After the aggravation of the ecclesiastical situation in Africa, which as a continent is under the jurisdiction of the ancient Patriarchate of Alexandria, on the Sunday of the Publican and the Pharisee, February 13, 2022, another new bishop was ordained in Cairo, again African. This is Bishop Nectarius of Gulu and Northern Uganda.
The ordination of the new African bishop took place in the church “St. Nicholas ”in Hamzaoui, Cairo, by His Beatitude Patriarch Theodore II of Alexandria together with Archbishop Damian of Sinai and with hierarchs of the Patriarchate and the Greek Orthodox Church. In his speech at the ordination, Ep. Nectarios expressed his gratitude to the archbishop and other hierarchs, clergy and laity of the Greek Church, who helped him establish himself as a theologian and clergyman of the Orthodox Church. He also duly thanked Patriarch Theodore of Alexandria, who gave him paternal attention and trust, placing him in responsible service among the people of his native Uganda. For his part, the patriarch highlighted the exemplary and successful work of Archimandrite Nectarios and already as a bishop wished him to always have two important things in his work: inspired vision and faith to fulfill the command of Jesus Christ, following his sacrifice.
The bishop (secular name Nicolae Cabuye) was born in Uganda in 1982 to a family of fifteen Roman Catholics. He graduated from the Rizari Seminary in Athens, then the Faculty of Theology there, specializing in ecclesiastical law. He also graduated in management training in the United States, and finally on November 1, 2013 he was ordained a monk by Archbishop Jerome II of Athens, who named him the former Metropolitan of Pendapolis of the Patriarchate of Alexandria, St. Nectarios of Aegina. For the next few years he was ordained hierodeacon and hieromonk in Athens, and eventually became a clergyman of the Alexandrian Patriarchate in Africa. Meanwhile, his entire family and many others around them converted to the Orthodox faith.
In recent weeks, this is the third newly ordained bishop for Africa and the second African of the three. Which comes to show that the current personnel policy of the predominantly Greek hierarchy of the patriarchate has had its weaknesses. It was they who gave rise to the Moscow Patriarchate to create a schism among African clergy by organizing its own exarchate in Africa.
February 15/28, 2021 – Week of the Prodigal Son, the second preparatory to Great Lent. On the eve of this day, at the all-night vigil, the 136th psalm “On the Rivers of Babylon” is sung. Pravoslavie.Ru offersa theological and philological commentary on this hymn from Orthodox perspective.
The Great Forty Day is preceded by four preparatory weeks. During this period, the Lenten Triod offers many liturgical texts that prepare us for Great Lent. So, at matins on the Week of the Prodigal Son and then on the Week of Meat and Cheesefare, after singing the polyeleos psalms (134 and 135) “Praise the name of the Lord” and “Confess to the Lord”, Psalm 136 “On the rivers of Babylon” is also sung.
The Typicon, giving liturgical instructions at Matins on the Week of the Prodigal Son, instructs us to sing the third psalm to two polyeleic psalms: “On the rivers of Babylon” with red alleluia[1]. The Church Slavonic phrase “red alleluia” literally translates as “beautiful alleluia”[2]. It can be seen that the Typicon, in ordering to sing this psalm in this way, distinguishes it from the background of the previous two psalms.
The 136th psalm consists of nine verses. In the Church Slavonic texts of the Bible, it is titled with the words: “To David Jeremiah”[3]. In the Hebrew Bible, the psalm is not inscribed with the name of the author; in the Latin and Greek Bibles, the name of David is given[4].
There are various opinions related to the authorship of the 136th psalm. Strong nostalgia for the homeland, clearly expressed in it (verses 5-6), prompts us to think that the author was among those captives who, after the decree of the Persian king Cyrus in 538 BC, returned to destroyed Jerusalem.
The Church Slavonic text of the 136th psalm is as follows:
“David Jeremiah.
On the rivers of Babylon, there with gray hair and plakakh, always remember Zion to us. In the midst of his willows, our organs are obesih. As if there were questions about the captivity of us about the words of the song and leading us about the singing: sing to us from the songs of Zion. How shall we sing the song of the Lord in a foreign land? If I forget you, Jerusalem, let my right hand be forgotten. Cling my tongue to my larynx, if I do not remember you, if I do not offer Jerusalem, as if at the beginning of my joy. Remember, O Lord, sons of Edom, on the day of Jerusalem, who say: exhaust, exhaust to its foundations. Cursed daughter of Babylon, blessed is he who will repay you your recompense, even if you repaid us. Blessed is he who has and smashes your babies on a stone”[5].
Babylonian captivity
“On the rivers of Babylon” – the use of the plural in the phrase “by the rivers” (synodal translation) indicates various areas along the Tigris and Euphrates rivers with their tributaries and artificial canals, drawn by the Babylonians to irrigate their fields, where captive Jewish families were and lived[ 6].
The plural of the verbs “sedokhom and plakahom” refers to the communication of captives among themselves. Together they cry and empathize with each other, remembering Zion – in this case, the word is associated with Jerusalem or the Temple.
We are in captivity of sin – “on the rivers of Babylon”
“On verbiy… obesihom” – the Church Slavonic verb “obesity”, as well as the Greek “κρεμασθῆναι”, in the context of the 2nd verse is translated into Russian as “hung”.
“Our organs” – in the Greek text is the word ὄργανα. It was borrowed into the Church Slavonic text without translation. The word ὄργανα is translated into Russian as “instruments”, while reading the synodal translation, we can understand that we are talking about musical instruments: “we hung our harps”. Musical instruments hung from trees indicate that the Jews have put aside the fun.
The hymn “On the rivers of Babylon” from the first verses reveals the whole meaning of Great Lent. We are in the captivity of sin – “on the rivers of Babylon.” Like the Jews, we need to put aside the joy and think about our sins, remember Zion – the Kingdom of Heaven or Heavenly Jerusalem.
Zion songs
“As if there were questions about the captives of us about the words of the song and leading us about the song: sing to us from the songs of Zion”: if translated from Hebrew, this verse reads like this: “There those who captured us demanded from us the words of the song; and our oppressors are gladness: sing to us from the songs of Zion.”
“Questioner” – “ordered” or “demanded”. The captive Babylonians demanded that the Jews say to them a few words from the Divine songs and praises that they sang in Jerusalem[7].
“How can we sing the song of the Lord in a foreign land?” – so you can translate the fourth verse. “Why were they not allowed to sing in a foreign land? Because unclean ears should not have heard these mysterious hymns”[8] – St. John Chrysostom interprets this passage[9].
“Foreign land” is not just a country far from the holy city, it is an unclean pagan land (see: Ezek. 4: 13-14), which gave “unclean bread”.
St. John Chrysostom calls with special care to observe oneself and build a real life in such a way that one does not become captives, alien and excommunicated from the father’s city[10]. “We will all listen to this and learn from it. Just as when they were deprived of the city, then they began to look for it, so many of us will experience the same thing when on that day they will be deprived of the mountainous Jerusalem” [11], – this is how St. John comments on the 136th psalm.
Jerusalem – the beginning of joy
“If I forget you, O Jerusalem, let my right hand be forgotten. Cling my tongue to my larynx, if I don’t remember you, if I don’t offer Jerusalem, as if at the beginning of my joy”: the fifth and sixth verses are built on the principle of an oath: “If I forget, let my right hand forget me; if I don’t remember, let my tongue stick to the palate.” The author of the psalm is ready to be punished for breaking his vows, that is, if he does not set Jerusalem as the beginning of his joy, may the Lord take away from him the opportunity to play the harp with his right hand, and forbid his tongue to sing the songs of Zion.
And the singing of this psalm in the preparatory period for Great Lent calls us to place Jerusalem, the Kingdom of Heaven, as the beginning of our joy.
Sons of Edom
The psalmist, turning to God, prays to the Lord to remember the evil deeds of the Edomites that they committed during the destruction of Jerusalem in 587 BC. (see: Obd. 1: 10–15): “Remember, Lord, sons of Edom, on the day of Jerusalem, saying: exhaust, exhaust to the foundations of it.”
The Idumeans, a kindred people to the Jews, have always been hostile to their brother and in all the sad events of his life they took an active and evil part (see: Am. 1: 11).
And the “day of Jerusalem” is the day when Jerusalem was completely destroyed, the city was deprived of defensive walls and towers, literally “undressed” (Is. 3: 17).
Daughter of Babylon
“Babylon’s accursed daughter, blessed is he who will reward you with your recompense, which you have rewarded us” – in the Russian translation of the psalm, the daughter of Babylon is called a devastator. The Greek text calls her “unfortunate” (ταλαίπωρος [12]), hence the word “cursed” – unhappy, miserable [13].
The unsightly expression “blessed is he who takes and breaks your babies against a stone,” according to some comments on the Psalter, points to the coarse and inhumane features of the Israeli religion. No matter how we treat the words of the psalm, the psalmist, apparently, does not wish death to all the innocent children of Babylon, but asks the Lord to remember quite specific destroyers what they did to Zion.
“Infants” – the image of the beginnings of petty allowances and annoyances that can grow to ineradicable passions
And in the spiritual life, many things can be compared with babies – this is an image of the beginnings of petty allowances and annoyances that can grow into deep, ineradicable passions and vices. Now they seem so small and defenseless that it is somehow even cruel to resist them [14]. But it is precisely at this initial stage that it is necessary to fight them – “blessed is he who breaks them against a stone.”
***
The 136th psalm, which is sung only three times a year during the all-night vigil during the preparatory weeks, shows us the great disappointment of the Jewish people, who lost their holy place – Jerusalem. The text also encourages us to think about the price of those great blessings that the Lord will give us.
Without any doubt, the sadness and tears of the Jewish captives should inspire us to cherish all the gifts sent from God.
Notes:
[1] Typicon, siest Ustav. M.: Publishing Council of the Russian Orthodox Church, 2002. S. 825.
[2] Dictionary of the Russian language of the XI-XVII centuries. Issue. 8. M., 1981. S. 19–20.
[3] Psalter. M., 2013. S. 367.
[4] Explanatory Bible, or Commentaries on all the books of the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament, edited by A.P. Lopukhin. M., 2009. S. 512.
[5] Psalter. S. 367.
[6] Explanatory Bible, or Commentaries on all the books of the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament, edited by A.P. Lopukhin. S. 513.
[7] Razumovsky G., archpriest. Explanation of the Holy Book of Psalms. M., 2002. S. 822.
[8] St. John Chrysostom. Conversations on the Psalms // St. John Chrysostom. Creations. T. 5. Book. 1. St. Petersburg, 1899, p. 451.
[9] Ibid.
[10] Razumovsky G., archpriest. Explanation of the Holy Book of Psalms. S. 822.
[11] St. John Chrysostom. Conversations on the Psalms // Creations. T. 5. Book. 1. S. 451.
[12] Liddell H.G., Scott. R. Greek-English Lexicon. Oxford, 1996. P. 1753.
