… AND HIS LOT IS AMONG THE SAINTS
On
the
anniversary of the finding of the honourable relics of the holy
Hierarch Philaret
(Voznesensky)
Then
shall the righteous man stand in
great boldness before the face of such as have afflicted him, and made
no
account of his labours. When they see it, they shall be troubled with
terrible
fear, and shall be amazed at the strangeness of his salvation, so far
beyond
all that they looked for. And they repenting and groaning for anguish
of spirit
shall say within themselves, This was he, whom we had sometimes in
derision,
and a proverb of reproach: We fools accounted his life madness, and his
end to
be without honour. How is he numbered among the children of God, and
his lot is
among the saints! Therefore have we erred from the way of truth, and
the light
of righteousness hath not shined unto us, and the sun of righteousness
rose not
upon us. We wearied ourselves in the way of wickedness and destruction:
yea, we
have gone through deserts, where there lay no way: but as for the way
of the
Lord, we have not known it.
From the Third Reading for Holy Hierarchs
(Wisdom of
Solomon 5.1-7)
The Holy
Hierarch Philaret, in the world George Nikolayevich Voznesensky, came
from a
pious Orthodox family. He was born in the city of Kursk on March 22,
1903. His
father was a priest and, later, Archbishop Demetrius of Hailar of the
Russian
Church Abroad. In 1909 the family of Vladyka Philaret moved to the Far
East,
and until 1920 the future hierarch lived in Blagoveshchensk, where he
finished
high school.
This is what Vladyka himself
recounted
about his childhood in a sermon at his nomination as Bishop of Brisbane:
“There is hardly anything specially worthy of note in my life, in its
childhood
and young years, except, perhaps, a recollection from my early
childhood years,
when I as a small child of six or seven years in a childishly
naďve way
loved to ‘play service’ – I made myself a likeness of a Church vestment
and
‘served’. And when my parents began to forbid me to do this, Vladyka
Evgeny,
the Bishop of Blagoveshchensk, after watching this ‘service’ of mine at
home,
to their amazement firmly stopped them: ‘Leave him, let the boy ‘serve’
in his
own way. It is good that he loves the service of God.’” From this
episode it is
evident that Vladyka’s future lofty ecclesiastical service was as it
were
foretold in a hidden way already in his childhood.
After finishing high school
the future
Archpastor moved to Harbin, where he graduated from the Polytechnical
institute
and received a specialist qualification as an engineer-electrical
mechanic. Later,
when he was already First Hierarch of the ROCA, he did not forget his
friends
at the institute. All those who had known him, both at school and in
the
institute, remembered him as a kind, affectionate comrade. He was
distinguished
by his great abilities and was always ready to help and helped his
fellow
pupils a great deal, delivering each one from any “woe” that may have
threatened them. After the institute he got a job as a teacher and was
known as
a good, knowledgeable pedagogue; his pupils loved and valued him. But
his
instructions for the young people went beyond the bounds of the school
programme and penetrated every aspect of human life. Many of his former
pupils
and colleagues after meeting him retained a high estimate of Vladyka’s
authority for the rest of their lives.
Living in the family of a
priest and
seeing the life and labours of his father, a strict and pious pastor of
the
Church, the future Vladyka naturally became accustomed, from his early
years,
to the church and the Divine services. But, as he himself said later,
this was
at the beginning only an external, haphazardly created habituation to
the
atmosphere of church life, in which there was “almost nothing deep,
inwardly
apprehended and consciously accepted”. In truth, inward apprehension of
the
necessity of faith and life in accordance with faith is very important
for a
man insofar as, without this , perceiving church life in a merely
external
manner, through the atmosphere in which he lives, a man can later, in
changed
circumstances, completely lose faith in God.
“But the Lord knows how to
touch the
human soul!” recalled Vladyka Philaret. “And I undoubtedly see such a
caring
touch of the Father’s right hand in the way in which, during my student
years
in Harbin, I was struck as if with a thunder-clap by the words of the
Hierarch
Ignatius Brianchaninov which I read in his works: ‘My grave! Why do I
forget
you? You are waiting for me, waiting, and I will certainly be your
inhabitant;
why then do I forget you and behave as if the grave were the lot only
of other
men, and not of myself?’ Only he who has lived through this ‘spiritual
blow’,
if I can express myself thus, will understand me now! There began to
shine
before the young student as it were a blinding light, the light of a
true, real
Christian understanding of life and death, of the meaning of life and
the
significance of death – and new inner life began… Everything secular,
everything ‘worldly’ lost its interest in my eyes, it disappeared
somewhere and
was replaced by a different content of life. And the final result of
this inner
change was my acceptance of monasticism…”
The holy hierarch accepted
the monastic
tonsure in 1931. In the same year he completed his studies in Pastoral
Theology
in Harbin. At this time he had been ordained – he was the priest
George. In
monasticism he received the name Philaret in honour of Righteous
Philaret the
Merciful. In 1937 Fr. Philaret was raised to the rank of archimandrite.
