|
|
Return to Home Page
ON THE DESTINY OF RUSSIA
AND THE RESTORATION OF THE ORTHODOX WORLD
A new Rus, on the pattern of the old, will be raised up on the bones
of the martyrs, as on a strong foundation; strong in her faith in Christ
God and the Holy Trinity; and she will be in accordance with the covenant
of the holy prince Vladimir – as one Church.
Prophecy of St John of Kronstadt
FOREWORD
To
destroy a country, you first have to destroy its soul. For when a country
loses its soul, it loses its spiritual identity. This was the programme
of first the Constitutionalists and then the Bolsheviks, who usurped power
in the Russian Empire in 1917. In order to destroy Russian spiritual identity,
their first target was the Church, the guardian of Russia’s soul.
In
their plan to create an atheist State, they failed. Although in 1917,
a third of Russians had lost their Faith, today, according to the latest
reports, only 15% of Russians are atheists. Moreover, it seems that many
of these are the elderly heirs of old-fashioned Soviet atheism. What has
brought the younger generations back to their undestroyed Church?
THE
COMMON STRUGGLE AGAINST SOVIET PERSECUTION
The’
long, dark night’ of Soviet rule, in the words of St Tikhon, Patriarch
of Moscow (+ 1925), ended sixteen years ago. It was hastened to its end
by the miraculous canonization of the New Martyrs and Confessors by ROCOR,
the free part of the Russian Orthodox Church, outside Russia, in 1981
in New York. The lives of the New Martyrs and Confessors led to the realization
of what the Church means for Russia, bringing about the collapse of Communism
after the celebration of the thousandth anniversary of the Baptism of
Rus in 1988. Then, many began to understand that ‘Soviet’
meant anti-Russian - hence the great numbers of Russian victims in the
Second World War. Many Russians began to realize that they had been the
victims of the bloodiest conspiracy in history.
Many
began to free themselves from fear and there began the process of Rebaptism.
First, there was the formal fall of Communism in 1991 and then, in the
year 2000, the recognition of the New Martyrs and Confessors inside Russia,
signifying the long-awaited freedom of the Church there. The process of
repentance and purification has been under way and still is under way
inside Russia. We do not know how many years and decades it will take
and when the majority of the population will at last be Churched. For
this to happen, they will have to realize that the Western consumerism
that they are now largely being fed on is, like liberalism, just another
variety of the same Western materialism as Marxist-Leninism.
No
objective observer of the events in Russia since 1988 can doubt any of
this and no observer can doubt the Providential role of the Church Outside
Russia in any of this. Its role in revealing the persecution of the enslaved
Church in Russia to the Western world and in canonizing the saints, whom
the Church inside Russia was not allowed to canonize, is beyond doubt.
As the ever-memorable Metropolitan John of St Petersburg and Ladoga (+
1995) wrote in 1992:
Having
separated administratively, the Russian Church did not lose its spiritual
unity. The part outside Russia gained the freedom required to denounce
the evil that ruled in the homeland, in Russia. In hostile surroundings,
either Non-Orthodox or else surroundings confessing a Non-Christian religion
altogether, Russian people abroad showed the world the spiritual feat
of standing in the truth of Orthodoxy, the feat of hope and faith, faith
that the time would come when the torment of our captivity would end and
the Lord would deliver Rus, worn out by suffering, from the yoke of the
sacrilegious (1).
THE
COMMON STRUGGLE AGAINST MODERNIST PERSECUTION
The
common struggle of both parts of the Russian Church against Soviet persecution,
inside and outside Russia, was mirrored by their common struggle against
renovationist persecution. Inside Russia, the renovationists, or modernists,
were sponsored by the Communists in order to destroy the Church from within.
They were defeated.
Outside
Russia, in conditions of relative freedom, the same struggle went on,
but whenever the modernists risked defeat, they ran to another jurisdiction.
There, they were free to pursue their errors, which were agreeable to
the powers of this world, whether heterodox or purely secular. In recent
years, as the part of the Russian Church based in Moscow has come into
contact with the outside world, it too has found itself forced to confront
modernist renovationism again.