[13] Dictionary of the Russian language of the XI-XVII centuries. Issue. 12. M., 1987. S. 320.
[14] Lewis K. Reflection on the Psalms // Lewis K. Collected Works. T. 8. M., 2008. S. 334.
Authors: Professor Larisa Marsheva, Petr Gramatik, February 26, 2021, https://pravoslavie.ru/137624.html (in Russian).
The unique document/artifact found in Plovdiv (Bulgaria) – a micro-copy of the American Constitution engraved on a metal (aluminum) plate, which dates back to the era of the First Constitutional Period in the Ottoman Empire, about which you will find more detailed information below:
In 1865, the movement of progressive Turkish intellectuals “Yeni Osmanlar” /Young Ottomans/, later called “Young Turks”, was founded, whose ideas were later developed and implemented by Kemal Ataturk, the father of modern Turkey. In Paris, the core of the movement was supported by the wealthy emigrant and former minister Mustafa Fazli Pasha. Among its members are Ibrahim Shinazi, Namak Kemal (1840-1888), Zia Pasha (1829-1880) – the founders of modern Turkish literature. In Paris, Shinazi collaborated with Lamartine. In 1860, on October 22, he and Agia Effendi published the first private newspaper, Terjumani Ahval, and later in 1862, Tasfiri Esphar. Only in Istanbul between 1867 and 1878. The periodicals numbered 113. The newspapers explained concepts and new technical terms such as a constitution, a constitutional monarchy, a parliament, or even a republic. The republican idea is not alien to them. Namik Kemal’s close friend Mustafa Rashid wrote: “N. Kemal Kemal was not only against tyrannical power, but an enemy of the sultan, of monarchism. Members of the movement needed information from France and the United States on the latest developments in democracy in theoretical and practical-political terms – censorship in the Turkish Empire has intensified after the translation and publication in Turkey of the Communist Manifesto and the Declaration of Human Rights ”. Imperial censorship, especially the censors of the “red” (bloody) Sultan Abdul-Hamid II, even banned the publication of the chemical formula of water (H2O), as someone could read on it so much “Hamid II is a zero”. The opposition is forced to be very careful and work in secret. It is normal to be a Young Turk, a Freemason and a follower of Sufism for the period described. The Bektashi considered Freemasonry a secret society of initiates, similar to theirs (both persecuted by the sultan’s rule) and established close ties, especially between the Melami Order and the Young Turk Freemasons in the Balkans. Regiment Sadak Bay (1908, Monastir) reports that a large number of its officers in Macedonia are members of this dervish order. Also the founder of the Ottoman Society for Freedom in Thessaloniki (1906) Bursali Tahir is dedicated to the Order of Sufis Melami. The first lodge in Turkey was founded in 1721. Mahmud I in 1748 banned Freemasonry. In 1826, Mahmud II banned the Bektashi order and disbanded the janissary corps. In 1839, the Grand Vizier Mustafa Rashid Pasha carried out reforms and restored Freemasonry. The founder and first sovereign commander of the Scottish ritual in Turkey (1864) was Prince Abdulhalim Pasha, brother of the governor of Egypt and uncle of the successor governor Ismail Pasha. In 1869, the Supreme Soviet of Turkey was recognized by the American jurisdiction of the South. Turkish historian Abdul Kadim Zalum believes that Masons were Ali Pasha, Fuat Pasha, Midhat Pasha and Talaat Pasha.
Valuable American diplomatic documents can be found in the correspondence with the Congress, concerning the Masonic intervention in the coup d’etat in the Ottoman capital of 1876 (cf. No. 305 / 30.05.1876, – In: Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, transmitted to Congress with Annual Message of the President. December 4, 1876, Washington, 1876, pp. 568-569; No. 307 / 17.06.1876, – In: ibid., pp. 572-573; No. 310 / 10.08 .1876, – In: ibid., Pp. 578-582, No. 311 / 01.09.1876, – In: ibid., Pp. 583-584, No. 312 / 13.09.1876, – In: ibid., Pp. 584-586). In 1876, Midhat Pasha, with the help of the Liberal reformist Young Turkey, succeeded in removing Abdul-Aziz from the throne, and a few days later the sultan committed suicide. His nephew Murad V ascended the throne, and liberal journalists Zia Pasha and Namik Kemal became private secretaries of the new sultan.
In 1861, a Protestant line in Constantinople attempted direct intervention in the church struggles of the Bulgarian people (for the attitude of Protestants to the church struggle in addition to the notes in the Missionary Herald; for Long’s opinion, see Constantinople, XIII, 36). September 1, 1862, and the special studio of J. Clark), about which Manyo Stoyanov gives us important information. Just when the situation of the Bulgarians was most difficult, the bishop leaders were sent into exile, the Uniate movement, supported by the Turkish government, was advancing, and Russian representatives supported the Greek Patriarchate, the branch of the Evangelical Alliance sent an delegation to Constantinople. (the delegation consisted of Dr. Yul. Menlingen, Sultan’s doctor, Armenian Protestant pastor H. Sahadjian and Dr. El. Riggs), which met with Bulgarian leaders Todor Burmov, Nikola P. Tapchileshtov and Dr. Zah. Strumski and offered them to turn for help to the union, which in turn would insist on the governments of the Protestant states in Constantinople, in the first place before the British, to intercede before the High Gate to settle the Bulgarian-Greek dispute.
For the Bulgarians at that time, help, wherever it came from, was expensive “, as Burmov writes, and therefore the three Bulgarian leaders submitted a petition to the Evangelical Union, signed by 33 Bulgarians and two bishops, in which they set out their demands in the struggle and prayed for support. Based on this request, the Constantinople branch of the union wrote to the President in London K. Erdlis, who spoke on the issue with the British Foreign Secretary John Russell and the Turkish representative in London Musuris, and wrote to the English representative in Constantinople H. Bulver. Diplomatic representatives and other Protestant countries in Constantinople (the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden) were also mentioned, who took an interest in the issue and some of them spoke to Ali Nasha, but nothing followed. The English representative Bulver expressed his sympathy for the Bulgarian people to the Bulgarian representatives, but stated that he was uncomfortable interfering in Turkey’s domestic policy. His colleagues – representatives of other Protestant countries – showed solidarity with him. Bulver and other diplomats may have realized that the missionaries’ hopes were in vain, especially after the collapse of the union. For example, Dr. St. Chomakov, who was in Constantinople at the time, suggested that the Bulgarian church be organized as Protestant only on two principles: 1) the Bible as the only rule of faith and morals and 2) complete separation. of the church by the state. Moreover, according to Clark’s study, a few days before Ilarion Makariopolski was sent into exile, Riggs had entered into written negotiations with him to form a union with the Protestants because he had been told that Hilarion in order to escape exile was ready to enter into a union with any church. To Riggs Hilarion’s proposal to sign a declaration that the Bulgarians agreed to accept the Bible together with the evangelical churches as the only obligatory rule for the faith and the church system, Hilarion replied (…): the new testament together with the rites and customs that have existed in our Bulgarian church since ancient times.” Clark claims this on the basis of Riggs’s diary, which we have not seen, and since there are no Bulgarian and other foreign sources, we can neither dispute nor confirm what he said). Plovdiv was the second target point of the Sobor missionaries in European Turkey. As a city and the center of a rich area with a vigilant Bulgarian population, according to the plans of the missionaries, it was to become a center of Protestantism in southern Bulgaria.
In the spring of 1859, American congressional missionaries William Meriam and James Clark arrived in the city. Their first job was to learn the local languages - Clark started studying Bulgarian language and Meriam – Turkish language; he also intended to work among the Turks. One of the brightest phenomena of the Bulgarian Revival is the construction of a network of schools covering all lands inhabited by the Bulgarian nation. Protestants are vigorously involved in this process and raise the level of education, setting a model for Bulgarian schools to strive for and to gain experience from. The first Protestant school was opened by them in Plovdiv in 1860. Remarkably, this educational institution appeared three years before one of the most prestigious schools of the time – the Robert College in Constantinople, founded by Christopher Robert, an American industrialist and Cyrus Hamlin – American professor, theologian and missionary -in 1863 in Constantinople. The Protestant schools in Shumen (1862), Stara Zagora (1863), Bansko (1867), Samokov (1869), Ruse (1873), Troyan (1880) were not late either.
The contribution of American colleges, churches, schools and missions in teaching their graduates in particular, and enslaved Ottoman subjects in general, the principles of the Declaration of Independence and the American Constitution, especially among the Bulgarian people, is indisputable.
At the moment, a huge bibliography on the subject has been collected from several years of personal research, as well as a detailed analysis of the Young Turks with the Masonic lodges in Paris and Geneva, based on Ottoman archives in Istanbul’s university and palace libraries. cantonal and university libraries in Switzerland. It can be said that there is information about parallel Masonic archival units with correspondence written on metal plates and reliable information about the use of microscopy in Masonic circles in the 19th century, to shed light on the large-scale periodicals of Ottoman immigration in Geneva, contacts between Geneva Freemasonry and Bulgaria (then part of the Ottoman Empire) in the State Archives of Geneva and in the Musée Maçonnique Union-et-Travail de Genève, the toolkit for the technical production (as well as their subsequent reading) of similar unique tablets in the Patek Philippe Museum – Genève.
For completing the research on that artifact finding a scientific or an institutional academic, public or private support and assistance, are still needed and systematically sought, opinions and possible interest in working together on this project for scientific processing and conservation of the artifact with the exclusive “edition” of the American Constitution text.
Following a request from the Government of Ukraine for emergency assistance due to the threat of further escalation, the European Commission is coordinating the delivery of essential supplies to support the civilian population via the EU Civil Protection Mechanism. This is to support Ukraine`s preparedness efforts for all possible scenarios.
Commissioner for Crisis Management, Janez Lenarčič said: “The EU stands in full solidarity with the Ukrainian people, also with concrete support. Once Ukraine asked for our assistance, we have been working around the clock to help the authorities. Immediate civil protection assistance is on its way. Already Slovenia, Romania, France Ireland and Austria have made the first offers and I expect more assistance in the coming days from other EU Member States.”
Salt is a part of life. Without it, a number of processes in the body are unthinkable. Salt and mineral salts are actively involved in the work of the nervous and cardiovascular systems. They are responsible for transmitting nerve signals that drive muscles and the heart. But one of the biggest mistakes modern people make in their diet is overdoing it with salt.
Salty foods can be a real temptation. It is possible to eat salty as intrusively as to get hungry for sweets. But if you overdo it with salt, there is a reason for it. The hunger for salt is not accidental and it has its possible explanations.
Attention! The article is informative. If you are very hungry for salt, consult a doctor.
What are the possible reasons why you eat salty so much?
Dehydration
If you do not drink enough fluids and your body is dehydrated, even mild, it will try to encourage you to eat more salty foods. This is because it activates a natural mechanism for retaining the few remaining fluids in the body that it needs to perform basic functions. To control this urge, drink more fluids and reduce salt in your diet.
