The fate of the Western Russian metropolis. Orthodoxy in Lithuania under the Jagiellonians. Orthodox churches in Lithuania The beginning of the oppression of the Orthodox in Lithuania date

Chapter seven. Class struggle in the Galicia-Volyn principality in the 12th-13th centuries. In the southwest of Rus' are the lands of the Galicia-Volyn principality, the so-called Chervona Rus. Fast mountain rivers: Cheremosh and Latoritsa, Tissa and Poprad, wide, calm Bug, Dniester, Prut,

Orthodox Church in Lithuania

The history of Orthodoxy in Lithuania is varied and goes back centuries. Orthodox burials date back to at least the 13th century, however, most likely Orthodoxy, along with the Russian-speaking population, appeared in the region even earlier. The main center of Orthodoxy in the entire region has always been Vilnius (Vilna), whose influence also covered most of the Belarusian lands, while in most of the territory of modern ethnic Lithuania Orthodoxy spread weakly and sporadically. In the 15th century, Vilna was a “Russian” (ruthenica) and Orthodox city; for seven Catholic churches (partially sponsored by the state, since Catholicism had already become the state religion), there were 14 churches and 8 chapels of the Orthodox confession. Orthodoxy penetrated into Lithuania in two directions. The first is state-aristocratic (thanks to dynastic marriages with Russian princely families, as a result of which most of the Lithuanian princes of the 14th century were baptized in Orthodoxy), the Second is trade and craftsmen who came from Russian lands. Orthodoxy in Lithuanian lands has always been a minority religion, and was often oppressed by the dominant religions. In the pre-Catholic period, interreligious relations were mostly smooth. True, in 1347, at the insistence of the pagans, three Orthodox Christians were executed: the Vilna martyrs Anthony, John and Eustathius. This event remained the most “hot” clash with paganism. Soon after this execution, a church was built in its place, where the relics of the martyrs were kept for a long time. In 1316 (or 1317), at the request of Grand Duke Vytenis, the Patriarch of Constantinople established the Lithuanian Orthodox Metropolis. The very existence of a separate metropolis was closely intertwined with high politics, in which there were three sides - the Lithuanian and Moscow princes and the patriarchs of Constantinople. The former tried to separate their Orthodox subjects from the Moscow spiritual center, the latter sought to maintain their influence. The final approval of a separate Lithuanian (named Kyiv) metropolis occurred only in 1458.

A new stage of relations with state power began with the adoption of Catholicism as the state religion (1387 year of the baptism of Lithuania and 1417 baptism of Zhmudi). Gradually, the Orthodox were increasingly oppressed in their rights (in 1413 a decree was issued to appoint only Catholics to government positions). From the middle of the 15th century, state pressure began to bring the Orthodox under the rule of Rome (for ten years the metropolis was ruled by Metropolitan Gregory, installed in Rome, but the flock and hierarchs did not accept the union. At the end of his life, Gregory turned to Constantinople and was accepted under his omophorion, i.e. e. jurisdiction). Orthodox metropolitans for Lithuania were elected during this period with the consent of the Grand Duke. The state's relations with Orthodoxy were undulating; a series of oppressions and the introduction of Catholicism were usually followed by relaxations. Thus, in 1480, the construction of new churches and the repair of existing churches was prohibited, but soon enough its observance began to falter. Catholic preachers also arrived in the Grand Duchy, whose main activity was the fight against Orthodoxy and preaching union. The oppression of the Orthodox led to the lands falling away from the Principality of Lithuania and to wars with Moscow. Also, a serious blow to the church was dealt by the patronage system, when the laity built churches at their own expense and subsequently remained their owners and were free to dispose of them. The owners of the patronage could appoint a priest, sell the patronage and at his expense increase their material resources. Often Orthodox parishes ended up being owned by Catholics, who did not care about the interests of the church at all, because of which morality and order suffered greatly, and church life fell into decay. At the beginning of the 16th century, the Vilna Council was even held, which was supposed to normalize church life, but the actual implementation of the important decisions it made turned out to be very difficult. In the middle of the 16th century, Protestantism penetrated into Lithuania, having significant success, and attracting a significant part of the Orthodox nobility. The slight liberalization that followed (allowing Orthodox Christians to hold government positions) did not bring tangible relief; the losses from the transition to Protestantism were too great and the future trials were too difficult.

The year 1569 marked a new stage in the life of Lithuanian Orthodoxy the state Union of Lublin was concluded and a single Polish-Lithuanian state of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was created (and a significant part of the lands came under Polish rule those that would later become Ukraine), after which the pressure on Orthodoxy increased and became more systematic. In the same 1569, the Jesuits were invited to Vilna to carry out the Counter-Reformation (which, of course, also affected the Orthodox population). An intellectual war against Orthodoxy began (corresponding treatises were written, Orthodox children were willingly taken to free Jesuit schools). At the same time, Orthodox brotherhoods began to be created, which were engaged in charity, education and the fight against abuses of the clergy; they also acquired significant power, which could not please the church hierarchy. At the same time, state pressure did not decrease. As a result, in 1595, the Orthodox hierarchs adopted a Union with the Catholic Church. Those who accepted the union hoped to receive full equality with the Catholic clergy, i.e. significant improvement of their own and the general church position. At this time, Prince Konstantin Ostozhsky, a defender of Orthodoxy (who was the second most important person in the state), especially showed himself, who managed to push back the Union itself for several years, and after its adoption, defend the interests of his oppressed faith. A powerful uprising against the union swept across the country, developing into a popular uprising, as a result of which the bishops of Lvov and Przemysl renounced the Union. After the metropolitan returned from Rome, the king notified all Orthodox Christians on May 29, 1596 that the union of the Churches had taken place, and those opposing the Union actually began to be considered rebellious against the authorities. The new policy was implemented by force: some opponents of the Union were arrested and imprisoned, others fled abroad from such repressions. Also in 1596, a decree was issued banning the construction of new Orthodox churches. Already existing Orthodox churches were converted into Uniate churches; by 1611 in Vilna, all former Orthodox churches were occupied by supporters of the union. The only stronghold of Orthodoxy remained the Holy Spirit Monastery, founded after the transfer of the Holy Trotsky Monastery to the Uniates. The monastery itself was stauropegal (received the corresponding rights as an “inheritance” from St. Trotsky), subordinate directly to the Patriarch of Constantinople. And over the next almost two hundred years, only the monastery and its metochia (attached churches), of which there were four on the territory of modern Lithuania, maintained the Orthodox fire in the region. As a result of oppression and active struggle against Orthodoxy, by 1795 only a few hundred Orthodox Christians remained on the territory of Lithuania. And religious oppression itself largely became the reason for the fall of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth; Orthodox believers, who made up the majority of the population in the eastern part of the country, were perceived by the authorities as a threat to the existence of the state, among An active policy was pursued among them with the aim of bringing them to Catholicism, and thus making the state more monolithic. In turn, such a policy precisely caused discontent, uprisings, and, as a result, the separation of entire pieces of the state and an appeal to co-religious Moscow for help.

In 1795, after the third partition of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, the territory of Lithuania for the most part became part of the Russian Empire and all oppression of the Orthodox stopped. The Minsk diocese is being created, which includes all believers in the region. However, the new government did not pursue an active religious policy at first, and took it up only after the suppression of the first Polish uprising in 1830 then the process of resettling peasants from the Russian hinterland began (however, not very successful due to the scattered nature and small numbers, the settlers quickly assimilated among the local population). The authorities were also concerned about ending the consequences of the Union in 1839, the Greek Catholic Metropolitan Joseph (Semashko) carried out the annexation of his Lithuanian diocese to Orthodoxy, as a result of which hundreds of thousands of nominal Orthodox Christians appeared in the region (the territory of that Lithuanian diocese covered a significant part of modern Belarus). 633 Greek Catholic parishes were annexed. However, the level of Latinization of the church was very high (for example, only 15 churches had iconostasis preserved, in the rest they had to be restored after annexation) and many “new Orthodox” gravitated towards Catholicism, as a result of which many small parishes gradually died out. In 1845, the center of the diocese was moved from Zhirovitsy to Vilna, and the former Catholic Church of St. Casimir was turned into the Cathedral of St. Nicholas. However, until the second Polish uprising of 1863-64, the newly created Orthodox Lithuanian diocese received virtually no assistance from the Russian treasury for the repair and construction of churches (many of which were extremely neglected, if not completely closed). The tsarist policy changed dramatically: many Catholic churches were closed or transferred to the Orthodox, sums were allocated for the renovation of old and construction of new churches, and the second wave of resettlement of Russian peasants began. By the end of the 60s, there were already 450 churches operating in the diocese. The Vilna diocese itself became a prestigious place, an outpost of Orthodoxy, venerable bishops were appointed there, such as the prominent historian and theologian of the Russian Church Macarius (Bulgakov), Jerome (Ekzemplyarovsky), Agafangel (Preobrazhensky) and the future patriarch and saint Tikhon (Belavin). The law on religious tolerance adopted in 1905 significantly hit the Orthodox Vilna diocese; Orthodoxy was abruptly pulled out of its hothouse conditions, all confessions were given freedom of action, while the Orthodox Church itself was still closely connected with the state apparatus and dependent on it. A significant number of believers (according to the Roman Catholic Diocese, 62 thousand people from 1905 to 1909) converted to the Catholic Church, which clearly showed that during the decades of formal stay of these people in Orthodoxy, no tangible missionary work was carried out with them.

