25. Суждения о нарушениях церковной дисциплины и Православной веры

“The best reward is love. When you want to change someone's character, the force that changes is love." Elder Amphilochius Makris. P. 74 The Moscow Hierarch Saint Philaret, instructing the Orthodox faith and Orthodox piety, protects the children of the Holy Orthodox Russian Church from: 1) schism, 2) heterodoxy, 3) heresies, 4) heterodoxy, 5) magic and similar superstitions. 1. When we talk about schism, we mean our Old Believers. The saint notices that the schism is intensifying and acquiring new false teachers “to the detriment of the Church” (2:15). In the Archdiocese of Ryazan, eight priests went into schism - “this should not be ignored,” especially since they may “be on trial, or have church money behind them” (2:15). The Holy Archpastor is surprised that a certain hieromonk “is giving himself over to the delusions of the Austrian Belokrinitsky false hierarchy. Archbishop Ambrose was dismissed from the diocese by the Patriarch, probably not for virtue, and lived in Constantinople. Without the blessing of the Patriarch, he left for Austria to join the schismatics. In Belaya Krinitsa they received him with doubt, among other things, as a tobacco smoker. But those who bought it with Russian money guessed what needed to be done. The main one among those who doubted was elected bishop - and he stopped arguing. Ambrose, contrary to the Apostolic rules, alone ordained him as a bishop. Therefore, this is not a bishop; and, consequently, others according to it; for Ambrose alone was appointed according to the rules” (9:324-325). It is not easy to fight the schism, since its “strong” followers “under the guise of not disturbing people, have positioned some of ours so that they do not prevent them from patronizing the schism, and from those who care about the good of the Church, what is being done is kept secret. Lord, give understanding and save everyone” (9:372). And the saint discusses how to return our brothers to the saving bosom of the Holy Russian Church: it is not “necessary to tease people with a reproachful word at the very beginning of your speech if you want them to listen to you... It is advisable that schismatics do not throw away their books after reading only the first page and become curious to read further” (4:431-432). “How to write Church history to admonish schismatics? - asks the holy Hierarch and answers: - If you write directly polemically, you must fear the same disaster to which polemical writings in general are subject; They will run around with such writings and will not know the truth and will not come to their senses. So, it is necessary that history, without declaring itself polemical, reveals events correctly; and, especially in those cases that are doubtful for schismatics, pointed out the reasons why what was being told is fair. A person will read or listen to a story, notice that they are telling him the truth, and therefore accept what is being told; and from this it should come naturally that he will accept information that serves to refute the schism” (36:12). If you demand immediate change, it may happen that you yourself erect a barrier and deprive the erring person of “the chance to know the truth” (7:303). It is also necessary “for relations with schismatics, one must be quite willing to resolve various questions and objections, pointing to evidence that they cannot refuse. Not giving an answer and postponing until information is obtained means, according to their concepts, to show one’s business to the weak” (10:327). Then the Moscow Archpastor proceeds to criticize the schism: “The schismatics have unblessed servants, and there is no true peace” (10:13). Particularly annoying is their attachment exclusively to two fingers during the sign of the cross. “When both finger formations, the nominal and tripartite ones, came to Russia together with the Christian faith, the nominal finger formation, without a doubt, seemed incomprehensible to the illiterate. Meanwhile, they could not help but notice that the priest folds his fingers differently when he blesses, rather than how they do when they are baptized. The sign used by the priest naturally seemed more sacred and more powerful than that used by the layman. From this, over time, some laymen might have come up with the idea of ​​making the sign of the cross with their fingers folded in the same way as they saw with a priest. Isn’t this where the beginning of the double-fingered constitution lies hidden in people, however, who are alien to the inclination towards heretical innovations? - Metropolitan Macarius, seeing the beginning, or perhaps growing, diversity of the sign of the cross among the people, wanted with his advisers to bring it to unity, but, apparently, he himself did not quite delve into the special meaning of the priestly naming sign of the cross and was inclined to