Angel or Devil? Hmm…

Angel or Devil? If you believe me the latter, please, prove with documentation that Leonid Kishkovsky is not the head of the OCA DECR, that SVS did not sign any agreement with Nashotah House, or that Eric Tosi did not say of the Diocese of NY and NJ financial records, “They simply don’t exist”. I’m not going to hold my breath, it’s not healthy. Checkmate to the lot of you.

One of the recurrent themes in the mewling complaints that I get from konvertsy is that people such as me are “whiners”. Indeed? Why? It is because I don’t bow and scrape in front of clerical miscreants? I note that most of them are fanatic devotees of Jonas Paffhausen and resent it when someone points up the lacunae in his public statements. They get particularly incensed when I (and other grounded people) don’t take them (or their idols) seriously. Let me give just two examples… I don’t wish to waste anyone’s time.

I must be a “whiner” when I point up that Jonas Paffhausen said, “Everything has changed”. I see… is that why Lyonyo Kishkovsky remains as the head of the OCA DECR, a post he has held since the days of Feodosy Lazor? That alone torpedoes that statement and renders it not only false, but, also, deliberately misleading. Lyonyo was with him in Moscow when JP claimed that there were only two secretaries and a housecleaner left in Syosset of the old guard. Trust me; I would have loved to be a fly on the wall to have heard Fr Vsevolod’s report to KMG on that statement. (Fr Vsevolod Chaplin and Bishop Mark Golovkov took over major portions of the MP DECR on 31 March 2009. KMG radically trimmed the department; obviously, he does not trust Hilarion Alfeyev.) You see, Lyonyo tried to interfere in the reconciliation talks between the ROCOR and MP in late ‘06… Lyonyo tried to claim that the OCA had a “veto” over former OCA priests in the ROCOR. Fr Vsevolod stuck a rocket up Lyonyo’s backside. He told Lyonyo point-blank that the talks were between the MP and the ROCOR, it was an in-house matter, and, if Lyonyo wanted to be part of the talks… well, let the OCA rejoin the MP, and, then, they could talk about it. Two priests have told me of this and both are reliable men. In short, JP lied in Moscow in front of people who knew that he was lying. I don’t think that that was a wise move. The konvertsy don’t care… their hero can do no wrong… even if he lies barefaced in public.

I must be a “whiner” when I point up that four years of financial records are now missing… “the records simply don’t exist”, according to Eric Tosi… and make the observation that any other organisation would fire the creeps and turn ‘em over to the feds. Therefore, the konvertsy are saying that the destruction of records is piffle to them. I don’t know if I want to know such people, let alone trust them. “Oh, the records are missing; we’ll have to forgive Iggy and Bobby”. THAT is lunacy. THAT is folly. That sort of logic only ends in Creedmoor (NY State mental hospital for the criminally insane on the Island). I have NEVER heard this used as an excuse by any other group. Perhaps, a lawyer can help me… doesn’t a non-profit organisation have a legal responsibility to keep its records up to snuff? You just don’t go around losing four years’ worth of records. Such people are not trustworthy… why is Iggy Burdikoff still the Dean of Upstate NY and why does Bobby K continue to pull down an OCA salary after all this? Or, does pointing this up simply reinforce my standing as a “whiner?”

One could go on, but, I think that is pointless. The OCA under Herman Swaiko was corrupt and creaky. The OCA under Jonas Paffhausen is corrupt and creaky. As Moses from Alaska put it so well, “Looks like the new boss looks just like the old boss”. Let me leave you with a thought. “Why should we applaud if the Metropolitan of the OCA signs an agreement with The Episcopal Church (TEC) after Moscow dropped dialogue with it?” THAT is something to ponder. As of today, Nashotah House is still a seminary of the TEC… you can’t spin this one, konvertsy.

They called the folks in Yekaterinburg “whiners” during the church crisis there in ’99… it seems that events vindicated the “whiners”. By the way, Yekaterinburg got a sterling archpastor, Archbishop Vikenty Morar, because the “whiners” made a stink… thank you “whiners!” Think on that.

So, what does the record say? Hmm… that’s up to you… but, if you wish to call me a devil… SUBSTANTIATE. Prove me wrong… with documentation. I’d love to see the records reappear! Boy, that would be magic!

Barbara-Marie Drezhlo

Tuesday 1 December 2009

Albany NY

Deacon Andrei Kuraev Believes that the New Patriarch Should Lead People to “Fall in Love” With Orthodoxy

Deacon Andrei Kuraev (1963- ), contemporary Russian preacher, theologian, and missionary

Odessa, 17 December 2008 (Interfax):

Deacon Andrei Kuraev, a Professor at the Moscow Spiritual Academy, believes that any future Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia should have a marked aptitude for missionary outreach. “The Moscow Patriarchate needs a patriarch who can make people fall in love with Orthodoxy. He should be able to send a ‘message’ to young people that Orthodoxy is not only a legacy of Russia’s past, but, also a part of its future. He should stress that the ultimate thing is Heaven above us”, Fr Andrei said at a press conference in Odessa. In his opinion, “The propaganda of death in today’s youth culture has too many faces, advocating homosexuality, drugs, and contraceptives, with a casual attitude to abortion. Abortion is viewed as a minor cosmetic surgery to improve the figure”.

“Therefore, we can set only one thing against this kind of ‘thoughtless tsunami’, that is, a world of ‘religious super-values’, through the means of a ‘missionary breakthrough’ in the MP”, Fr Andrei, himself a well-known missionary, believed. “It is too late to preach at our grandmas that abortions are no good and that contraception may cause their children to become migrant workers in Moscow. Consequently, we must convey these ideas to young people”, Fr Andrei said, and added, “I know no one amongst the ranking bishops other than Metropolitan Kirill” who could successfully meet such challenge. “There was nothing unexpected in the election of Metropolitan Kirill as the acting head (of the Church: Interfax). We need a comparatively young and vigorous man in this position”, the Ukrainian website Ekho (Echo) quoted Deacon Andrei as saying.

Interfax-Religion

http://www.interfax-religion.ru/?act=news&div=27925 (in Russian)

Editor’s Note:

Methinks that Deacon Andrei is speaking with a deliberately-forked tongue. Not for nefarious reasons, of course. If one looks at his description, it fits Kirill Gundyaev not at all. Kirill is no missionary, he is a bureaucrat through and through, he is windy, verbose, and rambling, as anyone who has read his speeches comes to realise in very short order. At age 62, he is on the old side for a “young” candidate. Indeed, there is a bishop who meets all of Deacon Andrei’s criteria… that is, Archbishop Vikenty Morar of Yekaterinburg, who is 55, vigorous, a missionary, and a man who cleaned up a corrupt diocese. Kirill is known for his ambition and non-tolerance of opposition. Deacon Andrei is being coy to save his own skin in the short term. By the way… Kirill is not capable of leading people to “fall in love with Orthodoxy”, whereas Vladyki Vikenty has that ability in spades. May the latter be elected and let the former “give speeches, issue ghost-written books, and jet about the world”, as a clerical friend of mine put it. Amen!

The New Patriarch Must Be Known, Respected, and Loved

Konstantin Zatulin (1958- ), Director of the Institute of the CIS and RF Gosduma deputy

This interview with Konstantin Zatulin, the director of the Institute of the CIS and RF Gosduma deputy, was conducted when the Holy Synod of the Moscow Patriarchate held an extraordinary session in Moscow that fixed the date of 27-29 January for the Local Council that shall elect a new patriarch. Therefore, the main issue, amongst others raised in the conversation, the date of the election of a new patriarch, is now resolved, however, it has not lost its relevance. To find out what challenges may face the Church in Russia church during this interregnum between patriarchs, what qualities any future patriarch must possess, and what initial problems shall face him, our Interfax-Religion correspondent, Aleksei Sosedov, asked the following questions of Mr Zatulin.