“Man thinks much, he dreams
about much
and he strives for much,” the holy hierarch Philaret said in one of his
sermons, “and nearly always he achieves nothing in his life. But nobody
will
escape the Terrible Judgement of Christ. Not in vain did the Wise man
once say:
‘Remember your last days, and you will not sin to the ages!’ If we
remember how
our earthly life will end and what will be demanded of it after that,
we shall
always live as a Christian should live. A pupil who is faced with a
difficult
and critical examination will not forget about it but will remember it
all the
time and will try to prepare him- or herself for it. But this
examination will
be terrible because it will be an examination of our whole life, both
inner and
outer. Moreover, after this examination there will be no
re-examination. This
is that terrible reply by which the lot of man will be determined for
immeasurable eternity… Although the Lord Jesus Christ is very merciful,
He is
also just. Of course, the Spirit of Christ overflows with love, which
came down
to earth and gave itself completely for the salvation of man. But it
will be
terrible at the Terrible Judgement for those who will see that they
have not
made use of the Great Sacrifice of Love incarnate, but have rejected
it.
Remember your end, man, and you will not sin to the ages.”
The first years of the
future holy
hierarch’s monasticism were passed in the usual temptations that are
encountered on the path of this life. At first Fr. Philaret was greatly
helped
by the advice of the then First-Hierarch of the ROCA, Metropolitan
Anthony
(+1936), with whom Fr. Philaret corresponded for several years. And of
course
Fr. Philaret tried to draw the answers to his perplexities in the
writings of
the holy fathers, who from the very beginning instructed him on the
path of the
spiritual life and who constituted an irreplaceable guide in the
absence of
living instructors. That Fr. Philaret was brought up in a truly
Orthodox spirit
precisely through the writings of the holy fathers is evident also from
the
fact that he later, almost always practically alone, rose up in defence
of
God’s righteousness and Church truth. The saints taught him not to be
afraid to
be alone in the struggle for the truth, for ‘if God is for us, who can
be
against us?’ (Romans 8.31). Fr. Philaret’s love for the Word of
God was
such that he learned by heart all four Gospels, and later, throughout
his life,
he attempted to construct his sermons on an interpretation of this or
that word
of the Lord, on the Gospel parables and stories.
In Harbin Fr. Philaret was
very active in
ecclesiastical and pastoral-preaching work. Already in the first years
of his
priesthood he attracted many people seeking the spiritual path. The
Divine
services which he performed with burning faith, and his inspired
sermons
brought together worshippers and filled the churches. Multitudes
pressed to
that church in which Fr. Philaret was serving. All sections of the
population
of Harbin loved him; his name was also known far beyond the boundaries
of the
Harbin diocese. He was kind, accessible to all those who turned to him.
Queues
of people thirsting to talk with him stood at the doors of his humble
cell; on
going to him, people knew that they would receive correct advice,
consolation
and help.
The holy Hierarch Philaret
loved and
pitied people. The Lord endowed him with a special gift – the gift of
finding
the right approach to each person. In his sensitive and compassionate
soul
Vladyka immediately understood the condition of a man’s soul, and, in
giving
advice, consoled the suffering, strengthened the despondent and cheered
up the
despairing with an innocent joke. He loved to say: “Do not be
despondent,
Christian soul! There is no place for despondency in a believer! Look
ahead –
there is the mercy of God!” People went away from him pacified and
strengthened
by his strong faith.
Vladyka was generous not
only in
spiritual, but also in material alms, imitating his protector, the
righteous
Philaret. Many learned only after his death how much good he had done
and how
he secretly given help to the needy. Many homeless people turned to
him, and he
refused help to nobody, except in those cases in which he literally had
nothing
left, when he would smile guiltily and say: “Nothing, my dear!” But
then he
would find a way out – and give away the things he was wearing.
