|
|
Return to Home Page
Three Romes: A Stark Warning
Two Romes have fallen, but the third stands, and a fourth there will
not be.
The Russian Monk Philotheus c. 1520
Foreword
From
an Orthodox point of view, Old Rome fell when it lost the Orthodox Faith
and cut itself off from the Church in the eleventh century. The Second
Rome, Constantinople, fell when it was conquered by Muslims in the fifteenth
century. As for the Third Rome, Moscow, it fell to militant ‘humanist’
atheism in 1917. However, such simple notions need closer examination,
for they conceal greater truths from which we can still learn for our
benefit. These truths are all concerned with the question ‘Why?’
Why
did the First Rome fall?
Old
Rome fell, because it saw in itself the continuation of the old pagan
Roman Empire, the leaders of its Church substituting themselves for the
old pagan Roman Emperors, who had claimed universal jurisdiction. This
imperialism was taken up by newly-converted Germanic peoples and imposed
ideologically through the teaching of the filioque. This was a doctrinal
heresy, added to the Creed of the Universal Church, which made the Popes
of Rome substitutes for Christ, from Whom, according to their novel doctrine,
proceeded the Spirit of Truth and all authority. Thus, arrogant Germanic
nationalism, added to historic Roman narcissism, caused the Schism of
the West, which ripened and fell from the Tree of the Church in the eleventh
century. The new faith was called ‘Roman Catholicism’, a contradiction
in terms, for something merely local, ‘Roman’, cannot in its
local form also be universal, or ‘catholic’. The essence of
the fall was imperial ‘Romanism’, what can be called doctrinal
nationalism (1).
Why
did the Second Rome fall?
New
Rome, Constantinople, came soon after its foundation to be dominated by
Greek culture and language. Again and again, the political centralism
of the Greek-speaking Emperors and Empresses in Constantinople led them
into both heresy and brutality, especially in the form of blinding its
enemies. The imposition of this centralism led to the alienation of other
races. Thus, Persian Orthodox were led to fall into Nestorianism, which
spread to Afghanistan and China, meaning that the first Christians there
were not Orthodox. In turn, Armenians, Copts and Syrians fell into Monophysitism,
not necessarily because they were Monophysites, but because of their sense
of outraged nationalism.
The
fact that the Greek elite of Constantinople had already alienated these
peoples only encouraged the spread of Islam. The fact they also showed
such contempt for the ‘barbarian’ Western peoples did nothing
to prevent their fall into heresy. Even Orthodox Bulgarians and Serbs
at times rose up against the imperialistic injustices of Constantinople.
The racism, or ‘phyletism’ of the Greek cultural elite, who
even called other Orthodox ‘barbarians’ (2), led to their
willingness to compromise the Orthodox Faith at the Council of Florence
in 1439 and become Uniats. Any sacrifice could be made, provided that
the elite could keep its racial heritage. The result was that very swiftly
the Second Rome fell to the Muslims, the Lord allowing the Empire to be
taken away. The essence of the fall was something that the Apostle Paul
condemned, Hellenism, what can be called ‘ethnic nationalism’.
Why
did the Third Rome fall?
After
the fall of the Second Rome, there remained only one source of power in
the Orthodox Commonwealth and that was in Moscow. With the First Rome
fallen into doctrinal error, the Second fallen to the ‘Hagarenes’
after compromising the Orthodox Faith, responsibility for Orthodoxy fell
to Moscow. However, this responsibility soon became mingled with nationalism.
Tragically, those who had a broader vision of the Orthodox world, like
Patriarch Nikon in the seventeenth century, were deposed and from 1700
on the Russian Church found itself controlled by a Department of State
on the Protestant model. The aim was to reduce Orthodoxy to a mere national
ritualism of outward observance.
Then
the understanding of the Church Fathers was submerged beneath the knowledge
of German philosophy and Western technology, which together formed the
bedrock of the new centralizing Russian national chauvinism and its imposition
of Muscovite language, culture and customs, even in ancient Orthodox lands
and regions like Georgia, Belarus, Galicia and other border areas. This
inevitably led to the fall of 1917. Soviet Communism preached the supremacy
of Russia without Orthodoxy, replacing the Third Rome
by the Third International. It replaced icon banners with portraits of
its demons and in the centre of the Third Rome enshrined the ‘relics’
of its 'immortal' founder, Lenin. His forename, Vladimir, meaning ‘the
ruler of the world’, echoed that of St Vladimir, who had baptized
Russia nearly a thousand years before.
At
that time, millions of Russian Orthodox were massacred by other Russian
‘Orthodox’. The difference was that the former were practising
Orthodox, the latter were apostates and had quite lost their Faith. The
symbol of them was Stalin, the apostate Orthodox seminarian, who became
probably the greatest mass murderer in all human history. The problem
was that the Orthodox Faith had for them been reduced to a mere external
rite or ideology, for which an easier ideology, promising paradise on
earth without God, could be substituted. The Communists
behaved like Orthodox, but without Christ, i.e. anti-Orthodox. And that
is what they were, Christless, and so devilful. The essence of the fall
was externalism, what can be called ‘ritual nationalism’.