******

Aleksei Sosedov

Today, in your opinion, is it important to accelerate the process of electing a new Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia, or, is it better not to rush into this?

From the funeral of Patriarch Aleksei in Moscow (all other photographs are of the same event)

Konstantin Zatulin

It goes without saying that most Orthodox believers (both laity and clergy) are still grieving over the loss of His Holiness Patriarch Aleksei II. I am sure that everyone respects the dignity of his office and, of course, they also render respect and honour to this distinguished archpastor based on his personal abilities.

Nevertheless, life goes on, and the Church, now extended greatly by the efforts of its late First Hierarch, and having regained many of the positions in society that it lost in the Revolution, cannot remain without a chief pastor. It must be borne in mind that the Orthodox Church is a powerful instrument if it is wielded by a solid and decent leader. But, if some attempt to use the Church for the purposes of division, then, the Church suffers and, in the broadest sense, society suffers, for the believers, who are citizens as well, suffer. We can see a clear example of this in the Ukraine.

Given the fact that the Moscow Patriarchate is not limited to the borders of the Russian Federation, as its canonical territory extends over the Ukraine, Moldova, and other parts of the former Soviet Union, and, today, it is now reunited with the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, we cannot exclude attempts to influence the election of the new patriarch by foreign governments. Not everyone, of course, would meddle in such an affair, but, I am quite confident that the leadership of the Ukraine shall attempt to do so, playing on well-known questions (the establishment of a “Local Church” independent from Moscow: Interfax). President Yushchenko was not shy in his attempts to force a meeting and agreement between the Patriarchs of Constantinople and Moscow during the recent celebrations of the 1,020^th anniversary of the Baptism of Russia in Kiev! It is clear to everyone that one reason for the deterioration of the health of the patriarch and his sudden death was his most difficult mission to the Ukraine this summer.

I can well imagine that the absence of the First Hierarch of the MP can be used for blackmail purposes, especially concerning the question of the “separation” of the Orthodox Churches in Russia and the Ukraine. Some shall attempt to exert pressure on the Holy Synod, indeed, on the entire MP, to force it to agree to concessions in favour of the “autocephaly” of the Orthodox Church in the Ukraine, to destroy the unity of the historical canonical territory of the Patriarchate of Moscow and all Russia. It seems to me that we cannot disregard this particular danger. In the final analysis, the sooner we elect a new patriarch, the better it shall be for Church unity, for all the faithful, and the clergy. From the start, we know that there are many candidates for the post of Patriarch, and, in my opinion, delaying the date of the Patriarchal election does not give us any benefit. It just complicates the situation and allows time for intrigue and the manoeuvres of those factions that are concerned only for their own ambitions and political agendas, not for the state of the Church.

Aleksei Sosedov

In particular, what qualities do you think a new First Hierarch of the MP should possess?

Konstantin Zatulin

If the Church in Russia today was actually weak and impotent, then, the question of who would be its chief archpastor would be somewhat irrelevant. It would not be an important and critical matter. But, the 18 years of the patriarchate of Aleksei II raised the bar high for all those who would, in future, inherit the patriarchal throne. Certainly, the man we elect to it must be worthy. First of all, he must be known, respected, and loved. He cannot be an unknown figure, pushed suddenly from the depths of the church hierarchy to the top, without being familiar in the broadest sense, not just to the clergy, but, to the laity, indeed, to the entire Orthodox world. Any new patriarch must be able to prove, through his previous service, his organisational ability, his impartiality, his authority, his ability to make fine distinctions, and he should be a skilful diplomat. This last stipulation is particularly important, as the MP is not some local sect huddling in a closeted Penza cave. It is a worldwide church; undoubtedly, this mandates means that any candidate must possess experience. It does not matter how much respect we give a polite and pleasant cleric, if he is not known by anyone except ourselves. Priority should be given to recognised pastors. It is the most important factor.

For centuries, since the Church became an influential actor in society, the election of a new patriarch has encountered different challenges from the political and social milieu. This is a reality to be reckoned with. I would remind you that, at one time, the fear of competition between the secular and spiritual authorities led to the abolition of the patriarchate for some 200 years, during which time it was replaced by the Holy Governing Synod, a governmental department. This trend was furthered, even more, by the Soviet régime, which was, in principle, atheistic in nature. But, even they, at certain times, were forced to acknowledge that they could not carry on without the Church. Specifically, this happened in the most difficult times, during the war.

If we look at the current situation of Russia, our most crying need is to do everything to ensure that the election of a new patriarch is free and that the one selected would be the most worthy and most capable candidate. Those who advocate a pseudo-Byzantine situation, in which a loose and weak cleric, one who is easily to manipulated by them, should be totally excluded in our current relations between the state and the Church. The Church should be respected in its right to choose an archpastor whom it deems the most worthy, capable, and influential, and the secular authority should not fear this, but, rather, give respect to the Church’s decision. I am well aware that this discussion takes place at different levels, and, along with the view that I now espouse, some express the view that a manageable candidate rather than a capable one is better. This view is, in my opinion, extremely dangerous and extremely dated. The problems within the Church and the problems in the larger society are acutely critical and demand a solution. Therefore, we cannot accept any outside interference in the election of our patriarch. The Church must take its rightful place in society and choose the most worthy and capable archpastor possible.

Aleksei Sosedov

Firstly, what basic problems face the new patriarch?

Konstantin Zatulin

The task facing him shall have both internal and external aspects. The internal tasks are very serious and, at this stage, are complicated due to the fact that we have a difficult period facing the state, which is at the epicentre of financial and economic disruptions and crises, and I do not exclude the serious social problems associated with a declining economic output, which may even stop the work of some enterprises. At this moment, the Church should be fully open equally to the needs of both the workers and the employers. It must refer to Christian values in its preaching, mitigate social conflicts, exhort, heal, and appeal to the conscience and responsibility of the people so that these circumstances would not lead to threats to peace and order in the country, both large and small conflicts. The role of the Church in this cannot be overstated. As oil cast on the waves smoothes away disturbances, the Church can help the state deal quickly and effectively with the difficulties already facing us, and, perhaps, with those that shall face us in future. But, this is something that must be handled on a case-by-case basis.

Over the long haul, I think that there are serious problems connected with the growing influence of the Church in society, with its growing influence. This influence should be used rationally and wisely, not to the detriment of the Church. Neither the Church nor the state should interfere in the affairs of the other. It seems to me that there are serious problems at this time due to the rapid advancement of the Church and its breadth of growth, mainly, these are problems of religious identity and what is called “inner growth”, the problem of “what’s under the hood”. Now, the Church is officially-recognised, however, today, not all members of the clergy have a correct altitude when it comes to communicating with the people, all too many prefer material benefits and grub for them. The temptations are too much for all too many. Here, I think, the role of the new patriarch is most important, because he should call such sorts to account, so as to not allow what happened to the Church on the eve of the October Revolution. What made that event possible was the separation of the Church from the people; it was foreign to the people’s aspirations, devotion, thought, and so on.

With regard to the external challenges facing the church, I think that I have named them already. Today, the church is subjected to attacks from all sorts of competing sects, and, also, from those who see the MP as an especially-dangerous adversary because it continues to bind together a spiritual space that it wishes to divide. Do recall the famous conclusion of some Western political scientists that, following the demise of the Soviet Union, the Church is the institution that must be destroyed in order for some to achieve their geopolitical goals in the post-Soviet space. Today, no confrontation between Russia and the Ukraine can lead to a military conflict like that between the Serbs and the Croatians because, on both sides of the border, both here and there, a common Orthodox Church continues its life and activities. Over time, this situation may change, if the plans of those who wish to rip the Church in the Ukraine away from the MP and propagandise Ukrainian believers against their Russian brothers come to fruition. As of the present time, such people exist; they are now in power in the Ukraine. They are not sitting on their hands, they are constantly engaged in their plots, and, without a doubt, they have much support and sympathy from many sources in the West in this endeavour.

