Russian language
Why doesn't 3rm info work? Orthodox parish of the Church of St. Nicholas in the city of Slyudyanka. Position of the Russian Orthodox Church

Why doesn't 3rm info work? Orthodox parish of the Church of St. Nicholas in the city of Slyudyanka. Position of the Russian Orthodox Church

Moscow – the Third Rome? Representatives of the clergy and public figures at the exhibition-forum “Orthodox Rus'”.

The conference was opened by Archimandrite Tikhon, he thanked all those present for their interest in the conference, as well as in the exhibition-forum “Orthodox Rus'. My history. Rurikovich". Archimandrite Tikhon gave the floor to the presenter of the conference, Konstantin Malofeev, who noted the importance of the already traditional combination of the exhibition and the historical conference:

“Last year it was the conference “Triumph and Collapse of the Empire: Lessons from History,” this year the theme of the conference was the well-known philosophical concept “Moscow - the Third Rome.”

The conference was attended by leading Russian scientists, public figures, politicians, and representatives of the clergy:

Archimandrite Tikhon (Shevkunov), executive secretary of the Patriarchal Council for Culture

Konstantin Malofeev, founder of the St. Basil the Great Foundation

Natalia Narochnitskaya, Doctor of Historical Sciences, President of the Historical Perspective Foundation

Leonid Reshetnikov, Ph.D., Director Russian Institute Strategic Studies

Sergey Karpov, Doctor of Historical Sciences, Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Dean of the Faculty of History of Moscow State University named after M.V. Lomonosov

Dmitry Volodikhin, Doctor of History, Professor, Faculty of History, Moscow State University named after M.V. Lomonosov, writer

Yuri Petrov, Doctor of Historical Sciences, Director of the Institute Russian history RAS

Alexander Dugin, Ph.D., Ph.D., philosopher, political scientist, sociologist.

Natalya Narochnitskaya: Moscow – Third Rome. ABOUT reflection in Russian social thought. Myths and interpretations

Natalya Narochnitskaya noted the tendency of the modern West to deliberately use the concept of “Moscow - the Third Rome” as the ideological foundations of Russian imperialism, while the idea “ world empire"belonged not to a secular, political, but to a religious worldview and reflected the search for salvation:

“Understanding the religious content of power as service and zeal for faith, and not just for possession, which in previous times was only the property of individual outstanding statesmen(for example, Andrei Bogolyubsky), during the years of the Mongol yoke received a final interpretation. The Russian people, as A. Kartashev wrote, “in contrast to the Asian darkness that fell upon them Tatar yoke, first pagan and then Muslim (XIII-XV centuries), he immediately realized himself as a bearer of the light of the Christian faith, its defender from infidels, and felt his land as “holy Rus', historically felt himself of age, spiritually grew into a great nation.” So the development of the Muscovite kingdom to the empire is inextricably linked with the concept of service, first of all.

The myth of “philo-feyism” as a program of “Russian and Soviet imperialism” still reflects the poster image of Russia in liberal-Western literature. K.S. Gadzhiev, in a voluminous book that claims to be a modern large-scale overview of political and state doctrines, repeats the stilted cliché that the “Moscow - Third Rome” doctrine served as the basis for the territorial formation of the Russian Empire.

This stamp reflects the ignorance of irreligious historicism in relation to what equally belongs to both Eastern and Western Christianity the teachings about Rome, about the Kingdom - one of the deepest interpretations of the connection between universal spiritual history and earthly history, which does not separate the East and West of the Christian ecumene, but confirms their unity precisely in Christian history.

In the old days, the idea and the whole complex of concepts about a “world empire” belonged not to a secular, political, but to a religious worldview and reflected the search for Salvation. The first writings and interpretation of the visions of the prophet Daniel and his interpretations of the dream of King Nebuchadnezzar about four kingdoms, the last of which is the kingdom of Antichrist, the first beginnings of the teaching about Rome as the kingdom of Christian Truth are permeated not with the idea of world domination or triumph, or superiority, but of salvation and belong to the category eschatological literature.

A. Kartashev explains how, in the eschatological consciousness of Christians, “the Roman Empire becomes the frame, vessel, armor and shell of the eternal kingdom of Christ and therefore itself acquires some symbolic resemblance to this eternity in history.”

Rome has become an allegory of the mystical center, the stronghold of the world-historical struggle between good and evil, on the survival of which the end of the world depends. Tarnovo was called Rome in the Bulgarian chronicles, Chretien de Troyes called France Rome, Toledo became Rome and the imperial city in the mouth of Tirso de Molina.

Peru N.V. Sinitsyna belongs to the most basic research teachings about the Third Rome and its place in the understanding of the mystical and historical role of Orthodox statehood. The author notes that the literary skill of the learned monk, expressed not only in a witty conceptual discovery, but also in the laconism and aphorism of the method of expression, did him a disservice and became a formula with arbitrarily interpreted content, giving rise to various, unduly broad interpretations, a kind of ideological meditation.

Journalism returns anew to the image of the Third Rome, investing in it imperial or messianistic, universalistic or ethnocentric, panegyric or minor content. When we turn to the origins, we just need to understand that “medieval thinking and historical reality itself were fundamentally different.”

Further, Natalya Narochnitskaya noted that the doctrine of the Third Rome, voiced at the beginning of the 16th century by the monk of the Pskov Spaso-Eleazarovsky Monastery Philotheus, never had the overtones of world domination and generally cannot be interpreted as a call for domination over any territory:

“In the doctrine of the Third Rome, which fits in 10-15 lines, there is not a word about world hegemony or moral encouragement for the territorial expansion of Moscow. Moreover, the text itself does not contain the formula “Moscow is the Third Rome”.