the opinion of those who in Stoglava, the priestly sign of the cross, with some changes, turned it into a universal one under the name of two-finger, mixing its features in the description - and tripartite and nominative fingers. Patriarch Joseph spread this innovation, more than others, through printed books. But then the Greek Patriarchs returned us to the previous path of true church antiquity” (4:392). Supporters of the “two-fingered constitution should be brought to the church sign of the cross. But this must be done with reasoning and consideration of the circumstances” (7:303). We must fight for the main and even for the secondary - “both for the great and for the small... The schismatics exaggerate their demands, but they demand all concessions from us” (10:426). “Here is their project. A church and a pulpit will open on Rogozhsky. The Russian bishops will ordain a bishop from among them; then together with the other and, finally, with two of the third. These three will form an independent hierarchy. The eldest name of metropolitan or patriarch is bestowed by the Sovereign Emperor. This elder will belong to the Sovereign Emperor, without having on the part of the state any guardian like the Chief Prosecutor, so that no one takes precautions against foreign agents, Jesuits and Polish priests with the Polish Catechism who might sneak in. It is necessary to call this schismatic church one of the same faith and give the people complete (freedom) to go to this or to the Orthodox Church, but the clergy of this Church should not belong to the Holy Synod and not communicate with the Orthodox clergy in service. The intention is clear to open a wide path into schism for the Orthodox people, and to place the Orthodox clergy as if condemned from the schismatic hierarchy” (19–2:244–245). Also, “please pay attention to the all-Old Believer letter... Here is a review of the state government: “Unfortunately, the autocracy has not understood its responsibilities to the people for 200 years to this day.” Here’s more about the spiritual authorities: “The archpastorship severed the most sacred relationships connecting sovereigns with their subjects.” “The work of the revolutionary, written on behalf of the schismatics, is filled with such beauties,” the saint concludes. Therefore, I again ask for attention to my fellow believers” (19–2:260–261). The saint urgently expresses his request for fellow believers. “Would you like to know what I think on the issue of the development of common faith... I’ll say it briefly. Unity of faith is not the beginning. The beginning is Orthodoxy; and unity of faith is a branch, or movement of this principle towards the side of schism, to bring the alienated closer to the unity of the Church and hierarchy. In this case, every possible leniency was shown; and to continue this movement further would mean plunging the Church into schism. To add a bishop of the same faith to the priests of the same faith at this time would be useless or even harmful” (14:257). Through the mouths of well-meaning schismatics, he says that after the Highest favor to fellow believers, “they will have nothing more to desire than to join him, abandoning the ugly false bishops of Austria and Russia” (19–2:267). But acceptance into the Edinoverie society is required after a thorough test. – “Father Arkady, asking to join the Edinoverie Church, raises bewilderment because he previously had too peculiar a wisdom. Ask the monk Paphnutius if he considers Arkady trustworthy. Will he recognize that the rituals of the pan-Orthodox Church are more ancient and more perfect than those based on the Council of the Hundred Heads, and will he not place the Edinoverie Church above the pan-Orthodox one? I ask brother Paphnutius to say frankly what he knows and what he thinks” (13:76). The same about accepting someone else: call him “and talk with him to see whether he leaves the wrong path for pure and reasonable reasons, and show him the right one, and confirm him on this. In general, do not neglect these new fellow believers with your attention, so that they know that true Orthodoxy accepts them with the embrace of their hearts. “I think it would not be difficult for the monk Paphnutius and it would not be useless if he briefly wrote down who from the former society comes to them, and what dispositions and opinions they express” (13:74). Monks from among the same faith should be called to the priesthood. “Everyone is suddenly uncomfortable. It is fair to start with the monk Paphnutius, because he was the first to pave the way to the Orthodox Church with his own ideas and helped others along this path. But the monk Onuphry also sacrificed his honorable position outside the Church to the truth and the Church. And, as the oldest, he demands attention before others. Call (Bishop Leonid of Dmitrov asks. - K.S.) the monk Paphnutius and talk to him about