Vladyka gave the whole of
himself to the
service of God and his neighbours. In reading the Holy Scriptures and
the works
of the holy fathers, he did not see them as something abstract, but as
in truth
the words of eternal life, which every Christian who wanted to
be saved
had necessarily to follow in his life. One of his favourite passages of
Scripture, which he would often quote, was the words of the Lord from
the
Apocalypse reproaching the “lukewarm” Christians. Vladyka often
emphasised that
a man’s lukewarmness, his indifference to the truth, is much worse that
open
opposition to Christ. This, for example, is what he said in his sermon
on the
Sunday of All Saints:
“The Orthodox Church is now
glorifying
all those who have pleased God, all the saints.., who accepted the holy
word of
Christ not as something written somewhere to someone for somebody, but
as
written to himself; they accepted it, took it as the guide for the
whole of
their life and fulfilled the commandments of Christ.
“… Of course, their life and
exploit is
for us edification, they are an example for us, but you yourselves know
with
what examples life is now filled! Do we now see many good examples of
the
Christian life?!…. When you see what is happening in the world,… you
involuntarily think that a man with a real Orthodox Christian intention
is as
it were in a desert in the midst of the earth’s teeming millions. They
all live
differently… Do you they think about what awaits them? Do they think
that
Christ has given us commandments, not in order that we should ignore
them, but
in order that we should try to live as the Church teaches.
“…. We have brought forward
here one
passage from the Apocalypse, in which the Lord says to one of the
servers of
the Church: ‘I know your works: you are neither cold nor hot. Oh if
only you
were cold or hot!” We must not only be hot, but must at least follow
the
promptings of the soul and fulfil the law of God.
“But there are those who go
against it…
But if a man is not sleeping spiritually, is not dozing, but is
experiencing
something spiritual somehow, and if he does not believe in what people
are now
doing in life, and is sorrowful about this, but is in any case not
dozing, not
sleeping – there is hope that he will come to the Church. Do we not see
quite a
few examples of enemies and deniers of God turning to the way of truth.
Beginning with the Apostle Paul…
“In the Apocalypse the Lord
says: ‘Oh if
only thou wast cold or hot, but since thou art neither cold nor hot
(but
lukewarm), I will spew thee out of My mouth’…
This is what
the Lord says about those who are indifferent to His holy work. Now, in
actual
fact, they do not even think about this. What are people now not
interested in, what do they not stuff into their heads – but
they have
forgotten the law of God. Sometimes they say beautiful words. But what
can
words do when they are from a person of abominable falsehood?!… It is
necessary
to beseech the Lord God that the Lord teach us His holy law, as it
behoves us,
and teach us to imitate the example of those people have accepted this
law,
have fulfilled it and have, here on earth, glorified Almighty God.”
Following the example of the
holy
fathers, the holy Hierarch Philaret did not teach others what he
himself did
not do. He himself, like the saints, whom he called on people to
imitate,
accepted everything written in the Holy Scriptures and the patristic
writings
“not as something written somewhere to someone for somebody,”, but as a
true
guide to life.
Vladyka was exceptionally
strict with
himself and conducted a truly ascetic style of life. He had a rare
memory,
keeping in his head not only the words of the Gospel and the holy
fathers, but
also the sorrows and woes of his flock. On meeting people the holy
hierarch
demonstrated great interest for all sides of their life, he did not
need to
remember their needs and difficulties – he himself developed the
subject of
conversation that interested a man, and gave ready replies to the
perplexities
tormenting him.
In 1931 Manchuria was
occupied by the
Japanese armies. Fourteen years later the Japanese were succeeded by
the
communists – in 1945 the Soviet armies defeated the Japanese army;
immediately
after the Soviet communists the Chinese came to power. In the first
days of the
“Soviet coup” the Soviet government began to offer Russian
emigres the
opportunity to take Soviet passports. Their agitation was conducted in
a
skilful manner, very subtly and cleverly, and the deceived Russian
people,
exhausted from the hard years of the Japanese occupation during which
everything Russian had been suppressed, believed that in the USSR there
had now
come “complete freedom of religion”, and they began to take passports en
masse.