As for the Russian concept of the Third Rome, first formulated in 1523-1524 in works of the epistolary genre, it was set out in an official document of 1589 in the Charter of the Moscow Consecrated Cathedral with the participation of the Patriarch of Constantinople Jeremiah and the Greek clergy, when the Moscow Patriarchate was established.

There, the “Third Rome” was not even called Moscow, but “ Great Russia"in general - the kingdom. This indicates the connection between the concept and events church history, about the inseparability of the destinies of the “priesthood” and the “kingdom”, about a purely religious understanding of this paradigm.

Western historiography, having become acquainted with the concept itself in Russian journalism of the 19th century, begins after Russian-Turkish War 1877-1878 to assert that after the collapse of Byzantium, Russia lays claim to its role and dominance on its territory.

However, for medieval thinkers to reduce the concept of Rome to Byzantium would be dangerous and ambiguous, and would mean repeating its sad fate. Philotheus himself evokes the specter of not only the Second, but the First Rome, and is not satisfied with the ideas of Metropolitan Zosima, who called Moscow “the new city of Constantine.” Thus, the historical and spiritual retrospective and perspective are clearly expanded and deepened; national consciousness is not confined to the image of Byzantine-centrism and involves the European and Eastern Mediterranean geographical and Christian time space into its paradigm.

Philotheus’s only pride is the righteousness of his faith, however, such a feeling is characteristic of any solid value system: it becomes odious only when it is accompanied by preaching the violent spread and arrogant subjugation of others. But Philotheus does not have this at all, while in the West the idea of Rome, already several centuries earlier, unambiguously justified the desire for a geographically worldwide empire. On the contrary, as if foreseeing future accusations of “imperialism,” the elder warns the prince against the temptations of earthly glory and acquisitions.

Finally, it is necessary to provide another very convincing proof of the absolute absence of any proclamation of state ideology in Philotheus’s teaching. In one of the few versions of the message recognized by researchers, several lines about the Third Rome are only part of the text entitled “Message to the Grand Duke Vasily, in it about the correction of the sign of the cross and about the fornication of Sodom.”

The purpose of the appeal was not a call for world domination, but for the organization of internal church affairs and the maintenance of Christian morality. The tirade about Rome is given only at the end only to say: “For this reason it is fitting for you, O king, to maintain your kingdom with the fear of God.”

Many of today’s authors, neophyte “fundamentalists”, from opposite motives, based on the established unfounded opinion about the widespread dissemination of this prophecy in Rus', glorify this teaching as a “minted formula”, as a doctrine-proclamation, which allegedly became a real concept of state building, consciously implemented kings. In fact, this did not happen either for the simple reason that the message was unknown practically until the 19th century and there is no evidence that the Russian tsars knew about it or somehow responded to it.

The name of Philotheus became known to a wide circle of historians and thinkers in 1846 in volume I of the “Additions to the Historical Acts”, where Philotheus’s message to clerk Munekhin-Misyur was printed; the rest of his writings began to appear in the late 50s and 60s of the 19th century in "Orthodox Interlocutor".

The negative attitude of the West towards Russia, according to Natalya Narochnitskaya, is caused by jealousy - Europe could not survive the power of Rus':

“After the conquest and destruction of Constantinople, the Turks hung over Europe like a black cloud. Then the idea of a new one even arose crusade. At the same time, the expansion of Muscovy took place, which Western Europe prompted a certain jealous attitude. After the Mongol invasion, Rus' expanded and became powerful so quickly that Europe could not survive it. It is from then that the vilification of Russia as an aggressor begins.

A phenomenon of enormous significance that changed the entire international situation in Europe was the growth of Russian power in the 17th-18th centuries. Russia had by this time turned into a huge empire, stretching from Baltic Sea to the Pacific Ocean,

K. Marx, who did not favor Russia, wrote: “The astonished Europe, which at the beginning of Ivan’s reign barely knew about the existence of Muscovy, squeezed between the Tatars and Lithuanians, was stunned by the sudden appearance of a huge empire on its eastern borders, and Sultan Bayezid himself, before whom Europe was in awe , for the first time I heard Moskovit’s arrogant speech..."

AND new round The difficult relationship that exists today between Russia and the West is caused, according to Natalya Narochnitskaya, by the fact that “we are becoming stronger spiritually, more independent, we amaze the world with our independence in choosing a path. Despite the fact that the West built its paradise on earth, it never freed itself from the fear of uncertainty about the independence and strength of Russia. And as Pushkin said: “Europe in relation to Russia is as ignorant as it is ungrateful.”

Academician Sergey Karpov:"The Idea of Empire: from Byzantium to Rus'."

Sergei Karpov noted that the word “empire” is often profaned today:

“Where and when was the concept of empire formulated? The answer is obvious - this was done by the Roman Empire and its direct continuation - Byzantium. It was there, during the time of Justinian, that the basic principles of understanding what an empire was were laid down.

There are three constants about the nature and essence of imperial power: the doctrine of the divine nature of this power, its universality and universal character, and the legal principle of this power.

The source of the emperor’s power is the people - “whatever the principle pleases has the force of law, since it was the people who, through the Lex regia, which gives supreme power, communicated to him their supreme power and strength.” The word “imperium”, which originally meant “power, command”, gradually acquires the meaning of “sovereignty”, and in this meaning it is accepted by other peoples and, above all, by Russia.”

“In Byzantine legislation there is the concept of a “republic” - a common cause that does not contradict the empire, and the sovereign is thought of as a champion of the common cause as opposed to private interests. The rights of the sovereign are the rights of the trustee. There was an idea of deification through mimesis, through the imitation of God in the image of an ideal sovereign. The sovereign was depicted with a halo as a saint, but this sovereign one day washed the feet of the last beggar in imitation of Christ, as a sign of humility.