this... Tell me what he says, and use your prudence and foresight” (13:67). The saint supports before the abbot of the Holy Trinity Sergius Lavra, Archimandrite Anthony, the request of fellow believers of the Orenburg diocese to provide them with old printed books - the Holy Gospel and the Great Consumer Book. – “If there are three Gospels of Philaret, then it seems that they can be given to fellow believers, to establish them in unity with the Universal Church. I don’t think I’ll give away the breviary. Antiquity must be preserved in places like the Lavra - and there may be an important need for this book here” (9:58–59, 60). Before him, he sets out his following valuable judgment: “The builder of the monastery demanded my opinion on the conversion of the Edinoverie monastery into a pan-Orthodox one. The monastery is one of the former schismatic monasteries. I must think that having turned from a schismatic to a fellow believer, he still attracts some attention from schismatics, and his surroundings are filled with them. Consequently, he represents a point from which it is more convenient than from other places and more necessary to act on schismatics. Having become pan-Orthodox, it will become more alien to schismatics than it is now and, consequently, less useful for influencing them. Dissenters, having become fellow believers, easily enter into full communion with Orthodoxy, but when they are invited to join the same faith, they are afraid that, upon joining the Church, the rituals of the same faith will gradually be taken away from them, and this fear is one of the obstacles to joining the church of the same faith. This fear should intensify when a striking example of the transformation of a Edinoverie monastery into a pan-Orthodox one appears... Therefore, I advised the Edinoverie abbot to remain with the Edinoverie monastery, not to doubt the blessing of the Orthodox Church given to him, and try to make a sacrifice to God for his previous deviation from the Church by converting those who deviated... Moreover, I propose to reinforce the Edinoverie monastery with reliable people from among the Orthodox. Archimandrite Gerasim, a fellow believer, would not have been able to convert schismatics as much as he did if he had become not a fellow believer, but a general Orthodox; and, being a fellow believer, he would have succeeded even more if secular officials had not valued schismatic money more than Orthodoxy” (9:69-70). Saint Philaret rejoices that the Old Believers are peaceful: “The well-spoken Old Believers of the Rogozhsky cemetery visited me and talked to me peacefully. Glory to the mercy of God in everything” (2:53). 2. In relation to different confessions - heterodoxy and other faiths - the Moscow Hierarch speaks of a single rule: “It is necessary with all freedom and strength to reveal the conviction of the dignity of the Orthodox confession; but in exposing errors and those who err, tolerance, calm, meekness, condescension, caution are just as necessary as zeal” (23:19). When the saint talks about heterodox people, he is talking mainly about Latins - Catholics; also applies to Lutherans, Anglicans and Armenians. Catholicism is aggressive towards Orthodoxy. “Perhaps,” reflects Saint Philaret, “we especially need evidence of the truth now, when Roman cunning, without a doubt, taking advantage of the circumstances, makes special efforts to sneak into Russia. God will preserve us, giving wisdom and firmness to our King, but let us not hesitate to serve the truth against cunning" (4:181)... "They write and say that a meeting is taking place in St. Petersburg about the new advantages of the Roman Catholic clergy in our country; somehow, in Saratov they are planning to establish a seminary of this confession; children from Orthodox Christians in marriage with Roman Catholics, who according to the current law must be baptized in Orthodoxy, are allowed to be baptized in Roman if they want, etc. ...Pray to St. Sergius that he will enlighten my madness, should I say, and what, and to whom, or remain silent and bring my sorrow to those who visit the Orthodox Church here and abroad with difficult trials (9:389) ... “From St. Petersburg, the cry of a zealot of Orthodoxy is heard in Moscow that the Latin priest who has again appeared in St. Petersburg is attracting the female sex with his teachings, and is inspiring them to ask for the construction of a new French church in St. Petersburg and calling the Jesuits to it, supposedly for better education of children, which is not reliable in the hands of Polish priests. If this is true, then may zeal for Orthodoxy and love for the Fatherland rise up against this. If Polish priests are evil, then the Jesuits are no less evil... Who doesn’t know the Jesuits? The pope himself recognized their order as worthy of destruction. – Who doesn’t know their Monita secreta now? Petersburg tested them as