On the issue of the so-called “single opinion” of Metropolitan Sergius

This is a document condemning the teachings of Rev. Sergius Bulgakov on behalf of the Holy Synod, signed by Metropolitan. Sergius. There is an opinion that Met. Sergius drew up the document without the participation of the Synod, alone. This issue is addressed in the article. “The TEACHING of Archpriest Sergius Bulgakov about Sophia, the Wisdom of God, has repeatedly become the subject of church discussion. Thus, it was twice considered conciliarly in Karlovtsy: in March 1927 by the Synod of Bishops 1; in October 1935 by the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad 2, each of them was answered by Fr. Sergius Bulgakov [3; 4]. Twice this teaching was discussed in Moscow, as evidenced by the well-known Decree of the Moscow Patriarchate to Metropolitan Eleutherius of Lithuania and Vilna No. 1651 of September 7, 1935 (hereinafter referred to as Decree No. 1651) [5], to which there is also a response from Fr. Sergius [6], and another, which did not become the subject of controversy, Decree of the Moscow Patriarchate to Metropolitan Eleutherius of Lithuania and Vilna No. 2267 of December 27, 1935 (hereinafter referred to as Decree No. 2267) [7]. Characterizing Decree No. 1651 as Fr. Sergius and his followers specifically note that this Decree reflects the sole opinion of Metropolitan Sergius (Stragorodsky) (6, p. 25; 8, p. 10–12; 9, p. 160]. Decree No. 2267, practically not mentioned by researchers, is assessed in a similar way (8, p. 12). However, back in 1936, V. Lossky, analyzing the text of Decree No. 1651, noted that the Decree in question is not a personal opinion, but a “judgment of bishops” and, therefore, a conciliar act [10. s. 6–9], but he did not have evidence. A similar opinion that “condemnation is given the character of a church and conciliar act” is contained in the Act of the commission of teachers of the Orthodox Theological Institute in Paris, which included A. Kartashev, G. Fedotov, B. Vysheslavtsev, V. Zenkovsky, V. Ilyin, N. Afanasyev and other scientists [8, p. 42]. Additional information about the origin and nature of the considered Decrees of the Moscow Patriarchate is provided by Definition No. 93 of August 24, 1935 (hereinafter referred to as Definition No. 93) and Definition No. 135 of December 7, 1935 (hereinafter referred to as Definition No. 135), stored in Moscow, in the Archives of the Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church, the texts of which, with the exception of formalities features coincide with the texts of Decree No. 1651 and Decree No. 2267 1. The texts of Definitions No. 93 and No. 135 are printed on the forms “Moscow Patriarchate / Deputy Patriarchal Locum Tenens / Definition” (hereinafter referred to as the “Definition” form) (ill. 1, 3), and not on the forms “Resolution of the Deputy Patriarchal Locum Tenens and the Temporary Patriarchal Holy Synod under him” (hereinafter referred to as the “Decree” form) (ill. 5), which were probably used until the abolition of the Synod in May 1935 [8, p. 42]. Therefore, in the “Definition” forms there is no formula “The Deputy Patriarchal Locum Tenens and the Temporary Patriarchal Holy Synod under him LISTENED” of the “Resolution” form (ill. 5), instead of which there is a short “HEARD” (ill. 1, 3), without naming the meeting that made the decision. Just as in the Resolution, at the end of each of the Determinations there are signatures of the bishops present at the hearing and discussion (cf. Fig. 5 and Fig. 2, 4). However, on the “Decree” form, before the bishops’ signatures, there is the formula “Members of the Patriarchal Holy Synod” (ill. 5), which is absent for the reason stated above in the “Definition” forms (ill. 2, 4). According to the available signatures, Determination No. 93 was signed (ill. 2): 1) Deputy Patriarchal Locum Tenens Metropolitan Sergius (Stragorodsky); 2) Metropolitan Alexy (Simansky) of Leningrad; 3) Metropolitan of Kazan Seraphim (Alexandrov) 11, VI, s. 33–37; 4) Metropolitan of Yaroslavl and Danilovsky Pavel (Borisovsky) 11, V, s. 281–283; 5) Metropolitan of Ivanovo Pavel (Galkovsky) 11, V, s. 291; 6) Bishop