God was revered as a Pantocrator, and the Emperor as a Cosmocrator. The sovereign is the executor of God's providence. The emperor is not subject to the law, because he himself is the law. But at the same time, the emperor has restrictions that force him to honor the laws of his ancestors through the principle of economy.

The Byzantine system of power is primarily universalism. Any territorial losses are either temporary or given for sins. The power of the sovereign is power on a universal scale.

Another important postulate is the inextricable connection between the empire and the Church. The patriarch and the sovereign have a symphony, a consonance of power.

Also, empire is always associated with a missionary character. Missionary is not only preaching in foreign lands, but when the state itself conveys the truth of its faith and its system to others.

Moreover, Byzantium is a rule of law state, since the emperor was always elected.

The main difference between Byzantium was its connection with law, morality and ethics. It was the transfer of this connection of law-morality-morality-missionary work from Byzantium to Rus' that became the replacement of the disparate system that existed before Ivan III, with a system that became possible and strengthening different peoples under one scepter."

: “Russia – a state or a civilization?”

As a practitioner and analyst current situation, Leonid Reshetnikov expressed bewilderment that Russia does not think of itself as a separate civilization, while this is precisely what irritates and frightens the West today:

“When we talk about the postulate of the monk Philotheus, we do not fully understand that we are talking not about the state, but about civilization. We are not just an empire of the spirit. We are an alternative to the Western civilization that has already taken shape. And ours Russian empire was also an alternative Eastern Orthodox civilization. That is why we, then and today, cause irritation and a sense of danger in the West, because we are not just a large, powerful, strong, strong state, but an independent civilization.

We are different, we do everything differently. Already with the Rurikovichs, we began to be seen as something different, and not just as a state that was gaining strength. We often say about Alexander Nevsky that he chose the West or the East, but it was a God-sent choice, he had to preserve civilization, not the state. That’s why I wasn’t afraid of the horde or dependence, since the task was not just to preserve the faith, but our Orthodox civilization.

I had the opportunity to work in the Balkans for half my life, and I often thought about that incomprehensible love when I came to some village and the old people kissed hands and cried just because I was Russian.

Unfortunately, we underestimate this mysterious and sacred connection, when the Bulgarians, Serbs, and Greeks always looked to the East, to Russia. After all, at one time all these countries - Serbia, Bulgaria, Greece and others - were part of the Byzantine civilization, and all these peoples are still drawn to it.”

Leonid Reshetnikov called on Russia to return to the idea of civilization as the mission of the Russian people:

“Russia is faced with the task of returning to a civilizational approach, to understand that we long ago resolved the dispute between East and West, and long ago became a separate civilization. From God, the mission from Byzantium to us was precisely a civilizational one.”

Speech on the topic “The Moscow – Third Rome Theory”; historiographic tradition" was presented by Yuri Petrov, he wished everyone present to continue studying history and take part in conferences:

“If we want to further learn the history of our country on the basis of scientific, reliable research, then of course we must expand the circle of researchers. We must ensure that the historiographical tradition does not lose its historiographical perspective.”

Dmitry Volodikhin: “Monasticism of Muscovite Rus' and the birth of the idea of the Third Rome”

Dmitry Volodikhin noted the decisive role of Moscow monasticism in the formation of the idea of “Moscow – the Third Rome”:

“In the 16th century, the Russian kingdom developed three major historiosophical ideas: Moscow as the Third Rome, Moscow as the Second Jerusalem, Moscow as the Destiny of the Most Pure One. All these concepts belong to the creativity of one intellectual environment, namely the Moscow monasticism.

It is a well-known fact that the idea of Moscow as the Third Rome was expressed by the monk of the Pskov Spaso-Eleazarovsky Monastery Philotheus. The words expressed by the monk Philotheus were apprehension - Rus' had acquired the role of a pillar of Eastern Christianity, a force that should save Orthodoxy from complete destruction and death. And Philotheus is afraid - what kind of piety should be in order to fulfill such a significant role, to correspond to it. It didn't go any further.

But subsequently, many decades later, it was the Moscow monasticism that managed to give this idea a different sound - political. This happened already under Fyodor Ioannovich, namely in documents related to the approval of the Moscow patriarchal see. It was there that the idea of “Moscow – the Third Rome” sounded like something belonging, if not to politics, then to ideology. This is the work of the metropolitan court, of Moscow monasticism.

When did this intellectual layer appear in Rus'? Moscow did not have this monastic tradition for a long time; southern Rus' developed it in the 11th-12th centuries, then it appeared on Pskov land, Novgorod land, then the Vladimir-Suzdal land acquired it in the 12th-13th centuries. And Moscow Rus' acquired this monastic tradition in the middle of the second half of the 14th century.

To a large extent, the birth of the monastic tradition is associated with the activities of two monastic figures: St. Alexis, Metropolitan of Moscow and St. Sergius of Radonezh. Under Alexy, the Chudov Monastery appeared - the intellectual center of Moscow monasticism. His comrades-in-arms dispersed from St. Sergius like rays, founding new monasteries. At the same time, Moscow was decorated with a huge number of new monasteries - Spassky, Simonov and others.

It was the Moscow monasticism that gave the Russian state the opportunity to think of itself in such lofty, theologically substantiated, historically grounded categories as the Third Rome, the Second Jerusalem, the Destiny of the Most Pure One.”