educators - and found them false” (19–2:239). If an Orthodox missionary appeared in Italy, a cry would immediately begin, but in Russia the West acts permissively - “The Pope is being shaken, but this does not yet threaten a complete fall. One Italian bishop favors Orthodoxy - this is a spark that may soon be extinguished. Garibaldi says: preach Orthodoxy; but at the same time he thinks not about the benefit of Orthodoxy, but about the harm to the pope. Let an Orthodox missionary appear in Italy - what could be the immediate consequence? – New political cries of Russia’s enemies” (13:101). Priests act and seduce the Orthodox with cunning, but we should not imitate them - “let the priests confirm the Orthodox and win the non-Orthodox with the truth. Truth must be stronger than cunning. You cannot do everything for the Church with external authority” (33:432). “Conversion must be matured under the influence of the word of power and the spirit: then it is reliable, and not when it is accomplished by the hand of the flesh” (2:42). “Joining the Orthodox Church itself does not differ in ranks and degrees, but is the same for everyone. It is another matter to introduce the rights of the priesthood” (4:654). “If the annexation is performed by a bishop, having already had permission from the Holy Synod to recognize the one who is being annexed as a priest, then everything can be accomplished in one priestly service, and he will partake of the Holy Mysteries as a priest” (4:660). “It is fitting that the one who joins should humble himself before the true Church, so that he may be exalted in time” (4:660). Among the doctrinal deviations of the Catholic Church, the Saint singles out the newly-minted dogma of the Immaculate Conception of the Mother of God. Answering a question from Archimandrite Anthony, abbot of the Holy Trinity Sergius Lavra, about the word of Saint Demetrius in praise of the Mother of God: “I adore Your sinless conception from holy parents,” he writes: “The words of Saint Demetrius can be understood about a conception pure from voluntary sin, for this happened after a long honest life, in old age, not according to the desire of the flesh, but in obedience to the prophecy of the Angel. But it is not incredible that he understood them the way they think about this in the West. He received his initial education in a way that included Western teachers and Western books. The opinion met, marked by reverence for the Mother of God, could be accepted out of the feeling of this reverence, while the thought did not occur to strictly examine it in relation to the dogma of the redemption of the human race from original sin solely by the blood of the incarnate Son of God... I doubt whether it is necessary to write discussions about the conception of the Mother of God and whether it is useful. It seems that we look at this issue quite calmly. It would not stir up strife, the resolution of which is difficult to foresee. Let us suppose that another, being careful not to shake the dogma of atonement, represents the birth of the Mother of God as pure only from arbitrary sin; and another, reverent for the Mother of God, considers it pure and free from original sin, not having in mind what this opinion has to do with the dogma of atonement. God bless them both. If they ask us, we will speak in the words of the stichera for the Annunciation: The Son of God dwelt in the womb of the Blessed Virgin, “purified by the Holy Spirit.” Has the Holy Church really not yet had time to establish its dogmas in 1850 years? – The Western Church apparently thinks so when it now proclaims a new dogma that was not a dogma before. The Eastern Orthodox Church is content and saved by the dogmas sufficiently established at the seven Ecumenical Councils” (10:15–16, 17). Other significant changes (by the time of the Saint) by Catholics of the holy faith include: the feast of Corpus Christi and the Filioque. Regarding the first innovation, only questions are posed: “What is the basis for establishing a holiday for a shrine that was revered, but for which a special holiday was not established in the centuries of the Apostles and Ecumenical Councils? What is the rationale for establishing an annual holiday for the Sacrament, which is performed on all holidays and almost all days? Why on Thursday after the Sunday of All Saints, and not on Maundy Thursday, on the day of the establishment of the Sacrament? What consistency is there in the order of rites - to carry the Body of Christ in the procession and put it aside without the use for which it was given, and immediately begin a new Liturgy for the celebration of the Body of Christ? (4:187). According to the second we read: “In the conversations of Saint Chrysostom on Pentecost, I instructed to look for the Filioque. Not found. Probably, one should marvel not at Saint Chrysostom, but at the Roman publisher. Western jealousy