls for helpers, and then we need the voluntary consent of the best parishioners elected by the shepherd, the consent to follow him in everything, to set an example of obedience to him and submission to the church statutes. The natural primacy of the pastor, his unity with his chosen assistants and the solidarity of all of them in the pursuit of the intended goal - these are the conditions that are necessary in order for the core of church and parish life to be formed. The same conditions are necessary for the proper development of this core” (p. 10). Having established himself on these theoretical constructs, Fr. Fudel turns to the forms of fraternal communication that are actually accepted among us - church-parish trustees and temperance societies. He is dissatisfied with neither one nor the other; the first because they are able to pursue only one goal - charitable, and at the same time in their organization they have very large shortcomings in his opinion (namely: the elective principle underlying their organization; the admission of a layman to the chairman, and not necessarily a parish priest); the second because they pursue only one goal - moral and religious, and at the same time they do not at all have the character of official public institutions. “Both institutions are one-sided. Each of them complements the one-sidedness of the other and therefore the coexistence of these two institutions in one parish is very important for the completeness of church and parish life” (p. 20). An unconditionally satisfactory form of parish life, completely consistent with the theory of Fr. Fudel serves as a form of parochial brotherhoods (p. 23). O. I. Fudel is sincerely delighted with the “rules on church fraternities, published in 1864. He likes them for their “little complexity and simplicity,” but what is most important about them is that “each fraternity has its own charter and can act only on the basis and within the limits of this charter.” He sees in these “rules” the perfect outline, so to speak, of his theory. But... let’s give him the right to express his enthusiastic mood about this coincidence: “Church-parish brotherhood,” he says, “is exactly that happy form that fully corresponds to the modern needs of the church parish throughout Russia. It is enough to remember here everything that we said in the first chapter about the needs of the parish and the tasks of the pastor; it is enough to compare these tasks and those conditions for the correct development of church-parish life, which we derived a priori, with those conditions of life of parish brotherhoods that are given by the “Rules” about them, in order to see the complete coincidence. We said that in each parish there are always several parishioners (men and women) who stand out from the general crowd both by their love for the church (!), and by their high religious and moral life, and by their obedience to the charter of the church and the voice of the pastor. Such persons, even if at first there were no more than three or four of them, the pastor, striving for the development of church and parish life, will single them out from the general mass and unite them in one common cause, with the same tasks of common labor, with the same responsibilities and rights. And this ordinary group of the best parishioners will form a parish brotherhood.... Then the question arises: why did these people unite? This question is resolved in accordance with the needs of a given place: the shepherd himself and his assistants determine in detail what they should strive for, what the tasks ahead of them are. If in a given area the main need of life is the fight against drunkenness, then the shepherd and assistants unite on the basis of the fight against evil through abstinence... if the main need is to fight sectarianism, then the main task will be to spread education through opening schools, interviews, etc. Each specific evil in the parish can be weakened by the opposite “doing” of the pastor and his assistants. And all these tasks of activity in accordance with the needs of each parish, tasks clearly understood and precisely formulated by the pastor and his assistants, constitute the charter of the church-parish brotherhood that arose so naturally! How simple and how beautiful it all is! What a variety of tasks to be carried out, what space for life and at the same time what a marvelous unity of form! (page 27). How simple and beautiful it all is!!... And yet, thirty years have passed since the publication of the “rules on brotherhoods” and two years since the appearance of the theory of parish brotherhoods by Fr. I. Fudel 1, and the latter have not yet appeared. What does this mean? This means that in reality the fraternal situation in Rus' is not as simple and beautiful as Fr. I. Fudel and other publicist writers. As one could already see from Mr. Lapkov’s brochure, church brotherhoods in western Rus' were caused by special, extraordinary circumstances: the persecution of Orthodoxy and the Russian people in the western region - on the one hand, and a clear consciousness and living sense of untruth - on the other hand. Deeply devoted to Orthodoxy and their nationality, the Western Russians of the 16th and 17th centuries were very clearly aware of the truth of Latinism, the falsehood of Uniatism and Jesuitism, and at the same time the national insult on the part of the Poles and Germans, and they fought against them not to their stomach, but to their death. They felt sympathy for their church and antipathy for the Latin church directly and sincerely, because in such relations to both they were brought up from childhood and such relations to both were to some extent their natural relations, the requirements of their moral nature; on the other hand, they realized quite clearly, because it was impossible not to realize, given the obviousness of the very state of affairs of that time, that they were the only fighters and guardians of their holy faith and nationality, that behind them there was no powerful state - their patron. It is clear that they, in a friendly crowd, went to defend their faith and nationality: this defense was not some idea of ​​theirs, which was the fruit of any considerations, abstract thinking, theological and dogmatic convictions or political calculations, but simply was a moral necessity for them, to which they devoted themselves entirely. You and I, Orthodox reader, are currently in a completely different position and, due to this special situation alone, we can in no way be in any way like the brothers