Alexander Dugin: “The Third Rome as a national idea”

“We were honored to become an empire in the 16th century. The anointing of Ivan IV to the throne and the Council of the Hundred Heads in 1551 were the entry into the rights of the empire. The emperor is not just an earthly ruler, he is an eschatological figure who prevents the coming of the Antichrist. What does the word “Christ” mean – the anointed one, but the royal anointed one. Accordingly, the king, the emperor is God’s anointed, hence the identity with Christ. Hence the doctrine of the sacred nature of the emperor and the empire - it is a sacred mission.

At the end Byzantine Empire When theology and ascetic practice flourish, eschatological events begin. After the end of Byzantium and the fall of Constantinople, the apostasy period begins. People find themselves in new ontological conditions. The only line that preserves the experience of connection with Christ remains the monastic ascetic tradition.

Constantinople fell, and Moscow rose, and the prince fulfills the function Byzantine Emperor. Moscow takes on the mission of being an empire, the status of the Moscow prince changes to the status of an emperor. And a new Russian imperial ontology begins. The peak of the Rurikovich mission is the 16th century, the hundred-domed cathedral of 1551 and the anointing of Ivan IV to the throne. From now on, we are an empire.

Further - Time of Troubles, the election of the Romanovs, after 1917 the last indication of the empire collapses, and now between us and Christ stands an empire that does not exist. Today we are again connected by only one line - the ascetic monastic tradition. And we need to go to the empire in order to go to Christ, this is our Orthodox Russian duty.”

After the conference, all those present were invited to a tour of the exhibition-forum “Orthodox Rus'. My history. Rurikovich".

Video: Victor Aromshtam

Answers to questions from visitors to the Missionary-Apologetics Project “Towards the Truth”...

***

456. Hello Maxim Valerievich.

Today I read an article on 3rm.info under the following heading: “Patriarchs Bartholomew, Cyril and Metropolitan Hilarion, the worst heretics in the Universe.” There are also a lot of links, photos and videos about the tender love of our hierarchy with heretics and masons.

I would like to know your opinion: about the “Moscow-Third-Rome” website, about the material presented there, about the upcoming Pan-Orthodox Council (8th?!). And also get good advice from you on how to live in our apostasy time? How to not remain silent so as not to betray God? In order not to fall away from the Mother Church? Best regards, Dimitri. Save us, Lord Jesus Christ!

08.02.2016.
"Be careful - the temptation of pseudo-Orthodoxy"
- a section devoted to the problem of pseudo-Orthodox teachings, superstitions, schism and young age... With hope for our salvation,
Maxim Stepanenko,
employee

Missionary Department

Tomsk Diocese of the Russian Orthodox Church

Dear friends! Very often, unfortunately, I see in my feed that many of my Internet friends share links to publications of a certain site “Moscow - 3 Rome,” which positions itself as an Orthodox Internet resource. modern language- double standard) against the backdrop of the fact that the authors themselves in their publications sow this very split, teach “analysis” of information in such a way that there is a negative attitude towards our Patriarch and the hierarchy:

If you carefully consider the publications of the sections “Patriarch”, “Orthodoxy”, “Heresies”, “Ecumenism”, and especially the section “Prophecies” on this site:

then we will see that the authors of the site promote schismatic sentiments, disrespect and disobedience to the hierarchy, openly call His Holiness Patriarch Kirill an ecumenist and a heretic (and not only him!), publish very dubious “prophecies” attributed to many famous elders and fathers of the Church (St. Seraphim of Sarov, Saint Ignatius Brianchaninov and many others), and also actively promote the “prophecies and teachings” of a certain Athonite monk Father Raphael (Berestov) - about whom Archimandrite Tikhon Shevkunov in his book “Unholy Saints” clearly indicated that Father Raphael mental health problems (over the years, as we see, have grown into spiritual delusion and young age (or pseudo-old age... which is essentially the same thing), as well as various pseudo-predictions of a dubious nature (both in content and in terms of the attributed authorship) from Pelagia Ryazan, Lavrenty Chernigovsky and many others..

We will also see on this site actively ongoing work to disseminate such false trends in our Church as uranopolitizm, tsarebozhie, anti-INN, etc....

The newspaper “Orthodox Cross” is also distributed among parishes.

As I thought, these are the so-called “true Orthodox catacomb church named after St. Tikhon, Patriarch-Confessor”... in a word - schismatics... Tsar-worshippers, Ouranopolitans, anti-INN and so on - so on - so on... Just see how they water there “filthy ecumenists” are the mud of our entire hierarchy! It’s even strange that parishioners stubbornly ignore this - how in this newspaper they pour dirt on the Patriarch! Remember: “not everything that is called “cross” and “church” is Orthodoxy!” You need to work more actively in the direction of exposing impostors! The website of this pseudo-Orthodox newspaper itself: www.pkrest.ru.

In such cases, it is immediately clear that if there is even a word against the official line of the Church, then you need to immediately look at the source! - in the source materials of this newspaper (if I may say so) - there is not a single word about a blessing from the clergy, all editorial staff are laymen... materials are selected mainly from the most popular publications about the new martyrs and confessors of Russia... more or less Orthodox articles signed by priests - we need to figure out what kind of priest he is, from what parish, etc…. does he have the blessing of his bishop to cooperate with an incomprehensible publication... next to the materials about fasting (I only looked at the issue of April 7, 2014 today) - there is also material about “the ecumenical activities of Metropolitan Hilarion and the falsity of the coming pan-Orthodox council.” That was enough for me... the most active in this direction are precisely the TOC of the false patriarch Raphael, which means the newspaper - at a minimum - cooperates with them.. at a maximum - it is their printed and electronic organ, a “wolf in sheep’s clothing”, hiding behind the Orthodox. materials in order to sneak into the Church and sow confusion and schism through lies..