The
Third Rome and the Future
It
may be argued that there is one vital difference between the first Two
Romes and the Third. The First has not repented, but persists in its errors.
The Second is still occupied, partly due to its ever-willingness to compromise
the Faith, as we have again recently seen in Istanbul. The Third, however,
is in the process of repenting. What truth is there in this argument?
True,
Communism fell fifteen years ago. However, the scars which Communism left
are everywhere clearly visible. Everywhere, alcoholism from the dread
Polish vodka, everywhere, sexually transmitted diseases and abortion,
everywhere, ecological catastrophe, everywhere, crime, injustice and intimidation,
everywhere, the rule of the Mafia (3). It took seventy-five years for
Communism to fail so utterly. It may take seventy-five years for repentance
for Orthodoxy to work so utterly. Today, over 27,000 churches are open
in Russia - a miracle when compared to the 6,000 churches open fifteen
years ago. But we shall only be assured of popular repentance, when there
are 100,000 churches open in Russia. There is still so far to go. We are
only just beginning.
Afterword
Thus,
human-beings have compromised the Faith brought by the Son of God, with
three sorts of nationalism. Firstly, they corrupted the teachings of the
Church, directly contradicting the words of Christ in the Gospel, that
the Spirit proceeds from the Father (Jn. 15, 26). This was doctrinal
nationalism. Then they sold their Faith for the mess of pottage
of their race. This was ethnic nationalism. Then they
substituted mere external ritual for the Faith. This was ritual
nationalism. And yet by virtue of the repentance and sacrifice
of the New Martyrs and Confessors, the Third Rome has, miraculously, been
allowed to rise again. Crucifixion is followed by Resurrection. However,
this rising again is only for a time. Here, there is a stark warning.
If Russia makes her Orthodoxy once more into a mere national ritual, she
will lose it again, and this time for ever.
All
the best elements in Russia’s history worked not nationally, but
internationally. They understood that Russia’s responsibility was
multinational and multilingual. Whether it was the wonderful mix of Russian,
Bulgarian, Greek, Syrian, Hungarian, Serbian and others in Kievan Russia,
St Anthony and St Macarius the Romans living the ascetic life in Russia’s
forests, whether it was St Stephen of Perm converting the Zyrians, St
Solomonia the Tartar, Patriarch Nikon, ‘Russian, but whose faith
and religion are Greek’, with his international Monastery at New
Jerusalem outside Moscow, whether it was St Herman of Alaska, converting
Inuit and Eskimo, St Nicholas of Tokyo, converting the Japanese, or St
John of Shanghai, celebrating in Greek, Chinese, Dutch, French or English,
they all understood that Orthodoxy is not a national cult, but a Commonwealth,
of which God has put Russia in charge, and that if Russia is not worthy
of that charge, it will be taken away from her.
Thus,
when contemporary Russia builds and opens new churches in China, Iceland,
Korea, Italy, Vietnam, Holland, South America, India and Cuba, and translates
the Gospel and the catechism into many languages, from Chinese to those
of Siberian peoples, she does well. But she must also realize that her
responsibilities are not only to her own ethnic peoples, but to World
Orthodoxy. Local Orthodoxy can quickly sour into a narrow chauvinism,
if it is not combined with love of the Orthodox Commonwealth. May the
New Russia learn from the errors and betrayals of the First and Second
Romes, but may she also learn from the errors of the Third Rome. The Orthodox
Christian Faith cannot be reduced to a mere ritual or language, for what
is important is its inner content. Let us hear much less about ‘The
Third Rome’, and much more about ‘Holy Russia’, which
is the defining essence of the spiritual meaning of Russia. For it is
to the example of Holy Russia, and to no other, that we must all turn
and repent.
Fr
Andrew
25
November/ 8 December 2006
Hieromartyr Clement, Pope of Rome
Notes:
1.
This is the error repeated by all Western European leaders ever since.
Thus, to take a local and contemporary example, the failed moralist and
politician and anti-Serb warmonger, Mr Blair, considers that some vague
and undefined State ideology, which he calls ‘Britishness’,
must be considered to be more important than every religion. So, he has
called for all who live in the United Kingdom to put every religion and
culture after ‘Britishness’. It seems extraordinary that this
arrogant lowland Scotsman should admonish, in his usual Calvinistic dictatorial
manner, fifty million English people, telling them that they can no longer
put Christ first. Is this a call to martyrdom?
2.
See for example pp. 284-285, 345, 354-356 and 366-367 in The Byzantine
Commonwealth by Dimitri Obolensky, Weidenfeld and Nicolson, London
1971.
3.
As seen in the recent assassination in London of the spy Litvinenko, poisoned
possibly by expatriate Russian-Jewish Mafia oligarchs, who made huge fortunes
from the ‘privatization’ of Russian national assets in the
1990s, under the alcoholic President Yeltsin.
|
|
|
|