of the 16th–17th centuries, even if we were members of modern Orthodox brotherhoods. In fact, currently carefully paying his membership fee every year, in addition to being the treasurer, secretary or member of the board of the fraternity free of charge - for the sake of honor only, providing the fraternity with some other small services, for example. literary work, we already feel a certain self-satisfaction in ourselves, thinking that we are bringing some kind of sacrifice to the altar of the church and the fatherland and are no longer carrying it, like other people... and at the same time, can we, in all honesty, be equal in devotion to the church and the fatherland to such brother-heroes of the 16th-17th centuries, who sacrificed all their property and did it - not for the sake of honor, but out of a desire to taste the pleasure of the consciousness of their righteousness, as we do, and sometimes directly expecting for this deprivation of office, property, loss of favor from their superiors, arrest, prison, gallows? Of course, we can be equal, and it would even be strange and unreasonable to think about competing with them in this regard. Why? Yes, very simply because no one is currently demanding any such sacrifices from us and no one needs them. The history of the brotherhoods confirms this in the most convincing way: they flourished for some time, and then, when the powerful Russian state came to the aid of the Orthodox faith and Russian nationality, they ceased to exist. However, brotherhoods (195) exist; the government takes care of their maintenance, their existence is justified by certain indisputably good results of their activities... This really cannot be denied! And we are far from thinking that worries and measures for their prosperity are unnecessary. The only question is what measures need to be taken to ensure their prosperity, in accordance with the mood of our time. We admit that treating with full respect the jealousy in the seventh case of Fr. I. Fudel, we consider his theory of parish brotherhoods to be very impractical and naive. For it seems completely unclear who should be understood by the name “best” people in the parish? The priest, of course, knows them, but the point is that these best people must act as leaders of the parish and, in this capacity, possess properties that a truly morally best person may not have. Such properties include, for example. popularity: for we are talking about persons who must captivate others, then the inclination and ability for practical social activity: a person and highly moral, but closed, taciturn, not sociable, loving solitude and inclined towards a contemplative life, perhaps he himself will not want to be a member of the fraternity, and he will hardly be useful to the fraternal cause; as an active member, singled out and preferred over other parishioners, the brother cannot limit himself to the good opinion of himself only of the priest: he must have such in the eyes of the parishioners. Otherwise, the priest with his three or four best people risks remaining forever in an exceptional position and simply turning the whole parish against him. Finally - no matter how strange it may seem - only a person who is financially secure, at least from extreme need, can be an active member of the brotherhood. In fact, to involve a person, burdened with eternal worries about daily bread for his family, in social activities, etc. Arr., speaking of other things, to directly steal his time and energy to serve others, doesn’t it mean placing on him a burden that may be unbearable for the shepherd himself? Yes, this is something worth thinking about. Taking all this into account, we will inevitably come to the idea of ​​\u200b\u200bthe extreme scarcity of people capable of fraternal work. This poverty is so great that at present there can be no question of the possibility of turning every parish, especially rural ones, into a brotherhood. If we pay serious attention to only one of the above-mentioned properties necessary for a brother - namely, material wealth, then in this regard we will be amazed at the scarcity of capable people. In fact, take a closer look at real life, be it urban or rural, at a circle of sober, businesslike, decent people and ask the question, what does all their activity, all their worries and cares amount to? It will not be an exaggeration if we say that among the millions of people there are only a disproportionately small group of people who are free from worries about their daily bread and can devote all their time and energy to social activities. The vast majority of people spend their entire lives struggling to achieve one goal - by legally permitted (we are no longer talking absolutely honest) means to ensure an existence that meets their needs and tastes. And one can hardly blame our century for this business trend. On the contrary, people pursuing this task enjoy due respect: they are respectable, honest people! Who would really dare to blame the father of a family for the fact that he works with all his might to ensure that his family enjoys the comforts of life, that his children receive an education, and that he personally and his household can enjoy, at least to a moderate extent, the benefits of civilization and scientific, artistic, and economic progress? Of course, moral, humane, religious needs cannot and should not be alien to this business sphere, for they are the same natural need as the needs of physical nature; but only among selected natures can they have an advantage over egoistic demands (albeit honestly egoistic); in the majority of people, of course, they find satisfaction first in love for themselves and then in love for their neighbor, either in the name of a religious motive (love of God) or in the name of humanistic beliefs and feelings. In a word, the increasingly complex demands of civilized life in our century have made it quite natural and easy for us to form various kinds of associations of paid honest labor and very poorly to instill associations of selfless service to humanity. And, in our opinion, there is no need to reproach our age too much for self-interest, for the inability to self-denial, to self-sacrifice: at least it is certain that such reproaches will not have the desired success. This does not mean, however, that at the present time the church should refuse to invite its lay members to work and sacrifice for the cause of enlightenment and charity. For this reason, the voice of its preaching should now sound as loudly and continuously as it sounded