The new patriarch will need to not only protect the canonical territory of the MP, but, also, to make progress in the matters launched by Patriarch Aleksei and Metropolitan Laurus concerning the reunification of the Church in the Motherland with the Church Abroad. There is a need for the MP to take an active role in the world. I think that the MP is no less capable than the Catholics of a broad dialogue with all people, both Orthodox and those outside the Church. Its role in the dialogue between the Islamic and Christian civilisations is extraordinarily crucial. One must understand that Orthodoxy was never involved in the Crusades, and, from that point of view, its word has always been respected in Muslim circles, which can help to ameliorate some of the problems of the contemporary world. Its non-acceptance of schism and its doing its best to heal the heresies afoot in the world, along with its open and frank preaching of the truth, should increase, even more, the credibility of the MP upon the world stage.

Aleksei Sosedov

In your opinion, do you think that we should actively pursue dialogue with the Catholics?

Konstantin Zatulin

Generally, I think that the lack of dialogue is worse than politicking, for the absence of dialogue is actually the threshold or the premonition of war. It goes without saying that we need a dialogue with the Catholics; I have noticed that there is great respect for the Orthodox Church in the traditional Catholic countries, at least, that is what I see from my own personal contacts. Where the people embrace traditional values, it is easier for such folks to understand those who profess the values of Orthodoxy. We also know that, in other languages, the Orthodox Church is called “Orthodox” because it is the Church that is based on the most ancient tradition. As a result, Catholics and Orthodox are eminently capable of engaging in dialogue. Naturally, this should not be done at the cost of losing our basis in truth, as was done at the time of the Unia, which was later condemned by the Orthodox Church and rejected by the faithful. Today, we must not ignore the desire of certain circles in the West, including some Catholics, to proselytise in traditional Orthodox lands. Finally, let’s look at Uniatism. It is nothing but a glaring example of an attempt, using a Trojan Horse, to proselytise on the canonical territory of the Orthodox Church! I think that, in addition to resistance to these attempts, we should conduct a dialogue in order to deter these temptations and not prejudge them. What unites Catholics and Orthodox is greater than what divides them. Any attempts to advance at the expense of the other and to poach on the other’s flock must be stopped. This is one of the main objectives of the dialogue between the Catholics and the Orthodox Church, because only such a mutually-respectful attitude can open up a space for discussion of the more serious problems facing Christianity as such.

Aleksei Sosedov

I would like to ask a question of concerning external affairs. We know that many religious leaders prayed over the coffin of His Holiness Patriarch Aleksei, including Ilya II, the Patriarch and Catholicos of all Georgia. What does his visit signify, in your opinion?

Konstantin Zatulin

I think that the Catholicos is a wise man, it is not without reason that the political factions in Georgia regularly turn to him for mediation. The fact that he came to Moscow was a correct move on his part, we must appreciate it as such, and, indeed, it was so assessed. Therefore, I think President Dmitri Medvedev specifically set aside time to talk with the Catholicos. Today, Russian-Georgian relations are not the best. The accusations made against us by the political élite of Georgia are disproportionate and unfair. They would have us act in the role of Judas Iscariot in our relations with Abkhazia and South Ossetia. We shall not succumb to this blackmail. We have many important values we hold in common, primarily those associated with our shared Christian faith, both in the past and in the present. This could be a starting point for the improvement of relations between our two countries. In this sense, we cannot overstate the role the Church. But, do understand that this cannot occur at the cost of betraying the fundamental positions of principle on the Russian side, on our assessment of the current régime in Georgia. Indeed, the Georgians themselves have concluded that the continuance in office of Mikhail Saakashvili, the culprit in all of this mess, is to the detriment of Georgia. But, how and when this issue will be resolved, this is an affair of the Georgian people, and, from that point of view, the position of the Georgian Church is very important. We do not encourage anyone nor do we push our point of view, but, a call to morality from the mouth of a hierarch that they trust implicitly would be very important.

11 December 2008

Interfax-Religion

http://www.interfax-religion.ru/?act=interview&div=205 (in Russian)

Editor’s Note:

Note well Mr Zatulin’s words. “Priority should be given to recognised pastors. It is the most important factor”. This means that those being seriously considered for the patriarchal throne are experienced archpastors of major sees. Indeed, most of what I have seen in the Russian-language press in the last few years has stressed the need for a pastoral patriarch to follow Aleksei Rediger. This, in itself, seems to militate against the election of Kirill Gundyaev, who is, in essence, a church bureaucrat, not a diocesan archpastor. If there is any hierarch who is opposed by many factions in the church, it is Metropolitan Kirill. The fact that he was a protégé of the infamous Nikodim Rotov (who was accused of being a Roman cardinal in pectore) does not brighten his chances. In short, he has too many enemies to be a unifying figure, which is what the Church is looking for at present.

Who can fill the shoes of Patriarchs Ss Germogen and Tikhon? To my mind, there is only one candidate worthy of the name. That is Archbishop Vikenty Morar of Yekaterinburg. Yekaterinburg is the third-most-important diocesan see in all of Russia. Yekaterinburg (Sverdlovsk in Soviet times) is the Russian Pittsburgh; it is one of the major industrial areas in the country. The industrialisation of the Urals started in Tsarist times, picked up speed in the Five-Year Plans, and plants from the western portion of the country were evacuated here during the Second Great Patriotic War. This is a populous and economically-vital region of Russia; it is major by any standard used.

Archbishop Vikenty Morar of Yekaterinburg (1953- ), a pious and competent archpastor of true patriarchal timber

Vikenty Morar became the archpastor of the Diocese of Yekaterinburg in 1999, after his predecessor, Archbishop Nikon, was removed by the Holy Synod due to great scandals in the diocese, both personal and institutional. Vladyki Vikenty had his work cut out for him. He turned the diocese around, gave it new hope, applied wise and prudent pastoral vision, and he proved a unifying figure of great moral force. Archbishop Vikenty uses all modern means of communication to spread the faith, he operates diocesan radio and TV facilities (in addition to Orthodox newspapers and magazines), he is an active encourager of the Orthodox internet, and he blesses priests to form rock-bands to perform throughout the diocese.

Unlike Kirill Gundyaev, who is greatly rumoured (I think properly) to be soft on Catholics, the Unia, and the EP, Vladyki Vikenty teaches the traditional faith, straight-up, no mixer, and no ice. He has a great devotion to the Royal Martyrs. This is a litmus test. Those who venerate the Royal Martyrs are straight in their faith, in the main (there are some right-wing loonies as well, but, these are exceptions to the rule). Those who do not, such as the pseudo-intellectual crowd at SVS in Crestwood, are found to be Renovationists and ecumaniacs.

Therefore, Vladyki Vikenty is the archpastor of a major see, he has substantial experience as a ruler and can point to many achievements, both material and spiritual, and he is certainly mature enough, being 55 years of age. He is very well-known in the Russian-language press, so, he is no unknown. He has had much contact with Presidents Putin and Medvedev, as Yekaterinburg is a major pilgrimage destination (the Royal Martyrs were murdered here in 1918) as well as being a major commercial, industrial, communications, and military centre.