Dear friends! I earnestly ask you: do not visit these very dubious sites, do not distribute dubious newspapers! If we already see a discrepancy at the very beginning: positioning itself as belonging to the Russian Orthodox Church MP and warning about the inadmissibility of schism and heresy, but at the same time in publications they spread the exact opposite of these statements - then this alone already puts the authors of the site and newspaper in doubt about their belonging to our Mother Russian Church!

The website “Moscow - 3 Rome” and the newspaper “Orthodox Cross” are UNORTHODOX resources, they are wolves in sheep’s clothing!

Be vigilant and careful in choosing your sources of information! Remember the words Holy Scripture: “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves.” (Matt. 7:15). Remember, my dears, that the enemy of God - Satan - uses many ways to deceive people and lead them away from God: “Beware, this will be done so cunningly that many will be deceived” (Matthew 24:4-5)…

There are many quotes from the Holy Scriptures that could be cited to warn us against such false teachers, false prophets, wolves in sheep's clothing! I urge everyone to be more attentive and selective in sources of information (especially Internet sources), because Satan does not sleep and is looking for how to deceive and how to destroy the human soul, leading it astray from the path of salvation into the jungle of schism and false teachings!

Icon “Moscow – Third Rome”

Description of the Icon.

This icon is a symbolic image of the city of Moscow, the Russian Kingdom itself as the Third Rome, the heir of Byzantium - the Second Rome. Since the content of the iconographic image is strictly limited to purely spiritual images and themes, this icon reflects only events related to the spiritual mission of the Third Rome: the preservation of Orthodoxy and the Throne of the Holder - the Orthodox Emperor, Tsar.

First Rome, "eternal" capital city the most powerful empire in world history, in the formation and rise of which a special Providence of God is seen.

Byzantium became its not only political, but also spiritual successor. Equal to the Apostles Constantine, who moved the capital of the Empire to Byzantium, was the first of the Roman Emperors to set an example of its service to Orthodoxy and the personal participation of the Tsar in Church affairs.

The history of the First Rome is specially marked by a miraculous appearance in the sky before Him, those who had not yet believed in Christ, and His army of the Cross (in the icon this phenomenon is shown at the bottom left above Rome itself).

The church historian Eusebius describes this miraculous phenomenon as follows: “Diligently offering up his prayers and petitions (to God that He would enlighten him about Himself and turn him from error to the light of truth), the King received the most amazing sign sent from God, so that It would not be easy to believe if someone else spoke. Once, at midday, when the Sun began to bow to the west, the Tsar said, I saw with my own eyes the sign of the Cross made of light and playing on the Sun, with the inscription: “By this conquer.” This sight filled with horror both Himself and the entire army, which itself, not knowing where, followed Him and continued to contemplate the miracle that had appeared.”

Once, already founding Constantinople, New Rome, Equal-to-the-Apostles Constantine clearly expressed the consistency of his plans with God’s will. It happened like this. The Emperor decided to show the boundaries of the future Royal City, outlining them with his spear. He did this while sitting on horseback, and to those close to Him, these boundaries seemed too long. To their bewilderment, the Emperor replied: “I will go until He who walks ahead of Me stops” (the icon shows Equal-to-the-Apostles Constantine on a horse with a spear lowered to the ground and leaving a mark on the ground; below are the fortress walls of the future Constantinople).

For a whole millennium, the Second Rome, led by the Anointed of God, occupied a leading place in the strengthening and preservation of the Orthodox Faith (the icon below right shows the First Ecumenical Council). However, he did not always remain faithful to Orthodoxy, its spiritual and moral ideals, which led to his inevitable death.

The fall of Constantinople was preceded by many omens. The most striking of them seems to be the phenomenon of fire and light emanating from the dome of Sophia (the icon shows the Hagia Sophia Cathedral, from the windows of which flames are bursting out, and light is coming out from the top of the dome).

The Byzantine historian describes it as follows: “On the 21st day of May, for our sins, there was a terrible sign in the city: at night the whole city was illuminated... Many people came running and saw: at the great Church of the Wisdom of God, from the windows of the dome, a great fiery flame came out and surrounded for a long time domed neck, and the flames gathered and united into one, and it was like an indescribable light, and it was taken up into heaven... When the light reached heaven, the doors of Heaven opened and, having received the light, they closed again.”

The Patriarch said to the Tsar: “This is that ineffable light that acted together in the great Church of God’s Wisdom with the former lamps and the universal bishops. Behold, the Angel of God, whom God established under Justinian the King for the preservation of the Holy Great Church and the entire city, departed that night into heaven; and this signifies that the mercy of God and His bounties have departed from us...”

Appearance of the Tikhvin Icon of the Mother of God in northern lands Rus' is also seen as one of these omens (the icon shows an Angel carrying this image and the phenomenon itself from Constantinople).

After the fall of Constantinople, the spiritual mission of the Second Rome was assumed by the Orthodox Church. Moscow State. We can say that the outward expression of this was the expulsion by Grand Duke Vasily the Dark of Metropolitan Isidore, who accepted the Union of Florence (in the center of the icon, above the radiance emanating from the dome of Sophia of Constantinople, is shown Grand Duke Vasily, ordering the imprisonment of Metropolitan Isidore, who arrived from the Florence Cathedral, in the cell of the Chudov Monastery).

A little later (1523), the Venerable Philotheus, an elder of the Pskov Eleazar Monastery, wrote a message to the Grand Duke of Moscow Vasily III, in which it was written: “Two Romes have fallen, the Third stands, but the fourth will not exist” (these words are in the inscription on the scroll on the icon , which is held by Angels under the image of the Lord Jesus Christ, called the “King of Kings”).

