ΟΡΑΜΑΤΑ ΕΚΤΟΣ ΕΚΚΛΗΣΙΑΣ

ΣΥΓΓΡΑΦΕΑΣ: Μοναχός Γοράσδος (Βλ. μονογραφίες «Το Βατικανό και η Ρωσία» καί «Οράματα εκτός Εκκλησίας – Μία ματιά στις πνευματικές και πολιτικές τάσεις του Ρωμαιοκαθολικισμού», έκδοσις Ιεράς Μονής Αγίας Τριάδος Τζόρντανβιλ Ν. Υόρκης).
ΠΗΓΗ: http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/visions-outside-the-church. aspx
ΜΕΤΑΦΡΑΣΙΣ - ΕΠΙΜΕΛΕΙΑ: Κων. Γερ. Μπαρλάς, Αιτωλοακαρνανία 2008.
ΣΗΜΕΙΩΣΙΣ: Τό κείμενο παρατίθεται σέ μονοτονικό σύστημα, γιά λόγους τεχνικούς. Οι εντός αγκυλών [ ] σημειώσεις, καθώς και οι σημειώσεις μετά το κείμενο, ανήκουν στον μεταφραστή.

Πολλοί άνθρωποι έχουν ακούσει, ότι η Θεομήτωρ έχει υποτίθεται εμφανιστεί σε Ρωμαιοκαθολικούς σε διάφορα μέρη. Δεν ξέρουν τί να σκεφτούν γι’ αυτά τα γεγονότα. Μερικοί πάνε τόσο μακρυά, ώστε να νομίζουν ότι εφόσον η Μητέρα του Θεού εμφανίζεται σε Ρωμαιοκαθολικούς, αυτό συνεπάγεται ότι η Ρωμαιοκαθολική Εκκλησία είναι μια αληθινή Εκκλησία που έχει την Χάρη, ειδικά εφόσον διάφορα θαύματα και θεραπείες λαμβάνουν χώρα στις τοποθεσίες των οραμάτων. Η Φάτιμα [1], ιδιαίτερα, έχει ξεσηκώσει μεγάλο ενδιαφέρον μεταξύ των Ρώσων που ζουν στο εξωτερικό, διότι η οπτασία υποτίθεται μιλάει για την Ρωσία με ισχυρά αντικομουνιστικούς όρους, οδηγώντας τους να παραβλέψουν το αιρετικό κι αντιορθόδοξο περιεχόμενο του μηνύματος συνολικά. Πώς πρέπει να σταθούμε απέναντι σ’ αυτές τις εμφανίσεις και τους ισχυρισμούς γι’ αυτές; Τί κριτήριο θα’πρεπε να χρησιμοποιήσουμε για να μας οδηγήσει στην εξέταση της αλήθειας οραμάτων εκτός της Ορθοδόξου Εκκλησίας; Ευελπιστώ πως τα όσα ακολουθούν θα βοηθήσουν να κατανοήσουμε τέτοια φαινόμενα.
Οι Άγιοι Πατέρες, ξέροντας ότι ο Σατανάς μπορεί να μεταμορφωθεί σ’ Ἀγγελο φωτός, μας συμβουλεύουν να είμαστε προσεκτικοί και δύσπιστοι με όλες τις εμφανίσεις στον ορατό κόσμο. «Αν είσαι ήσυχος με καλό τρόπο, επιθυμώντας να είσαι με το Θεό» λέει ο Άγιος Γρηγόριος ο Σιναΐτης, «ποτέ μη δέχεσαι εμφανίσεις[2] φυσικές ή πνευματικές, είτε έξω είτε μέσα στον εαυτό σου, ακόμα κι αν μπορεί να είναι μια εικόνα του Χριστού, ή ένας Ἀγγελος, ή κάποιος Άγιος, ή αν ίσως εμφανιστεί φως, ή αποτυπωθεί στο νου. Πρόσεχε, ώστε να μην καταλήξεις να πιστέψεις κάτι, ακόμα κι αν είναι κάτι καλό, και μην αιχμαλωτιστείς απ' αυτό πριν συμβουλευτείς εκείνους που είναι έμπειροι κι είναι ικανοί ν' αναλύσουν το θέμα, ώστε να μην υποστείς βλάβη. Ο Θεός δεν δυσαρεστείται με το πρόσωπο που είναι προσεκτικό με τον εαυτό του, ακόμα κι αν αυτό, από φόβο μήπως πλανηθεί, δεν αποδέχεται ακόμα κι εκείνο που είναι από Αυτόν, χωρίς συμβουλή και δοκιμή».
Θα μπορούσαμε να προσθέσουμε, ότι Κύριος ο Θεός θα μπορούσε όλες τις φορές να δώσει πλήρη επιβεβαίωση σ’ ένα πρόσωπο, εάν ευαρεστείται να το κάνει αυτό, που ν’ αφορά την αλήθεια του οράματος. Εάν τέτοια προσοχή είναι απαραίτητη όσον αφορά οράματα ΕΝΤΟΣ της Ορθοδόξου Εκκλησίας, πόσο πολύ περισσότερο επιφυλακτικοί θα έπρεπε να είμαστε σε σχέση με εμφανίσεις ΕΚΤΟΣ της Μίας, Αληθινής Εκκλησίας! Το μόνο κριτήριο για να εξετάζουμε αυτά τα οράματα θα πρέπει να είναι η Ορθοδοξία τους [3]. Εάν καθ’ οιονδήποτε τρόπο η Ορθοδοξία τους χωλαίνει, τότε πρέπει ν' απορριφθούν. Ακόμα κι αν το 99% του μηνύματος είναι Ορθόδοξο και μόνο 1% αποκλίνει από τις διδασκαλίες της Εκκλησίας, τότε όλο πρέπει ν’ απορρίπτεται [4]. Ο Θεός δεν μπορεί ν' αρνείται το Εαυτό Του ή να διδάσκει αναλήθειες, ακόμα και στον ελάχιστο βαθμό.
Ας εξετάσουμε τρεις αρκετά γνωστές περιπτώσεις που συνέβησαν στην εποχή μας. Πρώτα θ' ασχοληθούμε με την Φάτιμα, που είναι ιδιαίτερου ενδιαφέροντος, μιας κι εκεί η οπτασία μιλάει για την Ρωσία και τον ρόλο της στο πεπρωμένο της ανθρωπότητας.
Προς το τέλος του Πρώτου Παγκοσμίου Πολέμου, στη Φάτιμα της Πορτογαλίας, μεταξύ Μαΐου κι Οκτωβρίου 1917, τρία βοσκόπουλα, δυο κορίτσια κι ένα αγόρι, είχαν μια σειρά οραμάτων κάποιας που είπαν πως είναι η Κυρία μας, η Ευλογημένη Παρθένος. Κατά τη διάρκεια των έξι μηνών των οπτασιών, τα μηνύματα που ειπώθηκε στη Λουτσία να δημοσιοποιήσει, τότε ή λίγο αργότερα, αφορούσαν πάρα πολύ την ανάγκη να ενθαρρυνθεί η αφοσίωση στο ροζάριο [5] και στην άσπιλη καρδιά της Κυρίας μας [Παπική θρησκευτική Θεομητορική εορτή], και την ανάγκη να αλλάξει η ανθρωπότητα την κατεύθυνση στην οποία κινούνταν. Αποτυχία στο να κάνουμε αυτή την αλλαγή θα έφερνε την οργή του Θεού. (Aπό «Μελέτες στη Συγκριτική Θρησκειολογία - Ένα Ζήτημα που Αφορά την Δεύτερη Βατικανή Σύνοδο», υπό Βεράκ).
Το Δεκέμβριο του 1940 η Αδελφή Λουκία [6] - η μόνη απ' τους τρεις που παρέμεινε ζωντανή και που τότε ήταν καλόγρια του Καρμελιτικού τάγματος - έγραψε στον Πάπα Πίο τον 12ο (1876 - 1958) [7] λέγοντας: «Το 1917 η Παναγία Μητέρα προφήτεψε σ’ εμάς το τέλος του πολέμου που εκείνη την εποχή σκοτείνιαζε το πρόσωπο της Ευρώπης. Προφήτεψε άλλον ένα πόλεμο κι είπε πως θα ξανάρχονταν. Επέμεινε στην αφοσίωση της Ρωσίας στην υπερ-ιερή καρδιά της [Παπική γιορτή], υποσχόμενη ως αντάλλαγμα να εμποδίσει την εξάπλωση ψευδών διδασκαλιών στη Ρωσία και να μεταστρέψει την Ρωσία» [8]. (Aπό «Νέα Για τη Φάτιμα, το μεγαλύτερο Θαύμα της Εποχής μας», Βρυξέλες, 1962, σ. 144). Είναι απαραίτητο να θυμηθούμε ότι οι Καθολικοί κατανοούν «την μεταστροφή [προσηλυτισμό] της Ρωσίας», ως μεταστροφή της στο Ρωμαιοκαθολικισμό [9].
Πάλι διαβάζουμε στο Περιοδικό «Ο Σταυροφόρος της Φάτιμα» (τεύχος 17, Απριλίου - Μαϊου 1985): «Έτσι η μεταστροφή λίγων Ρώσων στον Καθολικισμό, είναι τώρα μέρος των προετοιμασιών του Θεού για τον προσηλυτισμό της Ρωσίας, όταν ο Πάπας κι οι Επίσκοποι τελικά υπακούν τη διαταγή της Κυράς μας της Φάτιμα να καθαγιάσουν [αφιερώσουν] τη Ρωσία με τον τρόπο που υπέδειξε ο Θεός. O λόγος για τον οποίο ο Ιησούς έδωσε αυτή τη συγκεκριμένη εντολή στον Πάπα και στους Επισκόπους, είναι διότι θέλει όλη η Εκκλησία Του ν’ αναγνωρίσει τον καθαγιασμό της Ρωσίας [δηλαδή τη μεταστροφή της στον Παπισμό], ως έναν θρίαμβο της άσπιλης καρδίας της Μαρίας. Η Αδελφή Λουκία καταγράφει σ’ ένα γράμμα με ημερομηνία 18 Μαΐου 1936: «Κατ’ ιδίαν μίλησα στον Κύριο μας για το θέμα κι όχι πολύ καιρό πριν. Τον ρώτησα γιατί δεν θα μετέστρεφε [στον Παπισμό] τη Ρωσία χωρίς τον Άγιο Πατέρα [τον Πάπα] να κάνει την καθαγίαση. Απάντησε: Γιατί θέλω όλη η Εκκλησία Μου ν’ αναγνωρίσει αυτήν την καθαγίαση, ως θρίαμβο της άσπιλης καρδίας της Μαρίας, ώστε να μπορέσει να επεκτείνει τη λατρεία του αργότερα και να βάλει την αφοσίωση στην άσπιλη καρδία [της Παναγίας] δίπλα στην αφοσίωση της ιερής καρδίας Μου.»
Εδώ θα’πρεπε να πούμε κάτι για τις μη Ορθόδοξες μορφές θρησκευτικής ευλάβειας [κι αφοσίωσης] στην ιερή καρδιά του Ιησού και στην άσπιλη καρδιά της Μαρίας, που το όραμα υποστηρίζει. Μια Ρωμαιοκαθολική [Γαλλίδα] καλόγρια, η Μαρία Μαργαρίτα Αλακόκ (Μary Margaret Alacoque, 1647 - 1690), υποτίθεται πως είχε ένα όραμα του Ιησού Χριστού, ο Οποίος της έδειξε την καρδιά Του, που έκαιγε από αγάπη, και της ζήτησε να διαδώσει την τιμή σ’ αυτή [την καρδιά]. Οι αποκαλύψεις που έλαβε πρωτοτυπώθηκαν στη διήγηση της ζωής της απ’ τον Ιησουίτη Επίσκοπο Λανζέ (Lanje) και προκάλεσαν τέτοιο σκάνδαλο που η έκδοση καταστράφηκε. Λόγω του γεγονότος ότι εκείνες οι «αποκαλύψεις» είχαν εκτεθεί τόσο στο κοινό, καταδικάστηκαν από τον Πάπα Κλήμεντα [10]. Παρόλ’ αυτά, αυτή η λατρεία [της ιερής καρδιάς του Ιησού] συνέχισε να υφίσταται υπό την σκέπη των Ιησουϊτών [11], και τελικά μπήκε στο κύριο ρεύμα της [ρωμαιο]Καθολικής θρησκευτικής ζωής ("Ποιμαντική Θεολογία - Μέρος Δεύτερο", Αρχιμανδρίτης Κωνσταντίνος, Τζόρντανβιλ, 1961, σ. 16). Εικόνες και γιορτές της Ιερής Καρδιάς έγιναν σημαντικό μέρος της [Ρωμαιο] καθολικής πνευματικότητας, κι οι Πάπες πρόσθεσαν τις εγκρίσεις τους σε εγκυκλίους [12], χαρίζοντας αφέσεις αμαρτιών (συγχωροχάρτια) για όποιον τηρούσε τη γιορτή. Για να μην υστερήσουν, άλλες ομάδες, που υποστήριζαν πως είχαν δει εμφανίσεις της Μαρίας, προώθησαν την ιδέα της τιμής (ευλάβειας - αφοσίωσης) στην «Άσπιλη Καρδιά της Μαρίας».
H καρδιά της Μαρίας μερικές φορές ζωγραφίζονταν μαζί με το [ζωγραφικό] μοτίβο της ιερής καρδιάς του Ιησού: Μία εικόνα (ζωγραφιά) με δύο καρδιές. Κι αργότερα, η θλιμένη καρδιά της Μαρίας, με πέντε ή εφτά σπαθιά να την διατρυπούν, έγινε άκρως δημοφιλής. Θα ήταν δύσκολο να κατηγορήσουμε τον Ρωμαιοκαθολικισμό ότι αρνείται τη θεότητα του Χριστού, μάλλον έχει διασπάσει την ολότητα του Χριστού, δίνοντας έμφαση στην τιμή (ευλάβεια - αφοσίωση) της ανθρώπινης φύσης Του ξεχωριστά, ορισμένες φορές μ’ έναν χονδροειδώς βιολογικό τρόπο [13].
Αυτό παραβιάζει μια κεντρική αρχή των [Οικουμενικών] Συνόδων, ότι τιμή (λατρευτική) πρέπει ν’ αποδίδεται στον [όλο, δηλαδή στον Θεάνθρωπο] Χριστό, κι όχι σε μια από τις φύσεις Του ή μέρη του σώματός Του. Έτσι, κομματιάζοντας την ολότητα του Υιού του Θεού, αναπτύσσεται μια τάση Νεστοριανισμού [14]. Μέρη του σώματος του Χριστού δεν πρέπει να γίνονται αντικείμενο ξεχωριστής λατρείας, ούτε θα’πρεπε ν’ απεικονίζονται ζωγραφικά (δηλ. μια φλεγόμενη καρδιά ή μια καρδιά που περιβάλλεται από ένα ακάνθινο στεφάνι). (Aπό «Συγκριτική Θρησκειολογία - Ρωμαιοκαθολικισμός: Μερικές Θρησκευτικές Πρακτικές», υπό πατρός Τζορτζ Μίτσελ). Αναφέρουμε εδώ αυτές τις θρησκευτικές πρακτικές, για ν' απεικονίσουμε την άβυσσο που υπάρχει μεταξύ Ορθόδοξης και Ρωμαιοκαθολικής πνευματικότητας.
Ακόμη, άλλη μία σειρά εμφανίσεων έλαβε χώρα σ' ένα μικρό ορεινό χωριό που ονομάζεται Άγιος Σεβαστιανός του Γκαραμπαντάλ (San Sebastian de Garabandal), στα βόρεια της Ισπανίας. Αυτές οι εμφανίσεις έγιναν μεταξύ Ιουνίου 1961 και Νοεμβρίου 1965. Αποδέκτες ήταν τέσσερα νεαρά κορίτσια. Παραθέτουμε μερικά απ’ τα μηνύματα που δόθηκαν [απ’ την οπτασία]: «Η Παρθένος επίσης μας υπενθύμισε να πηγαίνουμε συχνότερα στο ευλογημένο μυστήριο [δηλ. την Θ. κοινωνία]. Είναι γεγονός πως ακόμα και στην τελική εμφάνισή της (13 Νοέμβρη 1965) η Παρθένος μου είπε: «Κοντσίτα [έτσι έλεγαν την μία από τις κοπέλες], γιατί δεν πας συχνότερα να επισκεφτείς τον Υιό μου στο ναό;» Όταν είδα την Παρθένο της είπα, σαν να υπήρχε κατάσκοπος στο χωριό: «Ξέρεις, υπάρχουν κάποιοι Διαμαρτυρόμενοι εδώ». Η Παρθένος απάντησε: «Είναι όλοι παιδιά μου». Ο Ἀγγελος ήρθε κι είπε: «Πολλοί Καρδινάλιοι, πολλοί Επίσκοποι και πολλοί Ιερείς είναι στο δρόμο της απώλειας και παίρνουν πολλές ψυχές μαζί τους. Όλο και λιγότερη σημασία δίνεται στην (θεία) Ευχαριστία».