I certainly did not hide my preference, did I? I think the above recitation of facts backs up my opinion (for such it is, for what it’s worth). I shall remind all and sundry that no one expected that Jonas Paffhausen would be elected the Metropolitan of the OCA. You may see much concerning Kirill Gundyaev in the weeks ahead. I would say, “Remember Pittsburgh”. Oh, Yekaterinburg is the “Russian Pittsburgh”… hmm…

American Experts Confirm the Authenticity of the Remains of Tsar Nikolai II and His Family Found near Yekaterinburg in 1991

A Portrait of Tsar St Nikolai Aleksandrovich with the Order of St Vladimir (Genrikh Manizer, 1905)

Yekaterinburg, 5 December 2008 (Interfax):

American experts are certain that the “first” burial site near Yekaterinburg contained the authentic remains of Tsar Nikolai II of Russia according to Dr Michael Coble, the research director at the US Armed Forces DNA Identification Laboratory, “We examined three types of DNA and compared them to the DNA of Tsarevich Aleksei, the son of Nikolai II, and Andrei Romanov, a cousin of Nikolai II. If we look at the results of all three DNA tests, there can be no more doubt [as to the authenticity of the remains]“, Professor Coble told journalists in Yekaterinburg. He also noted that tests on the DNA of the tsar’s remains and the DNA found in a bloodstain on a jacket worn by Nikolai II, preserved at present in the Hermitage in St Petersburg, are now complete, but, the Sverdlovsk oblast forensic medical bureau shall issue its report at a later date. The bloodstain on the jacket was a result of an unsuccessful assassination attempt on Nikolai II in 1891. At that time, he was still the Tsarevich and was in Japan as part of a world tour. Whilst he was there, a deranged Japanese policeman attacked him with a samurai sword.

Eleven people, the family of the last Russian tsar, Nikolai II, and their servants, were executed in the early hours of 17 July 1918 on the order of the Presidium of the Ural Regional Soviet. A burial site containing the remains of nine people was found on Staraya Koptyakovskaya road near Yekaterinburg in July 1991. These were the remains of Nikolai II, his wife Aleksandra Fyodorovna, 46, daughters Olga, 22, Tatiana, 21, Anastasia, 17, as well as his servants Yevgeni Botkin, 53, Anna Demidova, 40, Aleksei Trupp, 62, and Ivan Kharitonov, 48. However, the remains of two members of the imperial family, Tsarevich Aleksei, 14, and Grand Princess Maria, 19, were not found at this time at this site. Years later, fragments of bones and teeth were recovered from a so-called “second” burial site during an archaeological dig on 29 July 2007. Russian and international experts confirmed the hypothesis that what the archaeologists found were the remains of Tsarevich Aleksei and Grand Princess Maria.

Interfax-Religion

http://www.interfax-religion.ru/?act=news&div=27630 (in Russian)

Editor’s Note:

DUM-DA-DUM-DUM… Yes, it’s the theme from Dragnet. One can hear Jack Webb now, “What you are about to see is true. The names were changed to protect the innocent”. Take a guess, loyal friends and readers… it’s BIG GREEN WEENIE AWARD time again. I know that it is probably a quixotic and forlorn quest, but, if the material exists in the Russian original, it should be translated into English IN ITS ENTIRETY. The material on the bloodstain and its testing were left out of the Interfax English translation.

FOR SHAME!

However, to return to the topic of the post above, this now allows the Church to claim the remains as genuine. I believe that it shall come out in future that the only reason the MP did not embrace the authenticity of the relics in 1998 was that Patriarch Aleksei Rediger and the then-Archbishop (later, Metropolitan) Laurus Skurla came up with a dodge so as not to upset the senescent Vitaly Ustinov, then, the First Hierarch of the ROCOR. Such manoeuvres are sometimes necessary, and those who commit them are guiltless of any sin.

Do reflect on the fact that the burial site of the imperial family in St Petersburg has a decidedly provisional air; so, one could rightly surmise that the relics shall be transferred to and reburied in Yekaterinburg, the site of their martyric podvig. If I am right, and I do not think that my guess is far-fetched, look for the translation of the relics to be the first major act of the next patriarch. Now… if only the next patriarch is Vikenty Morar… THAT would be the Holy Spirit truly at work!

One should also mention that Orthodox in America have a special reason to revere Tsar St Nikolai Aleksandrovich the Royal Martyr and Passionbearer. If it were not for the very generous financial aid that he extended from his personal purse, the Orthodox Church in the US and Canada (that is, the part outside the established Church in Alaska) would never have got off the ground. All those who babble about an “American church”, “not being under the thumb of the state”, and “personal responsibilty” should hang their heads in shame and repent of their ungrateful foolishness and folly. If this holy tsar had not shown his open-hearted generosity and hearty support in a very tangible way, truly, there would be no Church here, full stop. Symfonia is an central and indispensible Orthodox concept, after all…

Presidium of the RF Supreme Court Rehabilitates Tsar St Nikolai II and the Members of the Imperial Family

President Boris Yeltsin (1931-2007) bowing before the relics of the Royal Martyrs and their Loyal Companions in 1998

Moscow, 1 October 2008 (Interfax):

A ruling of the Presidium of the RF Supreme Court rehabilitated the last tsar, Nikolai II, and the members of his family. “The Presidium of the Supreme Court ruled to recognise that Nikolai Aleksandrovich Romanov [Nikolai II], Aleksandra Fyodorovna Romanova, Olga Nikolaevna Romanova, Tatiana Nikolaevna Romanova, Maria Nikolaevna Romanova, Anastasia Nikolaevna Romanova, and Aleksei Nikolaevich Romanov were groundlessly repressed and rehabilitated them”, a Supreme Court judge said on Wednesday in delivering the court’s verdict. In doing so, the court granted an appeal by lawyers for the Romanov royal family against an earlier court decision denying their rehabilitation. The decision of the Presidium invalidated an earlier determination by a Supreme Court panel, which found that Nikolai II and the members of his family were not eligible for rehabilitation.

German Lukyanov, a lawyer for the Romanov royal family, insisted in the appeal that NIkolai II and his household were subjected to reprisals based on social, religious, and political motives and that Russian law stipulates that all victims of political reprisals are eligible for rehabilitation. “Reprisals are coercive measures applied by government bodies invested with administrative powers to limit the rights and freedom of a person based on class, social, and religious motives. The body that made the decision to execute the members of the royal family was invested with such powers”, Mr Lukyanov noted.

In rebuttal, the representative of the RF General Procurator said during the court proceedings that the rehabilitation of the members of the royal family would be unlawful. “The members of the royal family were not arrested on political grounds and no court ruled to execute them. In addition, there is no information indicating that any court rulings were handed down in relation to the members of the royal family”, he said. The RF Supreme Court denied the rehabilitation of Nikolai II and the members of his family last November, thus upholding a decision by the Office of the RF General Procurator that the emperor, his wife, and five children, who were shot in 1918, were not eligible subjects for rehabilitation.

In the opinion of Mr Lukyanov, the panel of the Supreme Court that refused to rehabilitate the royal family did not give a proper and judicial study to the arguments presented and the evidence offered to support them. “The well-known fact that the royal family was kept under armed guard was given no consideration. They also did not take into account that Tsar Nikolai II was shot according to a decree of the Ural Soviet, which was affirmed by the Soviet régime in the form of a decision of the Presidium of the VTsIk (All-Russian Central Executive Committee)”, he said. Furthermore, Mr Lukyanov observed, “The Office of the RF Procurator General argued that the Soviet state did not adopt any official measure in regards to the repression of the royal family and the deprivation of their rights and freedom”. He went on to emphasise that the logic of the Office of the Procurator was that “political repression was not involved with anything concerning the events surrounding the royal family after the Revolution in 1918″.

Nikolai II, his wife Alexandra Fyodorovna Romanova, their children Aleksei Nikolaevich, Olga Nikolaevna, Tatiana Nikolaevna, Maria Nikolaevna, and Anastasia Nikolaevna, along with their physician, Dr Yevgeni Botkin, Aleksandra’s personal maid, Anna Demidova, their cook, Ivan Kharitonov, and Nikolai’s personal servant, Colonel Aleksei Trupp, were shot in the cellar of the Ipatiev House in Yekaterinburg in the early morning hours of 17 July 1918. The remains of the members of the royal family and their retinue were discovered buried near an old road not far from Yekaterinburg in July 1991. Expert analyses conducted as part of a criminal case pursued by the Office of the RF General Procurator confirmed that the remains were those of the tsar, his family, and retainers. The remains were buried at the Ss Peter and Paul Cathedral in St Petersburg on 17 July 1998.