Electrolyte imbalance
When there is an imbalance of important electrolytes in the body, you may experience a strong unexplained hunger for salt. In this way, your body tries to restore the amount of salt it needs so that it does not lose the electrolyte balance needed for vital functions, such as maintaining muscles and the heart.
Pregnancy
During pregnancy, you often have strange cravings for foods that you haven’t had enough of before. If you are pregnant, it is likely that your pregnancy is at the root of a strong hunger for salt.
Stress
Eating under stress is a common problem. High levels of stress can provoke hunger, which is difficult to control and is focused on various foods, including very salty.
What can you do to control your cravings for salt?
Eat citrus fruits
Citrus fruits and their juice have the ability to suppress the desire for salty. They also dull the hunger for jam, which is an added bonus. The reason they are so effective is that they contain many minerals in their composition. Citrus acids suppress salt cravings and balance the body’s pH, which is directly related to the presence or absence of salts in the body.
Herbs
Excessive sprinkling of your dishes with more herbs and spices satisfies the senses and reduces the desire for additional salting of food. Instead of adding more salt to your recipes, make them even richer in flavors and aromas with the right spices.
Vinegar
Vinegar contains almost no calories. It also does not contain sodium. This makes it suitable for all diets. Acetic acid has the property to suppress the hunger for salt, to balance the pH in the body and to give a wonderful taste to dishes.
Garlic
Garlic is great because it has antibacterial and anti-inflammatory properties. It fights bacteria and microbes in the body, stimulates the immune system thanks to its antioxidants. Garlic gives a spicy and aromatic taste to dishes, which reduces the desire for additional salting.
Carrots
Carrots are very rich in minerals. They are suitable for controlling blood sugar, cholesterol, contain very few calories, which makes them great for dieting. The fiber in them helps to prolong the feeling of satiety and reduces the desire for salt.
The ancient Christian city of Feodosia, sometimes called Theodosia, in today’s Simferopol and Crimean dioceses is a resort town in present-day southern Ukraine, the Autonomous Republic of Crimea. Feodosia, in Crimean Tatar: Kefe, is located on the Black Sea coast, 80 km. west of Kerch. It was the center during the Middle Ages of the principality of Theodore (or Gothia, Greek: Γοτθία) – a small principality in the southwestern part of the Crimean peninsula with the capital city of Mangup, which existed from 12 to 15 century. Under the name Kefe, the city became one of the main Ottoman ports in the Black Sea, remaining under Ottoman rule until 1783, when Crimea was conquered by the Russian Empire. In 1802 it was officially renamed Feodosia, a Russian adaptation of the Greek name Theodosia.
One of the oldest streets in the city is Gramatikovskaya – Voykova – Ukrainska. Emanuil Emanuilovich Gramatikov once lived there – a famous Theodosian businessman and the ancestor of the Crimean noble family Gramatikovi. He owned a fish processing plant, many lands, gardens, even post offices, housing and hotel buildings. In Dec. In 1829 the entrepreneur died of the plague. Because he had no children, he bequeathed all his property worth about 5 million rubles to Theodosia. During Emanuil Emanuilovich’s lifetime, the street on which he lived was nameless. But at the end of the 19th century, grateful Theodosians named it after the patron. With the advent of Soviet rule, Gramatikovskaya Street was renamed after the Russian revolutionary from Kerch, Peter Lazarovich Voikov, who died in 1927 from a White Guard bullet. The street kept this name for more than eighty years, but in the autumn of 2003 it changed its name to “Ukrainian”. On the same street was the home of the marine artist I.K. Aivazovski, who in his work, along with the landscape, repeatedly turned to the genre of portraiture. This side of the artist’s work is little studied and poorly described. The portraits of IK Aivazovski in their picturesque dignity are significantly inferior to the marine works of the maestro, but are undoubtedly of historical and memorial interest. In different years the artist painted self-portraits, portraits of relatives and friends, friends and acquaintances, sometimes by special order from certain institutes, organizations and societies, but most often for his own and his family’s memory. These works, mainly concentrated in the collection of the city art gallery, present us strict and businesslike male portraits, such as: “Portrait of A.I. Kaznacheev” 1847 (canvas, oil, 56×46), senator, leader of the nobility in the Tauride province; “Portrait of the poet-fable writer I.A. Krylov” 1894 (canvas, oil, 71×62); “Male Portrait” 1899 (canvas, oil, 47×47), “Portrait of the Artist’s Son-in-Law” 1894 (canvas, oil, 61×48), as well as a group portrait “I.K. Aivazovsky in a friendly circle” 1893 (canvas, oil, 56×81). The latter depicts sitting at the table: I.K. Aivazovsky (with his back to the viewer), to his left G.A. Durante, I.S. Gramatikov, M.H. Lampsi. Stands from left to right: I.V. Durante, K.P. Zioni, A.S. Gramatikov, N.S. Gramatikov. The portrayed are united by a common situation. Some biographical information about those depicted in this portrait can be found in the library of rarities (unique) “Tavrika” in Simferopol. Who were these neighbors of Aivazovsky, so he painted three of them in his unique group portrait?
An excerpt from an article by V. Geiman from the book “Theodosia in the Past”, published in 1918 on the Grammatikovi Charitable Capital, reads as follows: Theodosia, it is appropriate to remember these bright benefactors, because of the carelessly drawn up will, on which swords are now sharpened, spears are broken, and most often endless complaints, petitions and protocols are drawn. We mean Emanuil Gramatikov and his wife Smaragda, who left for charity all their property worth not less than five million rubles. The Gramatikovi family played the role of the leading family in Theodosia throughout the nineteenth century, and only in recent years has this family begun to disappear from the public arena in our city. ”
The ancestor of this family in Russia (in Theodosia) was Emanuil Emanuilovich Gramatikov, author of the said will.
His ancestors once moved to Thessaloniki from Serbia, but is of Bulgarian origin, because a branch of the genus, living until the 20s of the 20th century in Edirne and Aegean Thrace (present-day Northern Greece), due to his Bulgarian identity moved to the Kingdom of Bulgaria (to this day on the territory of the Republic of Bulgaria) with the biggest wave of refugees after the Mollov-Kafandaris agreement, and in some documents preserved in the Theodosian Quarantine Archive, Emanuil Gramatikov is called not “Greek”, not even “Serb”, but “Slav”.
He arrived in Russia in 1795, responding to an invitation to the inhabitants of what was then Ottoman Greece to colonize the southern Russian coast. Gramatikov arrives in Akhtiar (Sevastopol), where he begins heavy preparations for naval service. From Sevastopol he moved to Theodosia, where he served until 1809 as a translator at the customs, and then as a clerk in the office of the central quarantine office.
The quarantine cases also contain evidence that Gramatikov was accused of opening a fish processing plant, but apparently without significant consequences, because after the plague epidemic of 1811-1812 his cases were extremely successful and he established strong ties. in the field of supply for the fleet. Emanuil Gramatikov brought from Greece his two brothers, Stavro and Georgi, together with whom he expanded his business. , abandoning in droughts their possessions even at the whim of fate.
Gramatikov died suddenly, of the plague – his death on December 14. 1829 in Simferopol, where he was buried in the Greek church. His wife, Smaragda Dmitrievna, who according to the will was a lifelong user of all property, died in Theodosia on August 19, 1870 and was buried in the Christian cemetery. Her grave was searched several years ago and a massive marble monument has been erected there today. Here it is proposed to transfer the ashes of her husband, a petition for which was presented to His Eminence Dmitry, Archbishop of Tauride and Simferopol.
Representatives of the Gramatikovi family, as already mentioned, have been, for almost 90 years, taking the most active part in the public life of Theodosia. There are no children left after Emmanuel and Emerald. Georgi’s heirs by daughter adopted other surnames, and this name is maintained only by the descendants of Stavro. His sons, Alexander and Ivan, have long held a leading position in the family of Theodosia.
Ivan Stavrovich was the first justice of the peace of the Theodosian District, and was also elected to the First National Assembly on February 18. 1869 and until the dismissal, ie. until 1892, he was twice elected chairman of the World Congress.
Alexander Stavrovich was a member of the Zemstvo, and later from 1884 to 1910, and its permanent chairman, being the main inspirer of the zemstvo and county public life in general for 25 years. His memory is honored by the zemstvo by assigning his name to the zemstvo hospital in the village of Sedem Kladentsi (Sem – Kolodezei), placing his portrait in the hall of the zemstvo assembly, etc. For more than 20 years he was also the trustee of the Grammar Charitable Capital , running it along with another local veteran, Il. Paul. Tamara, also a descendant of a Greek settler and former mayor of Theodosia, Ivan Tamara (former mayor, 1820-1825). The last years of the rule of A. Gramatikov and I. Tamara provoked the beginning of this movement, which is reminded of in 1918 by the incessant newspaper columns, court offices and district administrations and other institutions.
The fertile ground for the creation of all sorts of lawsuits and lawsuits was prepared, unfortunately, by the testators themselves, who incompletely formulated their thoughts on the details of the management of their millions of capital, although this testament is a model of true Christian feat and testifies to the noble designs of these remarkable benefactors.
The will was drawn up in 1825, and was presented in court in 1830 and came into force for the implementation of the charitable plans of the Grammatikovi in 1870.
Thus, by handing over all their property, amounting to 18,000 tenths of land in Theodosia County, including homes and estates in Theodosia, post offices, etc., the testators admitted a significant ambiguity, which provoked later endless disputes.
As can be seen from the text of the will, the supreme supervision of capital affairs was entrusted to the “Greek honorary society”, namely, the rights and obligations of capital management and control of the actions of the two trustees, one of the Grammatikov’s family, the other, a church trustee (epitrope), both elected by the aforementioned society.
The complete impossibility of establishing the content of this term gives fertile ground for all kinds of discord. It is believed that the term “honorary society” was introduced from the Greek islands, where there was once a circular guarantee for the payment of taxes. In addition, at the time of drafting the will, 1825, such a term may have had its meaning, but since then, major reforms have been carried out in the Russian Empire, the liberation from serfdom, the introduction of urban institutions, courts, amended the whole system of public life. “Honorary Society” with today’s date will not be found in any nation, and even if the word was taken in its literal sense, we can hardly consider the same concepts given to this word in 1825 and today. Repeated attempts have been made to interpret this concept, which have not led to a successful result. The county and provincial zemstvos brought the case to the senate, pointing out the absence of an honorary society as a legal entity, the danger of homelessness of the bequeathed property, etc., and asked for the capital to be handed over to him. However, the Senate recognized the zemstvo as an ancillary institution, and the claim was dismissed. Recently, the zemstvo has taken steps before the Ministry to initiate a petition to the Supreme Authority to amend the corresponding item in the spiritual will for the order of capital management. And this petition was left unsatisfied.
Another character is the overall direction of the case with the issuance on August 4, 1915 of the Supreme Order for the transfer of all property to the Greek Church of the Assumption (Holy Introduction to the Virgin). The attempt of the trustees to take possession of the story / clergy was not supported by the notary and judicial institutions, which consider that the said order (order) does not give the right to establish property rights, but refers only to use, according to the conditions clarified in the will. ”, Ie with the help of the honorary society in question.