Είναι ενδιαφέρον να παρατηρήσουμε, ότι το 1967 η Κοντσίτα Γκονζάλεζ (μια απ’ τις αποδέκτριες) άρχισε να’χει αμφιβολίες για τις εμφανίσεις: «Ναι, το 1967, λίγο μετά που είχαν γίνει οι εμφανίσεις, όντως είχα αμφιβολίες. Συνέβη ξαφνικά τις 15 Αυγούστου. Δεν θα το ξεχάσω ποτέ. Υπήρχαν πολλοί άνθρωποι τριγύρω μου και με κατέκλυσε το συναίσθημα ότι δεν ήμουν ειλικρινής. Ένιωθα πως εξαπατούσα όλους αυτούς τους ανθρώπους κι ότι όφειλα να το ομολογήσω. Πήγα σ’ έναν Ιερέα και του είπα ότι ήταν σαν μια ψευδαίσθηση ή όνειρο ή ζώντας ένα ψέμα, ότι ποτέ δεν είχα δει την Παρθένο κι ότι τους εξαπατούσα όλους όλη την ώρα. Αυτές οι αμφιβολίες κι αρνήσεις των εμφανίσεων της Παρθένου διήρκεσαν πέντε ή έξι μέρες. Από τότε και μέχρι σήμερα έχω σύγχυση κι αμφιβολία μέσα μου». (Aπό «Θαύμα στο Γκαραμπαντάλ» της Κοντσίτα Γκονζάλεζ, συνέντευξη στον Χάρι Ντάλεη, Ντάμπλντέη εντ Κόμπανι, Ν.Υ. 1983).
Αναφέρουμε εδώ αυτή την εμφάνιση για να δείξουμε ότι ακόμα και σε μια περίπτωση όπου η ίδια η θεατής σε τελική ανάλυση είναι αβέβαιη για την πραγματικότητα αυτού που είδε, παρόλ' αυτά η ιστορία φαίνεται να βρίσκει καταφανώς σοβαρούς πιστούς. Δεν αποθαρρύνονται καν από τόσο ανησυχητικά γεγονότα όπως το ακόλουθο, που ανέφερε ένας απ’ τους θεατές: «Μετά που άρχισαν οι εμφανίσεις, ποτέ δεν χάσαμε ούτε μέρα [θείας] Kοινωνίας. Όταν δεν υπήρχε Ιερέας στην πόλη, ένας Ἀγγελος κατέβαινε να μας δώσει κοινωνία… Κάποια στιγμή ένας Ιερέας μας έδωσε οδηγίες να ρωτήσουμε πώς γινόταν να μας παρέχει κοινωνία ο Ἀγγελος, αφού μόνο ο Ιερέας μπορούσε να καθαγιάσει τις όστιες [15]. Ρωτήσαμε κι η Παρθένος είπε πως ο Ἀγγελος κατέβαινε κι έπαιρνε τις ήδη καθαγιασμένες όστιες από αρτοφόρια [εκκλησιαστικό σκεύος όπου φυλάσσεται Θ. Κοινωνία για έκτακτες περιπτώσεις] στη γη».
Μπορούμε να φανταστούμε την σύγχυση που αυτό θα προκαλούσε στην εκκλησία απ’ την οποία παίρνονταν οι όστιες! Είναι δυνατόν Άγγελοι να χρειάζεται να παίρνουν όστιες από αρτοφόρια εκκλησιών; Στο βίο του Ορθοδόξου αγίου Ονουφρίου, όντως ένας Ἀγγελος φέρνει την Θεία Κοινωνία, αλλά είναι αδιανόητο ότι ένας Ἀγγελος θα χρειάζονταν να πάρει Άγια Δώρα από ένα αρτοφόριο στη Γη [16]
Η τρίτη σειρά εμφανίσεων που θ' αναφέρουμε άρχισε στις 24 Ιουνίου 1981 στη Γιουγκοσλαβική πόλη Medjugorje (Μεντιουγκόργιε), όπου κάποια νέα παιδιά άρχισαν να έχουν οράματα από κάτι που αυτά θεώρησαν πως είναι η Παναγία. Η οπτασία ισχυρίστηκε ότι αυτές οι αποκαλύψεις θα είναι οι τελευταίες στον κόσμο. Το Νοέμβριο του 1982 μ.Χ. η οπτασία είπε: «Μετά που θα τελειώσουν αυτές οι αποκαλύψεις, θα υπάρξουν μόνο κάποιες ψεύτικες αποκαλύψεις στον κόσμο».
Ο κόσμος πήγαινε κατά κοπάδια στη Μεντγιουγκόριε απ’ όλο τον κόσμο ακόμα κι αν ο τοπικός Ρωμαιοκαθολικός Επίσκοπος του Μοστάρ, Παβάο Ζάνιτς, που αρνείται την γνησιότητα των εμφανίσεων, έκανε μια δημόσια ανακοίνωση στ’ όνομα της Γιουγκοσλαβικής Συνέλευσις Επισκόπων [κάτι σαν τοπική Σύνοδος] ότι «δεν επιτρέπεται να διοργανώνονται προσκυνήματα ή άλλες εκδηλώσεις που υποκινούνται από τον υπερφυσικό χαρακτήρα που υποθετικά αποδίδεται στα γεγονότα της Μεντγιουγκόργιε». [17]
Ήδη το 1981 οι κοπέλες που είχαν δει το όραμα έλεγαν: «Θα υπάρξει ένα ορατό σημάδι που θα διαρκεί στο λόφο των εμφανίσεων. Θα έρθει γρήγορα, θα το δείτε σύντομα. Περιμένετε λίγο περισσότερο, κάντε υπομονή». Και πάλι: «Το σημείο θα συμβεί στη γιορτή της Άσπιλης Σύλληψης [18] το 1981, έπειτα τα Χριστούγεννα, μετά την Πρωτοχρονιά κ.ο.κ.» Περιττό να πούμε ότι κανένα σημάδι δεν έχει εμφανιστεί ακόμα στο λόφο. Για έναν Ορθόδοξο αναγνώστη είναι επαρκές να ξέρει μόνο μερικά απ’ τα οικουμενιστικά μηνύματα που έδωσε η οπτασία, για να είναι βέβαιος ότι δεν είναι η Θεομήτωρ που εμφανίζεται εκεί. Για παράδειγμα:
«Όλες οι θρησκείες είναι το ίδιο μπροστά στο Θεό. Ο Θεός διατάζει σ’ όλες αυτές τις θρησκείες, ως βασιλιάς στο βασίλειό του.» («Καθολική-Αντί-Μεταρρύθμιση»,2001, Αγγλική έκδοση, πρβλ. και «Fr. Blaise, 500 Messages a Vivre», σ. 370, Μόντρεαλ 1986). «Για το Θεό δεν μετράνε οι διαιρέσεις κι οι θρησκείες. Είστε εσείς στον κόσμο που δημιουργήσατε τους διχασμούς, διότι οι πιστοί ξεχωρίστηκαν ο ένας απ’ τον άλλο». («Εμφανίσεις της Παρθένου Μαρίας στη Μedjugorje», Jan Urban (στα τσέχικα) . «Η Καθολική Αντί-Μεταρρύθμιση στον 20 αι.», Σεπτ. - Οκτ. 1987, Νοέμ. - Δεκ. 1985).
Για τον ανενημέρωτο, αυτό το μήνυμα έχει μια παραπλανητική έλξη και συμβαδίζει με την άποψη περί «ενός κόσμου». Αλλά σαν Ορθόδοξοι Χριστιανοί γνωρίζουμε, ότι το να πούμε πως «όλες οι θρησκείες είναι το ίδιο μπροστά στο Θεό» είναι άρνηση του Χριστού ως της μόνης Αλήθειας. Δεν είναι ο Ίδιος που λέει, «Εγώ είμαι η οδός, η αλήθεια κι η ζωή. Κανείς δεν έρχεται στον Πατέρα παρά μέσω εμού» (Ιω.14:6); Άρα το να λέμε πως όλες οι θρησκείες είναι το ίδιο, είναι άρνηση του Χριστού! [19]
Χωρίς ν’ αποπειραθούμε ν’ αναλύσουμε πολύ βαθιά το νόημα όλων των μηνυμάτων, μας είναι ήδη αρκετό να συνειδητοποιήσουμε πως κάθε μια απ’ αυτές τις εμφανίσεις, που υποστηρίζει πως είναι η Θεομήτωρ, δέχεται τα Μυστήρια της Ρωμαιοκαθολικής Εκκλησίας ως αληθινά κι έχοντα τη Χάρη. Αυτό από μόνο του κάνει αυτές τις εμφανίσεις εντελώς απορριπτέες για εμάς, αφού γνωρίζουμε πως Μυστήρια που έχουν και μεταδίδουν τη Χάρη βρίσκονται μόνο στη Μία, Αληθινή Εκκλησία του Χριστού. Αφότου η Δυτική Εκκλησία αποχωρίστηκε από τη Μία, Αληθή Εκκλησία τον 11ο αιώνα, δεν τίθεται καν ζήτημα για την ύπαρξη αληθινών Μυστηρίων στη Ρωμαιοκαθολική Εκκλησία. «Η Εκκλησία είναι μία και μόνο αυτή έχει την πληρότητα των δώρων της Χάριτος του Αγίου Πνεύματος. Άσχετα απ’ το ποιος ή με ποιον τρόπο κάποιος έχει απομακρυνθεί από την Εκκλησία - είτε λόγω αίρεσης, σχίσματος, ή παρασυναγωγής - αυτός χάνει την κοινωνία της Χάρης του Θεού. Άρα κανένα Μυστήριο που τελείται εκτός της (Ορθοδόξου) Εκκλησίας δεν έχει καμία ισχύ προερχόμενη από τη Χάρη.» (Αρχιεπίσκοπος Ιλαρίων, «Δεν υπάρχει Χριστιανισμός χωρίς την Εκκλησία», σ.114, Σαν Πάολο, Βραζιλία, 1954).
Ακόμα κι η ύπαρξη θεραπειών δεν είναι απόδειξη της αλήθειας των εμφανίσεων. Οι θεραπείες μπορεί να είναι απ’ το Θεό, από φυσικά αίτια ή αν ο Θεός το επιτρέψει από τον Πονηρό. [Κι ο διάβολος μπορεί να θεραπεύσει αρρώστιες που προκάλεσε ο ίδιος]. Ο Σωζομενός, στην «Εκκλησιαστική Ιστορία» του (Βιβλίο 2, παρ. 5) γράφει: «O ναός του Ασκληπιού στην Αιγίδα, μια πόλη της Κιλικίας, κι ο ναός της Αφροδίτης στα Άφακα, κοντά στο Όρος Λίβανος και τον ποταμό Άδωνι, κατασκάφτηκαν και καταστράφηκαν εντελώς. Και οι δυο αυτοί ναοί τιμώνταν και τους είχαν σε μεγάλη υπόληψη οι αρχαίοι, γιατί όσοι απ' αυτούς ήταν άρρωστοι στο σώμα θεραπεύονταν απ’ τις ασθένειες, γιατί ο δαίμονας εκδηλωνόνταν τη νύχτα και τους θεράπευε».
Στο έργο του αγίου Γρηγορίου της Τουρώνης (538-594), «Vita Patrum - Βίοι Πατέρων), διαβάζουμε στο βίο του αγίου Φριάρδου του Έγκλειστου: «Και καθώς θαρραλέα επέμεναν στην προσευχή, ο πειραστής (διάβολος) εμφανίστηκε τη νύχτα στο Διάκονο Σεκουνδέλλο, παίρνοντας τη μορφή του Κυρίου και λέγοντάς του, «Είμαι ο Χριστός στον οποίο προσεύχεσαι κάθε μέρα. Είσαι ήδη Άγιος και τ’ όνομά σου είναι γραμμένο στο Βιβλίο της Ζωής. Γι’ αυτό πήγαινε έξω απ’ το νησί και κάνε θεραπείες ανάμεσα στους ανθρώπους». Ο Σεκουνδέλλος, ξεγελασμένος απ’ αυτή την πλάνη, έφυγε απ’ το νησί κι έτσι ακόμα μόλις έβαζε το χέρι του πάνω στους αρρώστους στ’ όνομα του Ιησού Χριστού, αυτοί θεραπεύονταν».
Τα λόγια του Αρχιερέως Βόριδος Μολχάνωφ (Boris Molchanov) είναι πολύ επίκαιρα εδώ: «Είναι πολύ σημαντικό να γνωρίζουμε αυτόν τον λίγο γνωστό, αλλά αξιοσημείωτο πνευματικό νόμο, μέσω του οποίου όλος ο ψευδής κι υποκριτικός Χριστιανισμός θα οδηγήσει αναπόφευκτα τους οπαδούς του στην αποδοχή του Αντιχρίστου ή σ’ ένα κίνημα που θα προετοιμάζει την εμφάνισή του. Σε κάθε ψεύτικη διδασκαλία, όπως στη στάση των Φαρισαίων προς την αλήθεια, υπάρχουν κρυμένοι οι σπόροι της αιώνιας καταδίκης. Ηλιθιωδώς και μάταια πολλοί άνθρωποι δεν αποδέχονται την σπουδαιότητα του δόγματος. Η στενή σχέση μεταξύ δόγματος της πίστης, της πρακτικής ηθικής δραστηριότητας και του αγώνα για σωτηρία, έχει αναπτυχθεί εκτενώς απ’ τον Επίσκοπο [Άγιο] Ιγνάτιο (Μπριαντσανίνοφ, 1807 - 1867) και την Αυτού Μακαριότητα τον Μητροπολίτη Αντώνιο (Κραποβίτσκι). Σύμφωνα με τη διδασκαλία της Εκκλησίας, δεν είναι τίποτα τόσο σπουδαίο, όσο το να ομολογείς την θεόθεν αποκαλυμένη Αλήθεια, αφού ο ίδιος ο Λόγος του Θεού μαρτυρεί, ότι ο Θεός πρέπει να λατρεύεται εν Πνεύματι κι Αληθεία (Ιω. 4:23-24). Η αλήθεια δεν είναι κανένα ασήμαντο πράγμα με το οποίο μπορεί ο καθένας να σχετίζεται όπως θέλει. Στην αλήθεια, το Πνεύμα της Αληθείας, που εκπορεύεται απ’ τον Πατέρα, είναι παρόν κατά έναν αληθινό τρόπο. Και αντίστοιχα, σε κάθε ψέμα, είναι παρών ο πατέρας του ψεύδους, ο διάβολος. Άρα όποιος ομολογεί την αλήθεια, λαμβάνει το Πνεύμα της Αλήθειας κι όποιος ομολογεί ένα ψέμα αναγκαστικά θ’ αφομοιώσει το πνεύμα των ψεμάτων, το εκπεσών πνεύμα. Εκτός της Μίας, Αγίας Ορθοδόξου Εκκλησίας, δεν υπάρχουν κι ούτε θα εμφανιστούν τα μέσα για ν' αναγνωριστεί ο Αντίχριστος" («Εποχή Αποστασίας», Τζόρντανβιλ 1976, σελ.18)
Δεν χρειαζόμαστε ετερόδοξα οράματα για να μας καλέσουν σε μετάνοια, προσευχή και νηστεία. Επιπλέον, αυτά τα οράματα αποδέχονται τα Ρωμαιοκαθολικά Μυστήρια, τον θεσμό του Πάπα, ενθαρρύνουν μη Ορθόδοξες μορφές ευλάβειας κι αγκαλιάζουν τον ψευδή Οικουμενισμό [δεν έχει καμία σχέση ο αντιχριστιανικός Οικουμενισμός με την παγκοσμιότητα της Ορθοδοξίας]. Στους ταραγμένους μας καιρούς, καιρούς λεπτών πειρασμών και μεγάλων πλανών, όπου ψεύτικα θαύματα, οράματα κι εμφανίσεις αυξάνονται, εμείς οι Ορθόδοξοι Χριστιανοί θα πρέπει να εργαζόμαστε για τη σωτηρία μας με φόβο και τρόμο, μένοντας σταθεροί στην Αγία Ορθόδοξη Πίστη μας κι αναζητώντας οδηγία κι έμπνευση μόνο στην Αγία Ορθόδοξη Εκκλησία μας.