Interfax-Religion

http://www.interfax-religion.ru/?act=news&div=26735 (in Russian)

http://www.interfax-religion.com/?act=news&div=5215 (in English)

Editor’s Note:

The Memorial Church of the Spas-na-Krovi (the Saviour-on-the-Spilled-Blood) in Yekaterinburg, built on the very spot of the martyric podvig of the Royal Martyrs and their Loyal Companion-Martyrs

Interfax trips over itself, yet again, kids. In the above piece, paragraph four is missing from the English translation on the Interfax website. Lazy!

Watch for the Church to proclaim that the relics buried in 1998 were genuine. The reason that the Church did not say so then was because of internal Church politics. The ROCOR at that time was led by the senile Vitaly Ustinov, who was a vehement opponent of New Russia and he called the relics frauds (I remember an ignoramus supporter of Vitaly saying to me, “The communists are still in charge! They are being clever!” What bilious rot and rubbish. What people will believe!). The MP wished to keep the door open for a future reconciliation with the ROCOR (which did, in fact, occur in 2007), so, it took an agnostic stance on the relics at the time.

Trust me on this. The relics are going to be taken to the Memorial Church of the Spas-na-Krovi (the Saviour-on-the-Spilled-Blood) in Yekaterinburg and enshrined with great pomp and circumstance. The main celebrants would be Patriarch Aleksei Rediger, Metropolitan Hilarion Kapral, and Archbishop Vikenty Morar of Yekaterinburg (the most effective and beloved archpastor in Russia today, may he succeed Vladyki Aleksei as patriarch!), thousands of faithful would gather from around the world led by President Medvedev, Prime Minister Putin, Mayor Luzhkov, Maestro Valery Gergiev, amongst others (including many of our brethren from the other traditional Orthodox peoples), and the wound of the all-too-long separation of the ROCOR and MP would find final healing and resolution.

In fact, such an event would mark the end of the ROCOR as a separate body. We must understand that the OCA, MP/US (and MP/Canada), and the ROCOR are temporary and transitory structures containing the elements of the one Russian Orthodox Church in the US (and the Russian Orthodox Churches of Canada and Alaska, as well). When the relics of the Royal Martyrs are brought to Yekaterinburg, it shall be the proper time to dissolve these outworn vehicles and replace them with united autonomous Russian Orthodox Churches in the US, Canada, Alaska, Western Europe, and Australasia under the omophor of the MP. This would be in exact concordance with the expressed wishes of Metropolitans Antony Khrapovitsky, Anastassy Gribanovsky, Philaret Voznesensky, and Laurus Skurla. In addition, all other Orthodox of the blood of Rus should be invited to join us. God willing, many shall answer the call! (Alas, not all shall, due to nationalist schismatics. Sad!) Tsar St Nikolai was the great benefactor of the Church in America, Alaska, and Canada, and we owe him a debt of thanks that can never be repaid. If it were not for his generosity, there would be no Church in North America today.

Whom do you honour? Tsar St Nikolai or the heretic Schmemann? It is that simple, truly. People who venerate the Royal Martyrs, as a rule, don’t follow the pied pipers of SVS and AOCANA. People who are led astray by Schmemann et al, in general, don’t venerate the spilled blood of the New Martyrs (remember how bitterly and nastily they attacked the New Martyrs in the 80s and 90s? I do! So should you!).

The blood of the New Martyrs or the hot air of the Academic Pseudo-Intellectuals…. The Lady or the Tiger… I know where I stand; it leads one to the Supper of the Lamb. As for the other… the less said, the better!

“Shall you sit down for tea, Fr Andrew? Truly, I don’t bite…”

Drinking Tea (Vasili Nesterenko, 1997)

Editor’s Foreword:

This started life as a reply to a comment of Fr Andrew Morbey of Minneapolis MN. Well… it just GREW, like Topsy. To do it justice requires a full post. Fr Andrew, thank you for getting the ol’ brain in gear. Oh, by the way, do you take cream in your tea or do you take it straight, in the Russian manner?

******

I would not say that Honeycutt and Greene are “Orthodox apologists”. Both are nothing but half-baked Evangelical Anglicans with the thinnest possible Orthodox veneer. Honeycutt’s corrosive Russophobia is never far from the surface. As one Russian bishop rightly said, “Russophobia is a form of Christophobia”. Greene is nothing but a “pushy American female”, as a Russian priest-friend of mine remarked (I would add that she is bezkulturny). Honeycutt and Greene are nothing but Grabovois, and the mirage of the American church they advocate does not exist, save in their disordered imaginations.

In addition, both are apologists for the “American Church”, not Orthodoxy, and one can see how their work is immersed in Evangelical Protestantism and American Positivism (as is virtually everything written by Anglo-Saxon converts, I am afraid). Besides this, they are out of the AOCANA, which is only formally Orthodox. The Antiochians are nothing but Evangelicals/Anglicans with an Orthodox ritual (any group with a LAYMAN as chancellor is hardly churchly). Ergo, anything that arises from them must be ignored, and, indeed, fought. They are the American equivalents of the “Patriarchate of Kiev” and Philip Saliba is nothing but an American Philaret Denisenko. To join the AOCANA is to run to an American Penza Cave, huddling in the dark away from the ordinary Orthodoxy of the ages. To tell the truth, I refuse to set foot in any of their conventicles, they present “a likeness of power without the substance thereof”.

The bishops of the MP assembled outside the Cathedral of Christ the Saviour in Moscow for the Archpastoral Council

A choice is coming. We may follow Moscow, or we may follow the various pied-pipers out there. Saliba is one, Black Bart is another, SVS leads another cohort. If one follows SVS or Black Bart, one is on the high road to Uniatism. Dangerous, indeed. However, Philip Saliba is the most dangerous in a churchly (tserkovnost) sense. He has placed American phyletism as the driving engine of his movement, just as Philaret Denisenko places “Ukrainian” phyletism as the driving force of his. Any nationalism in church life is corrosive, and American nationalism is no exception. The fact that 70 percent of the AOCANA clergy are converts (most ordained before they were ready, as Mr Honeycutt illustrates so abundantly) is a weakness, not a strength. Compare this to the fraternal unity shown at the late Archpastoral Council in Moscow. Bishops from all over the world, of all nationalities, united together in holding high the banner of Orthodoxy. You can have UNITY (as shown by the MP) or you can have notional ISOLATION (as shown by AOCANA, OCA, and the Paris lot).

American converts are the largest portion of the Orthodox voices on the internet. Therefore, the world has gained a distorted view of the Church. All too many American converts are nothing but spoilt children in soiled nappies daring to lecture at the MDA. They have never faced the test, and they must have the humility to listen to those who have faced such, although I believe that shall require a miracle of the Lord. All too often, I come away from a convert or from one of their writings with the sad conclusion, “You can tell a convert, but, you can’t tell ‘em much”.

In short, we Russians have faced Butovo and Solovki, our Church is founded on the blood of millions of martyrs, and many of us here in America faced the useless (but, damaging) and bitter jurisdictional wars of the 70s and 80s. I should add that the worst (and most fanatical) actors in those bitter wars were the Anglo-Saxon converts on both sides. I should say that I find the current crop of converts no different. They are moralistic Savanarolas ready at the drop of a hat to light the fires of the auto dà fé under their opponents. They have no idea of the actual tolerance of the Church. I have heard “baba’s religion” and “nominal Orthodox” from Anglo-Saxon mouths once too often. Indeed, this website is a reaction to all that. They oppose a bloodless vision of the church to the rich and lively lived tradition of the Church. Of course, the wheat is mixed with the tares. Didn’t our Lord Christ say so?