As a result of all the controversy, in the end, the prevailing view is that an honorary society should be understood as the parish community, which also elects the second trustee from among the church trustees. The controversy continued for some time, during which a group of parishioners found that only censors could participate in the affairs of capital, ie. people with qualifications – enjoying the right to participate in city elections.
Others have explained this controversial paragraph 7 of the instruction on ecclesiastical epitrops in the sense that urban elections should be understood not only as elections in the field of urban self-government, but also as professional, for example, guild urban elections. In previous times, disputes and doubts were resolved by the administration itself, with the ministry recognizing the right to participate only to censors and the provincial government recognizing all parishioners. On August 4, 1915, the administration resigned from its supervisory functions and the most direct supervision over the activities of the parish municipality passed to the diocesan authority in the province. At the same time, the district court, and then the chamber and the senate, recognized as lawful the decree of the society composed of all parishioners of the Greek Vvedenskaya church. Of course, in Soviet times all the capital bequeathed to Christian charity by the Gramatikovi family of Bulgarian origin was expropriated with the rest of the church property. Nowadays, the local population pays tribute to the Grammars philanthropists, because the good should not remain anonymous, but should be popularized for the sole purpose of serving as an example and initiating followers in the exercise of Christian love for God and neighbor.
Another extremely interesting thing is that the wife of Alexander Sergeyevich Gramatikov was Dagmar, niece of General, Bonch-Bruevich, brother of the manager of the affairs of the Sovnarkom V.D. Bonch-Bruevich. Dagmar provided her accommodation for Sydney Reilly’s “work.” During the Civil War, Alexander (Elena Gramatikova’s brother) and Aivazovsky’s son-in-law, Prince Mikeladze Iveriko Davidovich, together bought the schooner Salomet and for some time supplied weapons to Turkey from Wrangel’s Crimean troops from Turkey, exchanging them for grain with smugglers. on the Turkish coast.
Even more unusual is the fate of Alexander Nikolaevich Gramatikov, brother of Ekaterina Nikolaevna Gramatikova, who in her first marriage was married to Aivazovsky’s grandson – Mikhail Latry. His life is intertwined with Vladimir Ulyanov-Lenin and Sidney Riley, the British spy who inspired Fleming to create the literary image of James Bond, Agent 007.
Soviet researchers and archivists made considerable efforts to search for, categorize, and publish letters and documents of VI Lenin, the leader of the Bolshevik Party and the first leader of the Soviet state. The fifth edition of his collected works contains more than 3,700 letters and telegrams, and the documents found after the publication of this edition are published in Lenin’s collection. The still undiscovered letters of Lenin, whose existence researchers know about, as well as Lenin’s documents stored in the former archives of the Institute of Marxism-Leninism, but unpublished for various reasons, are scrupulously listed in the twelve-volume Biographical Chronicle. Several previously unknown letters have been found by Western scholars in European archives. Due to the above, the new Lenin document, not included in the catalogs, complements the characteristics of the Bolshevik leader. In July 1908, Lenin sent the following letter of recommendation: Gramatikov (“Black”) belongs to the Russian Social Democratic Workers’ Party and has worked in the ranks of party organizations. Geneva, July 7, 1908.”
The original of this two-page letter is kept in the Public Archives of Canada in the Andrei Zhuk Foundation (early 1968 in the Austrian capital), established in 1978. In the first decade of the 20th century, A. Zhuk was active. member of the Revolutionary Party of Ukraine (RPU) and the Ukrainian Social Democratic Workers’ Party (URSDRP). During the First World War, he was associated with the Austrian-based Union for the Liberation of Ukraine (SOU). After the revolution, Zhuk lived in Vienna and Lviv. He retained his interest in Ukrainian socialism and the cooperative movement. In the period between the two world wars he did an incredible amount to preserve the archives of the high school and the materials about Ukraine.
But who is Gramatikov, whose political credibility Lenin attests to in his letter? His name, as well as the leader’s letter, are not mentioned in any of the editions of Lenin’s Collected Works or in the Biographical Chronicle. It is not mentioned in the multi-volume History of the CPSU, in the seven editions of the Soviet Encyclopedia, in the various publications with letters from the Mensheviks, or in Soviet or Western research on the pre-revolutionary history of the Social Democratic Party. However, the name Gramatikov appears in the reports of the Paris branch of the “Ohranka” – the tsarist political police, whose archives are kept at the Hoover Institute for War, Peace and Revolution.
According to the report of the “Ohranka”, written 4 months before the writing of Lenin’s recommendation, Alexander Nikolayevich Gramatikov, “of the nobles”, was born in Sevastopol in 1871. In 1896, while studying at Moscow University, he was arrested for political activity . For two years he was forbidden to live in the two capitals, as well as in any university city. In 1899, Gramatikov was arrested again in Tver, after which he was released into his mother’s care due to an unrecorded “nervous disorder”. After some time he moved to Kharkov, where he resumed his studies at the university, as well as his political activities. According to police, in 1905 he was associated with the Bolshevik wing of the Russian Social Democratic Workers’ Party, was a member of the party committee in Kharkov and its military organization, actively distributed leaflets in connection with the anniversary of Bloody Sunday. From February 1902 to March 1906 he was detained four times, but each time he was soon released. It is quite probable that Zhuk, who at the same time was connected with the RUP and the USDRP in Kharkov, knew about Gramatikov’s work in the local Bolshevik organization. As in most revolutionary groups, agents of the tsarist political police also infiltrated the Kharkiv Social Democrats. The problem with which Gramatikov, despite frequent arrests, escaped punishment has aroused certain suspicions in Zhuk and other Ukrainian socialists. After the defeat of the 1905 revolution, when Gramatikov, Zhuk, and a number of other Russian intellectuals emigrated, these suspicions probably prompted the Social Democrats to warn Lenin about Gramatikov. Vladimir Ilyich, in his letter of July 7, 1908, stated that he had no reason to doubt the loyalty of his Bolshevik ally.
During this time Gramatikov lived in Brussels. On March 2, 1908, SE Visarionov, director of the political Police Department, asked the Paris branch of the “Ohranka” to confirm the agent’s report that Gramatikov (known as “Black”, “Ivan Petrovich”) lives in Belgium, where he studies the production and application of explosives. As far as no answer was concerned, similar notes were sent on October 25 and December 6, 1911. The last time the Gramatikov family appeared in the archives of the “Ohranka” was in December 1911, when its Paris branch informed Visarionov that the socialist-revolutionary Gushtin is currently living in Paris with Gramatikov. Gushtin, whose real name was NI Metalnikov, was handed over to an agent of the Russian police. Apparently he also gave the information that the party comrades were concerned about the fact that Gramatikov had abandoned revolutionary activity to study philosophy. It is possible that, as a result of their neighborhood, Gramatikov’s personal ties with the SRs and the police have been strengthened. In 1912 or 1913 he returned to St. Petersburg, where he entered the role of a lawyer with a good career and excellent contacts. He dined at the most luxurious restaurants and helped establish the Aviators’ Club, which organized the first air races in St. Petersburg and Moscow. Among his closest friends were Boris Suvorin, the son of the publisher of the conservative newspaper Novo Vreme, and Sidney Rzli, who stole from the St. Petersburg Naval Shipyard where he worked, and apparently not without his help, drawings of German warships for the British intelligence. Riley considered Gramatikov “not only a scientist and thinker, but also a man of character, whose loyalty was beyond suspicion.” According to other sources, Reilly was for some time an agent of the “Ohranka”, as well as Gramatikov himself. This connection would explain the ease with which Gramatikov escaped prison, despite his frequent arrests until 1907 and the metamorphosis of his life after 1911. The change of direction – from the party to the police – as a result of blackmail by the “Ohranka” did not was an unusual phenomenon in the last decade of tsarist Russia.
Gramatikov and Riley crossed paths again in the autumn of 1918, when the great British spy returned to Russia, trying to ignite resistance there against the new regime. Gramatikov, who believed that the government “is in the hands of criminals and the mentally ill released from a mental hospital”, used his previous connections, organized an interview with Riley with General M.D. Bonch-Bruevich, from whom he made his niece Dagmar , a ballerina at the Moscow Art Theater, to allow his friend to use her apartment as a “safe place” where he kept large sums of cash in various currencies. Dagmar introduced him to two charming ladies – actress Elisaveta Otten and CEC secretary Olga Strizhevska, who fell in love with Riley and provided him with passes and secret documents, as Inna Svechenovskaya writes in her book Sex and Soviet Espionage (p. 281). Gramatikov, with the help of Vyacheslav Orlovsky (Vladimir Orlov), who had previously been associated with the pre-revolutionary “security guard” and became a member of the Extraordinary Commission (EC), provided Riley with false documents in the name of Sidney Georgievich Relinsky, allowing him to travel freely. The Soviet side under the guise of a Chekist, as reported by Sayers Michael in his book The Secret War against Soviet Russia, p. 28. Penetrating the Kremlin and the General Staff of the Red Army, Riley was aware of all the activities of the Soviet government. The English spy boasted that the sealed orders to the Red Army “became known in London before they were read in Moscow.”
It is very likely that he connected Riley with the anti-Bolshevik elements in the SR party. Riley, in turn, nominates Gramatikov for the post of interior minister to head the police and finance in the supposed new Provisional Government, in which Boris Savinkov is to become prime minister and General Yudenich the military minister. Schubersky, head of one of Russia’s largest trading companies, was to become Minister of Roads and Communications. Yudenich, Shubersky and Gramatikov – the future interim government had to overcome the anarchy, almost inevitable after such a coup. The above is also supported by the modern English researcher Philip Knightley (Knightley F. Spies of the XX century / Translated with English, M., 1994. p. 62), who describes the main collaborators of the SIS in Russia: Sidney Riley, George Hill, Somerset Maugham, who also worked for the Americans, Paul Dukes, and Robert Bruce Lockhart, an agent of the British Diplomatic Service in Moscow, who, although not a SIS officer, took an active part in espionage in Russia.
Gramatikov and Riley apparently played no part in the assassination of the German ambassador Mirbach and in the SR uprisings in the provincial towns in July 1918. But in August they were at the center of the so-called Lockhart conspiracy against the Bolshevik regime. . With money received from the unofficial representative of the British mission Bruce Lockhart, Riley bribed some Latvian red units to help him capture during a scheduled meeting in Moscow of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee (CEC) and the establishment of a military dictatorship of Savinkov. Residents of foreign intelligence services rightly judged that the fate of any conspiracy against the Soviets would largely depend on the position of the Latvians, who at the time were the most capable Red Army unit responsible for guarding the Kremlin. Two young Latvian commanders, who had arrived from Moscow, were brought to Petrograd. They contacted the naval attache at the British Embassy (which had not yet moved to Moscow), Captain Francis Alan Cromy. Their first meeting took place in the restaurant of the French Hotel. The commanders convinced Cromi that there was serious dissatisfaction among the Latvian riflemen with the authorities, that they were ready to go against the government if they had the support of army units. The commander of the 1st Division of the Latvian Riflemen, Eduard Berzin, was also involved in the operation. Lockhart gave them letters of recommendation to the commander of the British troops in Arkhangelsk, General Poole, and accompanying documents on British mission forms with stamps and his signature. (It was assumed that after the arrest of the Soviet government, the Latvian archers through Arkhangelsk on English ships would return to their homeland.)