At this time Fr. Philaret
was the rector
of the church of the holy Iveron icon in Harbin. There came to him a
reporter
from a Harbin newspaper asking his opinion on the “mercifulness” of the
Soviet
government in offering the emigres Soviet passports. He expected to
hear words
of gratitude and admiration from Fr. Philaret, too. “But I replied,”
recounted
Vladyka Philaret, “that I categorically refused to take a passport,
since I
knew of no “ideological” changes in the Soviet Union, and, in
particular, I did
not know how Church life was proceeding there. However, I knew a lot
about the
destruction of churches and the persecution of the clergy and believing
laypeople. The person who was questioning me hastened to interrupt the
conversation and leave…”
Soon Fr. Philaret read in
the “Journal of
the Moscow Patriarchate” that Lenin was the supreme genius and
benefactor of
mankind. Father Philaret could not stand this lie and from the ambon of
the
church he indicated to the believers the whole unrighteousness of this
disgraceful affirmation in an ecclesiastical organ, emphasising that
Patriarch
Alexis (Simansky), as the editor of the JMP, was responsible for this
lie. Fr.
Philaret’s voice sounded alone: none of the clergy supported him, and
from the
diocesan authorities there came a ban on his preaching from the church
ambon,
under which ban he remained for quite a long time. Thus, while still a
priest,
Vladyka was forced to struggle for church righteousness on his own,
without
finding any understanding amidst his brothers. Practically the whole of
the Far
Eastern episcopate of the Russian Church Abroad at that time recognised
the
Moscow Patriarchate, and so Fr. Philaret found himself involuntarily in
the
jurisdiction of the MP, as a cleric of the Harbin diocese. This was for
him
exceptionally painful. He never, in whatever parish he served,
permitted the
commemoration of the atheist authorities during the Divine services,
and he
never served molebens or pannikhidas on the order of, or to please, the
Soviet
authorities. But even with such an insistent walling-off from this
false church
behaviour, his canonical dependence on the MP weighed as a heavy burden
on the
soul of Fr. Philaret. When the famous campaign for “the opening up of
the
virgin lands” was declared in the USSR, the former emigres were
presented with
the opportunity to depart for the Union. To Fr. Philaret’s sorrow, his
own
father, Archbishop Demetrius of Hailar, together with several other
Bishops,
were repatriated to the USSR. But Fr. Philaret, on his own as before,
tirelessly spoke in his flaming sermons about the lie implanted in the
MP and
in “the country of the soviets” as a whole. Not only in private
conversations,
but also from the ambon, he explained that going voluntarily to work in
a
country where communism was being built and religion was being
persecuted, was
a betrayal of God and the Church. He refused outright to serve molebens
for
those departing on a journey for those departing for the USSR, insofar
as at
the foundation of such a prayer lay a prayer for the blessing of a good
intention, while the intention to go to the Union was not considered by
Fr.
Philaret to be good, and he could not lie to God and men. That is how
he spoke
and acted during his stay in China.
Such a firm and
irreconcilable position
in relation to the MP and the Soviet authorities could not remain
unnoticed.
Father Philaret was often summoned for interrogations, at one of which
he was
even beaten. In the end they tried to kill him: they set fire to the
house in
which he was living, having first boarded up the doors and windows on
the
ground floor. It was a terrible fire, and Fr. Philaret was only just
able to
save himself: he jumped out of a window on the first floor, and
incurred
serious burns. As a consequence of the interrogations and burns he
suffered,
for the rest of his life he retained a small, sideways inclination of
his head
and a certain distortion of the lower part of his face; his vocal
chords also
suffered. Thus the holy Hierarch Philaret was counted worthy of the lot
of the
confessors and martyrs for the Faith.
Archimandrite Philaret left
China only
after almost the whole of his flock had left Harbin.
“While striving to guard my
flock from
Soviet falsehood and lies,” recounted the holy hierarch, “I myself
sometimes
felt inexpressibly oppressed – to the point that I several times came
close to
the decision to leave altogether – to cease serving. And I was stopped
only by
the thought of my flock: how could I leave these little ones? If I went
and
ceased serving, that would mean that they would have to enter Soviet
“service”
and hear prayers for the forerunners of the Antichrist – “Lord,
preserve them
for many years,” etc. This stopped me and forced me to carry out my
duty to the
end.
“And when, finally, with the
help of God
I managed to extract myself from red China, the first thing I did was
turn to
the First Hierarch of the Russian Church Abroad, Metropolitan Anastasy,
with a
request that he consider me again to be in the jurisdiction of the
Russian
Church Abroad. Vladyka Metropolitan replied with mercy and love, and
immediately blessed me to serve in Hong Kong already as a priest of the
Synodal
jurisdiction, and pointed out that every church server passing into
this
jurisdiction from the jurisdiction of Moscow must give a special
penitential
declaration to the effect that he is sorry about his (albeit
involuntary) stay
in the Moscow jurisdiction. I did this immediately.”