In 1914, the First World War began, and over time the entire territory of Lithuania was occupied by the Germans. Almost all the clergy and most of the Orthodox believers were evacuated to Russia, and the relics of the St. Vilna martyrs were also taken out. In June 1917, Bishop (later Metropolitan) Eleutherius (Epiphany) was appointed administrator of the diocese. But soon it ceased to exist Russian state, and after several years of confusion and local wars, the territory of the Vilna diocese was divided between two republics - Lithuanian and Polish. However, both states were Catholic, and at first the Orthodox faced similar problems. Firstly, the number of Orthodox churches sharply decreased; all previously confiscated churches were returned to the Catholic Church, as well as all former Uniate churches; in addition, there were cases of the return of churches that had never belonged to Catholics. Over the course of several years of war, the remaining churches fell into disrepair; some were used by German troops as warehouses. The number of believers has also decreased, because... not everyone returned from evacuation. Also, soon the state division resulted in a jurisdictional division in Poland, autocephaly of the local Orthodox Church was proclaimed, while Archbishop Eleutherius remained faithful to Moscow. In 1922, the Council of Bishops of the Polish Church dismissed him from the administration of the Vilna diocese within Poland and appointed its own bishop, Theodosius (Feodosiev). Such a decision left Archbishop Eleutherius in charge of dioceses only in the aisles of Lithuania, with the diocesan center in Kaunas. This conflict even grew into a mini-schism; in Vilna, since 1926, a so-called “patriarchal” parish operated, subordinate to Archbishop Eleutherius.

The situation in that part of the diocese that found itself on Polish territory was especially difficult. The teaching of the Law of God in schools was prohibited, the process of selecting Orthodox churches continued until the beginning of the Second World War, and often the selected churches were not used. Since 1924, the so-called “neo-union” began to be actively implemented; land holdings Orthodox Church, to which Polish peasants moved. The authorities actively interfered with the internal life of the church; in the second half of the 1930s, a program of Polonization of church life began to operate. During the entire interwar period, not a single new church was built. In Lithuania the situation was a little better, but also not ideal. As a result of reindeviction, the church lost 27 out of 58 churches, 10 parishes were officially registered, and another 21 existed without registration. Accordingly, the salaries of priests performing registration functions were not paid to everyone, and then the diocese divided these salaries among all priests. The position of the church slightly improved after the authoritarian coup in 1926, which placed first place not religious affiliation, but loyalty to the state, while the Lithuanian authorities perceived Metropolitan Eleutherius as an ally in the struggle for Vilnius. In 1939, Vilnius was annexed to Lithuania and 14 parishes of the region were transformed into the fourth deanery of the diocese. However, less than a year later, the Republic of Lithuania was occupied by Soviet troops and a temporary puppet government was established, and soon the Lithuanian SSR was formed, which wished to become part of the Soviet Union; parish life came to a standstill, the army chaplain was arrested. On December 31, 1940, Metropolitan Eleutherius died, and Archbishop Sergius (Voskresensky) was appointed to the widowed diocese, soon elevated to the rank of metropolitan and appointed Exarch of the Baltic States. With the outbreak of World War II, Exarch Sergius received an order to evacuate, but hiding in the crypt of the Riga Cathedral, the Metropolitan managed to stay and lead the revival of the Church in the German-occupied areas. Religious life continued, and the main problem of that time was the shortage of clergy, for which pastoral and theological courses were opened in Vilnius, and it was also possible to rescue clergy from the Alytus concentration camp and assign them to parishes. However, on April 28, 1944, Metropolitan Sergius was shot on the way from Vilnius to Riga; soon the front line passed through Lithuania, and it again became part of the USSR. Ten churches were also destroyed during the war.

The post-war Soviet period in the history of the Orthodox Church of Lithuania is a story of struggle for survival. The church was subject to constant pressure from the authorities, churches were closed, communities were subject to strict control. There is a widespread myth in Lithuanian historiography that the Orthodox Church was used by the Soviet authorities as a tool in the fight against Catholicism. Of course, the authorities wanted to use the church, there were corresponding plans, but the clergy of the diocese, without loudly opposing such aspirations, quietly sabotaged them by complete inaction in this direction. And the local Kaunas priest even sabotaged the activities of a colleague sent from Moscow to fight Catholicism. From 1945 to 1990, 29 Orthodox churches and houses of worship were closed (some of them were destroyed), which amounted to more than a third of the churches operating in 1945, and this can hardly be called government support. The entire Soviet period in the history of the church can be called vegetation and a struggle for survival. The main tool in the fight against the Council for the Affairs of the Russian Orthodox Church was the argument “if you close us, the believers will go to the Catholics,” which to some extent restrained church oppression. The diocese, in comparison with the pre-revolutionary and even interwar periods, was greatly reduced and impoverished atheistic propaganda and prohibitions on faith, enforced by sanctions against those attending services, primarily hit Orthodoxy, alienating most of the educated and wealthy people. And it was during this period that the warmest relations developed with the Catholic Church, which at the local level sometimes helped mendicant Orthodox parishes. For bishops, appointment to the poor and cramped Vilna See was a kind of exile. The only truly significant and joyful event during this period was the return of the holy relics of the St. Vilna martyrs, which took place on July 26, 1946, placed in the church of the Holy Spiritual Monastery.

The beginning of perestroika eased religious prohibitions, and in 1988, in connection with the celebration of the 1000th anniversary of the baptism of Rus', the so-called “second baptism of Rus'” began - an active revival of parish life, a huge number of people of all ages were baptized, and Sunday schools appeared. At the beginning of 1990, during a very difficult period for Lithuania, Archbishop Chrysostom (Martishkin), an extraordinary and notable personality, was appointed the new head of the Vilna diocese. Georgy Martishkin was born on May 3, 1934 in Ryazan region in a peasant family, graduated from junior high school and worked on a collective farm. He worked as a monument restorer for ten years, after which in 1961 he entered the Moscow Theological Seminary. His first time in the church hierarchy takes place under the omophorion of Metropolitan Nikodim (Rotov), ​​who became a teacher and mentor for the future metropolitan. Bishop Chrysostomos received his first independent appointment to the Kursk diocese, which he managed to transform - filling long-empty parishes with priests. He also performed several ordination of priests who could not be ordained by anyone else, including the dissident Father Georgy Edelstein. This was possible thanks to the energy and ability to achieve one’s own goals even in the offices of the relevant authorities. Also, Metropolitan Chrysostomos was the only hierarch who admitted that he collaborated with the KGB, but did not snitch and used the system in the interests of the Church. The newly appointed hierarch publicly supported the democratic changes taking place in the country, and was even elected as a member of the Sąjūdis Board, although he did not take an active part in its activities. Also during this period, another prominent clergyman was noted: Hilarion (Alfeev). Now Bishop of Vienna and Austria, member of the Permanent Commission for Dialogue between the Orthodox Churches and Roman Catholic Church, took monastic tonsure and ordination at the Holy Spirit Monastery, and during the January 1991 events in Vilnius he was rector of the Kaunas Cathedral. During this difficult time, he turned on the radio to the soldiers with an appeal not to carry out a possible order to shoot at people. It was precisely this position of the hierarchy and part of the priesthood that contributed to the establishment of normal relations between the Orthodox Church and the Republic of Lithuania. Many closed temples were returned, and eight new temples were built (or are still being built) in fifteen years. In addition, Orthodoxy in Lithuania managed to avoid even the slightest schism.