The meeting of the Bolshevik leadership of the Bolshoi Theater in Moscow was postponed, and on August 28 Riley arrived in Petrograd to consult with Gramatikov on the implementation of the plans for an uprising in the former capital. But, as Gramatikov himself put it; “The fools struck too early.” On August 30, terrorists unrelated to the Reilly network killed M.S. Uritsky in Petrograd and seriously wounded Lenin in Moscow. Felix Dzerzhinsky, whose agents infiltrated Riley’s organization back in June and knew of his odious plans, quickly took advantage of these events as a pretext for Lockhart’s arrest, the search of the British mission in Petrograd and the beginning of the Red Terror. Most surprisingly, Riley and Gramatikov were able to burn their documents and flee the country.
The two conspirators last met in September 1925 in Paris, where Gramatikov spent his second emigration. This man, whom Lenin considered a loyal Bolshevik, again conspired against the Soviet government. Reilly, along with Gramatikov, White General A.P. Kutepov, expert on exposing provocateurs Vladimir Burtsev and British intelligence officer Ernst Boyce, are discussing the possibility of establishing contact with the alleged monarchical, anti-Bolshevik Moscow organization Trust. It was decided that Riley should go to Finland to investigate with the leaders of the Trust the possibility of another uprising. They did not know that the monarchical group had long been arrested by the OGPU. Riley was tricked into entering Soviet territory, and this time the “king of espionage” failed to return.
The fact that Lenin believed and supported a man like Gramatikov, who could really be associated with the tsarist “Ohranka” in pre-revolutionary times, and after 1917 developed a remarkable anti-Soviet career in alliance with his political opponents – the left, like Savinkov , to the right-wing monarchists, may surprise many. Subsequently, Lenin repeatedly proved to be a poor connoisseur of the human soul and the political leanings of his entourage, supporting Roman Malinowski in the Bolshevik Central Committee and defending him when obvious evidence of his affiliation with the “Ohranka”, and then praising that “wonderful Georgian” who became his successor.
Photo: cityscape painting of Ivan Konstantinovich Aivazovsky “Old Feodosia”, oil, canvas, 1839.
The cornerstone or central argument in any apology for the old style is the reference to the decision of the First Ecumenical Council to celebrate Easter. The reference to this decision is almost always accompanied by an author’s interpretation, which in any case should reinforce in readers the suggestion that the new style grossly violates this rule and even this fact alone is enough to put us outside the Church. To this summary many apologists of the old style allow themselves to add additional arguments and interpretations, namely that the decree was created primarily to prohibit the celebration of Easter with non-believers, and the purpose of the new style was to join us with them. But is that really the case?
Perhaps many who were interested in the question were impressed that all the apologies of the old style refer to the decisions of the First Ecumenical Council, but they never quote this decision, but rely on the 7th Apostolic Rule! However, the rules of the Holy Apostles, although they reflect the aspirations of the age and some debates of the First Ecumenical Council, are not rules of the Council, but something completely different! It is too manipulative to put a sign of identity between the two, as many do in bad faith. Rule number 7 of the First Ecumenical Council treats a completely different problem from rule 7 of St. Apostles. It is worth clarifying here that the so-called “Apostolic Rules” are not the work of the apostles themselves, but they are seen as the bearer of the early tradition of the Church and from the first centuries they had great authority, which, of course, helped and the First Ecumenical Council. And if we are to be completely accurate, and in order to avoid further speculation about the canons of this council, it is necessary to say clearly that the First Ecumenical Council did not leave a single canon about the celebration of Easter! That is, every time apologists of the old style refer in their texts to some rule of the First Ecumenical Council, which obviously tries to clothe their accusations of the new style with the authority of this highest forum of the Church, they definitely lie to us. . What was discussed and decided at the council, but without being formulated in a rule or canon, is about the celebration of Easter by all churches in one day, and not, as was the practice until then, different churches to use their own calculations and to celebrate on different days. This is clear from the message that Emperor Constantine the Great sent to the bishops who were not present at the First Ecumenical Council.
The seventh rule of the Holy Apostles states: “A bishop, presbyter, or deacon who celebrates the holy day of the Passover before the vernal equinox with the Jews must be deposed.”
It is obvious that this rule has to do with the debates during the First Ecumenical Council, but to claim that it is a rule of the Ecumenical Council itself is, to put it mildly, incorrect. But the apologists of the old style are not at all ashamed to do so, moreover, referring to this rule, they try to interpret it in a way that is beneficial to their thesis, but far from the truth. Relying on Zonara’s definite misinterpretation: “.. The whole commandment of this rule boils down to the following: Christians should not celebrate the Passover with the Jews, ie. not on the same day with them; as their non-holiday celebration must precede and then celebrate our Easter.
A priest who fails to do so must be overthrown. The same is defined by the Council of Antioch in its first rule, mentioning that the definition of the Passover is the definition of the First Council of Nicaea. ” If we make a brief historical overview, we will be able to see for ourselves the wrong rubbing of Zonara and again the complete unfoundedness of the accusations of canonical violations of the so-called new style.
Our Lord Jesus Christ Himself took part in the Jewish celebrations during His earthly life, as evidenced in the Gospel (John 2: 13-25; 5: 1-47). His example after the Ascension was followed by the apostles (Acts 2: 1; 20:16). This example was adopted by the early Church, so the first Christians celebrated Easter on Nisan 14, the same day that the Jews celebrated their Passover. This practice has long existed in the Roman province of Asia, and for this reason Christians were called the Fourteenth. Many of the other churches underwent the first Passover reform, and they began celebrating on the first Sunday after Nisan 14. This reform was not a theological interpretation of the feast, but rather a precision of the historical fact of the Resurrection, since Christ is resurrected on the “first day after the Sabbath” (Matt. 28: 1), that is, on Sunday.
It is interesting to note that the difference became the subject of discussion between St. Polycarp of Smyrna and Bishop Anicet of Rome during St. Polycarp’s visit to Rome in 155. your own understanding of the holiday. However, this difference did not lead to a rift between the two churches (as some of the apostates are hasty today), but on the contrary, taking into account their differences, the two hierarchs celebrate the Holy Eucharist together, confirming their unity in Christ. With this joint celebration of the Holy Liturgy, the two church leaders clearly showed that the question of the date of the celebration of Easter is not dogmatic and cannot be a reason for church division!
Unfortunately, people from the height of the epic did not always stand on the Roman throne. Anyket. During his reign, Bishop Victor of Rome (189-198) threatened to excommunicate the people of Asia Minor if they did not harmonize their Easter practice with Rome. Bishop Polycrates of Ephesus, who headed the bishops of Asia Minor, wrote a letter to Ep. Victor, in which he explained that the Asia Minor tradition follows the apostolic practice and for them the practice of Rome is an innovation, but they do not judge them, nor do they want to abandon it. Ep. However, Victor was adamant and excommunicated the people of Asia Minor from the Eucharistic communion. This harsh reaction of the Roman bishop Victor provoked a protest reaction even among such supporters of the celebration of Easter on the first Sunday after Nisan 14 as St. Irenaeus of Lyons. St. Irenaeus sent a message to Ep. Victor, urging him to remain at peace with those celebrating Easter on Nisan 14. In it, among other things, St. Irenaeus of Lyons says that the termination of the Eucharistic communion on ceremonial matters is inadmissible.
Here is the time to emphasize a very important point in church history, namely that in the beginning the Church did not perform its own calculation of the Passover. She closely followed the Jewish calculation, and the only differences were whether to celebrate Nisan 14 or Nisan 14. But in the II-IV century, the Jews reformed their calendar. Because their calendar is lunar, compared to the solar calendar, an error accumulates that needs to be corrected periodically (in the lunar calendar, the days are 29 and 30 days, with 364 days a year, so Jews often had to add one leap year. – instead of 12 it contained 13 months and thus equated their year with that of the solar calendar). As a result of the Jewish reform of the calendar, it so happened that when calculating the holidays according to the new calendar, it happened to the Jews that Easter sometimes began to fall before the beginning of the vernal equinox. In the ancient world, the vernal equinox was considered by many to be the beginning (unofficially) of the new year. As a result of this reform, Christians also had to celebrate once before the vernal equinox, once after it, which forced Christians to compile their own Easter tables for the calculation of Easter so that they could always celebrate after the vernal equinox – thus began the Christian Easter. The creation of such an independent Passover meant that Christians would no longer comply with the Jewish date of Nisan 14, which ceased to properly reflect the day of Passover after the Jewish calendar reform. In Rome and Alexandria they began to create their own Easter tables. We will not dwell in detail on the principle underlying the creation of these Easter calculations, we will only note that there were churches such as Asia Minor, for example, which continued to celebrate according to the established practice of Nisan 14 on the Jewish calendar. As a result of the changed church practice, when the Alexandrian and Roman churches established their own Passover, independent of the Jewish one, it sometimes came to the point that the difference in the celebration of Easter between Asia Minor and other churches reached 5 weeks.
It is precisely this difference that the First Ecumenical Council seeks to eliminate, and it is precisely this that is reflected in the 7 Apostolic Rule and Rule 1 of the Antioch Council. To unify the celebration of Passover throughout the Church and to make this celebration based on one’s own calculation of the Passover, which does not depend on the calculations of the Jews. Exactly and clearly, no prohibitions on joint celebration with the Jews, as the old-fashioned defenders try to convince us. And since there is no ban on celebrating Easter with the Jews, it is in vain that we are banned from celebrating with non-Orthodox people, especially since a canon containing the term non-Orthodox people does not exist anywhere. It’s all a matter of manipulation, math and a well-chosen audience. But in order not to be unfounded in our assertion that this rule does not forbid the celebration of Passover with the Jews, but only forbids it to be calculated according to their Passover tables, it is necessary to give a few examples.
the 7 Apostolic Rule in question appeared immediately or shortly after the First Ecumenical Council, but in any case before 341, because it is referred to in Rule 1 of the Council of Antioch. That is, in any case, according to the interpretation of the apologists of the old style, the Church forbade the joint celebration with non-Orthodox and Jews before 341. Yes, but convincing proof that the rule says what we say is the fact that Christian Easter continues to coincide many times with the Jewish and after 341. For example, the Christian Passover coincides with the Jewish Passover only two years after the Council of Antioch in 343. Subsequently, we celebrated the Passover with the Jews in 347, 367, 370, 374 and 394. In the next fifth century, we celebrated with the Jews nine more times, and so on. Christians and Jews last celebrated Easter together in 783, after which date, due to inaccuracies in the Julian calendar and new reforms in the Jewish Passover, joint celebration became impossible. Furthermore, since the rule in question forbids, according to the apologists of the old style, the celebration of Easter together with non-Orthodox, why were they silent when in 2007 Orthodox, Catholics and Protestants celebrated Easter together? According to them, the new style was created for this blasphemous purpose – to get closer to non-believers, while the old, perfect, enlightened style would never allow such a thing? It is good to keep in mind that the Orthodox, Roman Catholic and Protestant Easter will coincide again in the next 2010, will coincide in 2011 and in 2014 and in 2017, etc. Who is to blame for this? The new style? He cannot be, because pouring out their accusations against the New Style churches, the Old Style apologists somehow forget that the New Style churches remain faithful to this precept of Apostolic Rule 7, to celebrate Easter with the other sister churches. The calculation and celebration of Easter, as well as all movable holidays that depend on Easter in the new-style churches, remain unchanged and are calculated and celebrated in the same way and on the same day as the old-style churches. That is, in both the old and the new style, the Paschal is calculated as it was set in the ancient Church after the First Ecumenical Council. Then? Then there is only the possibility to agree with the only correct interpretation of rule 7 of the Holy Apostles and rule 1 of the Council of Antioch, namely that the words “who celebrates the holy day of Passover before the vernal equinox with the Jews” cannot in no way should they be understood as a prohibition on celebrating with Jews or anyone else, but only as an indication to break the long-standing ancient practice of making the Passover conditional on the Jewish calculation of the Passover.
So, why do you turn away from what is pleasing to the Most High?
ten, a hundred or a thousand years,
– in hell there is no search for the time of life.
(Sirach 41: 6-7)
In the first part of our article, we looked at one of the main arguments of the defenders of the old style, namely that the new style violates the canon of the First Ecumenical Council. However, the truth, as we have seen, is that the First Ecumenical Council did not draw up a canon for the celebration of Easter. As one of the most erudite defenders of the old style, the great Russian scientist Prof. VV Bolotov, is forced to admit, “no definite decisions (concerning Easter) have been issued by the First Ecumenical Council … What they at the council) could do is to reach an oral, unformed, friendly agreement decree that Easter should be celebrated according to the custom established in the Church of Alexandria. Perhaps it impresses readers that our article pays too much attention to the issue of what happened during the First Ecumenical Council. This is because it is the backbone of all apologies that dogmatize the calendar, which leads to numerous conclusions, which, although they have no canonical basis, have gained great popularity.
I am convinced that most of the defenders of the calendar mechanically repeat what they read here and there, but objectivity requires that the facts be always checked and verified. One of these hasty conclusions is that the Julian calendar satisfies all the requirements for Easter and the holidays associated with it, which is why it has become part of the Tradition! This statement is in itself absurd – the calendar cannot be part of the Tradition, it does not and cannot have a sotirological function. The calendar has an official function – it gives an indication of what to remember from the Church and what should be the internal logic of the annual service, but it does not sacred days and dates! By this logic we can declare the use of parchment as part of the Tradition, as it was used in the age of the councils. That is why these hierarchs of the Bulgarian Orthodox Church are completely right, who repeatedly respond to the accusations of the old calendarists that the Church celebrates events, not dates. This is the opinion of all canonical church pastors, whether they belong to a new-style or old-style local Church.
What does the Church actually celebrate – events or dates?
The most eloquent example of the fact that the Church has always celebrated events, not dates, is the feast of the Resurrection of Christ. In the brief historical retrospective made in the first part of the article, we saw that the early Church even until the fourth century celebrated the day of the Resurrection in different ways and on different days. Subsequently, the Church prescribed that this be done independently of the Jewish Passover and necessarily after the vernal equinox. The latter, because after the Jewish reform of the lunar calendar, the Passover for the Jews began to fall sometimes before the vernal equinox. What is important to note in this case is that the Resurrection was never associated with a celebration on a specific calendar day, but depended first on the Jewish Paschal calculations, and then on the calculations of the Alexandrian Church, which has been famous since ancient times. his skilled astronomers. Translated into plain language, the Resurrection of Christ could have fallen and falls both in March and in April, and sometimes even in May! Then we should ask, what does the Church celebrate – the event of the Resurrection of Christ or some specific date?
The situation is similar with all the moving holidays, which change in accordance with Easter the day on which they are celebrated, but, of course, the celebrated event cannot be changed. Here is the place to note that the generally accepted dates for the celebration of the events of the earthly life of Christ, the Mother of God, and most of the saints are very arbitrary. For example, the date of Christmas December 25 – January 7 (old style) is not historical. We do not know exactly when Christ was born, in the first years the Church did not even celebrate this holiday. Subsequently, the celebration took place in a very wide range. For example, churches in Africa believed that Christ was born on March 28, according to Clement of Alexandria (+215) it happened on April 18, in the East it was accepted on January 6, while in the West it was accepted on December 25. Subsequently, all churches adopted the practice of the Western Church to celebrate on December 25. However, this did not happen immediately, but in a rather long historical period. By the way, another argument against the unfounded claims of the old-fashioned apologists that the First Ecumenical Council somehow constituted the Julian calendar as something “sacred” and obligatory for the Ecumenical Church is the fact that the churches of Caesarea and Antioch agree to celebrate Christmas on the 25th. December only after 376, half a century after the First Ecumenical Council. The Church of Jerusalem did this more than a hundred years after the First Ecumenical Council, in the period 430-431. Interestingly, the Armenian Church, which until the end of the V century was an integral part of the Ecumenical Church, retains its ancient practice and continues to celebrate the Nativity of Christ on January 6 in the civil style, reciprocally on January 19 in the old style.
The holidays associated with the life of the Blessed Virgin Mary were formed in the period V-VI century, as a strong impetus for this gives the Fourth Ecumenical Council (431), which confirms the correctness of its veneration. All dates in the calendar on which we celebrate the events of the earthly life of the Blessed Virgin are also conditional. What clearer evidence is that the Church celebrates events that have been arbitrarily (astronomically) fixed on certain dates, following not the historicity of events but the internal logic of church preaching.
The situation with fixed holidays is no different. It is too late to fix them on certain dates. The synaxar cycle was formed in Byzantium only in the period of the IX-XII century, long after the last Ecumenical Council (787). However, even today in the various Local Orthodox Churches, which are one calendar, there is a discrepancy in the dates of celebration. We will not go into too much detail, but for clarity we will allow ourselves to give a few examples.
The Slavic churches celebrate the memory of St. Catherine on November 24, while the other churches follow the Sinai tradition and celebrate on November 25. The reason for the discrepancy in the celebration is no less curious and very indicative that the idea of a metaphysical calendar is foreign to the Church. According to the life of the saint, her memory should be celebrated on November 24, the day of her martyrdom. In the Sinai Monastery “St. Ekaterina ”, however, the feast of the saint was united with the Tradition of the Introduction of the Mother of God (November 25), because according to the Tradition on that day her relics were discovered. This practice was adopted throughout the Church. However, the Russian Empress Catherine the Great did not want the feast of her saint to coincide or rather to be in the shadow of the larger feast of the Presentation of the Mother of God, so she returned it a day earlier. The change affected all Slavic churches, and the rest continue to celebrate the saint on November 25, and the divergence continues to this day, without disturbing anyone.
Often in the arsenal of arguments of the defenders of the old style can be found the statement that “the old calendar has been illuminated by its centuries-old use in the Church”, that is, it has become something sacred from prolonged sacred use! Such an argument also does not stand up to criticism. It is identical to the one once used by the defenders of the “trilingual heresy.” By this logic, we must reject the language reform of St. Patriarch Euthymius only because he undertook to edit liturgical books, “sanctified by several centuries of use.” In Russia, the Nikon reform marked the beginning of the schism of the Old Believers, who to this day continue to hold on to the two fingers (the two fingers) – enclosing the body with the sign of the cross, filled not with three but with two fingers. By the logic of those who use this argument, we should declare the Old Believers a canonical church and the Russian Orthodox Church a schismatic one, just because Christians crossed themselves with two fingers until the 5th-6th centuries. Moreover, the argument for the two fingers is much stronger, because the cross actually sanctifies and blesses, unlike the calendar, and that is how the fathers of the First Ecumenical Council were baptized. But we must repeat once again that the sacrament of the Church has nothing to do with human logic, no matter how true it may sound.
I thank God for these days, which He gave us according to His great mercy and which, in addition to affirming the warm ties between us over the years, allowed us to experience the sharing of His Word in this extraordinary place of high spirituality, such as the monastery. St. Ivan Rilski ”. Our very presence here, I am sure, is in itself a blessing for which we are duly thanked and which has exceeded our expectations.
The resurrection of Christ, our hope! The Apostle Paul understood this very well and therefore calls us to share in Christ’s death, to share his sufferings, to know him and the power of his resurrection (cf. Phil. 3:10), presenting ourselves to God as living from the dead (cf. Rom. 6:13).
Resurrection applies to all people. A more careful reading of 2 Cor. 5:15 – “And Christ died for all, that the living should live no longer for themselves, but for Him who died for them and rose again” – offers us a clear picture of this. This verse, it seems to me, does not mean that the death of Christ has miraculously changed people’s lives and condition, nor that they are passively bound to this death. In other words, if we study the text in more depth, we will notice that it refers not only to the death and resurrection of Christ Himself, but is also an allusion to the death and resurrection of the baptized in Christ. All who believe and are baptized into Christ are also crucified with Christ. From that moment on, they live a new reality in faith in Christ the Savior (Gal. 2:20), because if anyone is in Christ, he is already a new creation. The old things are past; behold, all things are become new (cf. 2 Cor. 5:17 – “the old has passed away; behold, all things are become new”).
Christ gave us His life to make us righteous through God through Him (2 Cor. 5:21), but for our part, humanity must be careful not to receive God’s grace in vain (2 Cor. 6: 1). Those who are Jesus crucified the flesh with its passions and lusts (Gal. 5:24).
Thus we enter with the Resurrection into a new, even revolutionary, dimension: the day of Easter is not simply a mere reminder of a historical event; it transcends historical time because it belongs to the Time inherent in Christ, in which everything is present; where past and future intertwine in one moment, which is why the Resurrection manages to change everything in a single moment in which everything was real. In this way, Good Friday and Easter form a whole in the eternity of the divine life of Christ, although historically the Passion of Christ precedes the Resurrection. It is through suffering that God triumphs over suffering; through death He conquers death.
The pain of Christ is not opposed to His glory or His bliss. It is the substance from which He draws His eternal victory. The suffering of Christ, always suffering with man, overcome by His own Resurrection, soothes our suffering and, even if we do not see it, builds an answer to our own death. In this confidence of the mother, who has just lost her only son, of the young woman, who has lost her husband, will we dare to say: “Jesus himself, who died and rose for you, is suffering in the same moment as you, and the cross you bear is the cross of your Lord. And since Jesus Christ wears it at the same time as you, know – this carrying of your cross by both of you already means victory. But the day will come when your eyes will be opened and you will understand! ”?
But is it true, asks the late Olivier Clement, that Christ is risen, or are we just liars who are content with their lies? He adds: if Christ has really risen at least a little in us, we can be sure that no matter how great the difficulties, love and knowledge will invariably come. For one who expects to see a demonstration in order to be obliged to believe, the answer is clear: there is no such evidence. But in the life of the Church, throughout human history to the present day, there are many “signs of the Resurrection.”
The kingdom of God will not come as a fact that can be observed, Christ declared in Luke 17:20. It will come in all its power, in all its light and in its victory – every time we do not selfishly try to keep it for ourselves only within our churches; every time we do not lock it in the tombs of our own psyche, imagination, thoughts and emotions in which we think it is present. The secret place of our society, in so far as it is inhabited by the risen Jesus Christ, knows no bounds; it carries the universe into the vastness and depth of the love of its Lord.
Let us recall the wonderful Easter sermon bequeathed to us by St. John Chrysostom, which Orthodox Christians read at the end of Easter morning. The saint does not distinguish between the workers of the first hour and those of the ninth; Christ invites both to the feast, both those who are prepared and those who are not ready. He does the same to us. We are far away, writes one of our Orthodox clergy of the last century, or at least most of us, from drinking the cup of Suffering. We have not helped Christ carry His cross. We did not die with Him, but we fell asleep during His agony; we have forsaken Him; we have rejected Him through our many sins. And yet, though poorly prepared, though so unclean, Christ has invited us to share in the joy of Easter. Christ is no longer separated from anything or anyone. Victory over death is victory over division. Life in Christ becomes our life. Baptism introduces us to the dynamics of the Resurrection. The Eucharist becomes for us, says St. Cyril of Alexandria, the “body of Life.”
That is why the Apostle Paul calls us to become like Christ in death, to suffer His sufferings, to know Himself and the power of His resurrection (cf. Philippians 3:10), to offer ourselves to the Lord as living, who are returned from the dead. The resurrection is in us, from this moment. Our greatest sufferings, even our agony, if met with the most humble devotion, with the most humble childlike trust, will be identified with the sufferings and agonies of Christ and will lead us to a life much stronger than death. “It seemed to us that we were dying and now death no longer exists. We mourned our dead and here they are not dead, but in Christ they are very close to us. The resurrection made possible the joy of the martyrs by allowing them to pray for their executioners. The resurrection allows us to shelter and love unselfishly: I no longer need to turn the other goat into the remission of my fear, because death has been defeated and my fear has become faith. Holiness is nothing but a reflection of this amazing life-giving power. In the ancient Church they told of a saint resurrected from hell ”(Bishop Meletius, Metropolitan of France, Easter Message of April 26, 1981).
In our eyes, the Resurrection of Christ is not only a strong assurance of the immortality of souls, of people: it envelops the whole earth, all beings, all things, all moments, all images, all bodies, from the smallest grass to space. Everything will find its place in the glorious Body of the Risen One.
Reaching the essence of my subject and in order to shed more light on it, it seems to me right to undertake a pilgrimage through the Holy and Great Passion Week, as taught by the Orthodox Church to the faithful.
In the mornings of the first three days there is talk of the Bridegroom, who arrives in the middle of the night; blessed is the servant that is found awake; unhappy is he who will be found asleep. What is unique about Christ is that He did not come only to exceptional people, but for sinners. Jesus, who loved His people in the world, will love them to the end (cf. John 13: 1). Not only has God loved people, no matter who they are, until the last moment of His earthly existence, but He has loved them to the utmost. Those who have sinned in this world, who are covered with shame, who are torn by doubt, all desperate and hopeless … How generations of Christians could have become so meaningless as to turn the Church into a kind of sect of the righteous, one wonders. a monk of the Eastern Church in one of his works.
Here is the Bridegroom; He comes in the middle of the night. God is not far from me. He is where I am. He reveals to me that I am better than my sin. Only the true God can understand man. Only the true God can put such a peak of His love in His Suffering, accepting our sin and our condemnation on the cross. Jesus belongs to the same human nature as us. He has experienced each of our own personal stories. He ate the same bread as us. On the cross he was exposed to the same death as ours. He is one of ours. That is why He not only removed sin, but took it upon His shoulders. Carry it and carry it.
The groom came in the middle of the night. Here we are in front of the harsh reality of our lives, in which no change is possible: true freedom is associated with conversion. Christ comes to ask us about our deepest and most secret wounds; he comes to put his finger in the wounds of our soul. He comes not only to bring to light our sin, but to speak to us of repentance and forgiveness. Nothing can stop Him – no prostitutes, nobles, no criminals. He calls on all of them. He draws closer to everyone where he is most lonely, in the depths of his sin. And if someone is found to protest, He answers him with a question: Why is your eye bad, because I am good?
We do not need to look far. God is not here or there. He is in us. God is our daily existence. He accompanies us to our home, as in all our works. Shares our problems, brings our difficulties. He lives with us all our days and sleeps with us all our nights. He listens to both our conversations and our silence. He inhabits our loneliness. He is the One who deals with our secret. There are no secrets with Him. The Bridegroom Jesus is the shortest way to reach the farthest corner of the human heart.
The first three days of Holy Week culminate in a troparion called Cassian, named after the nun who composed it, which is sung at the celebration of Holy Wednesday morning. This is the piercing cry of a woman who has fallen into many sins.
Obsessed with the love of sin, offering rivers of tears, this great sinner decides, in spite of her despair, to turn to the Lord’s unceasing presence and mercy. In the very commission of her transgressions, and not having the courage to stop committing them, she knows that she is able to at least shout; to raise a cry of discontent, of fear, even of terror. She complains that night is coming and takes her into the bosom of pleasures, and begins to kiss the Lord’s feet – those feet that Eve hears in Paradise approaching and from which she is hiding. Lord, who will investigate my many sins? Who will reveal the depths of your justice, God the Redeemer and Savior of our souls?
The fulcrum here is the word of grace without a word of condemnation. Man’s past and present, no matter how guilty he may be, are covered by grace, because every human destiny is connected with the Providence of God’s grace.
Here is the greatness of what happened on Golgotha between the sinner and his God. Man sins and Christ dies. Man sins, and the Godman is rejected and cursed. Golgotha: not just a need for justice, but also a requirement for love, and perfect love. At the foot of the Cross we find the plyroma (fullness) of death and hopelessness of the whole world from the beginning to the end of history, which fullness falls on the crucified Christ. He endures every sin, every death, every suffering that awaits everyone who comes into the white world. The cross is a judgment of justice, a condemnation of condemnation, says St. Maximus the Confessor (PG 90, 408D). In the Syrian liturgy, says Olivier Clement, we hear the words of St. Peter, who stops one of the two robbers from entering Paradise: “Indeed, you have done much, the doors will remain closed.” The other, pointing to the cross he carries on his shoulder, displaces St. Peter with the words: “Here is the key. He will let me in. ” (cf. Olivier Clement, “Christ est ressusite”, – DDB, 2000, p. 43). Christ personally opened Paradise for him, because He Himself is Paradise, i.e. The presence of God. By transforming the cross, He planted the new Tree of Life in the heart of the bleeding earth (Olivier Clement, ibid., P. 42). There is much more we can reverence for this mystery.
But instead of stubbornly discussing the topic, instead of looking for its explanation in many words, which will be just sad chatter, let us be content in humility with the words of St. Augustine: “Give me someone who loves and he will feel what I mean. ”.
The service of reading the 12 Gospels on Good Friday morning examines the eternal relevance of the Savior’s Passion. The Saints have always felt that the sufferings of Christ are not an ordinary event in the historical past. They directly concern our time.
It has already been said that the suffering as well as the resurrection of God are a mystery to us, which is why we cannot speak of them in any other way than by analogy and likeness. Indeed, on the cross Christ is us, me and you, “transformed in His image.” Not only to soothe our suffering, but to bear it on Himself, which in turn will bear the fruit of life, the fruit of love.
To today’s man, who is trying to overcome death through biological immortality, this may seem insane. But what kind of life is this? The wisdom of the Cross is the source of divine life in us, in every moment – but only if we are able to contemplate the One who has penetrated us; if we can cling to Him and persevere as long as He fights for us.
“Were you there when my Lord was crucified?” Is sung in a Negro spiritual. There, on Golgotha, where Jesus embraced our suffering, at the center of our sins? There, on Golgotha, where today Christ is being tortured and crucified again – everywhere in the world and at any time? What is this need for Incarnation and divine death? In Christ man restores obedience and love, because the death of Christ is the supreme proof of His love for the will of the Father, for the obedience of the Son to the Father; through Christ, man overcomes sin and evil. It is essential that death is not only destroyed by God, but defeated in human nature itself, through man and in man. “For as death came through man, so also the resurrection from the dead came through man; As in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive ”(1 Cor. 15: 21-22).
In the tomb, darkness descends over the Crucified One. For a moment, the forces of evil seem to triumph. But at the same moment, the true meaning of His death is revealed. “He who dies on the cross, Christ, has life in Himself; He has life not as an external gift – something that can be taken away from Him – but it is in nature, in His substance. He is the life and the source of all life. As a man He could really die; but in Him God Himself enters the realm of death. The man who dies is God or, more precisely, God-man. Only with this union, without contradiction, without change, without separation or separation from God and from man in Christ, is it possible for man’s death to be accepted by God and to be conquered and destroyed from within ”(Le mystere pascal), Spiritualite Orientale, No. 16, edition Abbaye de Bellefontaine, 1975, pp. 47-48).
The ultimate goal of the Incarnation is the destruction of death. The encounter with death is the hour of Christ; the hour for which He came (cf. John 12:27). In the grave He does not wait passively. The Holy Fathers see at this moment a kind of duel between Christ and death, between Christ and Satan, because this death was the last triumph of Satan – and his ultimate defeat. This is the meaning of Christ’s descent into hell; His death became His victory.
His grave became a dwelling place: in death how did our Life descend? To destroy forever the realm of death and to save the dead from hell by raising them (Good Friday Mass, Song 1). The tomb, this place of rest, which is nothing but our own abyss, in which death arises and which represents our sin. There he asked Christ to be laid to rest, buried with us, to bring us the fruit of His resurrection.
“Let the creation be a joy! Let the inhabitants of the earth rejoice, because the hostile hell has been destroyed! ” (cf. Canon of Holy Saturday).
Thus the tomb, once opened, is filled with the Spirit of the Resurrection. As Hans Urs von Balthazar writes: “Hell itself has become a Church.” The Church, in fact, because in the Church the humanity of Christ, which is one humanity crucified and resurrected at the same time and which is also ours, becomes for us a source of Life. Therefore, the hymnographer tells us, hell is filled with bitterness: Because You were placed in a new tomb, Savior of the universe, hell was frightened, the gates were broken; then the tombs were opened and the dead were raised, the grateful Adam cried out with joy: “Glory to Your descent, Lord, Friend of the people, glory to You!” (Apostich from Good Friday evening). The death of Christ is a saving death, because it destroys the source of death – evil; because it shows the ultimate and complete defeat of evil.