of Melekes Artemon (Evstratov) 11, s. 405; 7) Archbishop of Oryol Alexander (Shchukin) 11, I, s. 99; 8) Bishop of Kaluga Augustin (Belyaev) 11, I, s. 20 ; 9) Bishop of Rybinsk Varlaam (Pikapov) 11, II, s. 44; 10) Bishop of Ulyanovsk Vladimir (Gorkovsky) [1l, II, s.210–211] 2; 11) Archbishop of Kharkov Innocent (Letyaev) 11, III, s. 249250; 12) Archpriest Alexander Lebedev, manager of the affairs of the Moscow Patriarchate. Definition No. 135 was signed (ill. 3): 1) Deputy Patriarchal Locum Tenens Metropolitan Sergius (Stragorodsky); 3) Metropolitan Feofan of Gorky (Tulyakov) 11,VI, s. 402–404; 4) Metropolitan of Ivanovo Pavel (Galkovsky) 11, V, s. 291; 5) Archbishop of Yelets Seraphim (Protopopov) 11,VI, s. 68–69; 6) Archbishop of Kharkov Innocent (Letyaev) 11, III, s. 249–250; 7) Archbishop of Dmitrov Pitirim (Krylov) 11, V, s. 436–437; 8) Archbishop of Vladimir Sergius (Grishin) 11,VI, s. 105–107; 9) Archbishop of Oryol Alexander (Shchukin) 11, I, s. 99; 10) Metropolitan of Yaroslavl Pavel (Borisovsky) (11, V, s. 281–283]; 11) Archbishop of Stalingrad Anthony (Romanovsky) 11, I, s. 304–305; From the above materials it follows that the operative parts of Decrees No. 93 and No. 135 and the corresponding parts of Decrees No. 1651 and No. 2267 are not the “sole opinions” of Metropolitan Sergius of Stragorod, but decisions of small or “incomplete” councils (councils of “attached” bishops), known in the history of the Church 12, p. 292–310. The absence in the texts of the Decrees of a list of bishops who signed the corresponding Decrees is a consequence of the formal features of the Decrees. The texts of Decrees No. 1651 and No. 2267 are published according to the official publications of 1935 (for Decree No. 1651) and 1936 (for Decree No. 2267) (according to modern spelling). 1) Message of the Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad dated March 18/31, 1927 // Archbishop Nikon (Rklitsky). Biography of His Beatitude Anthony, Metropolitan of Kyiv and Galicia. New York, 1961, vol. VII, p. 172–176. 2) Determination of the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad of October 17/30, 1933 Wed. Karlovtsy, 1935. 3) A memorandum presented by Professor Fr. Sergius Bulgakov to Metropolitan Evlogy in the spring of 1927 // About Sophia the Wisdom of God. Decree of the Moscow Patriarchate and memos of Prof. prot. Sergius Bulgakov to Metropolitan Evlogy. Paris, 1935, p. 54–64. 4) Memo to Metropolitan Evlogy prof. prot. Sergius Bulgakov regarding the definition of the Council of Bishops in Karlovtsi regarding the doctrine of Sophia the Wisdom of God. Paris, 1936 (supplement to the magazine "Path"). 5) Decree of the Moscow Patriarchate to His Grace Metropolitan Eleutherius of Lithuania and Vilna No. 1651 of September 7, 1935 (official publication). 6) Memo presented in October 1935 to His Eminence Metropolitan Eulogius prof. prot. Sergius Bulgakov. // About Sophia the Wisdom of God. Decree of the Moscow Patriarchate and memos of Prof. prot. Sergius Bulgakov to Metropolitan Evlogy. Paris, 1935, p. 20–53. 7) Decree of the Moscow Patriarchate to His Grace Metropolitan Eleutherius of Lithuania and Vilna No. 2267 of December 27, 1935 (official publication). 8) Hegumen Gennady (Eikalovich). The case of Prot. Sergius Bulgakov (historical outline of the dispute about Sofia). San Francisco, 1980. 9) Nun Elena. Professor Archpriest Sergius Bulgakov // Theological Works, Moscow, 1986, issue. 27, p. 107–194. 10) Lossky V.N. Dispute about Sofia. “Memos” prot. Sergius Bulgakov and the meaning of the Decree of the Moscow Patriarchate. Paris, 1936. 11) Mitr. Manuil (Lemesevskiy). Die Russischen orthodoxen Bischӧfe von 1893 bis 1965. Erlangen, 1979–1989, t. I-IV. 12) Lapin I. The Council as the highest body of church power (Historical and canonical essay). Kazan, 1909. See: Condemnation of the teachings of Archpriest. S.N. Bulgakov about Sofia. Decree of the Moscow Patriarchate of September 7, 1935 The editorial board thanks Deacon Andrei Yurchenko, who kindly provided copies of the Definitions in question. In the catalog of Metropolitan Manuel (Lemeshevsky) was named Bishop of Ulyanovsk from October 22, 1935 11, II, s. 210–211.