ΣΗΜΕΙΩΣΕΙΣ:
1. Τοποθεσία στην Πορτογαλλία όπου υποτίθεται εμφανίστηκε η Παναγία.
2. Οράματα - Οπτασίες
3. Αν δηλαδή, συμφωνούν με τα δόγματα, τις διδασκαλίες και την Ιερά Παράδοση της ΟΡΘΟΔΟΞΗΣ ΕΚΚΛΗΣΙΑΣ
4. ΠΡΟΣΟΧΗ! Ακόμα κι Ορθόδοξο 100% να είναι το περιεχόμενο, πάλι πρέπει να είμαστε επιφυλακτικοί, διότι ο Σατανάς και οι δαίμονες μπορεί να έχουν σκοπό αργότερα να μας πλανήσουν με άλλα οράματα ή ακόμα και με αυτό μόνο να μας κάνουν να υπερηφανευτούμε.
5. Ρωμαιοκαθολική θρησκευτική πρακτική κατά την οποία απαγγέλεται ένα συγκεκριμένο τυπικό προσευχών χρησιμοποιώντας το ομώνυμο Ρωμαιοκαθολικό «κομποσχοίνι»
6. Φωτεινή, από το λατινικό lux=φως.
7. Πίος σημαίνει ευλαβής, άρα θα μπορούσε να μεταφραστεί ως Ευλάβιος. Η λέξη Πάπας δεν έχει από μόνη της αρνητική έννοια, αφού σημαίνει απλά «πατέρας». «Πάπας και Πατριάρχης Αλεξανδρείας και Πάσης Αφρικής» ονομάζεται κι ο Ορθόδοξος Πατριάρχης Αλεξανδρείας και Πάσης Αφρικής. Επίσης ο Κόπτης (αιρετικός Μονοφυσίτης) Πατριάρχης της ίδιας περιοχής ονομάζεται «Πάπας Αλεξανδρείας και Πατριάρχης πάσης Αφρικής». ΠΡΟΣΟΧΗ! Οι Κόπτες ονομάζουν την «Εκκλησία» τους «Κοπτική Ορθόδοξη Εκκλησία», αλλά δεν έχουν καμία σχέση και κοινωνία με την ΟΡΘΟΔΟΞΗ ΕΚΚΛΗΣΙΑ, αφού είναι αιρετικοί Μονοφυσίτες. Σε ξένα ντοκυμαντέρ τους έχουν ονομάσει Ορθοδόξους, διότι αυτοί που 'κάναν το ντοκυμαντέρ ήξεραν τόση θεολογία, όσο ξέρει ο κυρ-Γιάννης ο περιπτεράς Κινέζικα. Άρα το πρόβλημά μας δεν είναι η λέξη «Πάπας», αλλά ο «Επίσκοπος και Πατριάρχης Ρώμης» (που επικράτησε να ονομάζεται «Πάπας») κι ο οποίος έπεσε σε αίρεση.
8. Στον Παπισμό.
9. Επικράτησε να ονομάζονται οι αιρετικοί Παπικοί «Καθολικοί», ενώ θα’ πρεπε να λέγονται απλά «Παπικοί» ή «Ρωμαιοκαθολικοί». Μόνο οι ΟΡΘΟΔΟΞΟΙ ΧΡΙΣΤΙΑΝΟΙ είναι όντως Καθολικοί, αφού η Ορθόδοξη Χριστιανική Εκκλησία είναι η Μία, Αγία, ΚΑΘΟΛΙΚΗ κι Αποστολική Εκκλησία (όπως απαγγέλουμε στο Σύμβολο της Πίστεως) που ίδρυσε ο Κύριος μας ΙΗΣΟΥΣ ΧΡΙΣΤΟΣ. Ούτε «Δυτική» πρέπει να λέγεται αφού και στη Δύση υπάρχουν Ορθόδοξοι και στην Ανατολή Παπικοί. Επίσης, κακώς χαρακτηρίζεται «Λατινική», αφού δεν χρησιμοποιεί πλέον την Λατινική γλώσσα, αλλά και γιατί ακόμα κι Ορθόδοξες Θείες Λειτουργίες τελούνταν στα Λατινικά πριν το Σχίσμα(1054 μ.Χ.).
10. Τον 14°, [1705 - 1774] το 1772 .Τραγική η πλάνη των Παπιστών: Ο ένας Πάπας (ο Κλήμης 14ος ) την καταδίκασε κι ο άλλος (ο Βενέδικτος 15ος) την αγιοποίησε το 1920! Αφού οι Πάπες είναι αλάθητοι και τους καθοδηγεί το ίδιο Άγιο Πνεύμα, τότε πως το Άγιο Πνεύμα άλλα είπε στον ένα κι άλλα στον άλλο; Το Παπικό αλάθητο είναι μια βλάσφημη κακοδοξία κι εμπαιγμός των απλών Ρωμαιοκαθολικών πιστών.
11. Ιησουίτες: Μέλη της Ρωμαιοκαθολικής Θρησκευτικής Αδελφότητας του Ιησού ή Εταιρίας του Ιησού (Societas Iesu), που ιδρύθηκε το 1534 από τον Ισπανό Ιγνάτιο Λογιόλα. Προσοχή να μην τους μπερδέψετε με τους Jesuati (Ιησουίτες κι η πιο σωστή απόδοση κατά τη γνώμη μου θα ήταν «Ιησουϊστές»), που είναι μέλη του θρησκευτικού Ρωμαιοκαθολικού Τάγματος των Ιησουιτών, που ιδρύθηκε στην Ιταλία το 1363 από τους Ιωάννη Κολομπίνι και Φραγκίσκο Μιάνι και διατάχθηκε η διάλυσή του το 1668 από τον Πάπα Κλήμη Θ΄.
12. Τις οποίες πολύ αμφιβάλλω αν ο απλός Ρωμαιοκαθολικός πιστός τις έχει διαβάσει.
13. Με ακραίως σαρκικό τρόπο, όπως στην κινηματογραφική ταινία του Μελ Γκίμπσον «The Passion of Christ» (Τα Πάθη του Χριστού). O Mel Gibson εμπνεύστηκε μέρος του έργου του από τον βίο της θεωρούμενης από τους Παπικούς Αγίας Γερμανίδας Άννας Αικατερίνης Έμεριχ (1774 -1824), η οποία ήταν μυστικίστρια και στιγματική (τα στίγματα δεν καταγράφονται καθόλου στην παράδοση της Ορθόδοξης Εκκλησίας, πράγμα το οποίο σημαίνει πως δεν είναι θεϊκό σημάδι, αλλά μάλλον δαιμονικό). Έλεγε πως στα οράματά της είχε δει τα μαρτύρια του Χριστού, τις ψυχές στο Καθαρτήριο (Ρωμαιοκαθολική κακοδοξία-αίρεση) και την Αγία Τριάδα με τη μορφή τριών ομόκεντρων σφαιρών που η μια διαπερνούσε εντός της άλλης, η μεγαλύτερη αλλά λιγότερο φωτεινή αντιπροσώπευε τον Πατέρα, η μεσαία τον Υιό κι η μικρότερη αλλά πιο φωτεινή το Άγιο Πνεύμα. Το ίδιο αρρωστημένο, θρησκόληπτο υπερσυναισθηματικό μοτίβο με μια υπερβολική προσκόλληση κι εμμονή στα σωματικά βάσανα του Ιησού το συναντάμε σε όλους τους στιγματικούς «Αγίους» της Παπικής «Εκκλησίας». Μετά το Σχίσμα (1054μ.Χ.), οι Παπικοί έπαψαν να έχουν Αγίους, αφού έπαψαν να είναι Εκκλησία και δεν έχουν τη Χάρη του Αγίου Πνεύματος.
14. Αίρεση του 5ου αιώνα μ.Χ., που αναπτύχθηκε από τον Πατριάρχη Κων/λης Νεστόριο, σύμφωνα με την οποία η ανθρώπινη κι η θεϊκή υπόσταση του Χριστού είναι ξεχωριστές κι υπάρχουν δυο πρόσωπα, ο άνθρωπος Ιησούς Χριστός κι ο Θείος Λόγος που ενανθρώπισε. Οι Νεστοριανοί αποδίδουν στην Παναγία τον όρο «Χριστοτόκος» κι όχι «Θεοτόκος». Η αίρεση καταδικάστηκε στην Οικουμενική Σύνοδο της Εφέσου το 431 μ.Χ.
15. Ο αγιασμένος άζυμος άρτος των Παπικών που χρησιμοποιείται στη Μετάληψη. Ο Ιησούς στο Μυστικό Δείπνο (Μτ. 26:26 -2 8) χρησιμοποίησε ένζυμο ψωμί, κι όχι άζυμο. Άλλη μια (Ιουδαΐζουσα) καινοτομία των παπικών, γι’ αυτό τους έλεγαν κάποτε κι «αζυμίτες».
16. Εδώ θεωρώ σκόπιμο ν’ αναφερθώ και σε κάποιες εμφανίσεις - εντός Ορθοδόξου χώρου- που ακούω ή διαβάζω κατά καιρούς. Πολλές φορές αγράμματες γριές ή χωριάτισσες λένε πως είδαν την αγία Παρασκευή. Είμαι ο τελευταίος πάνω στη γη που θα ρωτήσει η αγία Παρασκευή πού, πότε και σε ποιόν θα εμφανιστεί. Μα γιατί, όμως δεν άκουσα ποτέ έστω μία απ' αυτές τις γριούλες να’ χει κάποια αμφιβολία για το αν όντως είναι η αγία Παρασκευή αυτή που τους εμφανίζεται κι όχι κάποιος δαίμονας; Έχουν τόσο εγωισμό πάνω τους που ούτε καν τους περνάει απ’ το μυαλό το ερώτημα: «Πως σε μένα την ανάξια εμφανίστηκε η αγία Παρασκευή;» Άλλο παράδειγμα: Στο μοναστήρι του αγίου Εφραίμ στη Νέα Μάκρη κυκλοφορούν ολόκληροι τόμοι με τις εμφανίσεις του Αγίου σε διάφορους πιστούς (κυρίως γυναίκες). Δεν είμαι εγώ ο αρμόδιος να κρίνω για την αλήθεια αυτών των εμφανίσεων, απλά θέτω ένα ερώτημα: Γιατί δεν συνάντησα ούτε μία περίπτωση σ’ αυτά τα βιβλία που έστω μια φορά ένας ν’ αμφέβαλλε; Ερώτημα θέτω απλά.
17. Από τότε τα πράγματα άλλαξαν λίγο. Αν και η Ρωμαιοκαθολική Εκκλησία δεν έχει ακόμα εγκρίνει επίσημα αυτές τις εμφανίσεις, όμως το 1993 η επίσημη δήλωση των Επισκόπων που ήταν υπεύθυνοι να ερευνήσουν την υπόθεση έλεγε: «Εμείς η επιτροπή των Επισκόπων μετά από τριετή έρευνα δεχόμαστε τη Medjugorje ως ιερό μέρος, ως τόπο προσκυνήματος. Αυτό σημαίνει ότι δεν έχουμε τίποτα εναντίον εάν κάποιος τιμά τη Θεομήτωρα με τρόπο που συμφωνεί με τη διδασκαλία και πίστη της εκκλησίας. Γι’ αυτό το αφήνουμε σε περαιτέρω έρευνα. Η Εκκλησία δεν βιάζεται.» Η παλιά καλή διπλωματική μέθοδος της Παπικής «Εκκλησίας». «Ήξεις-αφίξεις». Ετοιμαστείτε τώρα για το καλύτερο: Ο Πάπας Ουρβανός ο 8ος (1568 - 1644) είχε δηλώσει: «Σε περιπτώσεις που αφορούν προσωπικές αποκαλύψεις, είναι καλύτερα να πιστεύεις παρά να μην πιστεύεις. Γιατί αν πιστεύεις κι αποδειχθεί αληθινό θα είσαι ευτυχισμένος που πίστεψες, γιατί η Αγία Μητέρα [Παναγία] το ζήτησε. Εάν πιστεύεις κι αποδειχθεί ψευδές θα λάβεις όλες τις ευλογίες σαν να ήταν αληθινό, γιατί πίστεψες ότι ήταν αληθινό.»(!!!!!) Kαμμία σχέση με το ερευνητικό ταπεινό Πατερικό πνεύμα που ελέγχει το ενδεχόμενο πλάνης. Για την κατάντια της Παπικής «Εκκλησίας» αφότου αποκόπηκε από την Ορθόδοξη Εκκλησία ισχύει η παροιμία: «Ήταν το κλίμα στραβό, το’ φαγε κι ο γάιδαρος…».
18. Παπική κακοδοξία-αίρεση σύμφωνα με την οποία η Παναγία γεννήθηκε χωρίς το προπατορικό αμάρτημα, άρα δεν έχει ανάγκη σωτηρίας.
19. Άσε που δείχνει και πνευματική ανωριμότητα.

HIEROMARTYR BARSANUPHIUS OF KHARKOV

and those with him

By Vladimir Moss

Igumen Barsanuphius (Grigoryevich Yurchenko) was born in 1880 in a prosperous peasant family in the village of Lozavatka, Mikhailovsky uyezd, Kherson province. He finished his studies at a missionary theological seminary. Until 1905 he worked as a teacher in the city of Alexandria. From 1907 he was a novice in the Kiev Caves Lavra. He was tonsured in the Lavra. From 1915 to 1920 he was a teacher in the Birzyukov monastery in Kherson diocese.

In 1918 he was almost shot by a band of Bolsheviks who demanded a large sum of money from the community under threat of death. The whole brotherhood had already been made to stand against a wall, waiting to be executed, but the sum of money demanded was somehow found and they escaped death. It was wonderful to hear Fr. Barsanuphius relate the unusually joyful condition he was in when he was so overcome by a foretaste of eternal life that death became something desired, he longed for it to come about as soon as possible. And how great was his disappointment when he did not achieve this aim because of the remission of the execution.

For a short time the community was subjected to the common lot of looting and repression. Then, under cover of night, Fr. Barsanuphius ran away and hid in the house of his brother. However, he was arrested and imprisoned in terrible conditions in stuffy, damp basements, where his cassock rotted away from the damp and, besides other sorrows of imprisonment in that terrible time, there were so many insects exasperating the prisoners that they had to be scraped off like rubbish.

After a time, in 1921, Fr. Barsanuphius was released and was appointed by Bishop Onuphrius (Gagalyuk) to a parish in the village of Verkhniye Vairaki, near Yelisavettgrad, where by his sincere and zealous service he soon won general respect both among the lay believers and among the clergy.

The rise of renovationism revealed him to be a firm warrior in defence of the truth of the Church and a fearless exposer of the schismatics. Therefore the diocesan hierarch, Bishop Onuphrius, appointed him missionary in the struggle against renovationism for the whole Alexandria region. Having received this assignment, he arrived in the city of Alexandria, which is part of the Yelisavettgrad diocese.

At that time there was no Orthodox church in the city. Moreover, none of the true believers was well-known. Fr. Barsanuphius appeared in the cathedral of the Dormition during the Liturgy, which was being celebrated by the renovationists, and stood unnoticed at the back. He was tall, with a big beard and was dressed in monastic garments with a staff and prayer-rope. His attractive outer appearance fully corresponded to his inner beauty. Since he could not fail to be noticed, at the end of the Liturgy he was surrounded by the believers, who were already worried by the creeping in of innovations into the church, which had been exposed by certain zealots of piety. One of them had a book of the canons of the Ecumenical Councils. From it they could see that the actions of the renovationists were not canonical. But the authoritative voice of the Church was necessary. Therefore the first questions put to Fr. Barsanuphius were: Was he Orthodox? Who was he? Where did he come from? And what joy there was when they learned the answer to this burning question. But at that point the unknown Fr. Barsanuphius was invited by one of the zealots of Orthodoxy Ivan Savvich Mironov to his house, where others had also gathered. There the real church situation was finally clarified: Fr. Barsanuphius told about his appointment to the Alexandria deanery and read the epistles against renovationism of Bishop Onuphrius and others. A discussion took place on how to take if only one church from the renovationists.

But this unexpected joy did not last long. Having learned the state of affairs in his new mission, Fr. Barsanuphius returned to the place of his former service, where he was arrested (in the autumn of 1922) and taken back to Alexandria, where he was put in prison. There he remained until April, 1923. The only contacts with him consisted in the above-mentioned zealots of Orthodoxy taking it in turns to bring him parcels (food, etc.). In the Great Fast Fr. Barsanuphius was released from prison. By that time, the above-mentioned group of people, who had started to build up an Orthodox parish, had grown into a large community, which after several attempts succeeded in getting the civil authorities to transfer one of the four renovationist churches (which was already fairly empty) to them. Fr. Barsanuphius was appointed the superior of this church, which was in the name of the Protecting Veil of the All-Holy Mother of God.

It was from this time that Fr. Barsanuphius' most active ministry began. The servant of God attracted everyone to himself by his unusually welcoming manner, his sincere love, his attentiveness to everyone, his kind, meek and humble manner and by his irreproachable personal life in fasting and unceasing prayer and abstinence in all things (on Wednesdays and Fridays the whole year round, and throughout the Great Fast, he ate nothing before the evening, and in the first week of the Great Fast and in Passion Week he did not eat for three days). During services he was attentive and concentrated, completely immersed in prayer. In the parish church services were conducted according to the monastic typicon, but they were not exhausting. One would go in on a weekday while he was serving and would hear his gentle voice from in front of the altar, and a certain peacefulness and compunction filled one's soul. The comparatively large church soon began to fill up with believers from all ends of the city. The rumours about what had happened in the church of the Protecting Veil and about the unusual batyushka spread far, even beyond the bounds of the region, and at almost every service there were people from the environs. Many who had attended the service went to Fr. Barsanuphius' flat for advice, asking what to do so as to have a right church. And they received the instructions they needed. Each of his services contained a simple edifying sermon, and in these sermons he fulminated against evil, the vices of everyday life, calling people to repentance. The truth was made clear and the lie of renovationism was exposed. The believers were exhorted not to condemn their brothers who had got caught in this or that net, but to pray for them. And in general batyushka used every opportunity to edify the people: whether during needs, or at feasts, over a cup of tea, the conversation always revolved around current church events or soul-saving themes. Many wanted to invite batyushka to their homes, and so invitations to a cup of tea were not uncommon. On these occasions batyushka would speak or read from the Gospel, especially for young youths and virgins, in whom he stirred up a desire for the truly Christian life. He would often read from the works of Bishop Ignatius Brianchaninov.

Very soon all the renovationist churches became empty and a large part of the city's clergy repented, while in the region out of eighty renovationist parishes there remained even less than ten. In fact, there was an extraordinary revival of church life in the city. Fr. Barsanuphius went to Patriarch Tikhon on church matters, and, since he was a hieromonk, he was raised by his Holiness to the rank of igumen (in 1923). When he returned, his flock rejoiced at the patriarchal blessing, and were strengthened by his reading epistles condemning the renovationist higher church administration in the church.

This greatly enraged the remaining renovationists, and especially the GPU. A group of renovationists was formed in the city led by Bishop John (Slavgorodsky) and a priest by the name of Chorny (who was, if not an open stooge of the GPU, then at any rate one of their co-workers who often visited that institution). This group, together with the city authorities, took measures to strike a blow at Fr. Barsanuphius and the community he led. But the religious exaltation had reached such proportions that the authorities decided not to undertake direct measures to liquidate the whole of the movement. Fr. Barsanuphius was arrested several times (in 1923, 1924 and January, 1925), and there was even an open trial attended by a great mass of people, in which Fr. Barsanuphius replied so wisely to the lawyers' ingenious questions that it served for his yet greater glory without engendering any serious consequences except, it seems, for a monetary fine. The trial was summoned because of the baptism of a child which had been carried out, supposedly, without the prior registration by the civil authorities - an omission that used to be punished with great cruelty.

Although the above-mentioned renovationist group had three empty churches, including a cathedral, it received permission from the authorities to use the single Orthodox church (of the Protection), supposedly on equal terms. In order to realize this aim, they with their bishop at their head came to the Protection church on Lazarus Saturday not long before the beginning of the service and demanded the hand-over of the keys of the Protection church on the basis of the instructions of the central authorities. Since rumours about the forthcoming invasion had already filtered into the community, the church was closed and the keys hidden. Up to a thousand people gathered. Some had come earlier to do confession (because of the large numbers of those wishing to do confession they were told to come before the service), while others had begun to assemble because of the rapidly disseminated rumour about what had happened in the Protection church. The whole of this huge number of people, who could not fit even into the spacious area around the church, strove to defend the church. They did not allow the renovationists even as far as the doors. The local authorities, who opposed the Orthodox in every way possible, came to the aid of the renovationists in all kinds of local communist organizations, including the komsomol and the mounted police. But all of these were unable to frighten or disperse the gathered people, who consisted mainly of fearless women tightly pressed to the main doors. Finally the fire-brigade appeared and drove the Orthodox away from the doors with their water cannons. Then the renovationists and their helpers went to the doors and with the help of locksmiths broke the locks.

The next day “Bishop John” entered the church and was met with “Many years, Master!” while the Orthodox stood to one side, shouting: “Wolf in sheep's clothing" and other names appropriate to his activities. From the moment the renovationists took control of the church it emptied. On the most holy days of Passion Week and Pascha the Orthodox were left without a church. The community was still strong at that time, and measures were immediately taken to obtain the return of the church to the Orthodox. An enormous number of signatures were collected, representatives of the community were elected and began to act. First they went to the regional centre of Kharkov. But since it was from there that permission for the renovationists to seize the church had been given, no positive results were obtained. They appealed to Moscow. And there with great efforts, after several journeys, and with the help of acquaintances among the powerful of the communist world, they succeeded in obtaining an order for the return of the church by the feast of the Transfiguration, 1924.

At the same time, the authorities accused Fr. Barsanuphius of being the organizer of the people's rebellion. To create a case, they also arrested several members of the parish council and group of fifty, including some women. Fr. Barsanuphius was arrested in the following manner. After midnight representatives of the authorities arrived at his flat, knocked insistently at the door, burst in and carried out a search. As a result of the search they supposedly found a packet with material implicating Fr. Barsanuphius in the organization of the rebellion. The packet turned out to be in the bed of the future Peter Mikhailovich Chernobyl (the future Archimandrite Nectarius), who happened to be sleeping there that night and who was also arrested. It was obviously a forgery, and Fr. Barsanuphius, when presented with it, said as much:

"It's a forgery. You brought it here."

The investigator said something crude and laughed. Then he ordered Fr. Barsanuphius to dress quickly. Within a few days not only Fr. Barsanuphius, but all those who had been present in the flat were arrested and imprisoned in the local jail. The case lasted for more than three months with many interrogations and threats, but it was so mendacious that when it was passed to the so-called higher instance, it was terminated and all the prisoners (who included Fr. Nectarius) were freed after three months in prison.

On the second day after his release, Fr. Barsanuphius was again serving at the feast of the Transfiguration to a double general joy: the church had been recovered from the renovationists and batyushka had been released. And again batyushka's activity continued in the same spirit and with still greater power. But again not for long.

On the eve of the feast of the Nativity of Christ, in the same year, Fr. Barsanuphius was arrested during the night by the GPU and immediately despatched to Kharkov. The local GPU refused to tell the community where he was. But they guessed: representatives from the community went to Kharkov and obtained his release. He returned from Kharkov around the New Year, but again not for long.

Now something quite unexpected happened. Fr. Barsanuphius' activities had aroused the envy of the clergy, all the more since rumours began to increase that the community wanted to see him made a bishop. This became known to the diocesan hierarch, Bishop Onuphrius. For this or some other, more serious reason, in April, 1925 Fr. Barsanuphius was suddenly and unexpectedly appointed district dean and superior in the town of Pervomaisk (Olviopol), in Odessa diocese, where there was not one Orthodox church. At the very height of the community's flowering, Fr. Barsanuphius was torn from it and sent to a remote little town under the complete control of the renovationists. In his place was appointed a protopriest who later joined the sergianist schism. Under his leadership the community became so weak that the authorities blew up its wonderful stone church and everything came to an end. Then the same happened to all the other churches. Not a single church remained in the town.

No amount of delegations, signatures of the whole community or tearful appeals before the diocesan bishop could change this appointment. The community became widowed, and bitterly lamented its lot.

At this point Fr. Barsanuphius displayed self-sacrificial obedience. Without delay, with sorrow tearing his heart, he tearfully said goodbye to his flock and went into the unknown to fresh sorrows. On arriving in the new town, he with difficulty got to the cathedral church and in the presence of the semi-renovationist superior of the cathedral made an announcement about his appointment as superior and dean of the whole district to the members of the community. The superior, Protopriest S., received him coldly, but he was quickly surrounded by the love of the community and fixed up with a flat.

News about him circulated round the district already after the first service. The cathedral began to liven up. Priests and laymen arrived to consult him about moving from renovationism to Orthodoxy. Many of the laymen did not even know that their priests were renovationists. One of the protopriests, Simeon, left the renovationists and joined the Orthodox. And so the Orthodox now had a church in the town.

But this church revival was short-lived. The local renovationist bishop and the GPU became alarmed. On the second day of Holy Trinity, 1926, Fr. Barsanuphius was arrested and immediately despatched to Kharkov, while the only Orthodox church in Pervomaisk was closed. The petitions of the community were ignored. Fr. Barsanuphius was imprisoned in Kharkov prison, and after several months was again released, but without the right to leave Kharkov. On being released in a strange, overcrowded city, he had difficulty in finding accomodation and had to go to the GPU regularly for registration.

The future Archimandrite Nectarius organized services in Pervomaisk in private houses, and frequently went to Kharkov to visit Fr. Barsanuphius and bring back letters from him. On one of these visits he was ordained as a reader by Bishop Onuphrius.

In Kharkov, too, Fr. Barsanuphius soon won general respect and love. He visited what was almost the only Orthodox church, and sometimes served in it. His service in this church, where very many clergy and hierarchs who were not allowed to leave the city were gathered, did not last long, because in 1927 Metropolitan Sergius' notorious declaration was published. This caused new disturbances among the people and gave the authorities the excuse to intensify the persecution. Part of the clergy recognized the declaration; those who did not recognize it were arrested and sent into exile, while the non-commemorators ceased communion in prayer with the commemorators and began to worship in flats at night. Fr. Barsanuphius organized a catacomb community consisting of about ten people. The Orthodox led by Fr. Barsanuphius rejected Sergius’ declaration as being a God-hated abomination, a form of cooperation with the antichristian authorities.

Fr. N. Vinogradov and Igumen Barsanuphius went to meet Bishop Paul (Kratirov), but in the course of their conversation they came to doubt in the Orthodoxy of Bishop Paul, as a result of which Bishop Paul refused to give them his blessing (Archimandrite Nectarius explains this on the basis of Bishop Paul’s views being slightly to the left of the two priests’). The priests were much closer to Bishop Damascene of Staroduba.

Fr. Barsanuphius was dean of the Pervomaisk area, and, according to the witness to the OGPU of Ivan Chubtsov, was also active in the Zinovievsk (Yelisavettgrad), Alexandria and Kremenchug areas. The overwhelming majority of the parishes of his deanery followed him: in the villages of Pustelnikovo, Golovkovka, Zvenigorodka, Marto-Ivanovka, Ivanovka, Berezovka, Novaya Praga, Nedogarok, Krasnaya Kamenka, Voinovka, Schastlivoye, Kukulovka and Novostaroduba. Only the Pokrov church in Alexandria and the church in the village of Protopopovka remained with the sergianists. However, the Protopopovka Christians later joined the Josephites. In Alexandria the Josephite clergy – Protopriest A. Kotovich, Protopriest John Shvachko and Fr. Nicephorus Bryukhovetsky served in flats. There were no Josephite monasteries in Alexandria, but there were sisterhoods. In 1929 the superior of the church in the village of Berezovka, Hieromonk Abercius (Orlenko), tried to organize with some of his parishioners a secret skete in Siberia. This attempt failed and he returned.

So as to be sure about the truth and to avoid any self-willed actions, contact was made with Moscow, with Petrograd and with the authoritative hierarchs of the Church. By journeys or letters or messengers information was received, together with oral and written epistles of such hierarchs as Metropolitan Joseph of Petrograd, Metropolitan Agathangel, Metropolitan Cyril of Kazan, Archbishop Seraphim of Uglich, Bishop Basil of Priluki, Bishop Victor of Vyatka, Bishop Alexis of Voronezh, Bishop Hierotheus of Velikij Ustiug, and other bishops and priests. Copies of letters were received even from the locum tenens of the patriarchal throne himself, Metropolitan Peter, in which this hierarch clearly and simply exposed the unlawfulness of the actions of Metropolitan Sergius. In certain of these he with Christian love beseeches Metropolitan Sergius to renounce the course undertaken by him.

Fr. Barsanuphius decisively, with the aid of many believers, both in Kharkov itself and in his former parishes and in other places, supported the believers in various ways: by letters and by personal meetings. Thus as the persecutions connected with the declaration increased, and the Church that did not recognize Metropolitan Sergius was almost completely liquidated in its visible form, a community was formed around Fr. Barsanuphius which he served secretly. It consisted not only of local inhabitants, but also of people who arrived periodically from distant places: the Donbass, Kuban district, Poltava, Kherson, Odessa, and even Belorussia. Fr. Barsanuphius' activities in this period broadened considerably. He was as it were the centre of a well-known church district. He was visited by the clergy of dissolved monasteries, by priests, monks, nuns and laymen of every age and calling. Some came to receive consolation in sorrows, others on church business, others for personal spiritual instruction.

People came to him from all over. Young people of both sexes also came. They were captivated by his words and the beauty of his spiritual life, and declared their readiness to enter upon a God-pleasing life under his direction. Such people with his blessing lived sometimes in groups, being directed in their lives by his advice. However, he never created special rules for anyone. He gave general church rules to all those wishing to live a God-pleasing life: in the morning - morning prayers and the midnight service, at lunchtime - the hours, in the evening - Little Compline with the evening prayers. He blessed the more zealous to follow the whole cycle of services. In spite of the at that time widely spread phenomenon of secret monasticism, Fr. Barsanuphius tonsured none of those who desired it, and in general did not approve of that kind of monasticism. He is known to have tonsured only one novice of the Khoroshevsky monastery who was living in obedience to an older nun. To Fr. Nectarius he said: to serve the Church, you need to have been in a monastery for at least two years. However, to all of his spiritual children who were inclined towards the monastic life he gave the instruction to live in a monastic way: to pray, to fast according to the typicon, to avoid unseemly society, not to eat meat, and to strangers not to give the impression that you do not eat it. And in general he told his spiritual children who were not near an Orthodox church, which included almost everyone, to pray the services prescribed by the typicon: Vespers, Mattins, the Hours, the Typica, together with the reading of instructions - everything that was permitted for laypeople without uttering the priestly exclamations. The prescribed readings from the Apostle and the Gospel were read. And such prayers with chanting and reading were carried out sometimes even in the presence of large numbers of people, usually at night, in the flat of one of the believers. Commemorations of the dead were arranged, and there were even cases of burials. They themselves accompanied the dead with chanting of the Thrice Holy hymn, etc. Fr. Barsanuphius approved of these acts and would serve the burial service at a distance.

However, the GPU did not slumber. They discovered both the secret services and the appeals and letters that defined the relationship of all these people to the declaration of Metropolitan Sergius. On January 1, 1931, in one night a massive arrest was carried out of the bishops that remained in freedom, the other clergy and even the laypeople who had displayed some zeal in this respect.

Fr. Barsanuphius himself was arrested on January 16 for being “a leader of the Kharkov branch of the counter-revolutionary monarchist church organization, the True Orthodox Church”. From January to June the same accusation was levelled by the OPGU against all the leading Ukrainian Josephites. 140 were arrested: two bishops, fifty-two priests, nineteen monastics, seven deacons and readers, and sixty laypeople.

Those arrested were subjected to many and various kinds of tortures. The most common form of torture was deprivation of sleep for many days: people remained in this condition for 5, 10 and even 20 days in a row, standing or sitting under the observation of sentries who took turns at their posts. People were tortured day and night by being kicked or prodded; they did not allow them to doze off. Some were deprived of parcels, others were beaten, others were kept in solitary confinement, or in incredibly cooped-up conditions, in rooms which were full to overflowing and hermetically sealed in summer or very cold. Also, they would give them nothing to eat and then feed them to satiety without giving them anything to drink. Shootings were staged, and many other things.

Fr. Nectarius, the biographer of Fr. Barsanuphius, who died in the rank of archimandrite in the Russian Church Abroad in Jerusalem in 2000, apart from what he saw and heard, had to endure some of these torments himself. Thus he writes that in his cell was a sentry who allowed none of the prisoners to sit or sleep at night. Some of the prisoners went go out of their mind from sleeplessness, and were ready to sign anything to stop the torments (if they understood what they were doing when they signed). Archimandrite Nectarius was taken several times from the torture cell to interrogations. The interrogator would swear at him and shout:

“You’ll stand there until the Second Coming! But look, here’s a better idea: we’ll hang you upside down! And they you’ll sign!”

He took out a revolver, put it straight to Nectarius’ face and threatened to shoot. Then he beat him with the handle of the gun. But Nectarius still refused to sign.

He spent four or five days in the “standing chamber”. Then they gave him a rest for several days and again led him into the chamber. This time he had to stand without sleeping for eleven days. Then he was hurled into the basement, where the interrogator came with his revolver and said:

“This is your last place. Now we’ll sit down and decide your fate. Tomorrow you’ll be shot.”

It was February, very cold, and the basement was full of snow, but Nectarius was so weak and so wanted to sleep that he fell on the snow and fell asleep.

The next day he was taken to the district court in Poltava. However, the trial was still in the future. The interrogations continued. As a rule, they took place at night. Once during a nightly session the interrogator said to him:

“In your Scriptures it is written: ‘You must be obedient to every authority’. Why then do you not submit to Soviet power?”

I was silent. Then the interrogator put the question directly:

“Do you agree with the world-view of Soviet power?”

“No,” I replied, “I do not agree.”

“Let us suppose that,” said the interrogator. “I understand: you are against the civil authorities. But why are you against the Church? Why do you not recognize the lawful Metropolitan Sergius?” And, without waiting for my reply, he replied himself: “Because you do not need the Church, but politics! And counter-revolution! Therefore you have chosen for yourselves as instructors such counter-revolutionaries as your Metropolitan Joseph of Petrograd, and Demetrius of Gdov, and other most evil enemies of Soviet power…”

The aim of all these tortures was to get answers from those arrested that were desired by and useful to the NKVD. They wished to establish the existence of a fictitious revolutionary political organization and draw as many people as possible into it. For this they needed all kinds of information, even about non-existent things, and this they tortured their victims: was he there or there, who was also there, was such-and-such a person with you, what did they say, what did they read. Or: since you are already doomed, make a clean breast of it, reveal the counter-revolutionary organization and save yourself, etc. People were summoned for interrogation and torture at any time of the day or night. If they did not get what they wanted, the torturers continued their work, forcing people to write under dictation or simply sign a prepared protocol. If they did not get what they wanted, there would be more abuse, kicking, playing with revolvers under the accused person's nose, staged shootings, etc. They would say: "You will stand here until the very Coming of Christ", "We shall hang you head down and that's not all we'll do," "Your crime is such that you will be shot in any case, but you can save yourself - we're waiting for a sincere repentance." And then it was suggested that they save themselves by revealing the counter-revolutionary organization or becoming their man: "you can pray and do other such-like things, we don't persecute the church," etc.

The prosecutor’s conclusion declared that “the counter-revolutionary organization of churchmen, ‘The True Orthodox Church’, had many branches and embraced the whole of the Soviet Union”, including the Ukraine. There was supposedly a tightly organized structure in the Ukraine controlled by the centres in Moscow and Leningrad. This net, according to the OGPU, consisted of three main branches: Kharkov, led by Bishop Paul (Kratirov), Dnepropetrovsk, led by Bishop Joasaph (Popov), and Odessa, led by Fr. Gregory Seletsky and Abbot Barsanuphius. The first branch contained eleven groups: Kharkov, Sumy, Stalino, Kiev, Debaltsevo, Kadievo, Marioupol, Popasnyan, Berdyansk, Slavyansk and Krasnoluchinsk. In the second branch there were three: Novomoskovsk, Krivoy Rog and Ladyzhino. And in the third branch there were: Kharkov, Poltava, Yelisavettgrad, Alexandria, Nikolayev and Kherson. Each group was in its turn composed of cells: “Each group and cell had its immediate leaders chosen from the most trusted and reliable people, who had links with the leaders of the branches… Thanks to the constant links between the centres and the branches, a systematic leadership of the counter-revolutionary activities of the peripheral branches of the counter-revolutionary organization was guaranteed.” Such assertions were undoubtedly far from the truth. The Josephites not only were not in “constant contact” with each other, but sometimes had tense relations with each other.

On December 14, 1931 there took place the first trial in connection with the affair of the True Orthodox Church. A special meeting of the OGPU College passed a sentence of antisoviet activity on one hundred and twenty six people – fifty-three were condemned to three years in the camps, fifty-eight to exile to the northern regions for three years, five were deprived of the right to live in twelve inhabited points while being restricted to their place of residence for three years, and ten were released. On January 2, 1932 the College condemned the fourteen leaders: Bishop Paul, V.V. Podgorny and Fr. Gregory Seletsky to ten years in the camps, while Bishop Joasaph, Abbot Barsanuphius (Yurchenko), Abbot Eustratius (Grumkov), Archimandrite Macarius (Velichko), A.I. Krasnokutsky, N.V. Tolmachev, Fr. Theodore Pavlov, Fr. D. Ivanov, Fr. B. Kvasnitsky, S.P. Labinsky and Fr. John Skadovsky were sentenced to five years in the camps.

Among those condemned were:

Protopriest Anthony Kotovich. A relative of Hieromartyr Nicholas Piskanovsky, he was born in 1885 in the village of Novy Dvor, Grodno province, in the family of a priest, and went to a theological seminary. From May, 1916 he served as a military priest near Riga and in Torzhok. From 1918 to 1921 he was priest of the church of Ivanovka, Taganrog uyezd, Then he moved to the Alexandria region, and served in the village of Kukulovka, Alexandria uyezd. He took no part in renovationism. In 1923 he was appointed second priest of the Protection church while Fr. Barsanuphius was first priest. When Fr. Barsanuphius was arrested, he took his place, and in 1926 became dean of the Alexandria region. He was arrested several times, both in connection with the affair of Fr. Barsanuphius and for his refusal to recognize the declaration of Metropolitan Sergius. When Fr. Barsanuphius was arrested and the new superior of the Protection church submitted to legalization, Fr. Anthony publicly declared in the Pokrov church, where he was serving as dean, that he was leaving the jurisdiction of Metropolitan Michael of the Ukraine. In March, 1928 he came under the omophorion of Bishop Alexis (Buj) of Voronezh. Most of the parishes of the deanery followed him. But since there was no church in Alexandria itself, he began to serve together with Protopriest John Shvachko and Priest Nicephorus Bryukhovetsky in flats, celebrating the Liturgy every day. After the arrest of Bishop Alexis, he came under the omophorion of Bishop Maximus (Zhizhilenko). Soon after this, he was arrested for the last time in 1929 in connection with the discovery in the flat of the Glinsk dean, Fr. Simeon Ryabov, of antisergianist literature sent him by Fr. Anthony. Fr. Anthony was imprisoned and charged with being “a participant in the Alexandria group of the Odessa branch of the counter-revolutionary monarchist church organization, the True Orthodox Church”, and on January 3, 1930 was sentenced to five years (according to another source, three years) exile in accordance with article 54-10. He was sent to Yeniseisk (or the north) and shot in the second half of the 1930s.

In March, 1928 Fr. Anthony’s Matushka Nina Feofilovna brought to Bishop Alexis in Voronezh a petition that he accept the Alexandria parishes under his omophorion. She was also arrested, with six priests, a deacon and three laymen, on January 16, 1931, and was subjected to tortures in the GPU in Alexandria. She was exiled, and returned at the end of her term. What happened to her thereafter is unknown. Several of those who attended Fr. Anthony’s illegal services received long sentences. One of them, the virgin Charitina, received a ten-year sentence in the camps.

Priest John Polikarpovich Shvachko. He was born in 1873 in the village of Gubovka, Alexandria uyezd, and went to a theological seminary. He served in a church in the Alexandria region, but after its closure in 1926 found himself without a parish. He lived in Alexandria. On January 16, 1931 he was arrested for being “a participant in the Alexandria group of the Odessa branch of the counter-revolutionary monarchist church organization, the True Orthodox Church”, and on December (September) 14 was sentenced in accordance with article 58-10 to three years’ exile in the north. Nothing more is known about him.

Priest Hilarion Pavlovich Genkin. He was born in 1881 in Yelisavettgrad, and finished his studies at a theological seminary. In 1909 he was ordained to the priesthood. He served in the village of Krasnaya Kamenka, Alexandria region. In June, 1929, Fr. Hilarion, together with the Inguletsky dean, Fr. Nicholas Fomenko, went to Petrograd and was received by Archbishop Demetrius under his omophorion. The Alexandrian Josephites commemorated Vladykas Alexis and Demetrius until 1931. Fr. Hilarion succeeded Fr. Anthony Kotovich as Josephite dean of Alexandria. But the life of the deanery was de facto administered in many things by Archimandrite Barsanuphius, who had served there until the middle of the 1920s. In 1930 Fr. Hilarion was placed under guard on a charge of antisoviet agitation “against the removal of bells”, but was not condemned. On January 16, 1931 he was arrested in Krasnaya Kamenka in connection with the affair of the Alexandria group of the Odessa branch of the True Orthodox Church. On January 17, 1931 he was arrested for being “a participant in the Alexandria group of the Odessa branch of the counter-revolutionary monarchist church organization, the True Orthodox Church”, and on December 14 was sentenced in accordance with article 58-10 to three years in the camps and sent to a camp. Nothing more is known about him.

Priest Gregory Rodionovich Bublik. He was born in 1889 in the village of Aleshka, Tauris province, and went to a theological seminary. As a priest, he served in the village of Krasnaya Kamenka, Alexandria region. In 1930 he was under investigation “for anti-Soviet agitation”, but was not condemned. On March 10 (or January 16), 1931 he was arrested for being “a participant in the Alexandria group of the Odessa branch of the counter-revolutionary monarchist church organization, the True Orthodox Church”. On December 14 he was sentenced in accordance with article 58-10 to three years in the camps and was sent to a camp in the north. Nothing more is known about him.

Priest Ivan Savvich Zhushman. He was born in 1882 in the village of Zelenoye, Petrovsky uyezd, Kursk province, into a peasant family, and went to a theological seminary. He served in the village of Schastlivoye, Alexandria region. On January 17, 1931 he was arrested for being “a participant in the Alexandria group of the Odessa branch of the counter-revolutionary monarchist church organization, the True Orthodox Church”. On December 14 he was sentenced in accordance with article 58-10 to three years’ exile and was sent to the north. Nothing more is known about him.

Priest Dionysius Arkadyevich Oratovsky. He was born in 1871 in the village of Maleshty, Moldavia, and went to a theological seminary. He was ordained to the priesthood and served in the church in the village of Kukulovka, Alexandria region. In 1928 he was under investigation on a charge of “incorrect composition of lists of believers”, but was not condemned. On January 17, 1931 he was arrested in Kukolovka in connection with the Alexandrian group of the Odessa branch of the True Orthodox Church. On December 14, 1931 he was sentenced in accordance with article 58-10 to three years’ exile in the north. Nothing more is known about him.

Priest Theodore Vasilyevich Belinsky. He was born in 1879 in the village of Krasnopolye, Alexandria region. He finished his studies in a theological seminary. He was ordained to the priesthood and served in the church of Kukolovka, Alexandria uyezd. On January 17, 1931 he was arrested in connection with the Alexandrian group of the Odessa branch of the True Orthodox Church. On December 14, 1931 he was sentenced in accordance with article 58-10 to three years’ exile in the north.

Priest Nicetas Porfiryevich Olshansky. He was born in 1886 on Donskoye farm, Preobrazhenskaya station, Khoper uyezd, in a Cossack family. He finished his studies at a theological seminary. He was ordained to the priesthood and served in the church in the village of Voinovka, Alexandria region. In 1926 and 1929 he was under investigation on a charge of antisoviet agitation, but was released after two months. On January 17, 1931 he was arrested in connection with the affair of the Alexandria group of the Odessa branch of the True Orthodox Church. On December 14, 1931 he was sentenced in accordance with article 58-10 to three years in the camps, and sent to Siblag. On September 4, 1933 he was released from the camps and departed for Sukhumi. Nothing more is known about him.

Few of those condemned in this trial returned home. Many died in unbelievably difficult circumstances. Fr. Barsanuphius himself received five years in the Temnikov camps, and was then transferred to the Sarov camps, where he was accomodated in the main church.

To his great joy, Fr. Nectarius met Fr. Barsanuphius again in the Temnikov camps. “They put him in our barracks, and now we were able, as before, to pray together, celebrate services and have spiritual discussions. Communion with him brought me great consolation. Every time I received a blessing from him, I experienced a joyful feeling, and if there was bitterness or disturbance in my heart, it immediately left me. Not only to me, but also to the other believing prisoners batyushka brought consolation in the sorrows and difficulties of camp life. His friendly manner and radiant external appearance attracted everyone. His behaviour in the prisons and camps, as Fr. Nectarius observed, was remarkable. He said with complete sincerity that prison for him was a spiritual school, and he accepted imprisonment as an opportunity for spiritual improvement, without fear and with gratitude to God.

Fr. Barsanuphius was placed in the cells of inveterate recidivists, criminals who had lost all human feelings, bandits, murderers, thieves, etc. And here his truly Christian behaviour often pacified even these beasts in human form. Some of them became so attached to batyushka that even before parting with him they sought to communicate with him by correspondence or in some other way. In the cell he behaved as a priest and a monk. In spite of the noise and shouting and swearing, and the heavy tobacco smoke, he would stand for hours in prayer with his prayer rope, as if not noticing the situation around him. Whatever parcels he received he shared with everyone. He did not descend to the environment he was in, but neither did he despise it; he forced everyone to look on him as a true servant of God. In the camps, in spite of all prohibitions, he categorically refused to do any work and did not allow his external appearance to be changed in any way: only by force was he shorn and his beard shaved off. He was never despondent, always in a state of prayer. He comforted many.

During Fr. Barsanuphius’s first sentence, as he was being driven from camp to camp in unimaginable conditions, he nearly died from typhus. In Sarov he was beaten almost to death by the criminals, and on leaving camp in the middle of the 1930s he was a completely hunched-up invalid, like St. Seraphim of Sarov, unable to walk without the help of crutches. It was difficult to recognize the comparatively young, tall, well-built Fr. Barsanuphius.

As a result of his invalid condition, and through his relatives' getting to know the authorities, at the end of his sentence he was able to return to Kharkov. Externally he had changed, but internally he was the same man. And without losing a minute he started work: the saving of souls. Once again there were services in his flat and in the flats of others; services were conducted at night; he communicated and strengthened the remaining believers.

The persecution had reached the point where it was dangerous to have icons in a cooperative house, and even in private houses; it was risky for those serving in Soviet institutions even to look into a church or to cross themselves in public. Burials were now carried out with a special Soviet ritual, with music and red flags. In families children who were studying in schools often persecuted their parents who practised religious rites.

Since it was now almost impossible for a priest to walk in the streets in priestly attired and not be noticed, Fr. Barsanuphius took off his priest's clothes and took on the appearance of an old man in the usual Russian long shirt with a belt round his waist. In this way he was able to visit many of his faithful spiritual children, both in his former parishes and in other places: in the Kuban, the Donbass, Belorussia, in several towns of the Ukraine and in Odessa. His main aim in these trips was to celebrate the Divine Liturgy, take confessions and give communion. Only his faithful, who knew each other, attended these services.

Fr. Nectarius was a witness of one of these journeys of Fr. Barsanuphius. In a house surrounded by a high fence on the edge of a town, batyushka confessed people for two days, and during the night. News of his whereabouts passed from one person to another. There was not even time to eat. Other priests carried out a similar type of service in other towns. Some lived in one place without any kind of registration; only the family with whom they lived knew about them, together with those who came to the services, which were carried out sometimes in underground churches. There was such a priest in the Kharkov region. And another in the Donbass. One priest went around with a grinding lathe. One archimandrite, on returning from the camps, became a stove-repairer.

In the course of his service as a priest in the Soviet period, Fr. Barsanuphius was arrested up to 25 times. In all interrogations he behaved fearlessly, with the dignity of a servant of God. In difficult moments, as he himself said, he fell silent, praying inwardly until he received an inner reply, and without paying attention to the enraged interrogator. Then he gave a fitting reply that broke all the cunning webs of the interrogator, who then, changing his tone, praised the direct and courageous confessor.

The main thing for Fr. Barsanuphius was to keep the commandments of God and the canons of the Church without admitting any concessions. Nothing could make him transgress the established ecclesiastical laws concerning marriages and the burials of, for example, suicides or non-Orthodox.

He was counted worthy of grace-filled revelations and visions. Thus in the camp in Sarov, after he had been beaten, the Lord counted him worthy of an inner spiritual illumination. And during a serious illness he was transported as it were into the other world and had a whole series of visions. And there were others during the celebration of the Divine Liturgy.

Though an invalid, Fr. Barsanuphius would periodically go to serve his flock in various parts of the Ukraine, Belorussia and the Kuban. During one of his trips, to Odessa at the end of 1936, he was arrested and put in prison, where he was deprived of every means of communication with the outside world. At the end of the investigation, on May 21, 1937, he was sentenced to five years in Kolyma, the coldest part of North-Eastern Siberia. According to some sources, he was released from there on June 13, 1942. However, according to another source, Fr. Barsanuphius did not arrive at the camp. We have no information about the long and difficult journey there in railway cars. But a chance eyewitness described a person who looked just like him and who died in Kamchatka, without arriving in Kolyma....

HIEROMARTYR SERGIUS OF VYATKA PROVINCE (+ 1942)
and those with him

By Vladimir Moss

Fr. Sergius Sukhorukov was born in the village of Shanyrikha, Vasilsursk uyezd, Nizhegorod province. He served in the tsarist army as an under-officer. As a priest, at the end of the 1920s he served in the village of Chernushka, then in Sheshurga, and from 1930 – in the village of Lom, Yaransk uyezd. He was a zealot of piety, and said from the ambon that the declaration of Metropolitan Sergius was apostasy from the Orthodox Church and that those who accepted it were betraying Christ as did Judas. Vladyka Nectarius of Yaransk, who was shot in 1937, transferred Fr. Sergius from church to church, perhaps in order that his fiery sermons should be heard everywhere. In 1930 he was arrested for refusing forestry work and sentenced to two years in the camps and three years’ exile, but the sentence was not confirmed.

Fr. Sergius’ church warden was Isaiah Yakovlevich. Once, at the end of the 1920s, he was summoned to the village soviet, where they tried to force him, as church warden, to sign the declaration. He refused outright: “We are not servants of the atheist power, we submit only to Christ…” While the president was drawing up an act for him to sign, Isaiah recited Psalm 90, “he that dwelleth in the help of the Most High”. He refused to sign it, and the president, exasperated, at length shouted: “Are you a magician, or what? Go home!”

People used to come to Isaiah for advice, and he always filled them with courage. His face shone like a priest’s. Once on December 18/31, 1930 there was a meeting of the parishioners at Lom to decide what to do. They included Fr. Sergius, Isaiah Yakovlevich, another trustee Alexander, who later hid for ten years, James Stepanovich Oshaev, who had been a trustee of the destroyed church at Kiknur and who later received a martyr’s crown. This was Fr. Sergius’ last supper with his parishioners. James’ Stepanovich’s daughter, Matushka S., remembers some words of his relayed to her by her mother: “Preserve the Church by going up to Soviet power? But what will that Church be? Christ’s?” Next Sunday she was taken to confession and communion with Fr. Sergius since her parents feared that it would be the last. And they were right. She never went to a church again for 62 years – until the Free Russian Orthodox Church appeared in Suzdal. Within a week after Christmas two policemen came to take Fr. Sergius away. The parishioners hastily brought him a sarafan and shawl, and dressed in these, Fr. Sergius left the church, avoiding the policemen. The parishioners took him to another village 10 kilometres away. But the self-sacrificing parishioners could not protect their priest for long. This took place at the beginning of 1931.

In the summer of 1932 he was arrested in Lom and accused of “joining the staff of the church-monarchist organization, the True Orthodox Church”, of “organizing the church counter-revolutionary underground” and of “directing it and conducting active counter-revolutionary work in the population”. On August 14, 1932 he was sentenced to three years in the camps and sent to a camp. After his release he lived in the village of Staraya Rudka, Sharanga region. On December 4, 1937 he was arrested, and on November 3, 1938 he was sentenced to five years in the camps and sent to a camp. On April 20, 1942 he died in the Talazhsk section of the camp.

His wife, Maria Nikolayevna Sukhorukova, was born in 1899 in the village of Kumya, Kozmodemyansk uyezd, Mari province. She was disenfranchised, and had no fixed domicile. In 1932 she was arrested in the village of Sovietskoye and accused of “joining the staff of the church-monarchist organization, the True Orthodox Church” and of “conducting counter-revolutionary work in the population on the orders of the organization”. On August 14, 1932 she was released, taking account the time she had already been in prison. In 1935, after the return from camp of her husband, she helped him in illegal services in secret churches in the homes of believers. On February 11, 1938 she was arrested for being “a participant in a counter-revolutionary church-monarchist organization, ‘the Secret Church’”, and on November 3 was sentenced to five years in the camps and sent to a camp. Nothing more is known about her.

SAINT DUNSTAN, ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY (+ 988)

By Vladimir Moss

Early Years

Our holy Father Dunstan was born in the village of Baltonsborough, near Glastonbury, in about the year 909. His parents were of noble stock, and were called Herstan and Cynedritha. When the saint was still in his mother’s womb, she went to church on the Feast of the Meeting of the Lord – Candlemas, as it was known in the West. According to the custom, everyone was holding lighted candles in their hands. Suddenly all the candles went out. Equally suddenly, Cynedritha’s candle was rekindled; the amazed congregation then rekindled their candles from hers. This was taken as a sign that the child she was carrying would be a great light in the Church, from whom many others would draw enlightenment and inspiration.

The saint knew Glastonbury from his earliest years. According to an ancient tradition then current, the first Christians who came to England found at Glastonbury "an ancient church not built by human hands and prepared by God for the salvation of men, which the Lord by many miracles showed to have been dedicated to Himself and the Most Holy Mother of God Mary”.

Once the young Dunstan was taken there on a pilgrimage by his father. During the night an old man dressed in a shining white garment appeared to him in a vision, and led him through all the rooms of the holy church. He also showed him the monastery buildings which were to be built by him during his abbacy in the very order in which they were later constructed.

On seeing their son’s promise, Herstan and Cynedritha sent him to Glastonbury to be educated. Like a bee, he darted through many fields of religious literature. He also learned from the Irish pilgrims who came to venerate the tomb of St. Patrick.

Once he fell ill and was on the point of death. In the middle of the night, however, he received a sudden access of strength, and, springing up immediately, went with God’s guidance towards the monastery. Some dogs rushed at him, barking furiously; but he repulsed them with a thin twig and carried on. Having arrived at the church, he climbed onto the roof by a route that the workmen used, and, descending down the other side, came to a little chamber, where he innocently fell asleep. There he was found the next morning, to the amazement of everyone. For he had been at the point of death, as his nurse witnessed, and the chamber where he fell asleep was very difficult to get. The nurse was especially amazed, and went up onto the roof to take a look round.

Besides his religious activities, Dunstan cultivated the arts of metalworking, painting and harp-playing. One day, he was invited to the house of a certain noblewoman called Ethelwynn. She had asked him to design a stole to be used in the Divine services which she would then adorn with gold and silver and precious stones. Dunstan came, bringing his harp with him. Then, as they were returning to work after supper, the harp, which was hanging on the wall far from the reach of any visible hand, spontaneously began to play the melody of the hymn: ‘Let the souls of the saints who have followed in the footsteps of Christ rejoice in the heavens. Since they have shed their blood for His love, they will reign with Christ forever!’ Everyone was amazed at the miracle, wondering what it could mean.

In 923, Archbishop Plegmund of Canterbury reposed in the Lord, and was succeeded by Dunstan’s uncle, Athelm, Bishop of Wells. Athelm invited the saint to stay with him at Canterbury in the archbishop’s house, and Dunstan accepted. Archbishop Athelm foresaw the future greatness of his nephew and introduced him to King Athelstan, who showed him great favour.

But then a temptation was allowed to try him. Certain companions and relatives of his at the court became jealous of Dunstan’s success and accused him to the king of practising black magic. The soldier of Christ did not falter, but remembered the words of David: ‘Unjust witnesses are risen up against me, and injustice hath lied to itself’. He placed before his spiritual eyes the promise of Christ: ‘Blessed are ye when men shall revile you and persecute you and say all manner of evil against you falsely for My sake. Rejoice and be exceedingly glad; for great is your reward in heaven.’ And so, comforted by these words, he ‘became as a deaf man in whose mouth are no reproofs’; for when the dogs barked at him he hardly ever opened his mouth. But their madness grew more frenzied, and, binding him like a sheep by the arms and legs, they threw him into a muddy pool and trampled on him. He got up and set off for a friend’s house which was about a mile away. But then the friend’s dogs ran keenly up to him, and, thinking him to be more a monster than a man, started barking at him savagely. However, they soon recognized his soothing voice and calmed down. Sighing deeply, the servant of God reflected how the irrational nature of animals showed him more kindness than the animal ferocity of his kinsmen.

Shortly after this, the saint went to stay with another relative of his, St. Alphege ‘the Bald’, Bishop of Winchester. Once the holy bishop was going with Dunstan to the dedication of a church at the west gate of the city. After the festivities, when they were returning past the church of St. Gregory, the bishop called a halt for Compline. As they were putting their heads together for the absolution, a stone suddenly fell out of the empty sky and passed between them, injuring no one but grazing their heads. Where could this have come from, people reflected, if not from the evil one?

St. Alphege several times asked Dunstan to become a monk. But he refused, pleading that he wanted to marry. Then the bishop prayed to the Lord that the young man would pay heed to his warnings. Immediately Dunstan was seized by an intolerable pain in his bladder which passed to his whole body. Thinking that he had elephantiasis and that he was on the point of death, in great anguish he sent for the holy bishop whom he had just spurned. When the bishop arrived, he announced to him his intention of following his salutary advice. Chastened, and now recovered from his illness, Dunstan received the monastic tonsure.

St. Alphege also ordained him to the priesthood, and then sent him back to Glastonbury. There he built for himself a very narrow cell in which to fast and pray. He also occupied himself in making church bells and other ecclesiastical ornaments.

Now there died a close friend of the saint’s, a deacon by the name of Wulfred. Not long after his repose, Wulfred appeared to Dunstan and revealed to him many heavenly mysteries, as well as the whole course of his future life. When Dunstan asked for a sign whereby he could be assured of the truth of these revelations, Wulfred led him to the cemetery, and, pointing to an unused plot, said: ‘You will know that what I say is true from the fact that in three days’ time a priest will be buried here, although he has not yet fallen ill.’ On awaking, Dunstan related the prophecy to some others; and as they were coming back from the cemetery the chaplain of a certain very religious noblewoman came up and asked for that plot for his burial. Shortly after, he sickened and died; and within three days he had been buried in that very spot.

Now there was a very rich woman of royal birth and strictly religious upbringing called Ethelfleda. On the death of her husband, wishing to live a widow’s life in accordance with her strength, she bought a small house near the church so as to be able to serve the Lord day and night. Dunstan loved her very much; and she diligently supported him for Christ’s, as well as for kinship’s, sake.

Among other good works, she was much given to hospitality; and on one occasion she prepared a meal for King Athelstan, who was coming to Glastonbury to pray. The day before his visit, the king’s stewards came to see that everything was suitably prepared, and remarked that there was not enough mead. She replied: ‘My mistress, the Most Holy Mother of God, will not let me go short, either in mead or in anything else pertaining to the royal dignity.’ After saying this, she entered the Old Church, and, prostrating herself, prayed to the King of all that He would grant her an abundance of provisions for the service of the king.

The king duly arrived with a large company in attendance. After the Divine Liturgy, he joyfully came to his invited seat. The supply of mead was exhausted at the first toast, but God abundantly made up the deficiency so that nothing was lacking for the whole day. However, when the king’s servants told him of the miracle, he abruptly stopped and said to his men: ‘We have sinned by over-burdening this handmaid of God with our unnecessarily large numbers.’ And getting to his feet, he bade farewell to her and continued on his way.

Now Ethelfleda fell seriously ill, and the saint prepared her for her end, looking after her as if she were his own mother. Because of this, he was late for Vespers one day, and at dusk came back to the church to celebrate the delayed service. As he was standing outside the church chanting psalms with the brethren, he saw coming from the direction of the setting sun a white dove of extraordinary beauty with wing-tips sparkling like fire that entered the house of Ethelfleda.

After the service, the saint went back to the house. Standing by the curtain at the entrance to her bedroom, he could hear her having a serious conversation with what seemed to be an intimate friend; and, wondering who it might be, he asked her maidservants who were standing by. They replied that they did not know. ‘Before you came,’ they said, ‘the chamber was filled with a reddish light of extraordinary splendour. That has stopped, but she, as you can hear, has not ceased from carrying on a conversation with her interlocutor.’ Dunstan sat down until she had finished her conversation. Then, drawing back the curtain, he entered her room and asked her with whom she had been speaking. ‘You yourself saw him coming before you came here,’ she said, ‘and do you ask me now with whom I have been speaking? For he who spoke with me is the same person who appeared to you as you were chanting psalms outside the church. And he told me in private everything concerning my departure from this life. But there is no need for you and your friends to weep for me – God will graciously visit me at my death and allow me to enter into the joys of Paradise. However, I want you to do this for me as if I were your only friend: hasten early in the morning, prepare a funeral vestment for me to wear, make ready a bath, and after my bath celebrate the Divine Liturgy, communicating me in the Holy Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. At that moment, with God leading me, I shall go the way of all the earth.’ Dunstan promptly obeyed the blessed lady’s commands to the last detail. And after partaking of the Holy Mysteries, just as the Liturgy was coming to an end, Ethelfleda gave up her soul into the hands of her Creator.

In 939, King Athelstan died, and was succeeded on the throne of England by King Edmund. Dunstan became one of his counsellors, for his court at Cheddar was not far from Glastonbury. As in Athelstan’s reign, this provoked the envy of some of the courtiers, who slandered the saint to the king and procured his banishment. Dunstan then asked the help of some foreign envoys who were then at court, and they, taking pity on him, promised him their hospitality and everything he might need if he accompanied them back to their kingdom.

The next day the king rode out hunting with his men. As they came to the forest, they dispersed in friendly competition along different paths. However, the baying of the dogs and the calling of the horns enabled many of the stags to make a quick escape; and only the king, with one pack of dogs, found himself on the track of a stag. In his flight the exhausted animal came to a very deep gorge into which he suddenly hurled himself, followed by the dogs. The king, following close behind, was accelerating when he saw the gorge. Desperately he tried hold back his horse, but without success. With all hope for his life gone, he commended his soul into the hands of God, saying within himself: ‘I thank Thee, O God Most High, that as far as I can remember, I have not harmed anyone at this time, except only Dunstan, and I shall be reconciled with him promptly if my life is saved.’ When he had said this, his horse came to a standstill on the very edge of the abyss.

Praising and giving thanks to God, the king realized that he had come so near to being killed in order that Dunstan might be vindicated; and on his return he ordered him to be brought before him without delay. When Dunstan came in, he said: ‘Hurry up, get a horse, and come with me and my soldiers.’ And, mounting their horses, they immediately took the road to Glastonbury. On arrival, they went into the church to pray; and after praying and wiping the tears from his eyes, the king again called the servant of God to him. Taking him by the hand, he kissed it and led him to the priest’s chair. Having seated him in it, he said: ‘Be the powerful incumbent of this seat and the most faithful abbot of this church. And whatever you need, whether for the Divine services or for the sacred Rule, I shall devoutly supply from my royal bounty.’

Abbot of Glastonbury

Dunstan was placed in charge of the monastery at Glastonbury in the year 943, and immediately instituted the strict application of St. Benedict’s Rule for the monks, thus giving a major impetus to the revival of monasticism in England after the devastation of the Viking wars. He also began to build many new building for the monastery in accordance with his childhood vision. One day, a great beam was being passed to the roof of the church, and was about to touch it when it began to tilt downwards and fall, threatening the lives of many people below. A cry went up, and the saint’s eyes were drawn to the scene. With his right hand he made the sign of the Cross, and lo! By the invisible power of God the beam was restored to its place.

Enraged by these miracles, which were drawing the souls of their beholders closer to the Lord, Satan tempted the saint by appearing to him in many fearful guises. One night, as he was keeping vigil at the altar of St. George and resting a little, the devil came up behind him in the form of a bear, threatening to devour him. At first the man of God tried to beat him with a staff which he always carried with him; but to no avail. Then he resorted to the stronger spiritual weapon of psalmody: ‘Let God arise, and let His enemies be scattered, and let them that hate Him flee from before His face’. The deceiver fled in confusion…

Through another vision of evil spirits, the saint prophesied the death of King Edmund. For as he was travelling in the king’s escort, he suddenly saw a black form running among the king’s trumpeters. After gazing at it for a long time in amazement, he turned to his neighbour, ‘Half-King’ Athelstan, the alderman of East Anglia, and said: ‘Beloved, do you see what I see?’ ‘Nothing out of the ordinary,’ he replied. ‘Sign yourself with the sign of the Holy Cross, and then see if you can see what I see,’ said the holy man. When he did this, Athelstan also saw the evil spirit. When they made the sign of the Cross again, the enemy disappeared.

As they continued on their way, Athelstan asked the saint to what extent this vision of theirs was related to a dream he had had, in which he had seen the king fall asleep while feasting among his nobles, whereupon almost all the chief men and counsellors had turned into sheep and goats. Dunstan immediately replied: ‘The king’s sleep means his death; but the changing of the chief men and counsellors into mute and irrational beasts refers to the future, when almost all the chief men and rulers will of their own accord deviate from the way of truth.’

As they came to the king’s quarters, they were still discussing these matters. And at dusk on the same day Dunstan again saw the evil spirit wandering among the servants at the king’s banquet. Then, on the very day on which the king was killed, May 26, 946, he saw it for the third time as the king was returning from the Divine Liturgy to the banquet-hall. During the feast, the king saw a man named Liofa, whom he had banished from the kingdom six years before, sitting at a table next to an alderman. He got up and tried to drive the outlaw from the hall, but was stabbed by him and died. The king’s body was taken to Glastonbury, where St. Dunstan performed the funeral service.

Edmund was succeeded by his brother Edred, who loved Dunstan no less than his predecessors, loading him with honours and submitting to his wise counsel.

In 953, Bishop Ethelgar of Crediton died; whereupon King Edred tried to persuade the saint to accept the vacant see. But he refused, not wishing to desert the king, whom he loved, for the sake of the episcopate. The king then asked his mother, St. Elgiva, to intercede. So she invited him to a royal banquet and again put forward the same proposal. But he replied: ‘I ask you, lady, not to ask me this again; for I tell you truly: I must not be made a bishop during the lifetime of your son the king.’

The Lord, however, was not pleased by Dunstan’s refusal, as was revealed to him in a vision that night. For he saw himself returning from a pilgrimage to the apostles’ tombs in Rome and was coming near the Mons Gaudium. Then St. Peter and his fellow apostles Paul and Andrew approached him. Each held in his hand a sword, which they offered him. On Peter’s sword were inscribed the words: ‘In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.’ Then Andrew sang sweetly from the Gospel: ‘Take My yoke upon you, for I am meek and lowly of heart, and ye shall find rest unto your souls.’ Peter then raised a staff which he held in his hand and struck Dunstan lightly on the palm, saying: ‘Take this as a warning not to refuse the yoke of the Lord in future.’ Waking up, the saint asked a monk who was sleeping in the same room who it was that had struck him. He said that he did not know. Dunstan thought for a while, and then said: ‘Now I know, my son, now I know by whom I have been struck.’

In the morning he recounted his vision to the king, who said: ‘Since the swords you took up with the apostles’ blessing are the weapons of the Holy Spirit, you can be quite certain that through the sword given you by the blessed Peter and inscribed with the word of God, you are to receive the archbishopric from heaven.’ As for the other swords, that given by St. Paul may have signified the see of London, whose cathedral church was dedicated to the apostle and which Dunstan held for a short period before he became archbishop. And that of St. Andrew may have signified the see of Rochester, whose church was dedicated to the First-Called and which Dunstan was called upon to defend in his later years.

King Edred had been chronically sick throughout his reign, and now he came to die. Feeling his end draw near, he sent a messenger to Dunstan to bring his treasures from Glastonbury, where the saint had been looking after them, to Frome, where the king lay. As Dunstan was riding from Frome, on St. Clement’s day, 955, he suddenly heard a voice from heaven: ‘King Edred now rests in peace.’ At the sound of the voice, his horse, unable to bear the angelic power, fell dead to the ground, astonishing the saint’s companions. When he had explained to them the voice and its meaning, and as they were blessing God and commending the soul of the dead man into the hands of God, messengers came up and confirmed the truth of the voice. And so the walls of the palace were resounding to cries of lamentation as the saint entered. He found the royal corpse abandoned; and so, faithful in death as in life, he performed the funeral service and buried the king in the Old Minster, Winchester.

The death of King Edred marked the end of the peaceful part of St. Dunstan’s tenure of the Glastonbury abbacy. For he was succeeded by Edwig, the son of King Edmund - a rash youth under the influence of a mother and daughter, both named Elgiva, who wanted him to choose one of them to be his wife. This wanton behaviour of the king was to bring him into conflict with the saint…

Now the time came for the anointing and consecration of the new king after his election by the people. The ceremony was duly performed, but then the king had no time to attend the banquet with his nobles and bishops, but immediately ran after the loose women. When Archbishop Oda saw that the king’s wilfulness on the day of his coronation displeased all the counsellors sitting around, he said to his fellow-bishops and the other leading men: ‘Let some of you, pray, go and fetch the king, so that he may, as is fitting, be a pleasant companion to his followers at the royal banquet.’ But one by one, fearing to incur the king’s wrath or the women’s complaint, they began to demur. Finally, they chose from among them two whom they knew to be strong in spirit – Abbot Dunstan and Bishop Cynesige, a kinsman of Dunstan’s, to go in obedience to the command of all and bring back the king, whether he wished it or not.

Entering the king’s chamber in accordance with their superiors’ command, Dunstan and Cynesige found the king’s crown, which was bound with gold, silver and precious stones, and shone with a many-coloured light, carelessly thrown on the floor far away from his head, while the king himself wallowed between the two women as if he were in a pig-sty. They said to him: ‘Our nobles have sent us to you to ask you to come as quickly as possible to your proper seat, and not to scorn to be present at the joyful banquet of your chief men.’ But when the king did not want to rise, Dunstan, after first rebuking the folly of the women, drew him by his hand from his licentious reclining with them, replaced the crown on his head, and brought him with him to the royal assembly by force.

Like Jezabel of old, the elder Elgiva now conceived a violent hatred for Dunstan and obtained the consent of the king to deprive him of all his honours and possessions, and to expel him from the kingdom. Dunstan’s friends and supporters were also persecuted. Elgiva even sent secret agents to kill Dunstan before he could leave the country. But he eluded her grasp, and made a speedy passage to the continent. There he was kindly received by Count Arnulf of Flanders, staying in the Abbey of St. Peter in Ghent.

The saint did not cease to weep and groan day and night, thinking of his country and the spiritual condition of his monastery. One night, he dreamed that he was with a group of brethren as they were coming to the end of the Vespers psalms. After the canticle, ‘My soul doth magnify the Lord’, they began to sing the antiphon from Job: ‘Why have ye disparaged his truthful words, and composed speeches to reprove him, and…’ At this point the chant stopped and they all fell silent; nor was he able to persuade them to complete either the words or the melody. Several times they went back to the same point in the chant, never did they say the last words. And he, rebuking them in the same vision, said: ‘Why do you not want to end the antiphon with the words: “what ye have had in mind ye discharge”?’ Then came the Divine reply: ‘Because, I say, they will never discharge what they are striving for in their minds – to tear you away from the government of this monastery.’ Waking up, the saint gave thanks to God the Most High, his Comforter. And indeed, some of the people in the vision turned out later to have been plotting against him in secret.

King Edwig married the younger Elgiva, although the union was within the forbidden degrees of kinship. As a result, the northern parts of the English kingdom, Mercia and Northumbria, rebelled against him, and chose his brother Edgar as their king. And in the next year Archbishop Oda dissolved his marriage. When Elgiva tried to rejoin the king, she was caught by men from the north; they severed the muscles and sinews of her lower limbs, and she died in agony a few days later. Finally, Edwig died, and when Edgar reunited the kingdom under his sole rule, he recalled Dunstan from exile…

Archbishop of Canterbury

In the year 958 King Edgar ‘the Peaceable’ ascended the throne. In the same year St. Dunstan was made Bishop of Worcester. Then, in 959, he was transferred to the see of London. And in 960 he was elected Archbishop of Canterbury. The truly ‘symphonic’ cooperation of King Edgar and Archbishop Dunstan laid the foundation of a golden age in the history of the Anglo-Saxon Church. This age had been prophesied by a heavenly voice which St. Dunstan had heard in 943, at the birth of Edgar: ‘Peace to England as long as this child reigns, and our Dunstan survives.’ ‘The succession of events,’ wrote William of Malmesbury, ‘was in unison with the heavenly oracle; to such an extent did ecclesiastical glory flourish and martial clamour decay while he was alive.’

However, the early part of Edgar’s reign was marred by his attempts to seduce two nuns of Wilton, St. Wulfhilda and Wulfrida, by the second of whom he had a daughter, St. Edith. For this he was placed on a penance by St. Dunstan, and was not allowed to wear his crown from his sixteenth to his thirtieth year. He accepted this penance humbly, and it is probably for this reason that his coronation did not take place until the year 973, in a ceremony in Bath Abbey which became the model for all future English coronations.

After Dunstan had been elected archbishop, he set off, like all English archbishops- elect, for Rome, to receive the pallium (omophorion) from the Pope. On the road he gave away all his provisions to the poor, which greatly irritated his servant. So when he asked him one day: ‘What do you have to sustain us tonight?’, the servant replied: ‘Absolutely nothing; for you have taken no care about it – you have given everything away, either to our own men or to strangers.’ Then the bishop said: ‘I ask you not to be too worried by this; for Christ our Lord is bountiful to all those who believe in Him.’ But the steward replied again: ‘Now you will see what your Christ will give you tonight – you who have squandered everything.’ And he continued scoffing as the saint went in search of a place to serve Vespers. His scoffing soon ceased, however, when they were met by messengers of an abbot who had been waiting for them for three days, and who now most charitably supplied the needs of the saint and his men for many days ahead.

On returning from Rome, Dunstan immediately set about spreading the monastic reforms which he had initiated at Glastonbury; and he found the king a willing helper in this holy task. Already, as Bishop of London, he had founded a small monastery of twelve monks at Westminster with St. Wulsin as abbot. Now he appointed his disciples Saints Oswald and Ethelwold, both zealous monks, to the sees of Worcester and Winchester respectively; and under their vigorous leadership the south of England was soon covered with Benedictine monasteries.

The saint cared for the people as a father for his children. One practical measure he introduced was to order gold or silver pegs to be fastened to the drinking jugs in taverns. This reminded people not to drink more than their just measure and greatly reduced drunkenness and quarrels.

He could be strict, too, when the occasion demanded it. Once three false coiners were caught and sentenced to have their hands cut off. On that day, which was the Feast of Pentecost, the saint was going to celebrate the Divine Liturgy; but he waited, asking whether the sentence on the coiners had been carried out. The reply came that the sentence had been deferred to another day out of respect for the feast. Then the saint said: ‘I shall on no account to the altar today until they have suffered the appointed penalty; for I am concerned in this matter.’ For the criminals were in his jurisdiction. As he spoke, tears gushed down his cheeks, witnessing to his love for the condemned men. But when they had been punished, he washed his face and went up to the altar, saying: ‘Now I am confident that the Almighty will accept the Sacrifice from my hands.’

Once the saint was rapt up to Heaven in a vision, and saw his mother being married to a great king amidst the joyful chanting of the heavenly hosts. After this had continued for some time, one of the chanters, a young man clothed in a shining white garment, came up to Dunstan and said: ‘How is it that you see and hear this multitude glorifying the great King, while you, who ought to be especially joyful at the marriage of your mother, remain silent?’ Dunstan replied that he did not know the chants that were being sung, nor did he know how he could glorify the King. The young man said: ‘Do you wish me to instruct you how to chant?’ When Dunstan humbly replied that he did, the young man taught him the antiphon: ‘O King and Lord of all nations, for the sake of the throne of Thy majesty grant unto us the forgiveness of our sins, O Christ our King. Alleluia.’ This antiphon was repeated several times in the vision until it was firmly established in the saint’s memory. And immediately he awoke he ordered a monk to write down what he had so recently learned. Then he commanded all those in obedience to him, both monks and clergy, to learn it. Thus did the saint learn to glorify with chants and spiritual songs the marriage between Christ and His Mother, the Holy Church.

On another occasion the king asked the saint to postpone the beginning of the Divine Liturgy until he had returned from hunting. The third hour was approaching, and the man of God was standing clad in his hierarchical garments, immersed in tearful prayer. Suddenly he fell into a light slumber and was rapt up to Heaven, where he heard the angels singing; ‘Kyrie eleison, Christe eleison, Kyrie eleison.’ Coming to himself, he asked whether the king had arrived. The answer was that he had not. Again he prayed, and again he was rapt up to Heaven, where he heard the last words of the Liturgy being pronounced in a high voice. At that moment some clergy ran up to him and told him that the king had arrived. But he replied that he had already been present at the Liturgy, and would not be present at or celebrate it again that day. On being asked why, he revealed to them his vision, after which he forbade the king to hunt again on the Lord’s Day. Then he taught the clergy the ‘Kyrie eleison’ which he had heard in the heavens.

Once a nobleman entered into an uncanonical marriage. When he refused to renounce it, Dunstan excommunicated him. The earl then went to Rome, where he obtained from the Pope a written order to the archbishop compelling him to allow the marriage. But Dunstan, as his name {‘firm rock’} implied, was firm as a rock: ‘I am not to be moved,’ he said, ‘even by the threat of death, from the authority of my Lord.’ In this way the saint demonstrated his truly Orthodox consciousness and freedom from the papist heresy that sought to place the Pope’s authority above that of the Universal Church. Nor did the king try to persuade him to disobey the King of kings and Lord of lords, Jesus Christ. And so the nobleman came to repentance, and appeared before Dunstan barefoot and with a candle in his hand; whereupon he was released from his ban.

Now in the capital city of Winchester opposition arose against the monastic reforms which St. Ethelwold, backed by St. Dunstan, was introducing. The secular clergy decided to refer the matter to the king, who in turn referred it to the saint. Dunstan then asked the king to convene a council in Winchester, which met in the refectory of the Old Minster in the presence of the king and queen, the nobles, monks and clergy. The final decision was announced by St. Dunstan: ‘This Old Minster was founded as a habitation for monks. Let those who benefit from its revenues henceforth live as true monks.’ It is said that during the council, when the possibility of restoring the secular clergy to the Old Minster was being discussed, a cross spoke fro the wall: ‘Far be it from you! You have done well: to change again would be wrong.’

However, the secular party did not leave it at that. When King Edgar died in 975, and the throne passed to his young son Edward, a great storm arose against the monks in many parts of the country, and the secular clergy who had been expelled from the Old Minster used the council convened at Calne in 977 to renew their complaint. But Dunstan was not to be moved. ‘Since, in my old age,’ he said, ‘you exert yourselves in the stirring up of old quarrels, I confess that I refuse to give in, but commit the cause of His Church to Christ the Judge.’ His words were confirmed by God’s verdict. For as he spoke the house was suddenly shaken; the floor of the upper room in which they were assembly fell under their feet; and the enemies of the Church were thrown to the ground and crushed by the falling timber. Only the beam on which the saint was sitting did not move.

The climax of the troubles came with the murder of King Edward in 979. St. Dunstan was greatly saddened by the death of his beloved spiritual son, and, at the coronation of his half-brother, Ethelred, at Kingson, he prophesied great sorrow for the English people in the coming reign. The prophecy was exactly fulfilled after Dunstan’s death.

Further sorrows awaited him. In 984, St. Ethelwold and the Bishop of Rochester came to visit him in Canterbury. He received them with great joy; but when they were about to return to their sees, he burst into tears, and his weeping was so intense that he could hardly speak. The bishops were terrified by this unusual behaviour and asked him the reason. After a pause he replied: ‘I weep because I know that you will soon die.’ ‘Don’t prophesy such terrible things, most holy Father,’ they said, ‘for we shall not die, but shall see each other safe and sound another time.’ But Dunstan confirmed his previous words, saying: ‘What I have said will come to pass; for you will die to this world but live to God. Nor must you remain any longer in this life, but you will to God to reign with Him forever.’ The bishops returned to their sees, sobered by a pious fear of God. Within a few days they both reposed in peace.

As archbishop, Dunstan continued to care for the western monasteries which he had founded or restored. Once he came to the monastery at Bath, where he was charitably received by the brethren. After lunch, he was rapt up in a vision and saw one of the pupils of the nearby Glastonbury school being borne away into the heavens amidst a great host of the heavenly citizens. The next day, a certain Ceolwy came from Glastonbury to ask his blessing and seek his advice on certain problems to do with the monastery and the brethren. When the saint had given him his blessing, he asked him kindly whether everything was well with the brethren. Ceolwy replied that everything was well, completely forgetting about the boy’s death. But Dunstan gently said: ‘I do not suppose that everything could be well for all of you if someone has died.’ Then Ceolwy replied: ‘Everything is well indeed, except that one of our boys died yesterday at noon.’ ‘That is what I was saying,’ said the archbishop. ‘May his spirit rest in peace in accordance with the vision we have been granted.’

On another occasion he was staying at Glastonbury and walking with a certain monk called Elfsige near the western gates of the Old Church. Suddenly he heard a voice from heaven saying: ‘Come, Elfsige, come.’ Then, turning to the monk, he said: ‘Hurry, prepare yourself, brother; for today you have been called by the Lord to leave this world and go to Him.’ The prophecy was fulfilled a few days later.

The saint was constant in prayer and vigil, and when dawn broke he would often be seen applying himself to the correction of errors in manuscripts. During the day, he would give judgement between man and man, or resolve quarrels, or support widows, orphans and strangers in their necessities. He loved to tell stories from the lives of the saints (the martyrdom of St. Edmund was a particular favourite of his), speaking in both Latin and English. Everyone, including visitors from abroad, was enriched by his holy counsel. And during the Divine Liturgy he would pray with eyes and hands directed to Heaven and tears streaming down his cheeks.

Repose and Miracles

But now it came for the man of God to go the way of all flesh.

On the eve of the Feast of the Ascension, 988, a priest of the saint’s monastic family at Canterbury, the future Bishop of Elmham, Elfgar ‘the Almsgiver’, had the following vision. Dunstan was sitting on his Episcopal throne, dictating canon law to a scribe. While he was intent on these things, a great host of heavenly beings was seen entering the church through all the entrances. They surrounded the bishop with their festal array and cried: ‘Rejoice, our Dunstan! If you are ready, come, join our fellowship as a most honoured member!’ But he said: ‘You know, holy spirits, that I must preach to the assembled people in the mother church and communicate them in the Holy Mysteries of the Lord. So I cannot possibly come.’ To which they replied: ‘Be ready to come to us on the Sabbath.’

On the Feast of the Ascension, the saint preached three sermons whose power and glow was wonderful. Then, having said farewell for the last time to his cathedral family, he suddenly felt weak and retired to his bed. And on the morning of the Sabbath, May 19, 988, when the Mattins hymns were finished, he told the brethren to come to him. In their presence he commended his spirit to God and received the Holy Mysteries, which had been celebrated on the holy table in his presence. Then, giving thanks to God, he began to chant the words of David: ‘He made a remembrance of His wondrous deeds; merciful and compassionate is the Lord; He hath given food to them that fear Him.’ With these words he rested in peace.

St. Dunstan was buried with great honour in Christchurch, Canterbury. Very soon, miracles were being wrought at his tomb.

A woman who had been blind for many years was healed after watching and praying at his tomb.

A priest was cured of paralysis at his tomb. But a little later, while he was celebrating and giving thanks to God and St. Dunstan, he said: ‘And if there had been no Dunstan, I should still have been cured.’ Immediately he was struck with his former paralysis, and died soon after.

A boy who had been dumb and lame from his birth was cured at the tomb of the saint. ‘Glory to God in the highest. Alleluia’ were his first words, and he continued to extol the miracle for the rest of his life.

A girl who had been blind from her birth was brought to the tomb of the saint by her mother. When her eyes were opened she leapt for joy and said: ‘Mother, what are these beautiful things which I see?’ ‘Do you see something, my darling?’ asked the mother. ‘A beautiful man commanded me to see these beautiful things,’ she said.

A certain German named Clement had been excommunicated for certain sins, and had been dragged from place to place for seven years, possessed by a demon. Coming to the tomb of the saint, he attended the all-night vigil. At the response, ‘You see a miracle,’ he leapt up and vomited the demon out together with some blood.

In the year 1012, a controversy arose between the communities of Canterbury and Glastonbury as to which of them possessed the bones of the saint. The argument was finally settled in 1508, when Archbishop Wareham found the saint’s coffin at Canterbury with the inscription: ‘Here rests St. Dunstan’. The holy relics were found wrapped in linen and with a very fragrant odour, as of balsam, which testified to the heavenly glory of which the saint had been counted worthy.

St. Dunstan is commemorated on May 19.

Holy Father Dunstan, pray to God for us!

(Sources: W. Stubbs, Memorials of St. Dunstan, Rolls series, 1874, containing the earliest “Vita Dunstani” by Saxon priest B. (c. 1000) and the eleventh-century Lives by Abelard, Osbert and Edmer; William of Malmesbury, Gesta Regum Anglorum and Gesta Pontificum Anglorum and De Antiquitate Glastoniae Ecclesiae, 2; Eleanor Duckett, Saint Dunstan of Canterbury, London: Collins, 1955; David Farmer, The Oxford Dictionary of Saints, Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1978, p. 112; Christopher Brooks, The Saxon and Norman Kings, London: Fontana, 1963, pp. 127-128; Andrew Prescott, The Benedictional of St. Aethelwold, London: The British Library, 2002, p. 3).

SAINT BATHILD, QUEEN OF FRANCE (+ 680)

By Vladimir Moss

Our holy Mother Bathild was an Anglo-Saxon slave-girl who was sold into the household of the mayor of the Frankish imperial palace, Erchinoald, in the first half of the seventh century. Being beautiful in body and humble and obedient in soul, she quickly won the favour of the prince, and was nearly always in his presence, even bringing him drinks in his bedroom. She also served the older women in the household, washing their feet, dressing them and helping them in every way.

When Erchinoald's wife died, he wanted to marry the beautiful English virgin. But she hid herself from him, and Erchinoald eventually took a different woman to be his wife. Then Divine Providence, which raises the poor from the dung-hill, arranged that Bathild should attract the attention of the King of France, Clovis II, and in the year 649 they were married. From this marriage three sons were born: Clotaire III, Childeric II and Thierry III.

St. Bathild proved to be an exemplary queen. Using her influence with the king her husband, and with the help of Abbot Genesius (later Bishop of Lyons), she gave great alms to the poor and to the churches of God. And this generosity increased still more after the death of King Clovis in 657, when she became regent of the kingdom during the minority of her son Clotaire. She founded the monasteries of Corbie and Chelles, gave generous alms to many others, and urged hierarchs and abbots to enforce the keeping of the monastic rules. She supported the work of Saints Ouen and Leger, put an end to the simoniac buying of offices in the Church, suppressed the slave-trade of which she herself had been a victim, and redeemed many slaves. In the political sphere, the Austrasians were persuaded to accept her son Childeric as their king, which led to the union of the Franks and the Burgundians.

However, in 667 a plot hatched by Bishop Sigebrandus, which caused her sons to entertain unjust suspicions of her temporarily, led to her retirement to the monastery of Chelles. There she remained in obedience to Abbess Berthille until her death, performing all the humblest tasks and displaying all the virtues to perfection.

Finally, when she had fallen ill with a very painful intestinal disease and was close to death, a beautiful vision was shown to her. She saw a ladder standing in front of the church of the Mother of God, the summit of which touched the heavens; and it was as if Bathild herself was ascending the ladder in the company of the holy angels. The saint now realized that her end was approaching, but she hid this from the abbess for fear that she would fall ill from sadness. And so, having raised her eyes and hands to heaven, her holy soul was released in peace, and a heavenly light covered her bed. This took place in the year 680, very shortly after the death of her god-daughter, a little girl whom she had wanted to accompany her into the next world.

Many miracles were wrought through the intercession of the saint after her death. Once a bishop came to the monastery and brought his child, who was demon-possessed and very violent, to the sepulchre of the saint. The demon cast the child half-dead onto the pavement; but he stood up, crossed himself, thanked God and returned to his parents sane and sober.

According to William of Malmesbury, some of St. Bathild’s relics were deposited at Glastonbury.

St. Bathild is commemorated on January 30.

Holy Mother Bathild, pray to God for us!

(Sources: Life in M.G.H. Scriptores rerum merov., ii, 475-508; David Farmer, The Oxford Dictionary of Saints, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1978, p. 32; William of Malmesbury, The Early History of Glastonbury, edited by John Scott, The Bodyell Press, Woodbridge, 1981, p. 71)