Thus,
on 27 March 2007, the Patriarchal Diocese of Korsun in Paris under Archbishop
Innokenty, found itself obliged to suspend its participation in meetings
of the Standing Committee of Orthodox Bishops in France. This temporary
suspension has come about because of the centralizing tendencies of that
Assembly around the Patriarchate of Constantinople and the resulting crisis
within it. There is also the problem of the modernist elements who run
the Service Orthodoxe de Presse (SOP), which calls itself the official
organ of the Assembly. In fact, it is an organization which for decades
has been engaged in both anti-Orthodox and anti-Russian propaganda and
has continually attacked both the Church inside Russia and the Church
Outside Russia (ROCOR). No wonder that the Church Outside Russia long
ago refused to have anything to do with it. Now the Church inside Russia
has decided on the same course of action.
For
years we have resisted the modernist Renovationists, first in London and
then in Paris, confessing the Faith against the tide. In those dark days
we stood alone. Now we are being joined by 75% of the Orthodox world.
The position taken by ROCOR is confirmed by the rest of the Russian Church,
both in its condemnation of Soviet persecution and in the persecution
by modernism. Thus, today, both parts of the Russian Church stand together,
sharing the same viewpoints, strengthening one another.
TOWARDS
THE RESTORATION OF ORTHODOX UNITY
The
revival of Orthodoxy in Russia and the baptism of a hundred million into
the Church there may mean a change in the fortunes of worldwide Orthodoxy,
the rebirth of the Orthodox oikumene. Only on 23 March 2007,
Metropolitan Amphilochius of Montenegro, asserted that the position taken
by Russia on the question of Kosovo and Metochia would be decisive for
the ‘fate of Europe’. Either Western Europe would sink into
utter decadence, or else, by following the Russian view and refusing to
grant independence to Muslim colonists and bandits, it would stand up
for the Christian roots of Europe.
Of
course, other parts of the Orthodox world outside the Church in Russia
have also always supported an uncompromised Orthodoxy, whether in Serbia
and Montenegro, in Georgia and Jerusalem, or on the Holy Mountain of Athos.
In all these ‘keys to the kingdom’, there have always been
those who understood the importance of keeping Orthodoxy unblemished.
However, today, the younger generation in many other Local Orthodox Churches
are beginning to bring others to repentance, steering others back to Orthodox
ecclesiology, the calendar and other traditions. Thus, it is rumoured
that the Finnish Church is considering returning to the Orthodox calendar.
A quarter of the parishes in the ‘Orthodox Church in America’
(OCA) are now on the Orthodox calendar and many there are now disenchanted
with their previous errors on ecumenism. Some in the Polish, Czechoslovak
and Japanese Churches, which allowed some to use the Roman Catholic calendar,
are thinking the same way. A return to roots is under way. Relations between
the Russian Church and the Patriarchates of Antioch, Alexandria, Bucharest
and Sofia are good, as also with the Churches of Greece and Cyprus.
However,
in the isolationist, modernist axis of Istanbul and Paris there is still
stubborn resistance. Those bastions of modernism, the first to go modernist,
taking advantage of the Bolshevik coup d’etat in 1917, will no doubt
be the last to repent. They look not to the future, but to the past. Similarly,
there are those at the other extreme, also frequently elderly, who still
look to the past. As yet, they cannot see the wood for the trees and continue
to resist Russian-led Orthodox unity and integrity. This is because, dwelling
in the past, they look more to the compromises of the past than to the
repentance of the present and the hope for the future.
They
forget that there are such things as repentance and forgiveness, still
confusing Soviet with Russian, in the Western manner. Sometimes, this
may be because some lack love for Russia. But, more seriously, this situation
may also sometimes be indicative of a lack of love for real Orthodoxy.
Some do not understand that the use of the Roman Catholic calendar for
the fixed feasts is not a heresy. A grave mistake, yes, but not a heresy.
Some do not understand that without love, the canons have no sense. Some
do not see in their emotional resistance that those who fight against
the unity of the Russian Church are in fact fighting side by side with
the enemies of Orthodoxy, the very elements whom they claim to be resisting.