allows the Filioque to be printed in the Latin translation next to the Greek text, which does not contain this. Abbot Jaeger might not know Greek, especially in this case, for which it is more advantageous not to know” (4:202–203). “In the Western Symbol, the face of the Holy Spirit has a direct and immediate relation to the face of the Father, and in relation to the procession and to the Son - there is a two-term and indirect relation to the Father, when it is believed that the Son is born from the Father, and the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father... Should we think about the incomprehensible? And will speculating about the incomprehensible have the force of proof? (4:299). The saint considers the Western custom of kissing statues to be pagan and regrets that statues are tolerated in St. Petersburg: “Come to the church of St. Peter in Rome, bow to his image, cross yourself, as we have a custom, and kiss his foot, and I will come up to you and say: ... Is it good that you kissed the foot of the statue of Olympian Jupiter, which the pagans revered in their own way, and whose only name - Perun - was changed by one of the holiest bishops of Rome? How do you write about this? Or how can you keep silent? (4:150). “Unfortunately, we tolerate (that is, statues), especially in St. Petersburg, although we do not approve. The proof of which is in the statues of the Kazan and St. Isaac’s Cathedrals” (4:182). Another unpleasant action is evidenced by the Archpastor, who deeply loves holy Orthodoxy: the Polish members of the “humane institution” buy “unborn children from poor Orthodox mothers in order to raise those born in their Latin religion” (13:61). And yet, the Saint does not call Orthodox people to hatred, but, on the contrary, teaches Christian feelings: “Do not judge harshly those who have sinned by praying with heterodox people. Didn’t you tolerate it when a non-Orthodox listened to your Liturgy: after all, this is also a violation of the rule, although less than the concelebration of priests of different faiths. An Orthodox priest is allowed, by decree of the Holy Synod, to see off a deceased Roman Catholic, out of necessity, in vestments, singing: Holy God" (14:273–274)... "A priest of the Roman Church who has joined the Orthodox Church can marry? ordination; and, consequently, leads not to permission, but to the prohibition of marriage for one who is ordained in celibacy. Apostolic Canon 26 (and others - K.S.) says: “We command that of those who have entered the clergy as celibates, only readers and singers should marry.” From this it follows that those ordained as presbyters, deacons and subdeacons who are celibate have no right to marry” (4:641–642). - This means that a Catholic priest is accepted into his existing rank... The saint believes that it is not appropriate to publish an article that is unpleasant for the pope - not to mock “the ruler of the West. Peace be upon him, when the Psalmist teaches to be peaceful with those who hate the world” (4:469). To the reproaches of the “Latin” teacher that although the Orthodox Church prays for the union of the Churches, it does not act, the Saint replies: “The Orthodox Church prays for the union of the Churches so that the existing union of the Orthodox Churches would be preserved by grace, and so that by the grace of God the union with the Orthodox Church and those Churches that were separated from it by any wrong teaching would be restored... Not hamper the Christian love of the Orthodox Church and do not claim that she does not pray for the unification of the Roman Church" (4:567, 568)... “What would you (A.N. Muravyov. - K.S.) write about Lutheranism... I would not want direct polemics. The historical type of writing would be less military and would more easily attract readers. Topic: “On the attempt of Protestants and Reformers to unite with the Eastern Church,” wouldn’t it give you the opportunity to express what you need in an entertaining and not harsh manner?” (4:171–172). And the Holy Hierarch informs Archimandrite Anthony: “You can sing a prayer service for a living Lutheran and ask him for the grace of God, which draws him into the unity of the true Church, but for a deceased person it is a different matter. We do not condemn him, but it was his will to remain outside the Orthodox Church to the end. Knowing some Lutherans who had respect and faith in the Orthodox Church, but died without union with it: for the consolation of the faithful, I allowed prayer for them, not open in the Church, with which they were not openly united in life, but commemoration at proskomedia and memorial services in the house. The Synodal rule allows for one church action for such - for an Orthodox priest to escort a deceased non-Orthodox person to the grave in vestments, singing: Holy God” (10:278; 23:80)... About the Anglicans: “Let conversations open in some London