“Of course, death always reigns, reminding us of its presence: division, sorrow, separation from our loved ones, often cruel historical tragedies, hatred of oneself, of others. But always these states, if overcome by faith in the Risen One, can become paths to the Resurrection “(Olivier Clement, Ibid., pp., 48-49), because Christ descended to the depths of hell to share fully the state of death – not only those who have experienced it before. and after Him, but also for each of us who are in this moment between life and death. “Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest” (Matt. 11:28). His presence opens a place for light.
“Yesterday, with You, O Christ, I was buried, with You I awaken today, taking part in Your Resurrection after the sufferings of Your Crucifixion…” (cf. Easter Matins, song 3). , God forgives us, all and everything comes alive forever with the resurrection of Christ and the final victory over spiritual death, which is “the torn veil of love.” In the light of Easter, Christ is there – every time a human being is broken by pain and cut down. Behold, saith the LORD, I will open your graves, and bring you out, my people, out of your graves, and bring you into the land of Israel: and ye shall know that I am the LORD, when I open your graves, bring forth, my people (Ezek. 37: 12-13) The resurrection begins today and now, the Risen One stopped to each man and each woman individually, to all men and all women together and transformed them into His light.
“Come, take light from the Light without blemish, and glorify Christ the Risen One among the dead” (beginning of Easter Matins). The light shines in the darkness and this time the darkness is absorbed by it. Suddenly the earth is sown with new fire, the fire of the Holy Spirit. Christ is risen from the dead; Christ raises the dead. Christ the Risen One comes to inhabit the most secret place in our hearts, so that the latter may bear the whole universe in the depths of God’s infinite love, because there really is no greater love in human life than the proclaimed Resurrection of Christ.
Is the resurrection of Christ our hope? Undoubtedly, because the Resurrection for us Christians is not the only sympathy and consolation for later, but our vocation today.
Author: Stefan, Metropolitan of Tallinn and all of Estonia
Authorized translation from French: Petar Gramatikov
Note: Report presented at the 33rd session of the Encuentros Interconfesionales e Internacionales de Religiosos/as (E.I.I.R.), Rila Holy Monastery (Bulgaria), July 16, 2010 [published with the consent of the author].
We will introduce you to the great benefits of wine consumption. Apart from the pleasure of pouring yourself a glass of good wine (preferably red), it also has many benefits for our health. Here they are:
Longer life
Yes exactly. On the island of Icarios, they recently discovered an area where people live longer than anywhere else in the world. Guess what they consume daily – a glass of red wine, which they combine with healthy food.
A 2007 study found that procyanidins, compounds found in red wine tannins, help promote cardiovascular health. Wines produced in areas of southwestern France and Sardinia where people live longer have particularly high concentrations of the compound.
You get smarter
Resveratrol contained in wine can help improve short-term memory. After only 30 minutes of testing, researchers found that participants taking resveratrol had a significant increase in memory, and its intake was associated with the formation of new memories, learning and emotions.
Lower cholesterol levels
Reservoir also reduces high cholesterol levels, which can cause coronary artery disease if consumed in excess. One of the best ways to actively control harmful cholesterol levels – and ultimately prevent heart disease – is to limit your intake of saturated fats, especially red meat, and add a glass of red wine in the evening.
Reduces the risk of depression
In 2013, researchers from Spain discovered a possible link between wine consumption and depression. The study followed 5,500 men and women between the ages of 55 and 80 over seven years. Those who drank between two and seven glasses of wine each week were less likely to be depressed than those who did not drink wine. However, this drink should not be overdone.
Instead of fitness
Which would you prefer to drink wine or work out in the gym? Researchers at the University of Alberta in Canada have found that resveratrol improves heart, brain and bone function; in the same way these parts improve when you go to the gym. Now imagine the benefits of doing both!
Healthy heart
Red wine also reduces the risk of heart disease and stroke, as the tannins present in it protect against heart disease, while resveratrol is responsible for a healthy heart and helps eliminate chemicals responsible for blood clots.
9 interesting facts about wine and winemaking
As in any field of human knowledge and skills, there are curious facts and circumstances in wine production and wine in general that are not known to everyone.
1. Tartar. This is a deposit that settles on the walls of the wooden barrel after the processed grape juice is poured out of it. It is also called tartaric or tartaric acid and is a potassium salt.
2. You can make white wine from red grapes – but you can’t make red wine from white grapes. The juice of all grape varieties, in fact, has no color. The red color of the wine is due to the fact that the skin of the black or red grapes, which gives the color, is left in the marc until the juice turns red.
3. For wine storage it is best to buy a wine cabinet, which is desirable to be equipped with carbon filters (to remove foreign odors). But this is for everyday use. Long-term storage of wine is allowed only in the cellar. Storage temperature should not exceed 13 degrees Celsius.
4. The French insist that the prototype of the famous champagne glasses is the bust of Queen Marie Antoinette. However, the Greeks assure that this is in memory of the bust of the Beautiful Helen, known to us from the history of the Trojan War. It is not yet known whose version is more reliable.
5. The largest wine producer in the world is Italy (12%), not France, as many people think. The second place is occupied by America and France (11% of world production). The third position is in Spain – it provides the world with 9% of this high-quality alcoholic beverage.
6. Wine barrels are quite expensive vessels. For example, a barrel of French oak can cost up to $ 1,300. And from American oak – 300-500 dollars. But the high price is justified. The oak barrel has the ability to saturate the drink with a woody aroma for up to three fillings with wine. And even if you fill it for the fourth and fifth time, the aroma will still be there, albeit less pronounced.
7. Wine bottle stoppers are made from cork oak bark. This tree lives long enough – from 150 to 200 years, sometimes more. The bark is first collected when the tree is 25 years old. The bark of a tree is peeled once every 9-12 years, approximately 17 times, with an average annual harvest of 60 kg – and part of the bark is left intact. The date of the next peeling is written in red paint. And so after each harvest. The highest quality corks are produced in Portugal.
8. The largest cork oak in the world is the Whistling Tree in Portugal, which is more than 215 years old. Its bark has been peeled since 1820, and about 100,000 wine bottle caps have been made from it so far. Peel its bark once every 9 years. By the way, the tree got its name not by chance, but because of the many birds of different species that nest in its crown.
9. Approximately 600 grapes are needed to produce one bottle of wine.
Hunger is a useful feeling that signals that it is time to recharge our batteries. It supports the functioning of the brain, builds muscle, allows the body to recover from exercise and stress of the day.
It is normal to feel hungry every few hours. However, it is not normal if this happens too often, although we have eaten relatively recently.
What could be the causes of hunger soon after eating?
You are not consuming enough protein
Protein breakdown takes a little longer, which delays hunger over time. If your diet does not contain enough protein, you will become hungry soon after eating.
You do not eat enough fiber
Fiber also provides satiety for longer, unlike carbohydrates, for example. Fiber-free foods pass through the digestive tract much faster, leaving you hungry again soon after eating.
Your meals are too infrequent
Avoid starvation, because it brings a lot of difficulties to the body and puts it in a state of energy saving. This causes stress levels in the body to increase. Instead, divide your meals every 3-4 hours into small portions so that you recharge with energy-bearing nutrients at the optimal time.
You have insomnia
The longer you sleep, the more energy your body will need to control all the processes in cells, tissues and organs. This confusing process leads to exhaustion and the appearance of wolf hunger, especially at night, when the body should switch to a completely different mode.
Chronic stress
When you have high levels of stress, the body prepares for war with an unknown enemy. One of the first signs of this is the frequent occurrence of hunger. The body struggles to compensate for high levels of stress and find a source of energy to help it cope. Elevated stress levels are associated with high levels of cortisol in the blood. This hormone causes the accumulation of fat instead of releasing energy after a meal, which further contributes to the frequent manifestations of hunger.
What makes us eat when we are not hungry?
You have diabetes
When diabetes is not controlled, it affects not only blood sugar but also energy in the body. Sugar is mainly used to get fast energy, but in diabetes the body believes that it is very hungry, so it wants more. At high levels of insulin in the blood (as in type 2 diabetes) there are also frequent outbursts of hunger, as again the metabolism is disrupted and no energy is released due to the accumulation of adipose tissue in reserve.
Decreased thyroid function causes weight gain. Accelerated function – weight loss. Weight loss will be followed by rapid metabolism, in which nutrients are processed too quickly, causing you to become hungry again soon after eating.
Side effects of medications
If you are taking prescription or over-the-counter medications, read their instructions carefully. Some of them can cause unexplained hunger. Most often these are antidepressants, B vitamins, contraceptives.
Different types of hunger
And how to deal with them
Does your stomach ache? Usually, when we reach the end point of hunger, where our stomachs are so scraped that we feel sick, we tend to eat a whole elephant! Or at least food equal to his weight!
Joke aside. Each extreme bears its own harm. Abuse of harmful and high-calorie foods does not lead to anything good. Excessive use of healthy products will also not preserve your figure.
People tend to turn to food at many different times. To stay slim or to be able to fit into your old jeans, see what types of hunger you need to overcome! Don’t give in to them!
Natural hunger
When you haven’t eaten for too long, natural hunger strikes like a whirlwind. It is no coincidence that people say they are hungry like a wolf. In such cases, the risks of ingesting high-calorie foods are much higher. The quantities we eat are also larger. Then it gets hard for us.
Don’t let yourself get hungry. This will prevent you from overeating.
Hunger for nutrients
Even if this wording seems complete nonsense, this kind of hunger exists. Nutrient hunger is hunger for certain groups of nutrients, such as carbohydrates.
You know how sometimes you suddenly get terribly tired of sweets. This is because women tend to exclude whole groups of nutrients, thus the body experiences a frantic hunger for them at some point.
Hunger for anxiety
This is not really a form of hunger, but a way to calm the nerves. If you do not have to deal with this type of hunger, you risk starting to gain weight uncontrollably, because you will want to eat something every time you feel bad.
Hunger from addiction
This type of hunger is associated with food addiction. It could even be classified as a mental disorder, such as anorexia. If you are addicted to food, you will turn to it every time you feel helpless and sad. In such moments, food becomes the only consolation that makes you feel good.
Hunger from boredom
Have you ever eaten something simply because you have nothing else to do? It has happened to all of us, but it gets used to the wrong diet, which leads not only to weight gain, but also to various diseases associated with overweight.
Emotional hunger
Emotional hunger is not really real hunger. In moments of sadness and hopelessness, many people tend to dull the pain with high-calorie and forbidden foods, most often various delicacies.
If you had failed in love, what would you turn to? We are sure that the massive answers would be “to chocolate” or “to ice cream”.
Visual hunger
This hunger occurs when you are not really hungry, but you get tired of something tasty only at the sight of it. Do not give in to desire. Be strong! Only with will will you fight all these types of uncontrolled eating!