Some have yet to grasp that their opposition to a revived, free and united
Russian Church is in fact in the interests of the enemies of Orthodoxy.
TOWARDS
THE RESTORATION OF AN ORTHODOX EMPIRE
If
repentance continues in Russia, not only will the other Local Orthodox
Churches further unite, but also political changes will take place in
Russia. On 27 March 2007, Metropolitan Kirill of the Patriarchate inside
Russia, spoke of the desirability of the restoration of the Orthodox Monarchy
in Russia. He wishes to see the moral condition of Russian society restored,
so that one day Russians could see Orthodox monarchy restored. However,
he also added that Russia is simply not morally ready for this at this
time.
Virtually
everyone would agree with him, for to have an Orthodox Monarchy, virtually
100% of the people must themselves be Orthodox, seeing in the Monarch
their natural leader. For there must be spiritual unity between the Lord’s
Anointed and the people he represents. Otherwise, Monarchy will fall into
Western errors, either of oppressive Absolutism, or else of feeble Constitutionalism.
It was processes of spiritual disunity that originally brought about the
fall of the Orthodox Monarchy in 1917, when the people rejected their
own Monarch. Therefore, it will require the reverse spiritual processes
to change the present situation. And although the processes of spiritual
disunity and dissolution are indeed in reverse in contemporary Russia,
they are only just beginning.
Any
Orthodox Monarchy must be desired by the people from inside, not imposed
by force from outside. And, as the Metropolitan commented, any Orthodox
Monarchy must be just that, Orthodox, self-sacrificing, ascetic. It must
not be as the majority of spoilt Constitutional monarchies of Western
Europe, with their constant scandals, the self-sacrificial life of Queen
Elizabeth II providing one of the few exceptions here.
However,
if the Christian Monarchy were restored in Russia, it would provide a
focus and centre of unity for all the Local Orthodox Churches. And it
would also restore Russia to its historic role and destiny, since 1453,
as the leader of the Orthodox world, the centre of the Orthodox Empire.
AFTERWORD
Before
us we already see two patterns for the future. The first is the continued
and increasingly rapid descent into spiritual and moral catastrophe worldwide.
The demons who were unleashed in Western Europe in 1914 and went to Russia
in 1917 have been leaving the Soviet Union since 1991. They have been
moving to the European Union, established by the Treaty of Maastricht
in 1992, where they torment and provoke men into the spiritual delusion
of atheism. As the prophecies say, at the end of time, hell will be emptied
of demons, for they will all be on earth.
The
other pattern is the restoration of an Orthodox world, which will put
off the end until a later time. The restoration of the historical and
‘meta-historical’ (beyond history) destiny of Russia, and
so of the whole Orthodox oikumene, is now the only thing that
can hold back the end of the world. This is not a nationalist question,
not something that concerns only Russians. Speaking of this in 1992, Metropolitan
John of St Petersburg and Ladoga wrote:
The
understanding of ‘Russian’…is not exclusively an ethnic
characteristic. The participation in the ministry of the Russian people
can be undertaken by all who recognize that this ministry has been Divinely
established and who identify themselves with the Russian people in spirit,
aim and the meaning of life, regardless of their national origins (2).
And
before this, nearly twenty years ago, we wrote:
Has
perhaps the whole of this (twentieth) century not been a kind of Lent,
which is to end, yet, in a great Paschal celebration, the return of man
to God through repentance? (3)
For
we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together
until now (Romans 8, 22). As now we prepare to go up to Jerusalem,
we too await the Resurrection.
Priest Andrew Phillips
Felixstowe
East Anglia
18/31 March 2007
Lazarus Saturday
Notes:
1.
The Triumph of Orthodoxy in Russkiy Uzel, p. 50, Tsarskoye Delo, St Petersburg,
2007.
2.
The Mystery of Iniquity in Russkiy Uzel, p. 18.
3.
1989 in Orthodox Christianity and the English Tradition, p. 101, The English
Orthodox Trust, East Anglia, 1995.
|
|
|
|