hall about the rapprochement of the Anglican Church with the Orthodox Church: what will it be? “This means, according to Russian expression, to begin a long song, without being sure whether it can be sung to the end, and whether it will be necessary to fall silent soon after starting” (13:101). But the guest must be received with attention: “Priest Yong, who has been commissioned by his bishops to seek ways to rapprochement with the Russian Church, is to be in the Lavra of the American Church. They promise to use the Nicene Symbol without the Latin addition: “And from the Son.” The Russian Orthodox Catechism has been translated by them and is used by some for raising children. It is a difficult matter, but those who seek peace must be accepted in peace. Receive the guest with attention" (10:425)... About the Armenian Church: “The thought comes, isn’t the Armenian Patriarch too often sown on your (A.N. Muravyov’s – K.S.) pages? And that at parting he read a prayer over you, and other Armenian bishops showered you with blessings, this is doubtful to proclaim. It is another thing for an inquisitive son of the Orthodox Church to attend the Divine Service of the Armenian Church and study it; it is another thing for him to enter into special arbitrary communication with the Armenian hierarchy. If this happened because brotherly love forgot to be constrained by the strictness of the rules - praise to brotherly love. But is it necessary to proclaim in the book that we have ignored the church rule about not communicating in prayer with those of different faiths? Perhaps the Armenians will be tempted that their patriarch read a prayer over the head of the Chalcedonian” (4:247). 2. The Moscow Saint sees fanaticism in the actions of heretics, and untruth in their statements, from which evil stems: “Here is a sample of the Irvingians. On Easter they performed their public worship. At this time, one of them began to complain that there was an evil spirit in him and asked for help. Help was provided to him by beating him with sticks for half an hour. Finally, he said that he had received help, that the spirit was coming out and had attacked the throat, and would come out if the neck was crushed. They did this, and he ended up dead. However, they were not embarrassed. They took the body into another room and continued their Divine service. - The Mormons, followers of Smith, a merchant who later went bankrupt and fled several times, built a “holy city” in America, but were driven out by armed force, after armed and bloody defense. It was necessary to look for another promised land - and they found it in another empty area near a salt lake. This lake was called the Dead Sea, and the river there was called Jordan. They allow polygamy: but they say some of their teachers rebelled against it. Meanwhile they have a prophet and 12 apostles, 70 counselors, angels or bishops, priests according to the order of Aaron, and priests according to the order of Melchizedek” (4:447-448). Mormons “represent God as humanoid and non-omnipresent... It seems that fortune telling has spread from this sect” (9:262). And here is what the Saint writes about a certain French preacher, criticizing his “wisdom”: the preacher “says that if the people are oppressed and do not have legal rest, then they don’t know how it is here, but in France they will make a rest for themselves, bloody and terrible, a revolution. First of all, it is false. The revolution did not happen because there was no rest. It was not the working people, but the parasitic people who made the revolution. Secondly, why did the preacher introduce this interpretation of the revolution into his sermon?.. Was it not to foreshadow a revolution in our country?.. The preacher asks: how is the vital activity of the Eucharist revealed? And, bypassing the essential, he points to the accidental: - missionaries and sisters of mercy. Does this mean teaching? Isn’t this a stretch, with the intention of seducing and seducing?” (19–2:79–80). 3. Saint Philaret speaks about other faiths in passing: he raises the question whether in the Tver diocese it is not difficult for Mohammedans to accept Christianity and makes the following remarks: To Archbishop Gabriel of Tver: “Before, I drew your attention to whether you make it difficult for Mohammedans to enter Christianity, and you refuted this fear. Now I will draw your attention to whether you are being forced into Mohammedanism with Christianity. Not only in your letter to me do you boast, but in public papers it is printed that you sang the Lord’s Prayer in the mosque. This means that you have been publicly accused, or have accused yourself, of violating church rules. If it is not allowed to pray with heretics, even more so in a Mohammedan mosque, even more so the highest of prayers, which we want to say in the Church at the Liturgy, we prepare for this with a special