Exceptional importance in the matter of preserving Orthodoxy is given to the activities of the Russian Sovereigns (in the center of the icon the Holy Tsar Ivan the Terrible is shown on the throne, leading a debate about the Faith with the Jesuit sent to him). By the grace of God, none of our Great Princes and Kings ever leaned towards any heresy or Church schism.

The main enemies of Orthodox Rus' for many centuries were the Jews, in the East - the Hagarians, in the West - the Latins. But the most dangerous of them, to this day, are still the same Jews (the icon on the right shows St. Gennady of Novgorod, punishing the Judaizers condemned by the Moscow Council (1490), who, with his blessing, were led throughout Novgorod on horses (donkeys) face to tail in birch bark pointed helmets and in turned inside out dresses; in the hands of the saint there is a scroll with the inscription “Behold the army of Satan”, this inscription was applied to their birch bark helmets).

The very concept of “Jews” is supranational, since it expresses all Christ-haters who fight against our Lord Jesus Christ and His Church. For example, in the time of St. Gennady, the Jew Skaria was a Jew, and those who accepted his false teaching were Slavs, but this did not prevent them from becoming Jewish fighters for Christ. And their heresy received its name “the heresy of the Judaizers.”

Other enemies who attacked the western Russian lands, the Latins, began to be crushed by the Holy Blessed Prince Alexander Nevsky (shown on the icon on the left Battle on the Ice), and the Holy Tsar Ivan the Terrible waged wars with them, which went down in history under the name “Livonian” (this is reflected in the icon above the Battle of the Ice).

During the most difficult period of the Time of Troubles, the messages of St. Hermogenes, sent to different cities, played a decisive role in eliminating Latin aggression. In these messages, the Russian people were called upon to stand up for the defense of the Orthodox Fatherland (the icon depicts the moment of the transmission of one of these messages).

On the eastern borders of Rus', constant attacks from the Islamists were eliminated by the capture of Kazan (the capture of Kazan is shown in images of two related events: the siege of this city by Russian troops and the installation of the Orthodox Cross in it after their victory by the Holy Tsar Ivan the Terrible).

This final victory over the remnants of the Horde was preceded by the Battle of Kulikovo. Russian army under the command of Tsar John Vasilyevich, it marched to Kazan under a banner that overshadowed the army of the Blessed Prince Dmitry Donskoy (near Novgorod, the icon shows the Trinity Monastery and St. Sergius of Radonezh blessing the Holy Prince Dmitry Donskoy for this feat of arms).

In our time, Russia has two main enemies: the Vatican, which imposes a union on the Russian Orthodox Church in various ways (in the icon the Pope is shown sitting on his throne, the foot of which is buried in the abyss of hell, and the feet of the Pope himself, as his faithful servant, are embraced by an unclean spirit; the Pope turns away their face from the people of God - the Orthodox people, united by the power of the Orthodox Tsar) and the Zionists, who are building a new world order throughout the planet, convenient for the reign of the Antichrist (currently their power is concentrated in America, and on the icon this is symbolically represented in the form of a building with American flag)

Since ancient times, Orthodox iconography contained an apocalyptic plot called “Angels Capturing the Faithful,” and in one book miniature from the 16th century. this plot is depicted with the Orthodox Tsar in the center. Such iconography perfectly demonstrates the culmination of events at the end of world history, when, according to many prophecies, the last Tsar will rule in Russia, who will lead the Orthodox Russian people, this camp of saints and the beloved city in the immediate pre-Antichrist and Antichrist days” (Rev. 20, 8) , to battle with the apocalyptic beast-antichrist.

“I apologize, but I don’t really understand the tragedy of this particular moment.
What was better than the policy of justification that lasted all this time?
cooperation of the MP with the atheistic regime and betrayal
New Martyrs? What was better speech Patriarch Alexy II at a meeting with
rabbis in New York in 1991 about belief in “one God - the Father of all...
your prophets are our prophets"? What was better about recognition of joint
Catholic sacraments? Why is everyone freaking out now because of the photo?
political meeting of two church leaders?Mikhail Viktorovich Nazarov

* * *

"Revolutionaries on the right" and church conservatives.

The website “Moscow the Third Rome” as a propagandist of church schism...

Passions continue to simmer over the meeting of His Holiness Patriarch Kirill and Pope Francis at Havana airport. I proposed my interpretation of these events on the Russian People's Line, for which I was subjected to fierce criticism from the zealots on the RNL forum. The discussion under the article continues to this day, but it is gratifying that most of my critics say that they do not intend to go into schism. This means there is still space for dialogue. However, this is the position of only a part of the zealots, those found on the RNL forum. The situation is completely different on the flagship site of Zealotism “Moscow the Third Rome” (MTR), which I had to look at the other day using the links sent to me. What's going on there, my God?! There is already open propaganda of a real church schism! The spirit of sectarianism, which was previously characteristic of the MTP site, has reached its apogee.

It seems that some forces decided to use the meeting in Havana and the upcoming Pan-Orthodox Council as a reason to incite church unrest. Unfortunately, some sincere people are also included in this campaign. I notice this not only from the RNL forum, but also from the “intelligible and accusatory letters” that come to the editor and to my email address. Everything indicates the flaring up of turmoil. One of these letters from the Honored Artist of the Russian Federation Galina Simonova was published by the MTR website I have already mentioned. Several people sent me a link to this publication, which indicates attention to this topic. I received a letter from Ms. Simonova earlier via personal email, but did not have time to respond. Now that the author has made it “open”, we will have to answer publicly, although we personally, as far as I remember, are not acquainted. Galina Nikolaevna Shchepetnova (Simonova) is known in the church community, along with another Galina, director Galina Ivanovna Tsareva, since the time of “Diomidov’s epic " - as an active participant in the modern "Zealot movement", although she is better known to the general public as an actress and the wife of a member of the Moscow Helsinki Group, President of the Glasnost Defense Foundation Alexei Simonov (by the way, the Foundation, as I was informed, is recognized as a "non-profit organization performing the functions of a foreign agent "). From the first sentence of her letter to me, Galina Nikolaevna immediately “takes the bull by the horns” and begins to shame me that I “sold myself for thirty pieces of silver.” I am surprised at the primitive way of thinking of our zealots. They are completely incapable of perceiving the arguments of another person - they immediately make assumptions that the motive for his speech is corruption. Where does such morbid suspicion come from?! I can assume that this is a consequence of the “spirit of chosenness” that reigns among them. As for the substance of the arguments in Ms. Simonova’s letter, it is difficult to argue with her. The letter from a woman is very emotional and completely meaningless, so there is nothing to object to. Well, there is no arguing with the quotes of the Holy Fathers about Catholicism and the Vatican, they are absolutely correct, but it is not clear what relation they have to the Havana meeting, unless, of course, you decide in advance that in Havana “the Patriarch betrayed Orthodoxy.” Although, against the background of other letters, I would like to note that the message from G.N. Simonova is even distinguished by some peacefulness, especially in its final part.

Galina Simonova invites me to familiarize myself with the works of priest Dmitry Nenarokov, so that I know the position of those who stand “for the Russian Orthodox faith.” Dear Galina Nikolaevna, I don’t need to read the articles of the supernumerary clergy of the Moscow diocese, Fr. Dmitry Nenarokov, in order to understand those who stand “for the Russian Orthodox faith,” I personally know such bishops and priests, thank God. I am not personally acquainted with this same priest, although I have already seen his publications, since they are actively distributed online by your like-minded people. I concluded that Father Dmitry is a very active and ardent person, but there is no reason to recognize him as a spiritual authority. And for some reason I don’t remember him in the field of jealousy for the purity of the Orthodox faith in former times, which does not add confidence to his figure.

But I know such a true zealot of Orthodoxy as the abbot of the Sretensky Monastery, Bishop Tikhon (Shevkunov). And he holds a different opinion, and the position of the Lord is much more authoritative for me than the position of the newly minted zealots. Bishop Tikhon, in an interview with RIA Novosti, formulated the most important methodological basis for understanding the Joint Statement of the Russian Patriarch and the Pope signed in Havana. Bishop Tikhon says: “There is nothing better than peace. We are called to this and are sincerely ready for this. And it is precisely this path that His Holiness Patriarch Kirill follows. What about unification?<…>it is, of course, possible, but not at the expense of the truth, not at the expense of compromises in matters of our faith and confession of Orthodoxy. Therefore, as far as church unification is concerned, this question is not even raised.” Listen, gentlemen zealots! The question of unification with Catholics is not even raised!

Or listen to the assessment of the meeting in Havana by one of the most authoritative modern Orthodox elders Archpriest John Mironov, with whom I specially met last Saturday. Father John directly called everyone who attacks the Patriarch slanderers. You should listen, gentlemen zealots! It's about you! And this is not said by some ordinary cleric, even an outstanding publicist. This is said by a man who has been standing at the Throne of God for several decades. Who has seen in his lifetime things that many zealots never dreamed of. Who is the spiritual father of dozens (if not hundreds) of clergy of the Russian Orthodox Church, a huge number of laity. During the priest’s service in the Church of the Icon of the Mother of God “The Inexhaustible Chalice,” “there is nowhere for an apple to fall.”

The position of another genuine elder, Archpriest Valerian Krechetov, is important to me. And he, according to the testimony of his spiritual child, from whom I personally heard this, urged not to whip up hysteria. By the way, the priest expressed a very wise thought regarding the Pan-Orthodox Council in Crete: the status of the Council is assimilated by the ecclesiastical fullness of the assembly of bishops only after the fact. Therefore, now people who are completely illiterate and do not understand what they are talking about can make noise that the Eighth Ecumenical Council will be held in Crete.

I would advise all critics of the Patriarch to listen carefully to the brief speech of one of the authoritative modern confessors, Hieromonk Methodius (Zinkovsky), who was not afraid to expose some of those “who sit on Mount Athos” in unchurch thinking.

Meanwhile, Galina Simonova’s letter, published by the MTP website (in general, quite peaceful, as I already noted), is equipped with a completely boorish and deceitful preface by the editors. Presumably, the authorship of the site’s creator and editor-in-chief, Alexei Dobychin, who, however, for some reason always hides his authorship of the materials on this radical site, as well as the fact that he edits it. Apparently, he wants to pass all this off as “the creativity of the church people.” Mr. Dobychin openly and shamelessly lies, claiming that the “Russian People’s Line” was created and supported “on the initiative and with the money of the enemies of Rus' and Orthodox faith" That he personally knows “most of the leaders and curators of these projects.” I really am familiar with Mr. Dobychin, but very roughly, one might say “not at all”, but it would be interesting for me to see the curators of the “Russian People’s Line” invented by him with my own eyes. But it’s unlikely to succeed, since this is the fruit of Mr. Dobychin’s malicious imagination. The editorial preface clearly reveals the sectarian spirit of chosenness. Dobychin, you see, has the task of “bringing God-fighters out into the light of God” (this is about us!). And he does this with the goal of “protecting as many people as possible from the satanic poison of evil and heresy.” Well, the “messiah” appeared at the head of the MTP website! By the way, Dobychin is not ashamed of stealing our publications and passing them off as his own. It’s understandable, a person fights for high goals, why pay attention to such trifles.

I have already written about the position of Orthodox radicals from the MTR website in the article “Russian People's Line” - this is “Moscow - the Third Rome.” The article from five years ago also talked about attacks against RNL miners, so this topic is not new for us. In that article, I noted that the creators of the MTP website are classic impostors. They have nothing to do with the idea of a genuine "Third Rome". It would be more correct to call them “revolutionaries on the right.”

Here is their current main creation - “The apostate Patriarch Kirill entered into a union with Satan. Conversion of the Athonites." This is a real manifesto of split! The Patriarch MTR already puts the word in quotation marks, openly calling His Holiness the Patriarch “a servant of the Antichrist,” saying that now they cannot call him the Russian Patriarch (“The Lord has revealed to us that we can no longer name and recognize the conscious servant of the Antichrist as the Russian Patriarch,” - here so - neither more nor less - the Lord “revealed it to them”). The authors of the appeal call on Orthodox Christians not to go to churches of the Russian Orthodox Church. In this appeal, everything is turned upside down: it is argued, for example, that the joint statement of Patriarch Kirill and the Pope of Rome testifies that His Holiness the Patriarch “signed the union and recognized not only the heretical papal “church”, which has turned into the “church” of the Antichrist, he also recognized the supremacy of the Satanic Jesuit order over Orthodoxy, and recognized the supremacy of the Satanist Francis over the Orthodox Russian people.” Rave? Of course. But the trouble is that for the “revolutionaries on the right” nonsense is reality.

The “conversion of the Athonites” contains an open call for schism; they call believers to go to the catacombs. The position of the archpastors of the Russian Orthodox Church is described directly in the traditions of fantasy literature: they were “either intimidated by blackmail and death, or bewitched or zombified.” Zealots from the MTR website are calling for the gathering of a certain “council of bishops faithful to Orthodoxy,” which should “convict and depose the heretic and apostate, the servant of the Antichrist, Kirill Gundyaev and his followers.” A legitimate question arises: who will make up this “council of the faithful” when all the bishops are declared traitors? This is not stated directly in the appeal, but based on other publications one can guess who they are targeting as candidates for leader. The first is the former Patriarch of Jerusalem Irenaeus (Skopelitis), deposed and defrocked in 2005 (he is promoted as a “true patriarch” and a “true fighter for the faith”). The second is the former Bishop of Rasko-Prizren and Kosovo-Metohija Artemij (Radosavljevic), defrocked in 2010 (it was his portrait that illustrated the first Zealot appeal, signed by a certain “Orthodox Front”). The third is the former Bishop of Anadyr and Chukotka Diomede (Dzyuban), deposed from the priesthood in 2008 (there are already ideas to publish his first address as a manifesto of the current zealots). If we add here schismatics from the ROCOR bishops who rejected Russian church unity and various catacomb structures, we get a real “schismatic international of fighters for the true faith.”

The “Appeal of the Athonites” is signed very pretentiously – “soldiers of Christ and servants of the Sovereign.” Apparently, they already have a “sovereign”, since they are his servants (according to rumors, however, one of the signatories of the appeal is vying for this role). Unfortunately, the “conversion of the Athonites”, among others, is signed with the name of the famous elder schema-monk Raphael (Berestov). When I told Archpriest Ioann Mironov that the name of Father Raphael was under the address, he commented very softly, but accurately: “Father Raphael is a good man.” Indeed, taking advantage of the elder’s kindness and gullibility, the newly-minted zealots are speculating on his name, using his name as a weapon to split the Russian Orthodox Church! When you listen to Father Raphael’s teachings on spiritual topics, you hear the voice of a real elder. When the zealots force the priest to speak on political or church-political topics, he begins to speak “in the language of a poster,” in the language of propaganda from the MTR website.

The authors of the “conversion of the Athonites” draw an analogy between today’s events and the events of a hundred years ago, claiming, “then they betrayed and killed the King of the Earth,” and now, they say, “the King of Heaven is being betrayed.” The phrase is beautiful, but completely empty, although the analogy with the situation in the country and the Church 100 years ago is very appropriate. If only you know what was happening in the country at the beginning of the 20th century, and not try to obscure the meaning of what is happening with propaganda.

When I read this “appeal of the Afonites” on the MTR website, I involuntarily recalled the publications of the organ of Russian monarchists, the newspaper “Russian Banner” on the eve of the 1917 revolution. The once authoritative publication had by that time turned into a marginal anti-Semitic leaflet, with which none of the normal patriots wanted to have anything in common. The newspaper not only discredited healthy conservative forces that were trying to resist the growing liberal-revolutionary sentiments, but also rocked the situation in the country. Unfortunately, some church conservatives and patriots on the eve of the 1917 revolution turned into real “revolutionaries on the right” who, together with revolutionaries on the left, destroyed the Church and the state.

This is very important for us all to understand! After all, even today these extremes converge: the “revolutionaries on the right” - the Dobyns and other “Orthodox front-line soldiers and front-line soldiers” are doing the same thing with the philo-Catholic liberals. Belkovsky can now rejoice: finally, forces have been found in the Russian Orthodox Church that can be his allies in shaking up the situation in Russia. It's important to understand: Dobychin = Belkovsky, because they do the same thing!

And we, church conservatives, need to follow the royal path! Viktor Saulkin wrote well about this in his article “The Tsar’s Way Instead of “Perestroikas” and Revolutions.” This path is difficult, as always, because it is narrow. Therefore, it is important not to stumble and slide into the muddy stream of false jealousy. Why do you need to remain sober and remember the lessons of history?

Jealousy beyond the understanding of the zealots of the early twentieth century, who believed that Tsar Nicholas II was showing weakness, was retreating from right-wing ideals, and therefore he needed to be corrected a little, led to the destruction of the country, to a national catastrophe. It's time to learn lessons from history!