Archbishop Vikenty of Yekaterinburg (1953- ), one of the greatest (if not the greatest) pastors in the Church today

We can see the result of the above in our church life today. The OCA is a grinning and lifeless corpse with its devotees dancing about it in a grisly (and very sad) analogue of a pagan sacrifice, whilst the AOCANA is nothing but Billy Graham with Byzantine make-up. For all its faults (and it DOES have them, by God!), the MP stands for the Orthodoxy of the ages. Compare Herman Swaiko and Philip Saliba to Archbishop Vikenty of Yekaterinburg, Metropolitan Vladimir of Kiev, Metropolitan Sergei of Voronezh, or Metropolitan Mefody of Kazakhstan. There is NO comparison. We either stand with Moscow or we shall stray away from the Orthodoxy of the Holy Fathers. I wish that there was a kinder way of saying this, but, there is not.

We have the ill-fortune (or, is it a privilege?) to live in “interesting times”. What we do now shall have resonance for our grandchildren. That is why we must give decent burial to the corpse of the OCA, reject the siren-call of Saliba, and follow our elder brothers in the Faith in Moscow. God shall bless us for showing humility, at the least. The blood of the martyrs calls us! Shall you ignore the call? Remember for Whom the martyrs shed their blood (and are still shedding their blood in the Baltic states, the Ukraine and Carpatho-Russia, by the way)…

I am following the call of the New Martyrs of Russia, what about you?

Vara Drezhlo

Friday 11 July 2008

Editor’s Afterword:

One should note that opinion pieces, such as the one above, always go out under my name, and, if I express an opinion on an article posted, it is always as an openly-labelled editor’s note. I stand tall, I am not ashamed, and I do not hide behind the mask of “Anonymous”.

Bog blagoslovit, my friends. May God give us the strength to face and overcome the coming trials.

Archbishop Vikenty of Yekaterinburg and Verkhoturye: The Relationship of Nikolai II to Positive Changes in the Nation

Icon of the Assembly of the New Martyrs of Russia

This year is the 90^th anniversary of the death of the Royal Passionbearers. Archbishop Vikenty of Yekaterinburg and Verkhoturye gave an interview to Yekaterinburg Initiative about the proper understanding of the legacy and heritage of Nikolai II in the church and society.

YI

Your Eminence, what can you say about Nikolai II as a Christian politician?

Metropolitan Vikenty

Tsar Nikolai II was a model for the politicians of his time, and, in my view, he can serve as a model for contemporary politicians. He had the desire to influence the world in such a way so that there would be peace on earth and harmony, so that arms could be cut back to a reasonable level… Brought up in the Orthodox faith, his soul exemplified such moral values as conscientiousness, love for neighbour, and a tendency towards accord. He hoped that he could influence others to realise the ideals of unity, brotherhood, and mutual respect, including respect between politicians, between statesmen, between peoples, and between states. When we study his activity as a ruler, we see him as a man who based his rule upon the Christian values that his parents taught him. He tried to spread these values amongst all the heads of state with whom he associated.

The tsar’s intent in organising the Hague International Court of Justice was to prevent conflicts between states and between peoples, and it became a shining legacy of his spirit. He wished that people would not come to blows, but, rather, solve their disputes and problems peacefully. Many countries of the world now follow his wise counsels, and, in later years, many other international institutions arose on the basis of his ideas, such as the United Nations. It is evident from this that Tsar Nikolai II had enormous stature as a political figure in the world, especially in his role as a theorist of world peace.

YI

For many years, there were those who called pre-revolutionary Russia “the prison-house of the nations”… At that time, what was Russian policy towards resident foreigners and the heterodox in faith?

Archbishop Vikenty

As far as relations with other religious confessions were concerned, Tsar Nikolai II treated them all with respect. When he went to the parts of his empire that were predominately Muslim, he went to the mosque to show his respect of their faith, he read books about Islam to learn more about it, and he greeted his Muslim subjects on their religious holidays. On the whole, his interaction with them was very good, and his Muslim subjects repaid him with love, respect, esteem, and honour. This is an example of the atmosphere of the brotherhood and good relations that existed between the religious confessions in Russia. We did not have religious conflicts.

YI

Did the tsar do well as head of the Church?

Archbishop Vikenty

During his reign, approximately 7,000 churches and about 19 monasteries were built. Churches abroad were built using money from his privy purse. The tsar loved to go on pilgrimages to holy places very much, and he tried to instil in the people a similar love for doing such. In fact, whenever and wherever the tsar went on pilgrimage, a great host of people would follow. As a whole, the influence of Tsar Nikolai on church life was enormous. He approved the canonisation of many holy righteous men of God. Indeed, he canonised more saints in his reign than were glorified in previous centuries. Of course, we know that he added to the Menaion those such as St Seraphim of Sarov, St John of Tobolsk (a distant relative of St John Maksimovich), and a great many others of the righteous, as well.

YI

Vladyki, many people today believe that the imperial family is an excellent role model. What do you think of that?

Archbishop Vikenty

Oh, yes, I quite agree. At the time, and today as well, the imperial family was an example of high morals and spirituality, it was an exemplar of a real Christian family. Firstly, the mutual love of the spouses shone forth, and, secondly, it was a large and harmonious family, where the children were very well brought up. Despite the fact that the tsar ruled a vast empire and had many governmental responsibilities, he did not forget his family, and he took an active role in the raising of his children. Since he valued it very much, he found the time to sit with them, to read to them edifying spiritual literature, and he told them stories from the lives of the Orthodox saints. Together, they walked to the church to attend liturgy, the tsar would help his children with their devotions, they had a living connection with God, and they received solace and comfort from God through their prayers. All too frequently, Tsarevich Aleksei was ill [with excessive bleeding caused by his haemophilia], and, of course, the entire family fervently entreated God on his behalf, they felt that the Lord heard their prayers, that he helped and eased the sufferings of their brother and son.

In another instance, it would be instructive to note the depth of their prayer whilst they were imprisoned in Yekaterinburg and Tobolsk. In their letters we feel their coming before God in prayer, their hope in the Lord, and their profound faith. Undoubtedly, all these things were the fruits of their upbringing, which the parents instilled in their children from infancy onwards. Of course, the tsar’s great patience and generous humility were the evidence of a patient Christian soul, and although he evidenced such over the entire course of his life, they particularly manifested themselves precisely during the months of the family’s imprisonment.

Another testimony to the authentic faith of the tsar was the genuine conversion to Orthodoxy of his wife, the Tsaritsa Aleksandra. In order to convince such a person as Aleksandra, a woman who already had very deep beliefs, with roots in another religion and in another faith, it was necessary [for Nikolai] to know Orthodoxy very well, to know [how to express] the difference between Orthodoxy and Protestantism. He could show the beauty of Orthodoxy in his words and in his behaviour. The Tsaritsa saw his genuine love, because she was an honest and straightforward person who hated falsehood. Therefore, when she saw that Nikolai not only said good words about Orthodoxy, but, when she also saw his deep faith, then, she saw in her heart the beauty of Orthodoxy and she entirely fell in love with it, with all her heart and all her soul. Of course, she tried to pass on to her children the spiritual fruit that she gained from her husband, Tsar Nikolai.

At that time, it is not surprising that Russia was not only very well ruled, but, the population was growing by leaps and bounds. This generation of children was very large, many families had 10, 15, or even 18 children, and such numbers were not considered remarkable. Now, in looking for solutions to our demographic problem, we, unfortunately, look at a family’s income and their living conditions. However, in those days, they did not take such things into consideration, and they lived a simple and natural life that they saw as God’s divine gift to mankind, and they carried out the Will of God expressed in the commandment, Increase, and multiply, and fill the earth. The population increase during the reign of Tsar Nikolai was more than 3 million per year. This was how the power of Russia increased steadily. If we had continued this rate of growth up to the present, there would be over 600 million people living in Russia today.

YI

What meaning does the glorification of the Holy Royal Martyrs bear for Russia?

Archbishop Vikenty

Church of the Saviour on-the-Spilled-Blood (Khram Spas na Krovi), Yekaterinburg

For Russia, the glorification of the Holy Royal Martyrs has very great significance, not least because Tsar Nikolai was accused of every sort of grave error that could be done and he was blamed for everything wrong in the country. For a long time, it was said that the revolution came about due to his misrule, because he was a pathetic and incompetent man. In fact, there are many other reasons for the fact that this catastrophe came upon us.

Because of the canonisation, we know more about him because we have more attentively studied the period of Russian history when he reigned and we have been able to clear away many accumulated lies. Increasingly, we better understand his ability in governing the country and his achievements, that he made our Russian motherland majestic and powerful. We see what enormous labour he put into the development of our state so that it would be not only be rich materially, but, also rich spiritually, so that all would possess a deep and conscious faith, and just as the coat of arms of Russia has two wings, our Russian motherland would have two matched curved wings, i.e., it would have a strong and powerful material prosperity and it would also have a vigorous spirit. Now, it is very important for us to study the life and endeavours of Tsar Nikolai II so that our statesmen today can use this accumulated experience.

YI

Has the attitude of the people changed in regards to the memory of the tsar in recent years? If so, what are its dynamics?

Archbishop Vikenty

The Church of the Saviour on-the-Spilled-Blood (Khram Spas na Krovi) in Yekaterinburg

At present, in Yekaterinburg and in the surrounding oblast, I note that the attitude of the people to Tsar Nikolai II has changed greatly, for the better. If in previous years, especially in the Soviet period, people were at times proud of the fact that here, in Yekaterinburg, in the Ipatiev House, “we killed the tsar”, now, on the contrary, people realise that this was an appalling tragedy. In the past, we considered that this was not a crime, but, a good deed, a deliverance from an oppressor and tyrant. However, now, we realise that this was a tragedy, a crime, and an unspeakable barbarity.

This is how everyone now speaks, who come to the Church of the Saviour on-the-Spilled-Blood and to [the monastery] at Ganina Yama, they look about these places and realise the full import of what was done here. Coming here, they pray and feel the blessings of God, and they feel aid from the Royal Martyrs. The Royal Martyrs have given much help to the families of believers; their intercessions have helped to rid many of the habits of smoking and alcoholism.

Those myths about the tsar that are rooted deeply in the consciousness of our society, those constantly-repeated deceitful and incorrect historical fables about his epoch still hold many of our people captive. So, it is necessary to greatly increase our efforts to describe and to document these events so that the people would correctly understand the situation. Now, we hold many conferences and exhibitions in order to show the achievements of the tsar it all of its variety. Thus far, unfortunately, our society does not properly esteem Tsar Nikolai as a moral, highly spiritual, and religious man and as an effective politician. These exhibitions and conferences assist people to realise the importance of the last tsar for Russia. Last year, when we prepared an exhibition in St Petersburg, the staff at the Public Archives said that there are about 23,000 documents concerning the imperial family. In proportion to which they became acquainted with these documents, they completely changed their attitude to the tsar. Thus far, they understood it in the manner that they were taught in the Soviet years, i.e., he was a pathetic and weak-willed person. But, now, after having acquaintance with archival documents, these specialists saw a mighty, strong, and moral politician.

We should deepen our study of the historical evidence and present it to society so that the truth about the reign of Nikolai II would reach as many people as possible. Then, of course, our mission, our task, shall be completed.

17 June 2008

Yekaterinburgskaya Initiativa (Yekaterinburg Initiative)

Quoted in Interfax-Religion

http://www.interfax-religion.ru/?act=radio&div=885 (in Russian)

Behold, the Most Pure Cometh!

In pre-revolutionary Yekaterinburg, it was very crowded every 9 July as a motley crowd of locals and pilgrims from all over the province flooded into the town. They all came with the same purpose in mind, to honour and venerate their beloved Tikhvin icon of the Mother of God, and all were filled with the same spiritual joy during the feastday dedicated to the icon. Nobles and merchants, petty bourgeois and peasants, everyone hurried to the convent where the icon was kept. There was a solemn and reverent religious procession, a bustling fair, the touching singing of the sisterhood chorus, the generous hospitality of the convent, souvenirs and hand-made gifts by the nuns, all of this and more awaited those who went to the “Tikhvin Days” at the convent…

Today, the sisters of our convent return to our city its beloved icon, and they revive the holiday in its honour.

The Ancient Icon

According to legend, the wonder-working Tikhvin icon of the Mother of God appeared in Russia in 1338. The first time it was seen, it stood bathed in unearthly light above the waters of Lake Ladoga. Then, it appeared in different places until it finally stopped in Tikhvin, where a special church was built to house it. In 1577, an edict of Tsar Ivan Grozny decreed that the icon was to be housed at the Tikhvin Monastery. At various times, copies were made of the wonder-working Tikhvin icon of the Mother of God, and these, in turn, became as venerated as the original. One of these copies was brought to Yekaterinburg on 9 July 1811.

The Celestial Abbess: The Protectress of the City

Church of the Assumption in Yekiaterinburg, where the Tikhvin icon of the Mother of God was brought in 1811

In the morning on 9 July 1811, the bells rang out the holiday from all the belfries in the city. The harmonies of the bronze heralds proclaimed the joyous news: “Behold, the Most Pure cometh!” The crowds streamed from all the churches accompanied by the singing of the bells. The multi-faceted crowd sparkled with the festal vestments of the priests and minor clergy, icons, bright clothing and kerchiefs… everything merged into one united and colourful flow. The banners floated over the heads of the crowd and the praises of the Queen of Heaven sounded continually. The joyous crowd moved together, merging into a deep and moving river of humanity. It was a religious procession of the whole people, acting as one. Yekaterinburg thus greeted its new sacred object, the Tikhvin icon of the Mother of God, a precise copy of the ancient wonder-working image. The innumerable believers rejoiced and a glowing spiritual joy overfilled the soul of Abbess Taisia, superior of the Novo-Tikhvin convent, who had the sacred image brought to Yekaterinburg.

She distinctly remembered the day more than five years ago when, as the simple laywoman Tatiana Kostromina, she left her humble home to go to the bustle of the imperial capital of St Petersburg to ask about the conversion of this small skete into a regular convent. She prayed fervently, and she implored the Queen of Heaven to help her achieve this goal! Without any money, without any recommendations, she left for the northern capital, where no one knew her and she knew no one, to bow in supplication before the Holy Synod. From whence did this modest and illiterate daughter of a master workman in a Ural factory get the determination, despite the seeming impossibility of her quest, to turn to the mighty of this world, to insist, to plead, yes, to convince…? The mother abbess, in recalling all of this, could not assign the source of her determination to anything other than the beneficent aid of the Queen of Heaven, to whom she herself and all her sisterhood prayed incessantly with great zeal. They shed their fervent tears precisely before the Tikhvin icon in the small cemetery chapel.

The Most Holy Mother of God did not leave them barren and bereft; she did not leave them without Her aid. Soon after she arrived in St Petersburg, Tatiana found patrons to help her with this God-pleasing endeavour. Then, she met with Prince Golitsyn, who was the Oberprokurator of the Holy Synod, Admiral Fyodor Ushakov, who is now glorified as one of the saints, and other well-known people of that time. Prince Golitsyn was a childhood friend of Tsar Aleksandr I, and he convinced His Majesty that the intentions of the suppliant from the Urals were pure and merited support, and that led to a favourable outcome of the whole affair. Need I mention that the tsar himself was devoted to the Tikhvin icon? According to the terms of imperial decree, the new convent was to be called the Novo-Tikhvin convent.

Here it was, the daughter of the master workman, Tatiana Kostromina, now Abbess Taisia, entered Yekaterinburg precisely on the feastday of the Tikhvin icon of the Mother of God. She returned to the sisterhood after long years of separation with the precious sacred image, the Tikhvin icon of the Mother of God, a precise copy of the wonder-working icon, which had been made to her order.

A Hospitable Abode

A photo taken near the turn of the 20th century in the sewing workshop of the convent. The sisterhood was renowned for the high quality of their workmanship.

From that time forward, on the day that the Tikhvin icon arrived in Yekaterinburg, 9 July, was a special holiday in the town, it was a unique day in the city’s life. Preparations for it began long before the date. The sisterhood made convent souvenirs, painted icons, wove patterned carpets, and sewed and embroidered tablecloths, curtains and other household items for sale at the Tikhvin Icon Fair on 9 July. The items made by the sisters were famous for their high quality of workmanship, so, both townspeople and pilgrims eagerly sought to buy them.

Two weeks before the beginning of the holiday, the superior of the convent erected spacious tents in the cloister courtyard for the lodging of poor pilgrims. The most zealous amongst them came to the convent ten days before the festivities began. The nuns gave free food and lodging to anyone who came. The reserves of food, pastries, and sweets required for this were simply stupendous. All of the visitors were enraptured by the aroma coming from the sisterhood’s bakery; no one could resist the fancy bread that the sisters made themselves. The religious procession with the Tikhvin icon was an impressive spectacle, in front, some 50 priests and minor clerics, followed by the sisterhood of the convent (before the revolution it was some 1,000 strong!), and several thousand laity, both local and pilgrims came behind. The procession wended it s way around the convent, which was, truth to tell, a small monastic town.

At the beginning of the 20th century, the convent was actually a small monastic town

Every year, everybody, the locals and pilgrims alike, expected something new and different at the festival. For example, in 1913, an unusual fountain was unveiled. It was a refined metal cross, from which cold drinking water flowed. A newspaper at the time wrote, “Hundreds of hands are stretched out to this ‘miracle’, in order get a drink or to wash their faces”. Near the “cross”, encircled by flowers, was the Tikhvin icon, and unceasing laudations and prayers were said before it.

Return of the Sacred Image

Years passed… the faith atrophied in the hearts of Orthodox Christians and love shrank away… a revolutionary maelstrom engulfed Russia… the angelic peals of the bells were no longer heard, the banners were trampled into the dirt, and no one in the city sang praises to the Lord and His Most Pure Mother. The Novo-Tikhvin Convent was padlocked and the sisters were banished, and the sacred image… the Tikhvin icon, so long a fixture of the city… disappeared without a trace…

…2008, Yekaterinburg in Russia. The terrible persecution and war against Christ and His Church are now only entries in dusty history books. The golden crosses atop our churches rival the sun with their dazzling beauty and the revival of Orthodox Russia is rung out by the many-voiced bells of the city. Our convent came alive, yet again. We yearned for the return of our most revered sacred object.

“For a long time, we wished to have in our convent the same icon as was here in pre-revolutionary days, and, now, in 2008, we finally decided to do it. The sisters themselves painted a precise copy of the ancient Tikhvin icon”, related Nun Devora, the supervisor of the iconography atelier of the convent. Several months ago, some of the sisters drove to Tikhvin, were they studied the special features of the old image, how the old icon was painted, its size and other necessary details, and only after this did they begin the project. They ground the pigments, they prepared the paints, dissolving the elements not only with solvents, but, with their prayers. Reverential fear changed into quiet happiness. Having been in the proximity of the original sacred image, with the consciousness of taking part in a great endeavour, it sometimes caused them to pause in trepidation, but, their zealous faith in the constant aid of their Patroness gave them strength. Well… the face of the Most Pure Mother is complete, here is the Christ Child clinging in trust to His Most Gentle Mother… the gilding, the symbol of the brightness of Paradise of God covers the surface of the board. Some more time, and all the work shall be done…

Archbishop Vikenty of Yekaterinburg and Verkhoturye (1953- ), one of the greatest and most-respected archpastors in the contemporary Russian church

In July, Archbishop Vikenty of Yekaterinburg and Verkhoturye shall bless the finished Tikhvin icon in the course of the liturgy in a special visit to Tikhvin. On 8 July 2008, almost two centuries ago to the day of the arrival of the original image, the icon shall be delivered to Yekaterinburg on the feastday of the wonder-working Tikhvin icon of the Mother of God. Once again, the bronze heralds shall peal out to the Orthodox faithful the same wondrous news: “Behold, the Most Pure cometh!” Again, the clergy and thousands of believers shall march in procession in order to carry the long-awaited sacred image down the streets of the city to the gates of the resurrected Novo-Tikhvin convent. Everything shall be just as it was in the olden days. The icon shall be encircled with living flowers in an open-air shrine decorated with more flowers, and laudations and prayers shall be said before it yet again. Yes, the fair shall return, and the sisters shall show their traditional hospitality to all guests.

After the festival, the icon shall be placed in the Church of All Saints, as this is the only church restored so far in the convent complex. In 2010, for the 200^th anniversary of the convent, the icon shall be transferred to the newly-restored Cathedral of St Aleksandr Nevsky.

Through the prayers of the Mother of God, the beloved icon of Yekaterinburg returns home… yes, the locals bow before Her yet again, laying their hopes in prayer before their gracious Patroness.      

Most Holy Mother of God, help us!

22 May 2008

Novo-Tikhvin Convent, Yekaterinburg RF

http://www.sestry.ru/church/content/life/events/58/ (in Russian)

Archbishop Vikenty Shall Answer the Questions of TV Viewers and the Radio Audience Live on the TV Channel Soyuz and the Radio Station Voskreseniye

Archbishop Vikenty of Yekaterinburg and Verkhotrye (1953- ) at a Pannikhida for fallen heroes on Victory Day 2008 

Yekaterinburg, 26 May 2008 (Information Agency of the Yekaterinburg Diocese):

On Monday, 26 May, at 19.00 Moscow time, Archbishop Vikenty of Yekaterinburg and Verkhoturye shall appear live before the audience of the TV station Soyuz (Union) and the listeners of the radio station Voskreseniye (Resurrection). The live spiritual broadcasts of our archpastor are already a tradition here in Yekaterinburg. Orthodox believers in the Urals region await them impatiently, they listen to the words of Vladyki with great attention, and they ask him questions over the telephone in the course of the broadcast. Vladyki’s first live interview on the TV and radio was on 2 April 2005, as soon as the television channel Soyuz began broadcasting in Yekaterinburg. You can pose your questions to Vladyki Vikenty today over the telephone.

Pravoslavnaya Gazeta Yekaterinburg

http://orthodox.etel.ru/2008/21/26/26otvet.htm (in Russian)

Editor’s Note:

Here is a REAL Orthodox archpastor! Don’t you wish that Vladyki Vikenty was YOUR bishop? If your bishop is not as open and “transparent” as Vladyki Vikenty is… it’s time to find another bishop, no?

Syosset and SVS… be warned.  

Archbishop Vikenty of Yekaterinburg urges us to restore the Good Name of Tsar St Nikolai II

The Imperial Reception of the Freeholding Elders in the Courtyard of the Petrovsky Palace on 18 May 1896 (Ilya Repin, 1897)

Yekaterinburg, 19 May 2008 (Interfax):

Archbishop Vikenty of Yekaterinburg and Verkhoturye believes that it is imperative that we recognise and honour the merits of the last Russian emperor, Tsar Nikolai II. “Unfortunately, over many decades, his memory suffered from much slander and trivial criticism, and there was much mud thrown at his character. After some 90 years, it is necessary for us to cleanse his reputation, washing off all the mud, so that we can recognise the outstanding legacy of Tsar-Passionbearer St Nikolai II”, Archbishop Vikenty said at a conference in Yekaterinburg dedicated to the 140^th anniversary of Tsar St Nikolai’s birth.

Vladyki remembered that, during the Soviet period, schoolchildren were told that 1913 was the most booming year in Russian history, but, students were never told who was responsible for that achievement. “We must give all tribute and honour to the wisdom of the man who led Russia to such a high level of development. To think that we were told that the reign of Tsar St Nikolai II was ineffectual”, he emphasised. He added that during the period of St Nikolai’s rule some 7,000 new churches and 200 new monasteries were built in Russia, and 19 churches were built abroad.

Interfax-Religion

http://www.interfax-religion.ru/?act=news&div=24529 (in Russian)