from the first times of its operation: but the lay members can now respond to this call somewhat differently, adapting to the circumstances of the time. In our country, it is quite possible and already successfully operating brotherhoods consisting of two categories of members: some of them participate in the brotherhood only by monetary contributions, others only by labor for remuneration. These are the brotherhoods pursuing educational tasks: schools organized and maintained by brotherhoods are the most suitable objects, which can be influenced with equal convenience by a rich layman, for whom an hour of time can be worth more than 10 rubles. and a poor teacher - for whom, due to not having any classes, 15 rubles. monthly remuneration for classes at a fraternal school constitutes satisfactory payment for honest work. Both of them can thus be equally useful members of the church brotherhood without any great burden on themselves. The considerations we have expressed also apply to Church and Parish Trustees. The establishment of a separate guardianship in each parish, in our opinion, does not seem appropriate or practical - directly due to our poverty in people and funds. As the very term “Guardianship” shows, the institution bearing this name should direct its activities and efforts to the parish that needs special care, and not everyone indiscriminately. For now, it is enough if the poorest parishes with poor churches and mendicant clergy are worthy of the care of wealthy Christians; for given the existing inequality of the lower parishes, the poverty of some parishes while the wealth of others is especially striking. It is worth imagining a rich parish church in a provincial town with thousands of bells, a rich sacristy, and a wooden rural church with its squalid furnishings, and yet not only existing at its own expense, but also paying a monetary interest to the central church institutions, in order to be struck by the abnormality of such an attitude. Yes, these two churches seem to belong not to one dominant Orthodox Church, but to two - of which one enjoys generous patronage, the other seems to be persecuted. So we still have little church-brotherly spirit and unity, even in the same diocese! On this basis, it seems desirable that the parish guardianship should be composed of persons not necessarily from one, but also from several parishes and extend its activities “within the limits of not one parish” (§ 1), but over the whole region and, first of all, to the poorest parishes in the region: - Larger parishes, of course, can each have their own guardianship: but let the small ones unite together and form a common guardianship from their members. It is also desirable that the 3rd § of the Regulations be changed in the sense that the chairman of the guardianship should certainly be a clergy person (archpriest or priest). We must not forget that we are talking about a church institution, and in these institutions the church elder cannot in any way stand under the hand of a layman: otherwise such an institution will not escape reproach and criticism for the perversion of hierarchical relations. – The title of Honorary Trustee can be retained along with the Chairmanship under the general conditions of honorary membership, i.e., subject to a one-time significant contribution, or a certain annual one. – It would be desirable, finally, to change § 4 of the Regulations in the sense that permissions are decided exclusively by a majority of votes, and the voice of the chairman does not have any advantage over the votes of other members. If the votes are equally divided, the decision will be considered invalid. For the now adopted procedure, according to which “in the event of an equal division of votes, the side on which the chairman’s vote has the preponderance” (§ 4), stands in decisive contradiction with the principle of decision by majority and does not seem to have a sufficient basis for itself: in fact, what kind of majority is there where there are exactly half of those who disagree? That’s all the changes that would be desirable to make to the existing “regulations on parish trustees!” Frankly speaking, we ourselves do not attach much importance to these changes, precisely for the following reasons: firstly, because the “position” in its existing form is very satisfactory: after all, it passed through the censorship of Metropolitan Philaret; and he was an experienced master in the legal technique of this kind of “provisions”. Secondly, and this is mainly because it is a matter of external organization, but of the mood of living members organizing themselves into one or another fraternal union. The most perfect organization will not bear the desired fruit if it is not enlivened by the inner brotherly mood of the parishioners: this mood is the soul of the organization. It is this mood that we should care about most of all. But what measures should be taken to arouse this mood in the souls of parishioners? We think that these measures do not lie where we are accustomed to looking for them - that is, not in the rich treasuries of our mind, which today manifests itself with extraordinary zeal in delineating all kinds of organizations and reorganizations. Really, without exaggeration, we can say that in our time, if only someone stirs an intelligent thought or if a good movement of the heart manifests itself in someone, a draft “commission” on this issue with a detailed organization is ready, so we cannot complain at all about the lack of commissions and plans. But we think that in our time another area of ​​human strength is often forgotten, in which the Church of Christ primarily lives and is concerned - namely, the area of ​​the human heart. Shouldn't we look in this area for measures to raise the religious and moral mood of modern society? It seems to us that the search in this area is not at all difficult - for this area is close to us and close to our shepherds. And here is a simple pointer for traveling to this area: let every shepherd, as often as possible, temporarily and untimely, repeat to his flock: “brother! Congratulate yourself on being, and not only calling yourself, Orthodox Christians!” And let the flock often repeat the experiments of applying this pastoral advice to business. So, Orthodox reader, shouldn’t we follow this sign as soon as possible to this area? Perhaps then the fraternal cause in Orthodox Russia will move forward faster! The brochure in question originally appeared as an article in the Russian Messenger in 1892. You might be interested in: