Thoughts
on Russian Church Unity
(From
the editor's foreword in the journal Svyataya Zemlya [Holy Land],
No. 11, 1935, Jerusalem)
We are experiencing especially important times in our Church. Having
no government of our own, a government under which our lives would
follow the ways dictated by the moral ideals of the Russian people,
we live in various countries among those of various faiths, often
among heathens, or worse, former Christians who are now without
faithl, the Russian people are forced to adopt the ways of life
of those peoples among whom the Lord scattered them. The way of
life of these nations reflects their moral ideals; it cannot but
have an effect on Russian life in the diaspora. In every country,
Russian ÎmigrÎs developed their way of life, their own views. But
this leaves a mark on a person’s character, and on his inner world.
The only thing that unites the Russian people is the unity of the
moral ideal of the Russian people, and the preserver of the purity
of this moral ideal is the Russian Church Abroad, whose hierarchs
united in a Council of Russian archpastors abroad, independent of
any political or material influences.
Only the Church, the keeper of the untouchable treasure of the Orthodox
Faith, this life-creating essence of Russian national life, can
now be trusted to guide the world-view of the Russian people and
to keep safe the essential traits of the Russian soul in inviolability
from external influences.
Of course, the guarantee of the preservation of our national unity,
the guarantee of the preservation of the sanctity of the finest
traditions of the true Russian Orthodox ideal only exists in that
organ which is entirely independent of any outside influences, and,
having no interests at all except for the preservation of the purity
of the faith of the Russian people in the diaspora, is prepared
for patriotic self-sacrifice in its confession of the truth.
He who fully understands the spiritual needs of the Russian people
in the diaspora, who experiences heartfelt suffering for their sorrows
completely, can only be one for whom the Russian diaspora and the
Russian people are not only a brother nation, but for whom they
are of one flesh and blood and soul. Only that person for whom the
spiritual state of the people is that of his own can properly lead
the people on the path of salvation, without falling into temptation
and without being repulsed by instances of disgraceful distortion
of their souls. Only he who is an organic part of the diaspora,
not only spiritually, but physically, can pastorally combine in
his heart the sorrows of the diaspora, and will be prepared for
pastoral and patriotic self-sacrifice.
That is why we cherish the holy Conciliarity of our bishops, for
it is from them that we hear the bold voice of the hierarchs who
are enduring, alongside of us, both the spiritual and material difficulties
of exile.
We hold dear the Council for the very fact that it expresses the
spiritual unity of our diaspora and its spiritual independence,
and for this reason it by its very essence it can be dependent upon
no one, to fully defend the interests of the Russian Orthodox people
scattered throughout the world, serving only them, and not the special
interests of those organizations and political unions, faiths, jurisdictions
or nations which would exert their influence.
Any person who submits to another obligates himself to assume the
interests of the latter. By entering a non-Russian jurisdiction,
one would need to protect the interests not of the Russian nation,
not of the Russian Church, not the spiritual interests of the Russian
people, but first of all of those, to whom he submitted.
At the same time, today, when the Russian people in exile have no
national property—territory having been taken from them--no national
rulers to whom the treasure of the national spirit is dear, they
have only spiritual leaders. They assumed the entirety of Russian
national interests, possessing the mysterious essence of the Russian
national spirit, and they manifest these spiritual and moral ideals.
Our faith and traditions of Orthodox piety cannot be taken from
us; one can reject them out of blindness or ignorance, but they
cannot be taken away by force. This tradition of Russian piety,
preserved from external influence, the independence of our Council,
gathered from all points of our diaspora, will preserve for us Holy
Russia.
In the present difficult daily circumstances of the Russian Church
abroad, as we said, our hierarchs must truly be patriotically self-sacrificing
confessors of the truth. Indeed, insults from those of other nations,
material hardships, betrayals from false brothers, sorrows even
from our own brothers, from those of other faiths, ahead lying only
unremitting darkness, the striving of the enemies of unity to dismember
it—all this, instead of consolation and joy, is what our archpastors
and pastors see around them, this is what they must struggle against,
overcoming the helplessness which such circumstances evoke. That
is why a person who does not feel prepared for self-sacrifice cannot
understand the situation, cannot find the proper and necessary paths
of our treasure of the Orthodox faith and Russian Orthodox piety.
Of course, it is easier from afar, from a point of safety a judicial
security, to bear some platonic sympathy for those unbelievable
difficulties caused by internal and external forces and endured
by the pastors in the emigration. It is a great podvig [spiritual
struggle] to lead an unruly flock, who often demand that their pastor
fulfill their own capricious desires, which sometimes contradict
the basic principles of Orthodoxy, even of Christianity itself.
These pastors protect us from straying to non-Orthodox ideas and
the temptation of compromises, which could lead to the appearance
of some external Òsplendid and peaceful life,Ó and they protect
us from the wolves who try to exploit the incredible lack of awareness
of the flock in questions of faith, not to speak of canonical law.
In this silent, unnoticed great podvig of suffering over the spiritual
impoverishment of the Russian emigration is the greatness of the
Council of our hierarchs, in it lies the historical justification
of its existence. The colossal significance which the Council has
for preserving us as Orthodox and pious people will be fully recognized
only by the future historian, who will draw conclusions without
bias on all that transpired with the Russian people.
If we had no Council to spiritually unite the entire Russian emigration
from one end of the earth to the other, if Russian church groups
differentiate in their own countries, or, worse yet, went under
the omophorion of non-Russian jurisdictions, then the spiritual
division occurring as a result of their dissemination among other
peoples would gradually lead first to the external, then to the
internal disappearance of the Russian spiritual character, in awesome
proportions. Unwillingly, the traits of other nations (first external,
then internal) would be assumed, and the following generations raised
in this way, and in 15 years, no more, there will no longer be Russian
people. There will be Russian surnames, but not that which comprises
Holy Russia: there will be no Russian spirit, nor its life-giving
origins—Russian Orthodox piety; instead there will be Frenchmen
and Americans with Russian surnames.
The truly Orthodox Russian person is most alarmed at that mark which
causes division in the Russian Church Abroad. It happens that autocephaly
(that is, full independence in governance) is obtained by a local
church as a result of external circumstances, preserving at the
same time full unity of faith and unity in prayer with other Local
Churches. For in principle, if a church is Orthodox, its members
are humanity that is saving itself, the Head of which is the God-Man
Jesus Christ. In this way, the following churches found their identity
in an administrative sense: the Churches of Antioch, Jerusalem,
Russia, Serbian, Rumanian, etc.--in a purely administrative sense,
but not at all in an ideological one. The unity of mankind which
is seeking salvation is not violated by this, the salvific path
and attitude is not violated. This seeming division did not alarm
the Orthodox person very much who strove for salvation.
But if we closely examine the reasons which cause unrest, we will
see that division arises not on a personal and administrative basis,
as the newspapers attempt to portray it, relying on the insufficient
awareness of the Russian intelligentsia in matters of faith, but
on an ideological basis.
These are the bases upon which divisions and groupings of people
occur in various ecclesiastical unions: 1) compromise with non-Orthodox,
accepting ideas alien to Orthodoxy, 2) modernism. The first tendency
abides in Western Europe, the second in the newly-formed governments,
especially in the New World.
The limitations of space do not allow us to examine these bases;
let us see how the two directions lie at the foundation of the sorrowful
ideological divisions.
The Council of Russian bishops, gathering from all parts of the
Russian diaspora and headed by the staid protectors of Orthodox
tradition, firmly stood guard to this day over the purity of this
tradition. The unity of the Church and the uniting of all hierarchs
at the Council would demand following the traditions of Orthodox
piety in the full sense of the term. At the same time, this way
contradicts the inclinations and desires, it contradicts the very
mood of those who know only a part of the truth, from the heterodox
(and some untruth from us), who sympathize with the modernist tendency,
which has already shown its lack of saving grace.
This is what makes the Conciliar manner of preserving the purity
and wholeness of the Orthodox attitude unacceptable for those who
no longer sense the Church as a constantly-renewing entity which
saves mankind, but sees in her only a political force or a recollection
of a splendid past.
Look how the people in these various groups have fallen together.
They united in the commonality of their mood: modernist with modernist,
inter-confessionalists with inter-confessionalists, Orthodox with
the true preservers of the Orthodox spirit (and not only its external
aspects) of apostolic tradition.
It is in this and nothing else that the root of division lies. This
is simply the expression of the inner world, the spiritual state
of mind, but in fact it occurred in the soul first, before it was
written about and brought to life.
In that case, they will say, this is not a matter of divisions,
but the separation of traditional Orthodox from non-traditional
Orthodox, that is, of real Orthodox from those who mix into Orthodoxy
something novel, or from those who hinder piety. Alas, this is true.
For those who left and adopted other ways will more easily accept
novelties in emulation of the non-Orthodox, then one cannot be held
responsible, one can be free (not in an administrative sense—this
is only an excuse—but in a moral sense, freedom from conscience
and responsibility before the Church, the Council, this is the subconscious
root of division). Division is rooted in moral disharmony. That
which Christ spoke of (Matth. 25:32). This happens from the attitude
of the soul, from the free choice of either the path to salvation—in
agreement with the fullness of Orthodox piety loyal to God, or the
path to perdition, by seeking one’s own ways, in freeing oneself
from the moral imperatives, which is developed through communion
and unity with the Council of true preservers of apostolic tradition—our
Hierarchs.
From Svyataya Zemlya [Holy Land], No. 11, Jerusalem, 1935.
|