prayer: “Grant us, O Master, with boldness, without the condemnation of death, to call on You, the Heavenly God the Father, and say: Our Father.” You have not gained a single Mohammedan soul, but you have broken the rules and seduced the Orthodox. “Won’t you defend yourself and say that the Apostle Paul entered the synagogue?” I answer: a synagogue is not at all like a mosque, especially at the time when St. Paul entered it. The Christian Church was just being born: until then the synagogue was the abode of true religion, which through the preaching of the Gospel should be transformed into the New Testament Church, for which purpose Saint Paul entered it. But we do not see him entering pagan temples to pray and preach, for this would mean irritating and outraged and, consequently, blocking, and not opening, the path to edification in the faith. Saint Paul did not come to the Areopagus himself, but was brought and asked: then it was in order to proclaim the truth” (19-1: 81-82). And to A.N. Muravyov: “I also don’t want to agree with your generosity in declaring you great, regarding Mohammed. You want to show impartiality towards the Mohammedans and caress them: and it seems that you are not doing justice to Mohammed, but flattering him. There is no mental or moral dignity in him: and without this, what is greatness?.. Didn’t I also sin, to please you, by agreeing that he can be called great only by his successes? Think carefully about this” (4:251-252). 4. The saint considers magic and similar superstitions to be a harmful activity for both the soul and the body - disastrous for the spiritual state and harmful to health: “Nowadays, through the study of nature, they are entering the realm of magic... It occurs to me that I shouldn’t get in touch with the authorities, so that they don’t teach the people superstition” (9:221)... “Hear, I think, about fortune telling with tables... These days I came across a French book in which it is written that in America the fortune tellers are counted in many thousands and are united in societies, and that the tables preach the transformation of Christianity and the state like the sages 1848” (9:229–230)... “The fortune teller, in the direction of the table, treated the girl; but she was getting worse. Finally, he asked the table what it meant. The table said that the girl would die in a few days and then be resurrected in three days. The girl died, but did not resurrect, and the fortune teller and his sister, who participated in the same thing, were damaged in their minds... I advised taking him to St. Sergius, and I turned to you so that you would arrange for prayers to be performed over him" (9:299)... "A visitor from St. Petersburg told me the following. One Russian, who was in America at the consulate, an unbeliever, saw an inscription on the house: “Here you can talk with the dead,” and, entering the house, he found an old man with a fortune-telling table, who did not write, but answered by knocking. The examiner, eliminating the deception, put the table aside, and, asking, received answers that his deceased uncle was talking to him, that he was not in the best condition, ... and that he needed to pray for him. When asked who should pray, the questioner uttered several names and received unclear answers, and when he named his mother, the table kicked three times and jumped up. From that time on, the tester became a believer. How do you talk about this? (9:250–251)... “About magnetism, when they asked me whether to use it, I answered that Christians have been given the highest and truest powers, faith and prayer” (10:250; 23:23). And Saint Philaret also sees something positive in signs: “You can laugh at what they call signs. But sometimes the meaning is hidden in them, although the connection between the preceding and the subsequent is unclear. The bird flies in the spring and flies away in the fall, sometimes earlier, sometimes later: and it turns out that it seemed to have foreseen what kind of weather would follow. Not without experience, a sign was formed that the unusual appearance and impudence of animals is a bad omen” (10:62). General conclusion: salvation is in the Church - and the entrance to it is open. “Permission during confession to accept for joining the Orthodox Church without a special rite is permitted... without limitation by condition” (10:69). “In relation to people of different confessions, it is necessary with all freedom and strength to reveal the conviction of the dignity of the Orthodox Confession; but in exposing errors and those who are in error, tolerance, calmness, meekness, condescension, and caution are just as necessary as zeal” (5:12). “The Latins know how to prove to the government that there is a need for a bishop even where he is not needed. Let us be able to prove the truth just as they know how to prove what they want” (5:13). You might be interested in: