The question of Russian autocephaly arose only when, in 1439, at the “Ecumenical” Council in Florence, a church union was concluded between Rome and Constantinople
...Rus was never politically dependent on Byzantium, but for almost five centuries it was the metropolis of the Patriarchate of Constantinople; the metropolitan was usually sent from New Rome and was an ethnic Greek. Only twice - in 1051 and 1147 - was the Metropolitan of All Rus' elected by a council of local bishops. The question of Russian autocephaly arose only when, in 1439, at the “Ecumenical” Council in Florence, a church union was concluded between Rome and Constantinople (known as the “Union of Florence”).
Metropolitan Isidore of Kiev and All Rus', who signed the union, was arrested upon his arrival in Kyiv in 1441 (he fled to Rome, where he became a cardinal. He died there). Means of communication were then quite imperfect, so it was only in 1448 - after a long wait for news from Constantinople - that the council of bishops in Moscow elected Bishop Jonah of Ryazan to replace the heretic. This date is considered the actual beginning of the autocephaly of the Russian Church.
The details of the events taking place in Byzantium itself in Moscow were not known, and a message was sent to the emperor in Constantinople, which said:
“And our Russian Church, the most holy metropolitan of Russia, the holy ecumenical team of God, the apostolic church of the Wisdom of God, Saint Sophia of Constantinople, demands and seeks blessings, and obeys in everything according to ancient piety; and our father Jonah, Metropolitan of All Rus', similarly, in every possible way demands blessings and unification from there, unless [ except, except - approx. arctus] of the current new controversies. And we pray to your holy kingdom that you will show good will to our father Jonah Metropolitan about everything, and then from your holy kingdom you will love us.<…>We want to know about all these church matters<…>write your letters to His Holiness the Orthodox Ecumenical Patriarch<…>but not vema, even if there is already<…>His Holiness Patriarch, or not..."
There was no answer. Four years later, another message was sent to the Byzantine capital. Moscow could only guess whether Constantinople remained faithful to the union or not. There was again no response from Constantinople, but the Polish-Lithuanian King Casimir recognized Jonah as Metropolitan of All Rus', which meant the restoration of the unity of the Russian Metropolis.
...
Until the beginning of the 16th century, the position of the Patriarchal Throne of Constantinople was extremely difficult. The last stronghold of the Byzantines - the Crimean principality of Theodoro (Mangup) - fell under Turkish pressure in 1475. Moscow had no ties with Constantinople. In Moscow, without any information, the Patriarch of Constantinople was considered not only a possible supporter of the union, but also a captive of the Muslim Sultan, deprived of any independence.
...
In 1484, a church council was held in Constantinople with the participation of representatives of all the Eastern patriarchs, at which the union was condemned. Only from this time it was possible to talk about the final, official and unequivocal dissolution of the union on the part of Constantinople.
...
In 1497/1498, church communion between Moscow and Mount Athos was restored, and Moscow resumed financial assistance to the Holy Mountain. Finally, in 1514, diplomatic relations between Moscow and the Ottomans were established. ... In 1518, a large patriarchal embassy headed by Metropolitan Gregory arrived in Moscow. Thus, church communion was finally restored. The Greeks tried to persuade Moscow to abolish autocephaly, to which Moscow did not react, and the issue was dropped. ...In 1589, by agreement with the Greeks, the Moscow Patriarchate was proclaimed. The councils of Constantinople in 1590 and 1593 recognized the Moscow Patriarchate.
So, the formalization of Moscow autocephaly was associated exclusively with the deviation of the Patriarchate of Constantinople into a union with Rome. The Mother Church has lost the basis for maintaining its power in Rus'. The issue of union in Constantinople was finally resolved only in 1484, when at a church council in Constantinople with the participation of representatives of all eastern patriarchs, the union was condemned.
What do we have today? As columnist Dmitry Semushin aptly notes -
The title of the Patriarch of Constantinople is “ His Divine All-Holiness Archbishop of Constantinople-New Rome and Ecumenical Patriarch"- is illusory and is just a historical memory. New Rome with its emperor is long gone. There is also no non-religious sultan who exercised the highest leadership of the Constantinople Orthodox Church during the period of the “Ottoman yoke.” There is no Greek Constantinople, but there is Turkish Istanbul. All that remains of the former Christian empire that once ruled from the City of Peace is a complex of nine buildings tightly packed onto a small plot of land. This place is called "Phanar", and since 1599 it has been the center of the Patriarchate of Constantinople, living under the rule of the Muslim Turks. Ironically, the residence and patriarchal church on Phanar were built with money - a thousand rubles “donated” by the Russian Tsar Fedor Ioannovich Constantinople Patriarch Jeremiah for his establishment of the patriarchate in Russia.
***
Based on materials: "
Pages from the history of the Russian Church are revealed to the reader in the article by Vladislav Andreevich Tulyanov. Describing the conditions under which the Russian Church received autocephalous status and elucidating the reasons for this, the author turns to the difficult period of the 14th-15th centuries, when the fall of Constantinople was approaching, and the Byzantines tried in every possible way to enlist the support of the Pope.
As is commonly believed, Rus' became a Christian power in 988 thanks to the decision of the great Kyiv prince Vladimir I. Along with the Christian religion, the Byzantine clergy arrived in Rus', and the Kiev Metropolis was organized, canonically part of the Patriarchate of Constantinople. This meant that after the death of the next Kyiv metropolitan, a new one was appointed in Constantinople, most often from the Greeks. Some great princes made attempts to install a natural Rusich as the metropolitan of Kyiv, but for a long time such a practice remained very rare. One such example is the church unrest of the 70s. XIV century
Some researchers believe that the church unrest involving Dmitry Donskoy, Metropolitans Cyprian, Pimen and priest Mityai was provoked by the Patriarch of Constantinople. Cyprian was appointed metropolitan to Lithuania, which was part of the Kyiv Metropolis together with Muscovite Russia during the lifetime of Metropolitan Alexei - this divided the unified Kyiv Metropolis into two parts. After the death of Alexei, Dmitry Donskoy did not want to host Cyprian, obviously considering him a protege of Lithuania, and therefore an enemy of Moscow. Then the idea arose to choose a Russian metropolitan. It is possible that Prince Dmitry even wanted to establish an autocephalous church, because his protege Mityai, as stated in the chronicle, even before his trip to Constantinople, donned bishop’s clothes and settled in the metropolitan court. Mityai was sent to Constantinople, but died on the way. In Constantinople, they nevertheless installed the Russian Archimandrite Pimen, who accompanied Mityai, as metropolitan of Kyiv. After Pimen's death, Metropolitan Cyprian was finally received in Moscow, and the Kiev metropolitanate was again united under the rule of a Greek metropolitan.
In turn, this state of affairs saved Rus' from brutal internal strife and wars with Lithuania, which was part of the Kyiv Metropolis. For example, the metropolitans of the late XIV - early XV centuries. Cyprian and Photius, appointed in Constantinople, more than once reconciled the Principality of Moscow with the Principality of Lithuania.
The question of a Russian metropolitan was raised again in the 30s and 40s. XV century, during the reign of Grand Duke Vasily II. Due to the fact that this attempt was not only crowned with success, but the Russian Church acquired autocephaly, we will dwell in more detail on this episode of Russian history.
In 1431, Metropolitan Photius, who was the guarantor of the power of Vasily II, died. Prince Vasily, obviously, at the prompting of his associates, because... at that time he was only 16 years old, he wanted to install his protege, one of the Russian bishops, as the new metropolitan. Zimin A.A. claims that the Russian clergy unconditionally supported the Grand Duke. Some bishops were even “robbed” by Vasily II’s rival Yuri of Zvenigorod for this support.
The choice of the Grand Duke fell on the Ryazan Bishop Jonah. However, they did not have time to send Jonah to Constantinople to take office due to the struggle for grand-ducal power that broke out in 1433 between Vasily II and Yuri of Zvenigorod, the so-called. Feudal War. Only in 1436, when Vasily II finally managed to briefly gain a foothold in Moscow and defeat the troops of the Zvenigorod prince, Jonah was sent to Constantinople, but it was too late.
In Constantinople, Jonah met the already appointed new Metropolitan of Kyiv, Isidore, a close associate of the Byzantine Emperor John VIII. Byzantium was living out its last days and, under the onslaught of the Turks, saw its salvation in the person of the Pope, who promised to gather a new crusade against the Muslims. However, dad had to pay something. The pope considered the conclusion of a church union between Catholics and Orthodox Christians to be a worthy payment for the help of the Western Catholic world. For this purpose, it was planned to convene a council in Florence in 1438 - 1439. Thus, as soon as Isidore arrived in Moscow, he had to leave for Italy almost immediately.
Arriving in Moscow in the summer of 1438, Isidore handed the Grand Duke a message from Emperor John VIII and Patriarch Philotheus with a request to release him to the Florence Council. After a long argument, Isidore was finally released.
At the council, the Orthodox delegation had to sign the union on the Pope's terms. Simeon of Suzdal, who accompanied Isidore, accused the Greeks of “love of money” and “love of gold,” obviously hinting at the bribery of many Greek hierarchs by the pope. And this is not surprising: judging by the descriptions of the once great Constantinople that have reached us, at that time the capital of the empire was extremely poor. “Pero Tafur wrote in 1437 about the sparse and amazingly poor population of Constantinople. In some areas it seemed as if you were in the countryside with thickets of wild roses blooming in the spring and nightingales singing in the groves.”
It is characteristic that the Russian Bishop Abraham, who was part of the retinue of the Kyiv Metropolitan, refused to sign a union with Catholics. For this, on the orders of Isidore, Abraham was sent to prison, where, a week later, he finally signed the union. By this behavior of the Russian bishop, who did not advocate for the salvation of Constantinople at any cost (even at the cost of selling his own faith), one can judge the legality of the conclusion of the union.
Having signed the union, the Metropolitan of Kiev and All Rus' went back to his metropolis to impose new Uniate orders there. On March 5, 1440, he sent out a District Message throughout his metropolis. In it, he only talked about the very fact of concluding the union, not talking about the terms of this agreement. Isidore advised Orthodox Russians and Catholics from among the Lithuanians and Poles: “to come to confession to the Latin priests and receive the body of God from them, and the Latins must also go to their church and listen to the divine services.” Thus, besides the fact that Catholics and Orthodox should go to the same church and celebrate the Sacrament of the Eucharist together, Isidore said nothing more about the conditions of union.
Before going to the usual place of stay of Russian metropolitans (Moscow), Isidore traveled for a long time around the rest of his metropolis - the Lithuanian lands. Here he met complete recognition and submission. This is explained by the fact that he was seen, as before, as an Orthodox Metropolitan of Kyiv, and not as a newly minted Uniate cardinal. After all, judging by the news that has reached us, during his trip to Lithuania, the Metropolitan never informed his flock of the conditions for concluding the union. Things were different in Moscow.
Simeon of Suzdalets and the Tver boyar Thomas, who accompanied Isidore to the council, fled as soon as they learned about the conditions for concluding the union. This is what Simeon himself writes: “I, having seen such untruth and great heresy, I ran away... and the ambassador I ran to Thomas... to Novugorod.” It would be natural to assume that rumors began to spread from Novgorod that Metropolitan Isidore had betrayed Orthodoxy and signed a union, subordinating Rus' to the Pope.
Amid these rumors, Isidore arrived in Moscow, as the chronicler says: “hiding the charm of the Latin heresy within himself.” It is worth assuming that Grand Duke Vasily, knowing the rumors about Isidore’s “hereticy” and wanting to check it personally, prepared a meeting for him, at which Isidore himself was supposed to give himself away. Thus, the chronicler emphasizes that after Isidore’s arrival in Moscow, the Grand Duke “commanded to serve him.” There he gave himself away by remembering the Pope at a church service instead of the Patriarch of Constantinople. Apparently, it was at this moment that “his madness was exposed by Abraham, Bishop of Suzdal, and by Vasily, clerk nicknamed Karl.” Most likely, Isidore initially did not plan in Moscow to disclose the terms of the union with Rome, but after such exposure he had to do it.
A local cathedral was assembled in Moscow. At it, the agreement on concluding a union with Catholics was considered and recognized as heretical. However, the Grand Duke and the Moscow people did not dare to declare Isidore a heretic. The prince was not yet firmly seated on his “table”, because the conflict with the Zvenigorod princes had not yet ended, and Muscovites were afraid to go against the protege of the Universal Church. Isidore was offered to renounce, he refused and was imprisoned in a monastery. Then the Grand Duke decided to turn directly to the Patriarch of Constantinople.
In his message, Vasily II resorts to the well-known opinion of Vladimir I about Western Christianity. He writes: “Latin... heresies (Vladimir - T.V.) are in no way heeded, ... spat upon in every possible way by the rejector." Thus, if the holy ancestor himself rejected Western errors (although Vladimir himself was baptized before the actual division of the Ecumenical Church into Catholic and Orthodox, but already in his time there were noticeable ritual and dogmatic differences between Rome and Constantinople), then Basil II simply does not have the right change this decision.
The message also says that Isidore brought with him from Italy “many strange and alien things from the Orthodox Christian faith.” And after consulting with local Russian bishops, the Grand Duke decided not to accept these innovations.
In conclusion, the Grand Duke, in order to avoid such troubles as in the case of Isidore, asks that “in our fatherland in Rustei, the land of the God-loving bishops of our fatherland... having chosen a man of goodness, a man of spirituality, of the Orthodox faith, let us appoint a metropolitan to Rus'.” And further: “it is in no way possible that our Orthodox Christianity will be separated from you until the century.” Thus, the Grand Duke asks the Patriarch for the right to independently elevate the metropolitan to the rank, i.e. about the so-called church autonomy, but not about autocephaly, which implies that the autocephalous church receives a whole range of different rights.
However, having learned that the Patriarch was also a Uniate, the Grand Duke did not order messages to be sent to Constantinople. Instead, it was decided to turn to the unquestioning authority in the Orthodox world - Holy Mount Athos - for advice.
In his message, the Grand Duke asks the monks of the Holy Mountain about what to do with Metropolitan Isidore, who tried to introduce Catholicism in Rus'. Vasily the Dark reminds, meanwhile, the Athonite monks of “the violence that formerly happened on the Holy Mountain from the nasty Latins.” This seems to be a completely deliberate and logical move by the Grand Duke: after 1204, when Constantinople was captured by the troops of the Fourth Crusade, the Athonite monks were oppressed for a long time by the Catholic crusaders. Naturally, there could not have been any approval of the prince’s policy against Isidore on the part of the Athonites.
Soon the Grand Duke received a response from Athos, in which his policy was indeed approved and supported. The message says: “... if you keep the faith immaculate, for this there is much reward for you in heaven.” Thus, Basil II received quite satisfactory confirmation of his policy towards the Latin heresy of Isidore.
During this correspondence, Isidore fled from the monastery. The Grand Duke, obviously, should have been pleased with his escape, since he did not know what to do with him next. He could not execute him, nor could he expel him, therefore, when Isidore fled, the Grand Duke did not send a chase after him.
In addition to all of the above, we can say that in Rus' by the 40s. XV century formed its own negative attitude towards the “Latin” West.
In Rus' since the 13th century. were familiar with the cruelties of the Catholic crusaders in 1204 in the conquered Byzantium. Even then, the Russian people began to adopt from the Greeks a negative attitude towards the “Latin faith.” In addition, the XIII century. was marked by the direct onslaught of the Catholic West on the Russian lands. Firstly, the mission of the Dominican Order in Rus', whose goal was the transition of Russians to Catholicism, ended unsuccessfully. In 1233, Catholic churches were closed almost everywhere in Rus'. Secondly, the onslaught of the crusaders, repulsed by Alexander Yaroslavich in the Battle of the Neva and on the ice of Lake Peipus, could well have threatened Novgorod and most of Northwestern Rus' with a forced transition to Catholicism. In addition, the middle of the 14th century. was marked by the onslaught of Catholic Sweden on the lands of the Novgorod Republic. The Swedish king Magnus wanted to baptize the Novgorodians into Catholicism and possibly include them in his own state. The Swedes treated Karelians and Izhorians very cruelly who refused to convert to Catholicism.
All this gave rise to the image of a Catholic in the minds of Russian people, who found its embodiment in the person of Pope Eugene, described by Simeon Suzdal: “the proud Pope Eugene’s evil faith and violence of the Latin faith... the madness of an evil-minded cunning and gold-lover and the destroyer of the Orthodox faith... from the Greek who has fallen away from the faith through the love of gold and the love of money, ... being proud and magnified, and through the cunning and teaching of the evil Pope Eugenias.” Of course, the Russian people could not want to unite in faith with such an “evil Pope.”
Thus, in the second half of the XIV - first half of the XV centuries. Russian princes did not raise the question of the complete independence of the Russian Church from Constantinople. They would be completely satisfied with the independent choice of a metropolitan in Rus', with his further elevation to the rank in Constantinople. However, Rus' did not want to be a “bargaining chip” in solving the problems of Byzantium, which is why Isidore and his innovations were not accepted. The Grand Duke needed an ally in solving the internal problems of Rus', like Metropolitan Photius, who died in 1431, and the current Metropolitan Isidore, who was absent for almost a year and a half and did nothing to solve these problems, advocated only for the salvation of Byzantium. The Grand Duke was not ready to break ties with the Patriarchate of Constantinople. As we found out, Vasily II only claimed the independent choice of a new metropolitan, and especially pointed out that only in unity with Constantinople could there be true Orthodox Christianity in Rus'. However, having learned that the patriarch was also a Uniate, there was simply no other choice but to self-proclaim the Russian Church autocephalous. Thanks to this policy of Vasily II, Rus' was for some time the only Orthodox power in the world. This, in the eyes of Russian scribes, made the Grand Duke what the Byzantine emperor had previously been - a defender of the Orthodox faith and a true Orthodox monarch. This is reflected in the chronicles; many chroniclers call Vasily the Dark nothing more than “tsar”
The unification of the country corresponded to the interests of the church, primarily the preservation of canonical unity between the dioceses. The Moscow princes put forward the most realistic program for the liberation of the country. They sought to first unite all the forces of Rus' under their leadership and only then challenge the Mongol-Tatar invaders. The Moscow princes achieved their goals through diplomatic agreements.
The first step demonstrating the church's support for the activities of the princes of Moscow was Metropolitan Maxim's transfer of his residence from Kiev to Vladimir (1302). This gave Vladimir enormous authority in the eyes of the Russian princes. Metropolitan Peter (1306-1328) began the construction of white stone churches in Moscow , which was the symbol of the capital city. According to his will, he was buried in Moscow. His canonization, which took place in 1339, contributed to a further increase in the authority of Moscow . In 1355, Metropolitan Alexei (1353-1378) moved his residence to Moscow and obtained permission from the Patriarch of Constantinople to be called Metropolitan of Moscow.
The metropolitans helped the Moscow princes in pursuing a unification policy and protecting Russian lands from Tatar raids. The most powerful weapon in the hands of the church was excommunication, cast on unruly cities . In the guilty city, churches were closed, home services and religious services were prohibited, which was a severe punishment for a people who were entirely religious. The result of excommunication was usually the indignation of the people against the local prince and his coercion to carry out the will of the metropolitan. Such punishment was applied by Metropolitan Theognost (1329-1353) to the Pskovites, who provided refuge to the Tver prince Mikhail Alexandrovich, who escaped from the Tatars, but thereby put all of Russia under the threat of a punitive raid. Metropolitan Alexy in the same way pacified and brought to submission to Moscow the Nizhny Novgorod princes Dmitry and Boris Konstantinovich, who were arguing over the throne.
The unifying role of the church was possible only under the condition of its internal organizational, doctrinal and cult unity . During the period of fragmentation in the country there were forces seeking to disrupt church unity in favor of their political interests . The first such attempt was made in 1302. The South Russian princes, dissatisfied with the transfer of the metropolitan’s residence to Vladimir, obtained from the Patriarch of Constantinople the establishment second Russian metropolis with its center in Kyiv, but six years later it was liquidated, since its existence contributed to princely strife. Subsequently, the idea of dividing the Russian metropolis continued to be used by opponents of the unification of Russian lands. In 1371, on the initiative of the Polish king, an Orthodox metropolitanate was created in Galician Russia, which came under his control, in order to eliminate the reason for the reunification of local residents with Moscow. In 1375, the metropolis was re-established with its center in Kyiv - already third in Rus'.
After the death of Metropolitan Alexy (1378), Rus' began church unrest, associated with the replacement of the Moscow Metropolitan See. Only in 1390 the question of the Moscow metropolitan was resolved - Cyprian took the throne. He managed to restore the unity of the Russian Church, annexing the Galich Metropolis to his jurisdiction.
However, in 1458, the Patriarch of Constantinople, Gregory Mammav, again established the Galich metropolis . The situation of the Orthodox in Galicia began to deteriorate. In 1483, the Polish king Casimir II forbade the construction of new Orthodox churches and the repair of old ones. Orthodox Christians were prohibited from holding high government positions. After the Union of Lubech, which united Poland and Lithuania into a single state, Orthodox schools and printing houses were closed, the Polish language was introduced, and Orthodox believers were subject to increased taxes.
Orthodoxy was turning into a “servile religion.” To protect their faith and culture, Orthodox people created fraternities- special organizations similar to craft workshops, whose activities were regulated by Western European city law. Schools and printing houses arose under the brotherhoods, where children were taught the Russian language, the basics of the Orthodox faith, and books were copied and printed. Theological schools arose under some brotherhoods, where they taught how to defend the Orthodox faith from Catholic propaganda with arguments. The first of these brotherhoods - in the name of St. Nicholas the Wonderworker - arose in 1544 in Lviv.
The Novgorod feudal republic, which sought to preserve political independence, caused considerable damage to the unity of the Russian church. Religious slogans were used by Novgorod separatists as the ideological basis for political ambitions. The most striking example of this is Strigolnik heresy. It arose around 1380 and spread to Novgorod and Pskov. Only a small part of the population joined the heresy, so to stop it, church exhortation was sufficient, in which the already mentioned Bishop Dionysius played the main role. By 1427 the heretical movement was finally suppressed. The Church prohibited state authorities from carrying out capital punishment, and heretics were subjected to corporal punishment and exile.
Later appeared in Novgorod heresy of the Judaizers. Its founder was the Jew Shariya. The followers of the heresy - priests and noble people - rejected the features of the Orthodox doctrine and cult, for example, the doctrine of the Trinity of God, the incarnation of Christ, rejected communion and baptism, and the need for the priesthood. Outwardly they maintained piety, and two heretics were appointed priests to the Moscow Kremlin cathedrals. They managed to involve government officials (clerk Fyodor Kuritsyn), representatives of the grand ducal family (Ivan's daughter-in-law Elena), and a number of representatives of the Moscow clergy into heresy. In 1490, the secret heretic Zosima became metropolitan. The heretics were supported by Ivan Sh himself. Only after the talented sermons of Bishop Gennady of Novgorod and Saint Joseph of Volotsk was a council convened, which excommunicated the heretics from the church and blessed the state authorities to execute them.
A strong blow to the unity of the Russian Church was the attempt to adopt Union of Florence, which took place under Metropolitan Isidore. At the Council of Florence in 1439, he was one of the most active supporters of the union and convinced the Byzantine emperor and several bishops to sign the final agreement, for which he received the title of cardinal and papal legate in the lands of Livonia, Lithuania, Poland and Russia. He promised the pope to annex these lands to the union, but failed. The Western Russian princes accepted Isidore only as an Orthodox metropolitan, and not as a papal legate. In Moscow, where information about the events of the Council of Florence arrived, he was greeted without honor, and a few days after his arrival he was placed under house arrest in the Chudov Monastery.
After the Byzantine emperor accepted the Union of Florence in 1439 and the enthronement of the Uniate patriarch in Russia, the desire for independence from the Patriarch of Constantinople began to grow. . The removal of Metropolitan Isidore without the permission of the patriarch was a bold step in this direction. Jonah was named the new Metropolitan of Moscow. In 1448 he was ordained to the rank of metropolitan by a council of Russian bishops. The Orthodox patriarchs were forced to recognize Jonah as metropolitan. The fact of recognition of Metropolitan Jonah and the independence of the Russian Church is the ordination of the Greek Joseph as Metropolitan of Caesarea Philippi, performed by Metropolitan Jonah on behalf of Patriarch Joachim of Jerusalem (1466). In 1453, Constantinople was conquered by the Turks and the patriarch began to need money. In 1465, the Metropolitan sent the Patriarch the first batch of financial assistance in the amount of 20 thousand rubles. Thanks to this, the question of the legality of the election and ordination of the Moscow Metropolitan by Russian bishops disappeared by itself.
The acquisition of independence by the Russian Church, the fall of Constantinople and liberation from the Tatar dictatorship contributed to the formation ideology “Moscow – the Third Rome”, finally formed by the 16th century. Already at the end of the fifteenth century. in the work of the Suzdal monk Simeon “A Word Selected from the Holy Scriptures against the Latin Church and the Legend of the Formation of the Eighth Latin Council and the Overthrow of Isidore the Charming” the following ideas are expressed: Rome deviated into heresy, and Constantinople fell under the rule of the Basurman; Moscow rejected the charming Isidore and remained the only independent Orthodox capital; the ruler of Moscow must become a tsar, since the Orthodox Church cannot stand without a tsar.
Despite such close interaction, relations between church and state during this period were not cloudless. Their interests clashed especially sharply when the state tried to limit the economic independence of the church. Having significant material resources, the church had enormous social influence, which was not always controlled by the state, which hindered the process of centralization.
The question of church property (especially fiefdoms– land holdings with peasants) was discussed in the church itself. Two currents emerged - the “Josephites” and the “non-possessors”.
The leader of the Josephites, Archimandrite Joseph Volotsky (the name of the movement comes from his distorted name), advocated the concentration in the hands of the church of large material resources, including land and peasants. In his opinion, rich monasteries should be places of education for church administration personnel, who were supposed to be selected from among the nobility. In addition, material well-being was necessary for the public service of the church and monasticism.
The monastery, founded by Joseph near Volokolamsk, owned several tens of thousands of acres of land and thousands of peasants. Monks entering the monastery, depending on their contribution, were distributed according to obedience and received different allowances. The largest donors received a full set of clothing for all seasons, good food, a separate house and a cell attendant. They were promoted quite quickly up the church-hierarchical ladder. They carried out obedience to the bishops, helping them with office work, performing administrative and management functions. Possessing large funds, the monastery of Joseph Volotsky fed the hungry during the famine years, the number of which reached 7 thousand people, maintained an orphanage and a shelter for the homeless, and a hospital.
Another group - non-covetous people - was led by Nil Sorsky. He believed that monastics should live in accordance with the gospel ideal of poverty, using exclusively the labor of their own hands. Nil Sorsky and his disciples created several small desert monasteries in remote places.
The Josephites and the non-covetous people had a fierce debate with each other. A number of works appeared in which non-covetous people (Maxim the Greek, monk Vassian Kosoy - in the world Prince Vasily Patrikeev) spoke sharply against the Josephites, calling them predatory wolves and robbers. Under the slogans of non-acquisitive people, several protests took place among peasants dissatisfied with the formation of serfdom.
The state objectively supported non-possessors. Already Ivan III, having conquered Novgorod in 1471, took into the treasury most of the lands that belonged to the Novgorod archbishop. At the council of 1504, he raised the issue of transferring church lands to the state, but faced powerful opposition from the clergy. Under Ivan the Terrible, at the Council of the Stoglavy, this question was opened again. Considering the strong position of the Josephites and fearing the peasant movement, inevitable due to the increase in peasant duties on state-owned lands, the government did not dare to take away church lands. The Council of the Hundred Heads only forbade monasteries and bishops from accepting land and peasants as donations, except by grant from the tsar.
The Council of the Hundred Heads of 1551 played an important role in strengthening church discipline and streamlining the cult. Its decisions prohibited the cohabitation of women and men in monasteries and the storage of vodka in monasteries. Responsibility for the discipline of the clergy was assigned to bishops, abbots of monasteries and archpriests. The cult was unified: icon painting was regulated, books were checked, and corrected samples were sent to dioceses, two-fingered baptism was introduced, and the direction of the procession against the sun. Severe measures were taken against buffoons and other “laugh-makers.”
The strengthening of the state and church order, the obvious growth of the importance of the Russian Church in the Orthodox world made it possible to raise the question of establishing a patriarchate in Russia. For the first time such a question was raised in 1586 by the son of Ivan the Terrible, Fyodor, before the Patriarch of Jerusalem Joachim, who came to Russia to ask for financial assistance. Having received help, Joachim promised to petition the Council of Patriarchs for this, but was in no hurry to fulfill his promise.
In 1588, Patriarch Jeremiah of Constantinople came to Russia for financial assistance. Answering a question from the Russian bishops, he said that the decision of the patriarchs on the introduction of the patriarchate in Russia had not yet been made, but he himself was not averse to becoming a Russian patriarch. He promised to get this decision approved. The Russian clergy set the condition that the residence of Patriarch Joachim be Vladimir. If it is necessary for the residence to be Moscow, then Metropolitan Job of Moscow must be consecrated as patriarch. He enjoyed great authority in Rus', and the clergy did not want to deprive him of the Moscow see without any fault on his part. Patriarch Jeremiah, not knowing the Russian language and local customs, agreed for Job to become patriarch.
Job's naming took place on January 10 (23), 1589, and on January 23 (February 6) the ceremony of his installation as patriarch took place. In 1593, the Council of Patriarchs in Constantinople recognized Job as a patriarch, and Russian bishops had the right to independently elect and ordain the primate of the Russian Orthodox Church. The Russian patriarch received fifth place in honor after the Patriarchs of Constantinople, Jerusalem, Antioch and Alexandria.
In connection with the establishment of the patriarchate, the structure of the Russian Church changed. Novgorod, Kazan, Rostov and Ryazan dioceses received the status metropolis, and Vologda, Suzdal, Nizhny Novgorod and Tver - archbishoprics. The establishment of the patriarchate played a significant positive role in further tragic events of Russian history.
The relationship between the Russian Orthodox Church and the state during the formation of absolutism
On February 21, 1613, the Zemsky Sobor elected Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov as Tsar and swore allegiance to him and his descendants. Mikhail Fedorovich, who was 16 years old at the time. On July 11, 1613, Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov was crowned king. A new dynasty reigned in Rus'. The time of troubles is over.
Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov was the son of Metropolitan (Patriarch) Filaret , who, after the murder of False Dmitry II, was captured by the Poles. In 1618, under the terms of the Deulin truce, he was returned to Russia and in 1619 he was elected patriarch. As the king's father, Filaret was his co-ruler and had enormous authority and influence on state affairs. The Patriarch was titled great sovereign on par with the king. His courtyard was not inferior in luxury to the royal one. The patriarch was helped to manage the affairs of the church patriarchal orders- court, palace, order of the patriarchal treasury. The orders were headed by special patriarchal boyars(secular officials). In the patriarchal diocese, the trial of the clergy and monastic peasants in civil and church matters belonged to the patriarch. Filaret took care of the expansion and protection of the canonical territory of the Russian Church. In 1620, a new Siberian diocese was created with its center in Tobolsk.
Patriarch Filaret died in 1633. His successors – Patriarch Joasaph (1634 - 1642) and Joseph (1642-1652) did not interfere in the affairs of the state . They were busy strengthening church discipline, checking and correcting church books, and only occasionally reminded the tsar of his responsibilities to protect Orthodoxy and the church. Therefore, when compiling a collection of state laws - the Council Code of 1649, the interests of the church were not taken into account. The church, along with private owners, lost the “white settlements” in the cities, it was forbidden to acquire new lands (even those granted by the sovereign), and a special monastic order was created to manage the monasteries, subordinate to the tsar. The jurisdiction of this order also included the trial of the clergy in religious matters. In secular matters, the clergy were tried in the Palace Prikaz. Only the clergy of the patriarchal diocese remained under the jurisdiction of the patriarch himself. Some bishops sought permission from the tsar to independently judge their clergy. Disorder and abuses flourished in the clergy court. The monastic order interfered in the affairs of the church, appointing and dismissing abbots and other officials of the monasteries.
After the death of Joseph, Metropolitan Nikon of Novgorod was elected patriarch. As a priest and abbot of the Novospassky Monastery in Moscow, Nikon became famous for the severity of his life, education, and courage in intercession for the offended. Like Filaret, Nikon actively intervened in government and sought to raise the authority of the church . Under him, the church received a large amount of land and peasants, the patriarchal court over the clergy was restored, and even the governors were ordered to judge secular matters in accordance with church rules.
One of Nikon's first acts was a decree on correcting church books and icons according to Greek models. , which, by his order, were brought from Ravenna, an Orthodox Greek diocese in Italy. Archpriest Avvakum, Nikon’s comrade in the circle of zealots of ancient piety, which operated in Moscow during Alexei Mikhailovich’s youth, spoke out against this. Avvakum argued that the Ravenna books were corrupted by the Latin heresy, and should be verified according to old Russian models. Councils of 1654 and 1657 supported Nikon's reforms and excommunicated Avvakum and his supporters from the church. Avvakum was exiled to Tobolsk, and his supporters began to flee to remote places. The troops sent against them found the supporters of Habakkuk (they began to be called Old Believers, since they advocated loyalty to the Old Russian rite) by being burned alive in log houses. In 1682 Habakkuk, who never ceased preaching his teaching, was burned by court verdict.
Patriarch Nikon, like Philaret, began to be called the Great Sovereign. The Tsar trusted him with important state affairs. For example, going to war with Poland (1654), he appointed the patriarch as ruler. In 1658 there was a break between the king and the patriarch . On July 10, 1658, Nikons voluntarily left the patriarchal throne and retired to the Resurrection Monastery, ordering Metropolitan Pitirim of Krutitsa to manage church affairs . The confrontation between the king and the patriarch continued for several years. Nikon did not want to give in; he accused the tsar of apostasy from Orthodoxy and even sent him a curse. In 1666, Patriarchs Nektarios of Jerusalem and Paisius of Alexandria arrived in Moscow. In alliance with the Russian clergy, they condemned Nikon for leaving the throne without permission and deprived him of his holy orders. On January 31, 1667, Joasaph II, archimandrite of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, was elected patriarch.
After the death of Joasaph II (1673), Joachim became patriarch. Under him, state taxes began to be collected from the clergy priestly elders, the abuses of secular officials associated with this stopped. The Monastic Order was liquidated. The trial of clergy returned to the hands of the bishops and the patriarch. However, the monasteries were forced to take over the maintenance of charitable institutions for old service people, orphans and widows. In government affairs, the church contributed to the abolition of localism.
5. Russian Orthodox Church in the Synodal period (XVIII - early XX centuries)
The Synodal period covers more than two centuries of the history of the Russian Orthodox Church. Its main content is the creation of a state religion in Russia and state regulation of church life. During this period, the Russian Orthodox Church turned into an element of the state apparatus, designed to provide ideological support for the government by introducing government ideology into the consciousness of the people, which did not always correspond to Christian morality and popular ideas about morality. The result of this situation was a decline in the authority of the church in the eyes of various segments of the population.
Church reform of Peter I
The goals of the transformation of the church by Peter I were to neutralize opposition sentiments and transform the clergy into a service class, mobilizing its enormous material resources (people and land estates) to serve the state.
Patriarch Adrian died in 1700. Peter did not convene a local council to elect a new patriarch, as was previously customary, but appointed locum tenens patriarchal throne. He became Metropolitan of Ryazan Stefan Yavorsky. A native of Ukraine, one of the youngest Russian bishops, he did not enjoy authority in the church hierarchy and relied entirely on the tsar. Having a man devoted to himself at the head of the church, Peter began reforms.
In 1701, the management of church and monastic property was transferred to a special Monastic Order headed by a secular official. In 1711 the Senate was created , received the functions of the highest judicial body, exceeding in importance other bodies of state and church administration.
The ideological preparation of the reform was carried out by Archbishop of Novgorod Feofan Prokopovich. He compiled "Spiritual Regulations" which became the basis of church reform. The “Spiritual Regulations” came into force on February 21, 1721 . On this day, the collective leadership body of the church was established - Spiritual College, renamed for euphony Holy Governing Synod(Greek – “collegium”). Under pain of defrocking and exile, Peter achieved the “conciliar” consent of the Russian hierarchs to this step. A message was also sent to the Orthodox patriarchs, which did not indicate the true position of the synod, which was completely controlled by state power, and contained promises to increase financial assistance to the Orthodox churches located in the Ottoman Empire. As a result, the patriarchs approved of Peter's decision.
The first president of the synod was Stefan Yavorsky . After his death in 1722, his successor was never appointed. The work was led by the synodavice presidents – Feofan Prokopovichi Theodosius Yanovsky. In May 1722, to strengthen government control over the activities of the synod, the position of chief prosecutor occupied by a military or civil official appointed by the king. The chief prosecutor's duty was to monitor the activities of the synod and prevent the adoption of decisions contrary to state interests. The chief prosecutor had the right to suspend decisions made by the synod that he considered incorrect and to report them to the emperor. In addition, his responsibilities included managing the synodal office. The first chief prosecutor of the synod was Colonel I. V. Boltin (1722 – 1725).
In 1717, Peter limited the number of clergy. He forbade everyone, with the exception of the emperor and a few senior government officials, from having house churches. Was determined state clergy. For 100 - 150 households there was one priest, one deacon and one psalm-reader. In one church, regardless of the number of parishioners, it was impossible to have more than two deacons and psalm-readers. The clergy who turned out to be “superfluous” were defrocked and enrolled in the tax-paying estates. The number of monks was also limited; it was forbidden to accept a new person into the monastery until one of the old monks died.
Further transformations of the Russian Orthodox Church
After Peter, the church policy of the government continued in the direction he had defined. Her next step was to deprive the church of economic independence. Under Catherine I (1726), a separate Economic Collegium for the management of church property , which was subordinate to the Senate. Under Anna Ioanovna, this commission was removed from the synod (1738). Elizaveta Petrovna appointed guards officers as managers of church estates. The final point in the matter of secularization was put by Catherine II, who listed church real estate as state property (1768). More than 1 million souls of peasants who belonged to the church, individual bishops, and monasteries were classified as “economic” and subordinated to the economic board. Of the taxes they paid, the government allocated some amounts to the church (usually 25-30%), less in difficult financial years. Thus, the church lost its independence in financial matters.
Under Alexander I, the possibility of the church’s influence on spiritual education and personnel training was limited . The first step in this direction was the new Charter of theological schools, adopted in 1808 on the initiative of M. M. Speransky. This charter practically subordinated religious educational institutions to the Ministry of Public Education. To manage them, a Committee of Theological Schools, and local leadership was carried out Conferences for the Promotion of Scholarship, which included persons of both clergy and secular rank.
Under Nicholas I, the influence of the church on personnel policy was limited - the appointment, dismissal and transfer of clergy. The dioceses were formed consistory, which limited the arbitrariness of local bishops. Consistories were formed from local clergy by appointment of secular authorities and were supposed to approve decisions of bishops on the transfer to another place, prohibition from serving or dismissal of clergy. In addition, they served as courts of appeal for the clergy and represented their interests in the synod. The clergy was turned into a special category of officials. Church ranks were equated to military ones: bishops to generals, priests to staff officers, deacons to chief officers.
The attitude of the Russian Orthodox Church and the state towards other faiths during the synodal period
The principle of the Russian government's religious policy towards non-Orthodox religions was religious tolerance. The only religion that the government and the church had a sharply negative attitude towards was Judaism. Only at the end of the 18th century. Jews appeared within the Russian Empire (before that they were prohibited from entering the country). The government has determined for them the Pale of Settlement and restricted movement. It should be noted that what happened at the end of the nineteenth and beginning of the twentieth centuries. Jewish pogroms had no religious overtones.
Missionary activity of the Russian Orthodox Church in the first half of the 18th century. took place mainly in the Volga region . The result of the sermons of Orthodox missionaries was the almost complete conversion of the Chuvash, Mordovians, and Mari to Orthodoxy. To organize the life of the newly baptized, a “newly baptized office” was set up, subordinate to the synod. Tatars significantly fewer were baptized. They already had a more highly developed culture and religion than other peoples of the Volga region. The forced imposition of Christianity caused uprisings of the Tatars and Bashkirs and served as the reason for their active participation in the peasant war of Emelyan Pugachev.
At the same time, Christianity was preached among the Kalmyks. Baptized Kalmyks switched to a sedentary lifestyle and moved to Russia, mainly to the Kiev region. The Kalmyk khans initially expressed dissatisfaction with the departure of their subjects. In 1720, the Russian government concluded an agreement with Khan Ayuk, according to which for each baptized Kalmyk, Ayuk received 30 rubles in silver. In 1724, Ayuk’s grandson Taishim himself was baptized and ordered the 5 thousand Kalmyks who wandered with him to be baptized. By 1730, the number of baptized Kalmyks reached 20 thousand. Subsequently, the mission among them became less successful, since the structure of their life was transferred to government bodies, whose officials often committed abuses. The result was the flight of the Kalmyks beyond the Urals and their return to traditional religion.
In Western Siberia, Metropolitan Philotheus of Tobolsk preaches among the Khanty and Mansivel. He baptized over 10 thousand people and built 37 churches. His associate, Archimandrite Theophan, preached Christianity as far as Kamchatka, where he founded the Assumption Monastery. In 1728, a mission led by Archimandrite Joasaph began working there. The missionaries baptized about 10 thousand Kamchadals and built three schools where they taught children reading, writing, drawing, and working with various tools. Metropolitan of Tobolsk Sylvester , who replaced Filofey acted with violent methods. As a result of complaints from the Tatars to the secular authorities, he was transferred to Suzdal.
In Eastern Siberia, for the successful spread of Christianity, the Irkutsk diocese was created in 1706. Innocent became its first bishop. He preached among the Evenks, Yakuts and Buryats. The mission among the Chukchi was less successful at that time.
From the second half of the 18th century. Attempts were made at missionary activity in the Caucasus. The mission was headed by a Georgian - Archimandrite Platon-Russian Archpriest Lebedev. For 20 years (1771-1791) the mission managed to baptize over 8 thousand Ossetians. Thanks to this, an obstacle was put in place to the spread of Islam, which was actively carried out by Turkish missionaries in the North Caucasus in the foreign policy interests of Turkey.
From the beginning of the nineteenth century. a new stage of missionary work began. It was associated with the appearance in 1789 at the Kazan Seminary departments for the study of languages of the peoples of the Volga region and Siberia. The same departments appeared in educational institutions of all Siberian dioceses. By the beginning of the nineteenth century. Enough personnel who spoke languages were trained, church literature was published, and special schools for foreigners appeared. Preaching methods have changed. Together with the preachers, teachers and doctors now went to the pagans, missionaries studied the beliefs of different peoples and seriously prepared for discussions with them, looking for common ground. Often sermons and services were conducted in national languages, which attracted pagans to Christianity. Bishop Nil of Irkutsk was a deep expert in Lamaism , preached Christianity among the Buryats. Bishop Innokenty of Kamchatka attracted many Yakuts to his side by conducting services in their language. Thanks to new methods of preaching, it was possible to spread Christianity among some of the Kyrgyz and Chukchi, and baptize over 33 thousand.
Abroad, in the 19th century, Christianity spread to Japan. The founder of the Japanese mission was Hieromonk Nikolai (Kasatkin), confessor of the Russian consulate. He translated the Gospel and liturgical literature into Japanese, and baptized three noble Japanese, including the Shinto priest Swaabe. They spread Christianity throughout the country. In 1869, the mission received support from the Russian government. Schools were opened V Tokyo and Hakodate. In 1880, Nicholas was ordained bishop of Japan and ordained the first Orthodox Japanese as priests. He ruled the Japanese diocese until 1912 and left a good memory.
A special place is occupied by Metropolitan Jonah (1390-1461), who put a lot of effort into proclaiming its independence from the Patriarchate of Constantinople. Having devoted his entire life to serving God and Russia, he went down in Russian history as an example of true patriotism and religious asceticism.
Betrayal of the Kyiv Metropolitan
In 1439, an agreement was signed in Italy between representatives of the Greek Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church. It went down in history under the name of the Union of Florence. Formally pursuing the goal of uniting the two leading directions of Christianity, it actually served to further separate them, since it assumed, albeit with some reservations, the primacy of the Pope over the Orthodox Church.
In Rus', this document, signed by the majority of representatives of the Byzantine delegation, was perceived as a betrayal and violation of the foundations of the Orthodox faith. When the main initiator of the conclusion of the union, Metropolitan Isidore of Kiev and All Rus', who by this time had become the papal legate (plenipotentiary representative), arrived in Moscow, he was immediately arrested by order of Grand Duke Vasily II and imprisoned in the Miracle Monastery, from where he then fled to Lithuania.
The struggle for the grand ducal throne
After his arrest and subsequent escape, the position of head of the Russian metropolitanate remained vacant due to a number of political and military upheavals that befell the state. In 1445, the Russian lands were seized by the grand-ducal throne, which broke out between Vasily II and Dmitry Shemyaka, which Khan Ulug-Muhammad did not fail to take advantage of. Hordes of Tatars invaded the Moscow principality and, having defeated a Russian squad in the battle of Suzdal, captured the prince himself. As a result, the grand-ducal throne became easy prey for his competitor.
The futile labors of the Ryazan bishop
In order to gain a foothold on the princely throne, Shemyaka needed the support of the clergy, and for this purpose he planned to make Bishop Jonah of Ryazan Metropolitan of Moscow. This choice was by no means a consequence of his personal sympathies, but the result of a subtle calculation. The fact is that Bishop Jonah twice previously tried to lead the Russian church, but both times he was unsuccessful.
In 1431, when he died, he laid claim to his place, but who personally elevated him to the metropolitan rank, gave preference to the Smolensk bishop Gerasim. Four years later, when, due to his death, the position of primate of the Russian church again became vacant, Jonah hurried to Constantinople for the patriarchal blessing, but was too late. He was preceded by the same Metropolitan Isidore, who, by signing the Union of Florence, basely betrayed the interests of the Orthodox Church.
Election of the Moscow Metropolitan
Thus, by installing Bishop Jonah as Metropolitan of Moscow, Shemyaka could well count on his gratitude, and therefore, on the support of the clergy he headed. Perhaps such a calculation would have been justified, but life made its own adjustments. In 1446, Moscow was captured by supporters of Vasily II, who had been overthrown by him, and soon he himself, ransomed from Tatar captivity for huge money, came to the capital. The ill-fated Shemyaka had no choice but to flee to save his life.
Nevertheless, the work he began was continued, and in December 1448, a church council meeting in Moscow officially elected Ryazan Bishop Jonah as Russian metropolitan. The historical significance of the event was unusually high, since for the first time a candidate for this post was approved without the sanction of the Patriarch of Constantinople, under whose subordination the Russian Orthodox Church had until then been. Thus, the election of Metropolitan Jonah can be considered as the establishment of its autocephaly, that is, administrative independence from Byzantium.
Researchers note that such a step was largely caused by the extremely negative attitude of the Russian clergy towards the leadership of the Byzantine church, which, by all accounts, committed treason at the Council of Florence. By doing this, it completely undermined its own authority and provoked the Russian episcopate to take previously unacceptable steps.
Monk from Kostroma region
Considering the role that Metropolitan Jonah played in the history of the Russian Church, it is worthwhile to dwell in more detail on his personality. The future bishop was born in the village of Odnoushevo, not far from Kostroma. The exact date has not been established, but it is known that he was born in the last decade of the 14th century. The name given to him at birth by his mother and father, the service landowner Fedor, has not reached us either.
However, it is known for certain that the future Metropolitan Jonah felt a desire to serve God from early childhood and at the age of 12 he took monastic vows in a small monastery near the city of Galich. After living there for several years, he moved to the Moscow Simonov Monastery, where he served as a baker.
Prophecy of Saint Photius
An episode described in his life, compiled shortly after the canonization of Metropolitan Jonah, who died in 1461, dates back to this period of his life. One day, Moscow High Hierarch Photius (who also later won the crown of holiness) visited the Simonov Monastery, and looking into the bakery, he saw the monk Jonah, who had fallen asleep from extreme fatigue.
The matter is, in general, an everyday matter, but the high priest was amazed that in a dream the young monk was holding his right hand (right hand) in a blessing gesture. Seeing future events with his inner eyes, the Metropolitan turned to the monks accompanying him and publicly declared that the Lord had prepared the young man to become a great saint and primate of the Russian Church.
It is difficult to talk today about how his ministry developed in subsequent years and the process of spiritual growth, since information about his future life dates back to 1431, when the monk, who so attracted the attention of Saint Photius, was installed as Bishop of Ryazan and Murom. Thus, the prediction made regarding him began to come true.
Threat of loss of the western part of the metropolis
However, let us return to the day when Metropolitan Jonah was elected head of the Russian Orthodox Church (1448). Despite all the historical expediency of what happened, the position of the newly elected primate was very difficult. The problem was that only bishops representing the northeastern regions of Rus' took part in the work of the church council, while representatives of the Lithuanian Orthodox Church were not invited, since the majority supported the Union of Florence.
The situation that developed in connection with this could have had very negative consequences, as it provoked the emergence of separatist sentiments in the west of the metropolis. The fear that the Orthodox, offended by the disdain shown towards their episcopate, would want to break away from Moscow and completely surrender to the power of the Roman pontiff, was well founded. In such a case, the secret and open enemies of the newly elected Metropolitan of Moscow and All Russia Jonah could well have placed full responsibility for what happened on him.
Favorable coincidence of circumstances
Fortunately, things soon developed in such a way that they excluded the possibility of such a negative scenario developing. First of all, Metropolitan Jonah played into the hands of the fact that the attempts of Metropolitan Isidore, who fled to Lithuania, to remove the western dioceses from the control of the Moscow Metropolis and persuade their population to accept the union ended in failure. He was prevented from doing this by the Polish king Casimir IV, who, by coincidence, broke off relations with Pope Eugene I during this period.
When he died in 1447, Pope Nicholas V became head of the Catholic Church, and King Casimir IV restored relations with Rome. However, even at this stop, the fugitive Isidore was unable to realize his insidious plans, since the idea of union found fierce opponents in the representatives of the Polish clergy.
Support of the Polish king
For this reason, and perhaps due to certain political considerations, Krakow decided to support Metropolitan Jonah and the establishment of autocephaly of the Russian Church. In 1451, Casimir IV issued a personal charter in which he officially recognized the legitimacy of the decisions of the Moscow Church Council of 1448, and also confirmed the rights of the newly elected primate to all temple buildings and other property of the Russian Orthodox Church located within the Polish state.
Grand Duke's message
Isidore still tried to intrigue as best he could and even turned to the Kyiv prince Alexander for military help, but no one took him seriously anymore. It was much more important for Metropolitan Jonah to achieve his recognition by Constantinople, since the attitude of the entire Orthodox world towards him largely depended on this. The initiative in resolving this issue was taken by the Grand Duke of Moscow Vasily II.
In 1452, he sent a message to the Byzantine Emperor Constantine XI, in which he very thoroughly outlined the reasons that prompted the Russian bishops to elect a metropolitan, bypassing the then prevailing tradition. In particular, he wrote that “it was not insolence” that forced them to neglect the blessing of the Patriarch of Constantinople, but only the extraordinary circumstances that had arisen at that time. In conclusion, Vasily II expressed his desire to continue to maintain close eucharistic (liturgical) communion with the Byzantine Church for the sake of the triumph of Orthodoxy.
In the context of new historical realities
It is important to note that autocephaly was not proclaimed by Metropolitan Jonah. Moreover, Prince Vasily II, a very skilled man in diplomacy, conducted the matter in such a way that Constantinople did not doubt his intention to revive its previous tradition of electing metropolitans pleasing to their patriarch. All this helped to avoid then unnecessary complications.
When the Byzantine capital was captured by the troops of the Turkish Sultan Mehmed the Conqueror, the new Patriarch of Constantinople Gennady II, elected with his permission, was forced to moderate his claims to spiritual leadership, and the undeclared autocephaly of the Russian Church was established by the very course of historical events. It received its legal justification in 1459, when the next Church Council decided that to elect a high priest, only the consent of the Moscow prince was necessary.
Glorification among the saints
Metropolitan Jonah completed his earthly journey on March 31 (April 12), 1461. The life says that immediately after his blessed dormition at the tomb, numerous healings of the sick began to occur, as well as other miracles. When, ten years later, it was decided to rebury the metropolitan’s remains in the Assumption Cathedral of the Kremlin, then, taken out of the ground, they did not bear any traces of decay. This indisputably testified to God's grace sent down to the deceased.
In 1547, by the decision of the next Council of the Russian Church, Metropolitan Jonah was canonized. The day of remembrance was May 27 - the anniversary of the transfer of his incorruptible relics under the arches of the Assumption Cathedral. Nowadays, the memory of St. Jonah, Metropolitan of Moscow and All Rus', is also celebrated on March 31, June 15 and October 5 according to the new style. For his contribution to the development of Russian Orthodoxy, he is recognized as one of the most honored religious figures in Russia.
ESTABLISHMENT OF METROPOLITAN JONAH
What was left to do? Wait for more favorable circumstances? But Russia had already waited a very long time and remained without a metropolitan for about seven years. Moreover, it was unknown whether such circumstances would come or soon would come in Constantinople. And so Vasily Vasilyevich decided on the last resort that he had left - he decided to convene all the bishops of his land and propose to them that they themselves appoint a metropolitan for Russia, and namely Jonah, Bishop of Ryazan, as he had been chosen even earlier. At the call of the Grand Duke, the bishops arrived in Moscow: Ephraim of Rostov, Avramiy of Suzdal, Varlaam of Kolomna, Pitirim of Perm, and the bishops - Euthymius of Novgorod and Ilya of Tver sent their letters, in which they expressed their consent to the installation of Jonah as metropolitan. The cathedral opened in the Church of St. Michael the Archangel, and in addition to the saints, many archimandrites, abbots and other clergy were present here. First of all, we turned to the rules of the holy apostles and councils and found that these rules not only do not prohibit, on the contrary, they command the bishops of a certain region to appoint a greater saint or metropolitan. They felt that in Russia this required the consent and blessing of the Constantinople Patriarch, and they referred to the fact that the Patriarch with his consecrated Council had long blessed Jonah to be Metropolitan after Isidore, when Jonah went to Constantinople. They recalled that in Russia, out of necessity, metropolitans had previously been installed by a Council of their bishops: Hilarion under Grand Duke Yaroslav and Clement under Izyaslav. As a result of all this, Jonah, Bishop of Ryazan, was appointed metropolitan on December 5, 1448. The very arrangement consisted in the fact that when Jonah performed the Divine Liturgy, the metropolitan omophorion was placed on him, and the great metropolitan staff was given to him - a symbol of metropolitan power. This was the first metropolitan appointed by his bishops in Moscow itself, while the previous two experiments were carried out in Kyiv.
The appointment of Metropolitan Jonah, although it had all the properties of legality, but as something out of the ordinary, it naturally should have attracted attention and aroused opinions and rumors. Therefore, the saint himself was aware of the need to clarify the meaning of this event for believers. As soon as he ascended to his cathedra, in his district letter to all Russian Christians, among other things, he wrote: “You know, children, how many years the Church of God has been a widow without a greater saint, without a metropolitan, and that is why much trouble and languor has been caused to the Christianity of our land. And Now, by the will of God, the bishops, archimandrites, and abbots with all the great divine priesthood of our land gathered at the sacred Council and, remembering the previous command of the holy king about us and the blessing of the holy Ecumenical Patriarch and the entire holy Ecumenical Council, they installed me as metropolitan according to the Divine rules and according to the thought of the master, my son Grand Duke Vasily Vasilyevich and his younger brethren - the princes, who, while Orthodoxy was in Constantinople, received both the blessing and the metropolitan from there."
Macarius (Bulgakov) Metropolitan of Moscow and Kolomna. History of the Russian Church. Book 3. Section 2. Chapter 1. http://magister.msk.ru/library/history/makary/mak3201.htm#number
“BUT THE AGREEMENT WAS NOT ACCEPTED IN MOSCOW...”
Under the long-suffering Prince Vasily Vasilyevich, an important event took place in the life of the Russian church. As is known, in 1439, at a council of Orthodox and Catholic clergy in Florence, the union of the Eastern and Western churches was accomplished. The Emperor and the Patriarch of Constantinople sought this union, hoping that when the church strife between East and West was destroyed, then the Pope and Western sovereigns would help the Greeks in their fight against the Turks. Perishing from the Turks, the Greek authorities were ready to make all sorts of concessions to the pope, and the union was therefore structured in such a way that the Greeks retained their church rites, but recognized all Catholic dogmas and the primacy of the popes. At the very time when preparations were being made for the council in Constantinople, it was necessary to appoint a metropolitan to Rus'. They appointed a Greek scholar, very inclined towards union, Isidore. Having arrived in Moscow, he immediately began to prepare for a council in Italy, went there with a large retinue, and there he became one of the most zealous advocates of union with Latinism. Kindly received by the pope, he returned to Moscow in 1441 and announced an agreement with Rome. But in Moscow the agreement was not accepted, since the Greeks themselves had been instilling hatred of Catholicism in Russians for centuries. Isidore was taken into custody and managed to escape, “went out without a door,” fled to Lithuania and from there moved to Italy. And in Moscow they decided to separate from the Patriarchate of Constantinople, which betrayed Orthodoxy to the pope, and henceforth to appoint a metropolitan for themselves by electing a council of Russian bishops. According to the new order, Ryazan Bishop Jonah was installed as metropolitan of Moscow. At the same time, in southwestern Rus', in the old Kyiv metropolis, special metropolitans were established, still appointed from Constantinople.
Platonov S.F. A complete course of lectures on Russian history. SPb., 2000 http://magister.msk.ru/library/history/platonov/plats003.htm#gl15
CHURCH AFFAIRS
With his last misfortune, as if reconciled with fate and in blindness showing more State foresight than before, Vasily began to assert his power and the power of the Moscow Principality. Having restored calm within it, he first of all gave the Metropolitan of Russia, whom we had not had for eight years due to the strife of the Constantinople Clergy and our own turmoil. Bishops Ephraim of Rostov, Avramy of Suzdal, Varlaam of Kolomna, Pitirim of Perm gathered in Moscow; and Novogorodsky and Tverskoy sent letters, expressing their agreement with them. They, to please the Sovereign, ordained Jonah as a Metropolitan, allegedly referring, as stated in some chronicles, to the blessing given to him (in 1437) by the Patriarch; but Jonah, in his letters, written by him at the same time to all the Bishops of Lithuanian Russia, says that he was elected according to the charter of the Apostles by the Russian Saints, and strictly reproaches the Greeks by the Florence Council. At least from that time we became completely independent from Constantinople in church affairs: which serves to the honor of Basil. The spiritual care of the Greeks cost us very dearly. Over the course of five centuries, from St. Vladimir to the Dark, we find only six Russian Metropolitans; In addition to the gifts sent to the Kings and Patriarchs, the foreign High Hierarchs, always ready to leave our fatherland, took, as likely as not, measures for this case, accumulated treasures and sent them to Greece in advance. They could not even have ardent zeal for the State benefits of Russia; they could not respect its Sovereigns as much as our fellow citizens. These truths are obvious; but the fear of touching the Faith and seducing the people by a change in its ancient customs did not allow the Grand Dukes to free themselves from the bonds of spiritual Greek power; the disagreements of the Constantinople Clergy on the occasion of the Florence Council presented Basil with the opportunity to do what many of his predecessors wanted, but were afraid of. - The election of the Metropolitan was then an important State matter: he served the Grand Duke as the main instrument in curbing other Princes. Jonah tried to subjugate the Lithuanian Dioceses to himself: he proved to the local Bishops that the successor of Isidore, Gregory, was a Latin heretic and false shepherd; however, he did not achieve his goal and only aroused the anger of Pope Pius II, who with an immodest Bull (in 1458) declared Jonah an evil son, an apostate, and so on.
Karamzin N.M. History of Russian Goverment. T.5. Chapter III http://magister.msk.ru/library/history/karamzin/kar05_03.htm
SWORD OF THE SPIRITUAL
If the Russian clergy, in the person of its representative, the Metropolitan, so greatly contributed to the exaltation of Moscow, then it equally powerfully contributed to the establishment of autocracy, for at that time the clergy, more consciously than other classes, could look at the aspirations of the great princes of Moscow and fully appreciate this aspiration. Imbued with the concepts of royal power, power received from God and not dependent on anyone or anything, the clergy therefore had to be constantly in a hostile attitude towards the old order of things, towards tribal relations, not to mention the fact that strife The princely ones were in direct opposition to the spirit of religion, and without autocracy they could not stop. That is why, when the Moscow princes began to strive for autocracy, their aspirations completely coincided with the aspirations of the clergy; we can say that along with the secular, grand-ducal sword, the spiritual sword was constantly directed against the appanage princes