During the 2001 census, about 140 thousand people called themselves Orthodox (55 thousand of them in Vilnius), but a much smaller number of people actually attend services at least once a year according to intra-diocesan estimates, their number does not exceed 30-35 thousand people. In 1996, the diocese was officially registered as the "Orthodox Church in Lithuania". Nowadays there are 50 parishes, divided into three deaneries, they are cared for by 41 priests and 9 deacons. The diocese does not experience a shortage of clergy. Some priests serve in two or more parishes, because... There are almost no parishioners in such parishes (a couple of priests serve as many as 6 parishes each). Basically, these are empty villages with few inhabitants at all, just a few houses in which elderly people live. There are two monasteries: a male monastery with seven monasteries and a female monastery with twelve monasteries; 15 Sunday schools gather Orthodox children for education on Sundays (and due to the small number of children, it is not always possible to divide the children into age groups), and in some Russian schools it is possible to choose “Religion” as a subject, which in essence is a modernized " God's law." A significant concern of the diocese is the preservation and repair of churches. The church receives an annual subsidy from the state (as a traditional religious community), in 2006 it was 163 thousand litas (1.6 million rubles), which is certainly not enough for a normal existence for a year, even for one Holy Spiritual Monastery. The diocese receives most of its income from repossessed properties, which it rents out to various tenants. A serious problem for the church is the ongoing assimilation of the Russian population. In general, there are quite a lot of mixed marriages in the country, which leads to the erosion of national and religious consciousness. In addition, the absolute majority of nominally Orthodox are not actually churched and their connection with the church is quite weak, and in mixed marriages, children most often accept the dominant confession in the country - Catholicism. But even among those who remained faithful to Orthodoxy the process is underway assimilation, this is especially noticeable in the outback children practically do not speak Russian, they grow up with the Lithuanian mentality. Lithuania is also characterized by “grassroots ecumenism” Orthodox Christians sometimes go to Catholic masses, and Catholics (especially from mixed families) can often be found in an Orthodox church lighting a candle, ordering a memorial service, or simply participating in the service (with a slightly larger crowd of people you will definitely see a person , crossing himself from left to right). In this regard, a project is being carried out to translate liturgical books into Lithuanian; for now there is no particular need for this, but it is quite possible that in the not too distant future services in Lithuanian will be in demand. Another problem is connected with this problem: the lack of pastoral activity of priests, which Metropolitan Chrysostom also complains about. A significant portion of older generation priests are not accustomed to active preaching and do not engage in it. However, the number of young, more active priests is gradually growing (now there are about a third of the total number); Bishop Chrysostom ordained 28 people during his service in the diocese. Young priests work with young people, visit prisons and hospitals, organize summer youth camps, and try to become more actively involved in pastoral activities. Preparations are underway discoveries Orthodox House elderly Bishop Chrysostom also takes care of the spiritual growth of his wards; at the expense of the diocese, he organized a series of pilgrimage trips for monks and a number of clergy to the Holy Land. Almost all clergy have theological education, many along with theological and secular ones. The initiative to improve educational levels is supported. In the Lithuanian diocese a style has developed that is characteristic of the Western European dioceses of the Russian Orthodox Church. For example, some of the priests shave or trim their beards briefly, wear wedding rings, and do not wear cassocks on a daily basis. These traditional aspects are not acceptable in Russia, especially in the outback, but are completely natural for this region. One of the special differences of the Lithuanian diocese is the exemption of parishes from contributions to the treasury of the diocesan administration, because in most cases, the parishes themselves lack funds. Relations with Catholics and other faiths are smooth, conflict-free, but limited to external official contacts, no joint work or joint projects are carried out. In general, the main problem of Orthodoxy in Lithuania is the lack of dynamics, as in external relations, and in intra-church life. In general, Orthodoxy is developing normally for this region. In Lithuania, materialism is gradually gaining strength, which is displacing religion from everywhere, and Orthodoxy is subject to this process along with other faiths, including the dominant one. Big problem is mass migration to Western European countries. Therefore, it would be naive to expect the dynamic development of a separate small community.

Lithuania is a predominantly Catholic country. Orthodoxy here is still a religion of national minorities. Orthodox believers living in this Baltic state are dominated by Russians, Belarusians and Ukrainians. There are very few Orthodox Lithuanians, but they still exist. Moreover, in Vilnius, the capital of Lithuania, there is the only Orthodox parish in the country, which serves in the Lithuanian language. The community of St. Paraskeva, on Dijoji Street in the central part of the capital, is cared for by Archpriest Vitaly Mockus, an ethnic Lithuanian. He also serves at the Holy Spirit Monastery in Vilnius and is the secretary of the diocesan administration.

Reference . Father Vitaly was born in 1974 in the village of Saleninkai in central Lithuania, into a Catholic family. He converted to Orthodoxy at the age of 15, in the winter of 1990. Two and a half years later he entered the Minsk Theological Seminary. Finished full course seminary for three years and in December 1995 he was ordained a priest. Later he completed external training at the St. Petersburg Theological Academy.

We talked with Father Vitaly in a small living room at the Church of St. Paraskeva. Father talked about his childhood, about his difficult fate, about his first encounters with Orthodoxy. In the Lithuanian outback, where he lived, Orthodoxy was practically unknown. The only Orthodox resident of Saleninkai, Russian woman, came there only because she married a Lithuanian. Local children came to her house to look at a strange custom for those parts: how she “drinks tea from a plate” (she really drank tea from a saucer). The future priest remembered well that it was this woman who helped them when serious difficulties arose in the family. It did not escape his eyes that she led a worthy Christian life and testified to Orthodoxy with her deeds, which were stronger than words and convictions.

Probably, the example of the Christian faith and life of this Russian woman was one of the reasons that pushed Vitaly to learn more about Orthodoxy. An inquisitive young man went to Vilnius, to the Holy Spirit Monastery. True, the appearance of the monastery caused genuine surprise: instead of the expected white-stone church with narrow windows and golden domes, Vitaly saw churches built in the classical style and outwardly little distinguishable from Catholic ones. A natural question arose: how then does Orthodoxy in Lithuania differ from Catholicism? The interior of the temple? Yes, there was much less in common here than in architecture. Even less commonality was found in worship: Orthodox services were more prayerful, beautiful and long. The idea that Orthodoxy and Catholicism are identical or very similar has gone away by itself.

“I started going to the monastery on weekends: I arrived on Friday and stayed until Sunday,” recalls Father Vitaly. - I was received with love and understanding. It’s good that among the clergy there was a Lithuanian, Father Pavel, - I could talk with him on spiritual topics, and it was to him that I confessed for the first time. I didn’t know enough Russian at that time, mainly at the everyday level... Then I decided to stop studying at the school (I entered there after nine years of school) and at the age of 16 I arrived at the monastery to live permanently. This happened in March 1991. I dreamed of becoming a monk, but things turned out differently. I entered the seminary in Belarus, met a girl there and got married - immediately after graduating from the seminary, in 1995.

By the way, Vitaly’s father’s mother and his brother and sister also accepted Orthodoxy. But among the priest’s acquaintances and friends, the attitude towards his transition to the true faith was ambiguous. It just so happened that Lithuanians associated Orthodoxy with Russians, Russians with everything Soviet, and the USSR was perceived as an occupying state. Therefore, some Lithuanians did not have the kindest opinions about those who became Orthodox.

I had to experience all this for myself, especially in the first time after the country gained independence,” recalls Father Vitaly. - Sometimes they directly told me that I was going to the occupiers, to the Russians. People didn’t really distinguish between Russian and Soviet, because Soviet was offered in Russian. Although, to be objective, we can remember that the Lithuanians who implanted communist ideology in Lithuania were also Soviet. But I responded to all the accusations that I clearly separate religion from politics, spiritual life from social life. I explained that I was not going to the Soviets or the Russians, but to the Orthodox Church. And the fact that the church mostly speaks Russian does not make it Soviet.

But in any case, in Lithuania at that time there was a clearly visible attitude towards Orthodoxy as a “Russian faith”? - I ask.

Yes. And now it exists. If you are Orthodox, then you must be Russian. Not a Belarusian, not a Ukrainian, not someone else, but a Russian. Here they talk about the “Russian faith”, “Russian Christmas” and so on. True, the name itself - the Russian Orthodox Church - contributes to this. But we, for our part, strive in every possible way for non-Orthodox people to talk not about “Russian”, but about Orthodox Christmas, because among the Orthodox in Lithuania are not only Russians, but also Greeks, Georgians, Belarusians, Ukrainians and, of course, Lithuanians themselves. Agree, it is illogical to say “Lithuanian Christmas” when we are talking about Catholic Christmas. On the other hand, at the St. Petersburg Academy I heard the phrase “Polish Christmas.” You could say it was a mirror situation, a look from the other side. Of course, these terms are incorrect; they more reflect the popular, national understanding of Christianity.

“Unfortunately, this understanding is sometimes so ingrained that it is difficult to change,” I thought. We can also talk here about the language of worship and some other points. In this context, Father Vitaly noted that even the choice of a church in which they could serve in Lithuanian had to be approached with a certain degree of caution. The choice, in the end, fell on the church, where, before the formation of a full-fledged community and the appointment of a Lithuanian priest there, services were performed only twice a year - on Christmas and the patronal feast (November 10). Moreover, from 1960 to 1990, the Church of St. Paraskeva was generally closed: at various times it housed museums, storage facilities and art galleries.

There was a delicate element of ethnicity in our choice,” explains Father Vitaly. - Still, the Russian-speaking population of Lithuania feels a little abandoned, not entirely needed - especially people who do not know well official language. They do not have the opportunity to integrate normally into modern Lithuanian society. For such people, an Orthodox church is a kind of “outlet,” a place where they can hear services in the familiar Church Slavonic language and speak with each other in Russian. If we organized services in Lithuanian in a church where there is a permanent community and where they serve in Church Slavonic, we might not be understood. People might have the following thoughts: now, even here we are becoming unnecessary, and we will have to relearn Lithuanian. We still wanted to avoid these difficulties, not to offend or infringe upon Russian-speaking parishioners.

So, now the main part of the parishioners of the Church of St. Paraskeva are Lithuanians? - I ask a clarifying question.

We have different people in our church. There are purely Lithuanian families in which they do not speak Russian. But mostly mixed families. Although there is another interesting category of parishioners: non-Lithuanians (Russians, Belarusians, etc.) who are fluent in Lithuanian. It is easier for them to understand the service in Lithuanian than in Church Slavonic. True, over time, when they get to know the service well, they usually move to churches, where they serve in Church Slavonic. To some extent, our church becomes for them the first step on the path to becoming a church member.

“Well, in principle, it is quite understandable when Russian speakers strive for Orthodoxy. But what leads to the true faith of native Lithuanians? What are the reasons for this? I couldn’t help but ask Father Vitaly this question.

I think there are many reasons for this, and each person, perhaps, would focus on some of his own moments,” answered the priest. - If we try to generalize, we can note such factors as the beauty of Orthodoxy, spirituality, prayer, and worship. For example, we see (with some surprise) that many Catholics come to Lithuanian and even Church Slavonic services, and they order memorial services and prayer services from us. It happens that after a service in a Catholic church they come to us at the Holy Spirit Monastery or other churches and pray at our services. They say that we pray beautifully, that our prayers are long, so you can have time to pray well yourself. For Catholics this turns out to be very important. In general, many people are now getting acquainted with Orthodox theology, traditions and saints (especially since until the 11th century Orthodox and Catholics had common saints). Books about Orthodoxy are published in Lithuanian and works by Orthodox authors are published, and the initiators of the publications are often Catholics themselves. Thus, the works of Alexander Men and Sergius Bulgakov were translated into Lithuanian, and “Notes of Silouan of Athos” were published. Translations are also often done by Catholics, although they approach us with requests to review and edit the translated material.

What about the translation of liturgical texts? Still, you can’t do without them during services in the Lithuanian language.

You know, I remember that when I became Orthodox, I was a little offended if they told me that I had become Russian. And I wanted to perform the service in my native language. After all, we, having become Orthodox, continue to love our country, our homeland, just like the apostles who loved their countries in which they were born. To be honest, I had no idea how the process of establishing a service in Lithuanian could take place, but the Lord performed a miracle: the Liturgy in Lithuanian fell into my hands. The most interesting thing is that the translation was made in the second half of the 19th century and published with the blessing of the Holy Synod in the 1880s. True, the text is written in Cyrillic - it’s more than strange to read. At the end of the text there is even a short course on the phonetics of the Lithuanian language. Perhaps the translation was intended for priests who did not know Lithuanian. I have not yet been able to figure out the history of this translation, but the find pushed me to take specific actions. I began to re-translate the Liturgy - after all, the translation of the 19th century was to a large extent Russified and was not entirely suitable for current realities. But I didn’t know how to use the translation, I was afraid that some believers might perceive it as a manifestation of nationalism. Fortunately, the ruling bishop - at that time he was Metropolitan Chrysostom - himself asked me about the prospects of serving in Lithuanian. I replied that such services can be performed... After that, I began to translate even more decisively, and involved other people. On January 23, 2005, we celebrated the first Liturgy in Lithuanian. We are gradually translating other liturgical services into Lithuanian.

However, Father Vitaly makes it clear that so far the Lithuanian language is in rather weak demand in Orthodox worship in Lithuania. The majority of parishioners are Russian-speaking; they are accustomed to Church Slavonic and do not see much need for language changes. Moreover, about half of the clergy (including the current ruling bishop, Archbishop Innocent) do not speak Lithuanian adequately. Hence the difficulties - for example, the inability of priests to speak at an official event or the obstacles to teaching the Law of God in schools. Of course, younger priests already know Lithuanian quite well, but still in Lithuania there is clearly a lack of Orthodox clergy who speak the state language.

This is not the only problem for us,” notes Father Vitaly. - It is quite difficult financially for those priests who serve in small parishes. For example, in northeastern Lithuania there are four temples located relatively close to each other. The priest could live there, in the parish house. But the parishes themselves are so poor and small in number that they cannot support even one priest, without a family. Some of our priests are forced to work in secular jobs, although such a situation for a priest to work from Monday to Friday is rare. There is, for example, a priest who is the director of a school, and his temple is located in the school itself. There is a priest who owns his own clinic. This is an Orthodox clinic, although it is woven into the structure of the state medical system. Our parishioners go there for treatment; among the doctors and staff there there are many of our believers, Orthodox... Priests in rural areas engage in agriculture to support themselves.

Are there any specific difficulties that may characterize a country dominated by Catholics? - I cannot ignore a difficult issue in the sphere of interfaith relations.

In principle, relations with the Catholic Church are good; no one puts obstacles in our way, including the state. We have the opportunity to teach in schools, build our own churches, and preach. Of course, some situations require delicacy. For example, if we want to visit a nursing home, hospital or school, it is advisable to ask in advance whether there are Orthodox Christians there. Otherwise, misunderstandings may arise: why are we going to Catholics?

“It is clear that the Roman Church will react without any cordiality to Orthodox word on its territory,” I thought. On the other hand, in Lithuania, despite the obvious dominance of Catholics, there are not so few people to whom one can, in principle, convert Orthodox sermon without regard to the reaction of the Catholic Church. Indeed, during the Soviet era, Russian-speaking specialists were sent to Lithuania, who, as a rule, were “proven” communists, but then, after the collapse of the USSR, they moved away from the dominant ideology. Now they, as well as their children and grandchildren, are beginning to come to the Orthodox Church. According to Father Vitaly, out of 140 thousand Orthodox residents of Lithuania, no more than 5 thousand regularly attend church (they come to services at least once a month, in one of 57 parishes). This means that in Lithuania itself there is ample opportunity for mission among those who are Orthodox by baptism or origin. It is all the more important because this mission is being intercepted by various neo-Protestant groups, which are very active, sometimes even intrusive.

In the current situation, the future of the Orthodox Church in Lithuania largely depends on the success of the mission among non-church people. Of course, native Lithuanians will also come to the Church, including those who left Catholicism, but it is unlikely that their influx will become massive. Services in Lithuanian, preaching in Lithuanian, teaching the Law of God are, of course, important missionary steps that should not be abandoned. However, judging by the fact that over the past ten years there has been no mass conversion of Lithuanians to Orthodoxy, one can hardly expect serious changes in the ethnic composition of the parishioners of the Orthodox Church of Lithuania. Although for God, of course, every person is valuable and important, regardless of his nationality, language and political beliefs.

The situation of the Orthodox in Lithuania under Kashmir worsened significantly; under it, the final division of the Russian Church into two metropolises took place.

After the death of Sigismund Keistutovich (1440), Jagiello's son, young Casimir (IV), was elected Grand Duke of Lithuania. The Poles proclaimed Casimir the Polish king, and again both states were united under one crown.

The situation of the Orthodox in Lithuania under Kashmir worsened significantly; under it, the final division of the Russian Church into two metropolises took place.

Casimir kindly received the traitor Metropolitan. Isidore, and also contributed to the strengthening of Isidore’s student, Gregory, in Lithuania. To quickly establish Catholicism, Casimir summoned Latin Bernardine monks from Poland, and forbade the Orthodox to build new churches and repair old ones.

Since the time of Casimir, Lithuania has been dynastically united with Poland.

After Casimir IV, his son Alexander sat on the Lithuanian-Polish throne. Alexander was married to the daughter of Moscow Prince Ivan III, Elena. Elena, contrary to the promises made by Alexander during her marriage, was surrounded by the Latin clergy, not allowing her to even have an Orthodox confessor with her. And what can we say about ordinary Orthodox Christians!

The Moscow prince stood up for his daughter and for the Orthodox Western Russians and went to war against Lithuania. Having lost part of their territories, the lords became humble.

But losses continued under the next king, Sigismund I. In 1514, Vasily Ivanovich took Smolensk from Lithuania (the Novo-Maiden Convent in Moscow was built in memory of this event).

Under Sigismund I, a council of Western Russian bishops was held in Vilna in 1509, chaired by the most worthy Metropolitan of Lithuania Joseph Soltan. The Council spoke out against the interference of secular persons in church affairs and condemned the so-called right of “giving.” Due to the historically strengthened patronage, kings and magnates had the right to “give” the highest church positions to persons who often had nothing to do with the Church - lords, civil officials who had done something in favor of the king. As a result, episcopal sees were often occupied by unworthy people who did not care about protecting the rights of the Church. The decisions of the Vilna Council, however, were not carried out.

Sigismund I was tolerant of the Orthodox in Lithuania. But this cannot be said in relation to Galicia.

Galicia was one of the first Russian lands in 1349 to become a victim of Poland. Long ago in Galicia (1420) the episcopal see was abolished, and the Orthodox were left without a bishop, and the bishopric was ruled by governors. Sigismund gave the right to appoint a governor for Galicia to the Catholic Bishop of Lvov. After this, the position of the Orthodox here became similar to the position of Christians in the Turkish Empire. Priests were forbidden to walk around the city with St. Gifts to the sick, seeing off the deceased in vestments. Oppression and insults forced the Orthodox to rise up to defend their faith. Through the efforts of Joseph Soltan, the Lviv brotherhood and Prince.

Konstantin Ivanovich Ostrogsky made the Galician diocese directly dependent on the Kyiv metropolitans, which is why the latter from that time (1509) began to be titled Kyiv and Galician. Over time, the Orthodox achieved the restoration of the Galician bishopric. Archimandrite Macarius Tuchapsky was installed as the first bishop then (in 1539).

ORTHODOXY IN LITHUANIA UNDER SIGISMUNDS II AUGUST (1548-1572)

The union of Lithuania with Poland was undesirable for the Russians and Lithuanians, so the latter, during the life of Sigismund I, proclaimed the 9-year-old son of Sigismund I, Sigismund II Augustus, Grand Duke of Lithuania. But the Poles were not slow in proclaiming the prince and heir to the Polish throne. The situation therefore has not changed. Only then did the Lithuanians achieve the approval of the “Statute” of the Lithuanian state by Sigismund I. According to this “Statute”, Poles were considered foreigners in Lithuania and did not have the right to buy estates, etc. Down the road it became different. Following this, Sigismund 1 began to seize Russian lands. He gave his wife, the Italian Bona, the royal estates in Kremenets and Lutsk; the royal favorites and relatives settled throughout Western Rus'. Polish influence in Lithuania thus increased.

Having taken the throne, Sigismund Augustus initially treated the Orthodox with toleration. He even canceled the resolution of the Gorodel Sejm (1413), according to which “schismatics” were deprived of the right to occupy higher positions.

But soon Sigismund II gave himself into the hands of the Latins. Sigismund II was childless. Educated Ukrainians and Belarusians conducted secret relations with Moscow regarding the union of Lithuania with the Moscow Principality - all this forced the Poles and Sigismund II to conclude a union of Poland with Lithuania, which would mean a complete merger of the two states into one. Such a political union was declared at the Lublin Congress in 1569.

This union opened access to Ukraine for Catholics and Polish feudal lords. The Lithuanian-Russian lands attracted the greedy gentry. Ukraine and Belarus have now become the arena of the Polish-gentry colonialist offensive. The political union of Lithuania with Poland was completed. Now all that remains for Catholics is to implement the religious union of the Orthodox Church with the Roman Church. After Sigismund Augustus, the Polish throne became electoral. Foreign kings (Henry of France, Stefan Batory) began to ascend to the throne, and upon their very election they pledged to support the Catholic religion in Poland.

SPREAD OF PROTESTANTISM IN POLAND AND LITHUANIA

After the conclusion of a political union between Lithuania and Poland, Catholics began to implement a religious union. In reality, however, the papists were not able to quickly implement their plans, the reason for which was Protestantism, which almost completely destroyed Catholicism in Poland. The Latins therefore had to first fight the Protestants.

Protestantism began to penetrate Poland and Lithuania in the first half of the 16th century. Almost all Polish-Lithuanian aristocrats received their education at Western European universities, where they became acquainted with Protestant ideas. The German colonists, the family of the Lithuanian princes Radziwill, who owned almost half of Lithuania, as well as the religious tolerance of Sigismund Augustus and his marriage to Varvara Radziwill greatly contributed to the spread of Protestantism in Lithuania and Poland. Protestant preachers filled all of Poland and Lithuania, built their churches here, opened schools and printing houses. Protestantism became a “fashionable faith” both in Lithuania and Poland. Monasteries were emptying, entire parishes were converting to Protestantism following their pastors. The priests were in a hurry to get married, he converted to Protestantism and even one bishop got married. Only six parishes remained Catholic in Lithuania. Some of the Catholics, although they did not accept Protestantism, under the influence of Protestant ideas, advised to cleanse Catholicism, tear it away from Rome and form a Polish national Church.

But Protestantism, which arose as a protest against Rome, also influenced the Orthodox. Protestant schools were founded in some bridges in Volhynia; in 1562, the Calvinist Catechism was published in Nesvizh. The Protestants were accosted by the disciples of the heretics Bakshin and Kosoy, expelled from North-Eastern Rus'.

However, relying solely on reason, Protestantism could not establish itself among the Orthodox, who accepted the truth not with a cold mind, but with their hearts. Secondly, Protestantism was soon divided into many sects and thereby weakened, and thirdly, Catholicism, horrified by its collapse, summoned the so-called Jesuit order to fight not only Protestantism, but also the Orthodox. The Jesuits turned out to be a powerful weapon in the hands of the pope; they were able to quickly destroy Protestantism, but they also became the strongest, most dangerous enemy for the Orthodox.

ORDER OF THE JESUITS

The Jesuit Order was founded in 1540 by the Spaniard Ignatius of Loyola. Orders in the Catholic Church were those monastic communities where, in addition to the usual monastic vows, special vows were also given. Thus, the followers of Loyola, who called themselves Jesuits (from the Latin - Jesus, hence the name "Jesuits" - followers of Jesus), set their main vow and goal to spread the power of the Catholic Church throughout the world.

In achieving this goal, the Jesuits did not disdain any means, even immoral ones, in accordance with their slogan: the end justifies the means.

In 1563, the Jesuits were called to Poland and Lithuania to fight Protestantism. The Jesuits were met with hostility in Lithuania. But the cunning Jesuits softened the people's enmity towards themselves. They acted very carefully, led a modest lifestyle, did charity to the poor and declared that their goal was educational. They started free schools, organized magnificent religious processions, debates, etc.

Having strengthened themselves, the Jesuits began to fight Protestantism, and having dealt with Protestantism, they turned their attention to the Orthodox Church.

The government patronized the Jesuits, and they established themselves in all cities of Poland and Lithuania, having their own churches, monasteries and schools there. In Vilna in 1570 a Jesuit college was founded (from 1578 - an academy), headed by the learned Jesuit Peter Skarga.

The academy course embraced the lower and higher education. According to its main subjects it was divided into classes:

1.Infimu

2.Grammar

3.Syntax

4.Piitiku

5.Rhetoric

6.Philosophy

7. Theology.

Teaching here was, of course, conducted in Latin.

The Jesuits made fanatics of Catholicism out of their pets.

The entire Russian and Lithuanian nobility gave their children to be raised by the Jesuits, thereby preparing future apostates from everything native and Orthodox.

Having thus prepared the ground, the Jesuits began to promote union. This propaganda was carried out orally and with the help of apologetic-polemical literature. It is worth mentioning P. Skarga’s book “On the Unity of the Church,” which the Jesuit dedicated to Prince. Konstantin Ostrozhsky.

In addition to Skarga, the famous Jesuit Anthony Possevin also acted in favor of Catholicism in Lithuania, who stayed here after his failure in Moscow. At his suggestion, a seminary for Russians was founded in Vilna in 1582.

The last years of the reign of Stephen Batory were marked by new violence against the Orthodox by the Polish government and the Jesuits.

According to the bull of Gregory XIII of February 13-24, 1582, the Gregorian calendar was introduced in Catholic states. Batory, at the request of the Jesuits, issued a universal ordering the recognition of the new calendar by all subjects. The barbaric introduction of this calendar, worthy of medieval inquisitors, caused unrest among the Orthodox, who, obeying the ecumenical patriarch, and not the pope, celebrated holidays according to the old style. The Jesuits then began to break into Orthodox churches, interrupt services and forcefully force them to adopt the new style.

In 1586, through the efforts of the Jesuits, their pupil Sigismund III, a man of weak character, was elected to the throne. The Jesuits were now not slow in expanding their propaganda for the union, since they found in all their actions the support and assistance of their pet king, especially since Skarga was the confessor of Sigismund III.

THE INTERNAL STATE OF THE WESTERN RUSSIAN CHURCH AND ITS POSITION IN THE POLISH-LITHUANIA STATE AT THE END OF THE 16TH CENTURY

Due to historical circumstances, Western Russians and the Western Russian Church had to come into contact with Catholicism and Western culture. This certainly influenced the life and culture of the Orthodox population of Western Rus' and the life of the Church. First of all, the Russian gentry and the highest hierarchy were subject to such influence. Russian and Lithuanian princes, having accepted Western culture, seduced by the benefits, began to convert to Latinism, break away from their people, and be ashamed of their native culture and native language. The Russian nobility began to shun their clergy. It is more pleasant for them to be in company with an educated Jesuit - neatly and smartly dressed in a beautiful cassock, than to sit with an Orthodox priest who did not know how to flaunt Jesuit learning, backward, shaggy, although filled with nobility and love for his faith, for his people.

The authority of the church authorities therefore gradually began to decline. In addition, civil authorities began to interfere in church affairs, as a result of which the hierarchy sought protection from secular authorities, church-hierarchical positions began to be occupied by unworthy people, and a decline in morality occurred among the clergy.

The ground on which these relations between secular and spiritual power were formed was the so-called patronage. Patronage, or patronage, is a matter of zeal for pious Orthodox nobles, who, building churches and monasteries with their own funds, became patrons of these churches and monasteries, and at the same time acquired certain rights, for example, the right to submit, the right to recommend famous persons for the position of rector of churches and monasteries, the right of administration and the law of court.

This patronage was very important in protecting the rights of the Church, but over time it began to bring only harm to the Church, especially when the patron betrayed Orthodoxy. The privilege of patronage began to be abused, the princes sold their churches and monasteries, gave them as gifts, and exchanged them.

The Polish kings appropriated this right to serve. Sigismund Augustus and Batory expanded their power to the point that they themselves appointed their own candidates to the episcopal sees, who were given these positions as a reward for good civil and military service. When there was not enough patronage, the desired position was achieved with the help of specie. The rulers became people who did not have theological education, who were looking for the conveniences of life, people of low morality, leading a secular lifestyle and not thinking about protecting the rights of the Church.

And what about the lower clergy? They were victims of the tyranny of their master and were in the position of the master's slams. The education and morality of the lower clergy were also low. The Word of God was not preached, many of the shepherds were bigamists, and this is not surprising, for the rulers themselves stood no higher than their subordinate clergy.

The decline of morality is also observed in monasteries. Monasteries were often in the hands of people to whom the king gave ownership of the monasteries for the merits of the breeds by the government. These secular “abbots” lived in monasteries instead of with their wives and children and cared least of all about ensuring that the monks adhered to the rules of monastic life.

Such a disastrous state of the Church depended on its powerless position in the state. The Greek Arkady, who was in Rus', speaks about this deplorable situation of the Church: “who spoke a word for the rulers and for the poor clergy, for the poor priests, when they were insulted and church property was taken away? Poor priests were turned into simple serfs, some with a plow to work for "They must go to their lords, endure oppression, beatings, imprisonment. Who stood up for them and at what diet?"

All external oppression of the Church and internal disorder of church discipline weakened the Orthodox Church. The Jesuits wanted to take advantage of all this in order to subjugate the Orthodox Church to Rome.

But at the same time, a powerful force arose in the depths of the Orthodox Church, saving its faith from destruction and death. This force was the church brotherhoods.

CHURCH BROTHERHOODS AND THEIR PATRIOTIC AND RELIGIOUS EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES

The Orthodox-Russian people, due to historical circumstances, brought face to face with the alien Polish power, who did not find seemingly natural support in their higher clergy, abandoned by their princes, began to look for ways to save their Church, closely uniting in alliances - brotherhood.

Brotherhoods arose in Rus' back in the 14th-15th centuries, but at first they were of a secular nature, being craft guilds. Each such brotherhood had its own special charter, leaders and treasury.

The struggle of the Orthodox against Protestantism and then Latinism gave the brotherhoods a religious character. At their meetings, the fraternities began to consult about events related to protecting the interests of the Church, about the needs of education, about schools, and printing houses. Brotherhoods very quickly began to spread in all the larger cities of Western Rus'. These brotherhoods were the first to bear the heavy yoke of violence and defend the Russian people.

The Lvov Brotherhood (1439) should be considered the first to be founded; it received its final structure in 1585, when the Patriarch of Antioch Joachim approved its charter. The Patriarch of Constantinople, Jeremiah, who arrived two years later, expanded the rights of this brotherhood, separating it from the authority of the bishop.

Following the model of the Lviv brotherhood, brotherhoods are being established in Vilna, Brest, Minsk, Kyiv, Lutsk, Pinsk and other cities. Some brotherhoods were stauropegic. In such cases, the bishop was placed under the control of the brotherhood, which monitored all his actions and reported this to the Patriarch of Constantinople.

All classes belonged to the brotherhoods, but excluding Orthodox nobles and nobles. Thanks to such unity, the Russians were able to protect the purity of Orthodoxy, despite strong Jesuit propaganda.

One of the main features of the activities of church brotherhoods was their concern for public education. It was necessary to contrast Catholic education with my own education. To this end, the brotherhoods took care of the establishment of schools and printing houses. True, in the 15th century. in Rus' there were schools at churches and monasteries, but they could not resist such strong movements as Protestantism and Jesuitism.

There was a need for educated preachers and activists; it was necessary to distract Orthodox youth from Jesuit schools, and therefore it was necessary to open their own schools. There was a need for polemical literature and liturgical books, and for this it was necessary to establish their own printing houses.

Russian Orthodox nobles provided special service to the brotherhoods in this matter, of whom it is necessary to mention Prince. Konstantin Konstantinovich Ostrozhsky.

In 1577, he founded a higher school in Ostrog - an academy that was superior even to the Vilna Jesuit Academy. The Ostroh Academy is generally the first higher school in Rus'. In addition to the languages ​​of Slavic, Greek, Latin and Polish, theology, philosophy, rhetoric, poetry, dialectics, history, medicine and natural sciences were taught there. The rector of the Ostrog Academy was the famous Gerasim Smotrytsky.

Ostrogsky's example was followed by Prince. Yuri Olelkovich, who founded schools in Slutsk. Following the model of the Ostrog school, through the efforts of the brotherhoods, schools were founded in Lvov (1536), Vilna (1585), Mogilev (1590), Minsk (1613), Lutsk (1620) (see "Zh.M.P.", 1948, 10.) etc.

At the end of the sixteenth century. There were already about 15 fraternal schools.

Printing houses appeared at the same time as schools. The first printer, Deacon Ivan Feodorov, who fled from Moscow, set up a printing house in Zabludov with the assistance of Hetman Khodkevich (Orthodox Litvin), then in Lvov, where in 1573 the first Slavic grammar was printed, and Prince was invited from Lvov. Ostrozhsky to Ostrog, where he also set up a printing house, in which he printed the first Bible in Rus' in 1581.

Having printed the Bible, Feodorov returned again to Lvov. Being in poverty, at the end of his life he mortgaged his printing plant to a Jew for 411 zlotys. The Lviv Brotherhood then bought this printing house from a Jew for 1,500 zlotys.

At the same time, the Vilna Brotherhood also set up a printing house at its school. A printing house was founded in Dermani (near Ostrog) at the monastery. These printing houses printed liturgical books, textbooks, books of religious and moral content, and books of apologetic and polemical content occupied a special place.

Defenders of Orthodoxy now have the opportunity, through the written word, to respond to Jesuit attacks on Orthodoxy. Through printed works, Orthodox leaders called on the Russian people to fight for their religious and national independence.

The religious, patriotic and educational activities of church brotherhoods were of enormous importance for the Church in South-Western Rus', not only in their time, but also for subsequent history.

VISIT TO THE WESTERN RUSSIAN CHURCH BY THE CONSTANTINOPLE PATR. JEREMIAH

The visit of Patriarch Jeremiah II of Constantinople to Lithuania was of great importance for the Southwestern Church. The Orthodox, fighting against external and internal enemies, more than once asked the hierarch of Constantinople, on whom the Western Russian Church canonically depended, to help them in a difficult situation.

In 1589, Jeremiah, returning from Moscow, where in January of this year he installed Job as patriarch, stopped for some time in Southwestern Rus' to take care of the improvement of the Church. The Patriarch deposed some unworthy persons from the rulers and clergy, granted greater rights to church brotherhoods and approved their charters.

Among the deposed rulers was the Kiev Metropolitan Onesiphorus the Girl, who, before taking the rank, was a widower after the death of his second wife. In place of the one who was deposed, he was put in place, with the recommendation of Prince. Ostrozhsky and other Orthodox persons, Minsk archimandrite. Mikhail Rogoza. The choice, however, turned out to be unsuccessful. The church was in danger and needed a skilled helmsman. Rogoza, although a kind man, was weak-willed and inclined to serve two masters.

Jeremiah was in Lithuania for almost the entire year 1589. All this time he did not stop working for the improvement of the Russian Church. He denounced the Russian clergy, reproached, threatened, and deposed the unworthy. But it was difficult for Jeremiah to correct all the problems in a short time.

The Patriarch, however, had to rush to Constantinople. In order to strengthen the position of the Church in Lithuania, even if the metropolitan himself was inclined towards union, Jeremiah appointed the Lutsk Bishop of Terletsky as his exarch.

Kirill Terletsky, who came from the nobility, stood out from the entire episcopate for his education and zeal. The intelligent and active Terletsky, having entered the Lutsk department, soon managed to establish discipline and order here. However, Terletsky, like Rogoza, subsequently betrayed Orthodoxy. Unfortunate circumstances developed in such a way that many Orthodox Christians who were not firm in their faith, weakened in the struggle or succumbing to promises, betrayed their native Orthodoxy.

The deposition of unworthy hierarchs did not eliminate church disorder. The damaged hierarchy could no longer be restored to health. A more sure means of eliminating the unrest was another measure of the patriarch - expanding the rights of church brotherhoods. True, some rulers were also unhappy with this, for example, the Bishop of Lvov. Gideon Boloban, since the Lviv brotherhood was removed from Gideon’s power.

Mikhail Rogoza was also dissatisfied; he did not like the appointment of an exarch as patriarch. The discontent of the rulers began to manifest itself especially after Jeremiah’s departure, as the government began to restrict their rights.

At this time, the Jesuits intensified their propaganda, Skarga’s work “On the Unity of the Church” appeared, where Skarga offered the Orthodox a way out of a difficult situation - union; Orthodox rulers, Skarga promises, will then receive the same rights as bishops.

PREPARATION OF THE UNIUM

After the departure of Patriarch Jeremiah, the metropolitan and bishops really began to diligently take care of the improvement of the Church. In 1590, even a council was convened in Brest for this purpose.

However, after the departure of the patriarch, the Polish government begins to persecute the Orthodox even more. At this time, the Lutsk elder Simashkom was plunged into shameful imprisonment on Easter, Kirill Terletsky. The possessions of the Lvov ruler (Zhidichinsky monastery), as well as the Pinsk bishop, were attacked. Orthodox bishops, although they gathered at councils where they talked about the defense of the Orthodox Church, but between these councils they negotiated secret agreements on union.

The initiators of the union were Kirill Terletsky and Vladimir Bishop Ipatiy Popey. They, fearing the people, did not speak openly about their plan, but secretly tried to persuade all Western Russian bishops and, most importantly, the metropolitan to the union. Fickle Metropolitan Rogoza succumbed to the admonitions of the traitors, but he was afraid, like Potsey and Terletsky, to speak openly about union, because. Orthodox nobles and church brotherhoods would have opposed the union, which would have prevented the implementation of these insidious plans.

Of course, the Jesuits and the Polish government were especially interested in the union. In 1594, King Sigismund III himself appointed Terletsky and Potsey as representatives to travel to Rome to conclude an act of union. By the middle of 1595, both bishops finally collected signatures for the union from the Russian bishops (Przemysl, Lvov, Kholm, Pinsk and Kobrin) and went to Rome.

The Orthodox, having learned about the planned union, were excited. Book Ostrogsky sent a message to all Orthodox Christians, in which he called the union a betrayal of Orthodoxy, and compared the bishops who signed the union with Judas.

Alarmed by this, Lviv Bishop Gideon Boloban renounced the union, pointing out that he had been deceived by the Lutsk Bishop. The Bishop of Przemysl also renounced the union.

The Metropolitan was also concerned, but he did not have the courage to take the side of the Orthodox, and he began to assert that the bishops of Lutsk and Vladimir were acting without his knowledge. However, the metropolitan’s participation in the union was known to everyone, and no one believed his words.

Terletsky and Potsey were received very kindly by Pope Clement VIII. But the conditions of the union proposed by the Russian bishops did not satisfy the Jesuits and the pope, and therefore Clement forced the delegates to sign new conditions of the union, according to which all Catholic innovations were recognized ("and from the Son", the primacy of the pope, the doctrine of purgatory, etc.).

In memory of this event, a medal with an inscription was knocked out (for the perception of the Russians).

THE ATTITUDE OF THE ORTHODOX TO THE PLANNED UNION

Finally, the attempt of the Latins to introduce a union in the Southwestern Russian Church this time was a success: the southwestern Orthodox bishops, together with the metropolitan, signed a union with the Roman Church.

But the union among the common people was not easy. The news of Potsey and Terletsky's trip to Rome and their unauthorized concessions to the pope caused a general protest among the Orthodox clergy and laity.

Orthodox nobles and church brotherhoods gathered and corresponded with each other, preparing to suppress the union before its announcement. The people condemned all the hierarchs, refusing to obey them. Prince K. Ostrozhsky reported everything that had happened to the Ecumenical Patriarch. All Orthodox Christians were now waiting for the Patriarchal Exarch, who would depose the traitors. The magistrates were filled with protests against the union. Words were heard from the church pulpit calling for the defense of Orthodoxy.

At this time, Lviv didaskals Stefan Kukol (pseudonym Zizaniy) and his brother priest became famous for their sermons. Lavrenty. These sermons sharply denounced the Latins and traitors to Orthodoxy. The sermons of Stefan Zizaniy were printed in the fraternal printing house in Vilna and distributed among the people. Together with Zizaniy, other priests did not cease from the pulpit to call the Orthodox to firmness in the faith.

Book Ostrozhsky at a meeting of the Sejm made a strong speech, full of complaints for the religious oppression of Russians.

Even before the Brest Council, all church brotherhoods came out to fight the union. In the Vladimir-Brest diocese, members of the brotherhood stopped even going to church and obeying their traitor ruler.

Along with church brotherhoods, another class took part in the struggle for Orthodoxy - the Cossacks. The brotherhoods, having moral strength and influence on the Orthodox, did not have the military strength for the sometimes unequal fight against the enemy, and here the Cossacks offered their services.

The Cossacks were formed under the influence of the fight against feudal-serf oppression, as well as the fight against the Turks and Tatars. At the beginning of the sixteenth century. it was already a significant force in the 60s. This century the famous Zaporozhye Sich gained significance.

Dispossessed people, offended by the lords, joined the Cossacks, and therefore the Cossacks quickly responded to the oppression of their brothers. After the Union of Lublin in 1569, the Cossacks decisively came out to protect the Orthodox from the oppression of Catholics and Uniates. Here the struggle for faith coincided with the struggle for the rights of the peasantry. The polarized Russian nobility became increasingly alien to the people, whose defenders were now the Cossacks, and clashes between the Cossacks and the nobility took on a more acute form.

Thus, before the Union of Brest in 1593, a Cossack uprising broke out under the leadership of Hetman F. Kosynsky, which, however, ended unsuccessfully. Kosynsky was destined to be the first to be sacrificed for Orthodoxy: in Brest, the Poles walled him up alive as a rebel.

At the time of the introduction of the union in 1595, a Cossack uprising broke out under the leadership of Hetman Severin Nalivaiko and Cossack Colonel Loboda. Severin Nalivaiko - brother of Damian Nalivaiko, court priest of Prince. Ostrozhsky, famous for his scholarship and defense of Orthodoxy.

S. Nalivaiko managed to take possession of Lutsk, where the main instigator of the union was Terletsky, but Nalivaiko and Loboda suffered the same fate as Kosynsky. They were lured to Warsaw, as if for a treaty, and there, together with other Cossack ambassadors, they were “killed with a blasphemous death.”

This is how the Polish government dealt with the defenders of the Orthodox ancestral faith. But this was only the beginning of those disasters that are the fruit of the union hated by all Orthodox.

UNION OF BREST

At the end of 1596, an unprecedentedly crowded and solemn council met in Brest to introduce the union. Two patriarchal exarchs arrived at the council - Nikephoros from Constantinople and Cyril Lucaris from the Patriarchs of Alexandria.

Among the Orthodox bishops who attended the cathedral were: Metropolitan Luke of Serbia, Bishop. Mikhail of Przemysl and Bishop Gideon of Lvov, then many representatives from the East, as well as many Russian priests and monks, numbering over 250. Many laity, state dignitaries, deputies from voivodeships and 14 church brotherhoods also came to the council.

The metropolitan and 4 bishops were on the Uniate side. In addition to these persons, the Uniate Council was supplemented by ambassadors of the pope, Catholic bishops and ambassadors of the king.

All those who gathered for the cathedral in Brest were divided into two halves. Both halves were a formidable militia: tents and cannons covered the outskirts of Brest. The Orthodox gathered in one private house, where they awaited the Metropolitan's invitation. However, it soon became known that the Metropolitan had already opened a cathedral in the city cathedral. The Orthodox, having learned about this, decided to open a cathedral in the large hall of the house where they were gathered, since Potsey, as a local bishop, ordered all the churches of the city to be closed in front of them.

Exarch Nikephoros presided. According to ancient custom, the chairmen sent the metropolitan a threefold invitation to the council. When the Metropolitan did not appear, the council began its meetings.

The council accused the metropolitan and the bishops who were with him of disobedience to the authority of the ecumenical patriarch, condemned the union and deprived the metropolitan and the bishops associated with him. The Orthodox believed they had the right to conduct a trial of the metropolitan and bishops, because on the Orthodox side there were judges of higher power than the metropolitan (exarchs of the Eastern patriarchs).

The council decision was sent to the Uniates. This decision set out the reasons why the Orthodox could not accept the union; namely: that the Southwestern Church is part Eastern Church, is in her obedience and cannot decide such an important issue herself; that none of the Orthodox Christians instructed the Uniate rulers to enter into unity with the Roman Church, etc.

The Uniate side, out of fear, surrounded itself with military force, despite the sanctity of the place. Contrary to the canons, non-Orthodox Latins took part in the meetings; the Lvov Artsy Biskup presided.

The Uniate Council, in turn, defrocked all the clergy who were at the Orthodox Council; and the metropolitan in the district charter also cursed those who would mistake them for shepherds. After the Brest Council, the union was approved by the royal universal, who ordered everyone to carry out the decisions of the Uniate Council, Orthodox bishops were declared traitors to their church, and eastern exarchs were spies of the Sultan.

Thus ended the Poles’ plans to unite Southwestern Rus' with Poland. Thus ended the attempt of the popes to subjugate the Western Russian Church.

Whether there was much desire of the Russian people to accept the union - this seems to be clear.

But all this was only the beginning of the disasters that developed after the council. Many more sufferings and losses awaited the Orthodox Western Russian people ahead.

But the difficult political living conditions, violence and insane persecution did not break the Western Russians. The ranks of the Orthodox were thinning. but in the same fire of trials new strong-spirited fighters were born for their native great-grandfather’s Orthodox faith, proudly carrying in their hands the banner of Orthodoxy throughout the history of this struggle.

EFFORTS OF THE JESUITS AND THE POLISH GOVERNMENT TO EXPAND THE UNIA

Immediately after the Brest Council, persecution of Orthodoxy began. Exarch Nikephoros was arrested and starved to death in Marienburg prison, and Cyril Lucaris escaped. Uniate bishops expelled Orthodox priests from parishes and installed Uniates in their place.

The government helped the Uniates in these actions. Brotherhoods were declared rebellious gatherings, Orthodox priests were imprisoned, churches were taken away, Uniates even took possession of the Kiev St. Sophia Cathedral. The Pechersk Monastery barely defended its independence. Polish lords forcibly converted Orthodox churches on their estates into Uniate churches or leased them to Jews, who, having the keys, took money for every church service and demand.

The oppression of the Orthodox intensified even more after the death of Metropolitan M. Rogoza, who died repenting of the union (+1599).

His successor Ipatiy Potsey took the Trinity Monastery from the Vilna brotherhood and gave it to the Uniates, who started their own Uniate brotherhood.

15 years after the Battle of Brest in Vilna, out of 20 Orthodox churches, only one remained. In Lutsk, out of 22 shrines during the union, only one Church of the Intercession remained Orthodox.

The violence against the Orthodox by Hypatius Potsey himself led to the point that an attempt was made on his life, although unsuccessful. Popeye lost two fingers of his hand, which then lay for a long time on the altar of the Trinity Church like the fingers of a martyr.

With all this oppression, the union took root poorly. The Orthodox looked at each Uniate with contempt, while the Catholics looked at the Union in the same way as they did at Orthodoxy, considering it a “cotton” faith. The Russian gentry was ashamed of the union and directly accepted pure Latinism.

The Uniate hierarchy did not receive senatorial seats in the Sejm, as it was promised. All this is understandable why. Poland and Rome did not need a union in itself; it was supposed to serve as a bridge for the transition from Orthodoxy to Catholicism. This view was shared by Terletsky and Potsey. The latter tried hard to remove everything Orthodox from the union and transform it into pure Latinism. As a result, opposition to the actions of their metropolitan arose among the Uniates themselves.

The white Uniate clergy, closer to the people than the hierarchy and monastic clergy, still retained their adherence to the weak remnants of the Orthodox element in the union and, obviously, did not correspond to the intentions of the metropolitan. Therefore, in order to carry out his decisions, Potsey tried to highlight Uniate monasticism, transforming it according to the model of the Latin monastic orders.

ORDER OF BASILIAN

For the speedy Latinization of the union, Hypatius Potsey needed to transform Uniate monasticism according to the model of the monastic orders of the Latin Church. This transformation began with the Trinity Monastery taken away from the Vilna brotherhood. The Metropolitan’s assistant in this role was Joseph Velyamin of Rutsky, one of the Moscow traitors, who converted to Catholicism, and then the Union and was appointed by the Metropolitan to the archimandrites of the Trinity Monastery. Rutsky called upon the Carmelites and Jesuits to help him and ardently set about transforming Uniate monasticism. Although it was announced that the charter of the monastery was based on the rules of St. Basil the Great, but in reality the monastery received the organization of Catholic monastic orders. Other Uniate monasteries also joined the Rutsky charter, and thus the Basilian Order was formed, which became an instrument of Catholicization of the Uniate Church. The center of the Basilians was Zhovkva.

The Basilian monasteries were independent of the diocesan authorities, but were subordinate to the Russian Protoarchimandrite and had a special procurator in Rome for relations with the Roman Curia.

From the very beginning, the Basilian monasteries were filled with pure Latins; the Basilian Order was to become for the Uniate Church what the Jesuit Order was for the Roman Church.

After the death of Potsey (1613), his plans were carried out by Rutsky, who ruled the metropolis for 24 years. He enriched the order at the expense of estates taken from Orthodox monasteries, brought schools under the authority of the order, strengthened the education of the Basilians themselves, and granted them broad rights (for example, the right to choose a metropolitan and bishops, who could only be elected from among the members of the order).

The filling of the order with pure Latins reached the point that Uniate monasticism was completely Latinized, the Basilian schools became Latin, the Union, under the influence of the pupils of these schools, was more and more inclined towards Catholicism not only in its teaching, but also in its rituals.

OPPOSITION TO THE UNIA BY THE ORTHODOX

At the beginning of the seventeenth century. The situation of the Orthodox, especially in Lithuania, Volhynia and Galicia, became positively unbearable. The rest of Ukraine, thanks to the strength of the Cossacks, was somewhat calmer.

In 1610, the teacher of the Vilna fraternal school, MELETIY SMOTRITSKY, bitterly mourned the misfortunes of the Orthodox in the work “Frinos” or “The Lament of the Church to the East,” which struck even the Latins with its sad truth.

In 1620, at the Warsaw Sejm, one Volyn deputy Lavrenty Drevinsky spoke in defense of Orthodoxy with a strong speech in which he pointed out the terrible oppression of the Orthodox Church. Temples are sealed, Drevinsky said, cattle are locked up in monasteries, children are dying without baptism, in Lvov to the sick with St. You cannot go through the mysteries openly, people die without receiving communion, the body of a deceased Orthodox Christian can only be taken out through the gates used to remove sewage from the city, etc.

Catholics attacked Orthodox processions, churches, and houses. The Orthodox no longer had strong defenders, Prince. Ostrogsky died (+1608), and the rest of the Russian nobles became Polish. Only the defenders remained - the Cossacks.

Orthodox peasants, oppressed by the Jesuits and gentry, fled in droves to the Cossacks, carrying with them a terrible hatred of the Polish lordship. In the steppes of Ukraine, the formidable strength of the free Cossacks (in addition to the registered ones) grew with dangerous speed. The peasants, united by the Cossacks, jointly fought against the ever-increasing religious-national and serfdom oppression. The Cossacks played a very important role in the struggle of Western Russian Orthodox Christians against the union. The Cossack hetman Konashevich Sahaidachny skillfully restrained the fanaticism of the Poles until his death (+1622).

The struggle for union was also carried out with spiritual weapons. In 1597, the printing house of the Vilna Brotherhood printed the work of Christopher Fidalet “Apokrisis albo otvedi” on the book about the Brest Cathedral, written by P. Skarga. Skarga in his book recognized the Brest Orthodox Council as illegal and argued that since the rulers (traitors) accepted the union, the sheep should obey their shepherds. H. Filaret in the above-mentioned essay brilliantly refuted the evidence of P. Skarga. If Kirill Lutsky, writes Christopher, becomes Turkified, and he can become Turkish, then should the sheep really become Turks after such a shepherd?

In 1605, another Orthodox work on the origin of the union, “Perestoroga,” was published in Lvov.

A strong voice against the union was also heard from the East. The Russian monk of the Athos monastery, John of Vishensky, wrote “A Brief Notice of Latin Charms,” where he spoke out in strong and sharp terms against the oppression and oppression of the Orthodox. I. Vishensky also wrote letters to Prince. Ostrozhsky, brotherhoods and Uniate rulers.

FRATERNAL SCHOOLS AND MONASTERIES IN THE FIGHT AGAINST UNIA

Fraternal schools rendered particularly important services in the spiritual struggle for Orthodoxy. Despite all the oppression from Catholics and Uniates, brotherhoods continued to multiply everywhere. All of them established schools, and some even printing houses for the distribution of church and other Orthodox books.

In 1615, the wife of the Mozyr district marshal Galshka (Elizaveta) Gulevicheva donated a place and several buildings in Kyiv for the establishment of a new fraternal monastery with a school, where the Orthodox established the Kiev Epiphany Brotherhood with the later famous fraternal school. The following year, the brotherhood established a printing press and paper mill. In 1620, Hetman Sagaidachny built the Church of the Epiphany for the fraternal monastery, and Patriarch Theophan gave it the rights of a patriarchal stauropegy. The first rector of the Epiphany Monastery was Isaiah Kopinsky, and the first rector of the Brotherhood School was Job Boretsky, who had previously been the rector of the Lviv school.

The education of all fraternal schools was then dominated by the Greek element, brought here from the East by the Greeks, the main distributors of education in Southern Russia. Education in these schools was quite high and was very useful for its time.

Many prominent figures of education, theologians, fighters against the union, preachers, translators, and book correctors came from fraternal schools. From the Ostroh school came: Isaiah Kopinsky, the famous preacher Leonty Karpovich in his time, who suffered a lot for Orthodoxy, since 1615 the archimandrite of the Vilna Spiritual Monastery; Meletiy Smotritsky, author of "Frinos". From the Lvov school: Koretsky archpriest, later teacher of the Lvov school Lavrenty Zizaniy Tustanovsky - author of the Greater Catechism and Slavic-Russian grammar; then hieromonk-preacher Kirill Tranquillion, who wrote the “Teaching Gospel” and “Mirror of Theology” - the first experience of the dogmatic system; Hieromonk Pamva Berynda - compiler of an extensive Slavic lexicon; Pechersk hieromonk and since 1624 Archimandrite Zacharias Kopystensky. All the best representatives of the Orthodox hierarchy came from fraternal schools.

In addition to fraternal schools, the Orthodox Church found strong spiritual support in its monasteries. Along with the rise of enlightenment, the modern struggle against the union greatly influenced the rise of the moral level in society and the hierarchy and the revitalization of monastic life. Despite the deprivation of many monasteries from the Orthodox in the Union, the number of Orthodox monasteries was still constantly greater than the number of Uniate ones, and most of them were distinguished by their large population, having up to 80, 100 and 200 monks within their walls, while the Uniate monasteries stood almost empty. During the first 20 years of the union, the most difficult for the Orthodox Church, even up to 10 new Orthodox monasteries arose and between them three monasteries such as Pochaevsky, Vilensky-Svyatodukhovsky and Kiev-Brotherly, which became the main strongholds of Orthodoxy - the first for Volyn, the second for Lithuania, the third instead of the Kiev-Pechersk Lavra for Little Russia.

Since 1599, Elisha Pletenetsky, one of the most remarkable figures of that time, who became the true father of this famous monastery, the culprit of its complete renovation after its unfortunate decline in the past, was appointed archimandrite of the Pechersk Monastery; he finally strengthened its independence against the attacks of the Uniates, with whom he conducted long trials throughout his administration, significantly built it up from the outside, restored the hostel in it and raised monastic life, collected learned people, needed to support the modern educational movement and religious struggle, he opened a printing house, with the help of which he developed a wide publishing activity in the monastery for the benefit of all of Russia, established an institute of preaching and organized schools. The pious, enlightened and tireless administrator died in 1624, appointing the famous Zacharias Kopystensky as his successor.

In Vilna, the first archimandrite of the Spiritual Monastery, Leonty Karpovich, became the organizer of monasticism; during his short period of management of this fraternal monastery (+ 1620), he managed to provide great services to both the monastery and the brotherhood. The monastery's publishing activities were carried out with the help of its two printing houses.

In Galicia and Volyn, the culprit behind the revival of monastic life was Job of Knyaginisky, a student of the Ostrog school, who labored for a long time on Athos; he alone founded and organized up to 5 monasteries in the Lvov diocese (+1621) according to the cenobitic charter.

The venerable Job Zhelezo, abbot of first the Dubensky and then the Pochaevsky monastery (+ 1651), is especially famous for his holiness of life and suffering from the Uniates in Volyn.

Internet source:

http://www.murmanspas.ru/index.php?nav=1&church=2&p=prayers&action=showdetails&id=33&artpage=1&type= special

Russian Civilization