Soon Fr. Philaret flew to
Australia and
arrived in Sydney. The ruling Archbishop of Australia accepted him with
joy and
love, and already in the first weeks of Fr. Philaret’s stay in
Australia began
to speak about the possibility of ordaining him as a Bishop. In the
soul of
Archimandrite Philaret there immediately arose doubts and waverings. In
accordance with his profound humility, he considered himself weak and
unworthy
of such a lofty service. However, the experience of monastic obedience
did not
allow him to decline from the path to which ecclesiastical authority
summoned
him. In 1963 he was ordained Bishop of Brisbane, a vicariate of the
Australian
diocese. In his sermon at his nomination as Bishop Archimandrite
Philaret said
to the Archpastors who were present:
“Holy Hierarchs of God! I
have thought
and felt much in these last days, I have reviewed and examined the
whole of my
life – and… I see, on the one hand, a chain of innumerable benefactions
from
God, and on the other – the countless number of my sins… And so raise
your
hierarchical prayers for my wretchedness in this truly terrible hour of
my
ordination, that the Lord , the First of Pastors, Who through your
holiness is
calling me to the height of this service, may not deprive me, the
sinful and
wretched one, of a place and lot among His chosen ones…
“One hierarch-elder, on
placing the
hierarchical staff in the hands of a newly appointed bishop, said to
him: ‘Do
not be like a milestone on the way, that points out for others the road
ahead,
but itself remains in its place… Pray
also for this, Fathers and Archpastors, that in preaching to others, I
myself
may not turn out to be an idle slave.”
Of course, the humble
servant of the
Church had not idea at that time that already in the following year he
would
become First Hierarch of the whole Russian Emigration, and that his
name would
become known to all the ends of the earth as that of a confessor and
champion
of the True Orthodox Faith….
In 1964, having been for
many years First
Hierarch of the ROCA, Metropolitan Anastasy, for reasons of health and
age,
petitioned the Hierarchical Sobor for his retirement. The question
arose who
would be the new First Hierarch. Some members of the ROCA wanted to see
the
holy Hierarch John (Maximovich) as their head, but another part was
very
opposed to this. Then, to avoid any further aggravation of the
situation, and a
possible scandal and even schism, the Hierarch John removed his
candidacy an
suggested making the youngest Hierarch, Bishop Philaret, First
Hierarch. This
choice was supported by Metropolitan Anastasy: Vladyka Philaret was the
youngest by ordination, had mixed little in Church Abroad circles, and
had not
managed to join any “party”. And so, in 1964 Bishop Philaret of
Brisbane was
elected to the First Hierarchical see by the Hierarchical Sobor of the
ROCA.
Truly the hand of God was in
this !
Vladyka Philaret administered the Russian Church Abroad for 21 years.
Under him
many of those pleasing to God were glorified: Righteous John of
Kronstadt (in
1964), St. Herman of Alaska (in 1971), Blessed Xenia of St. Petersburg
(in
1978) and, finally, in 1981 – the Council of the New Martyrs and
Confessors of
Russia led by the Royal Martyrs and Patriarch Tikhon. It is worthy of
note that
until Metropolitan Philaret there was not one glorification of a new
saint in
the ROCA. This good beginning witnesses, as does Vladyka Philaret’s
whole
activity, to the fact that from the very beginning of his
first-hierarchical
service he adopted a course aimed at preserving and defending patristic
Orthodoxy, understanding that all the formerly Orthodox churches in the
world
were falling away from the faith, and that true Christians had nothing
in
common with “Official Orthodoxy”, and that therefore they should not
wait until
one of those sitting on the ancient apostolic cathedras who – alas! –
had
fallen away from the apostolic confession of the faith, should glorify
new
saints that had clearly already been glorified by God, but should do it
themselves.
Being educated on the
teaching of the
holy fathers, Vladyka Philaret strove to lead his church along the path
of the
holy fathers. Unfortunately, he was not sufficiently understood by his
episcopal brothers, some of whom absolutely refused to understand his
striving.
The holy hierarch had a difficult task in front of him, insofar as, on
the one
hand, it was necessary to lead the Church in the direction of a
decisive
rejection of the apostasy of “World Orthodoxy”, and on the other, to
preserve
unity between the members of his own Synod. A particularly consistent
supporter
of rapprochement with World Orthodoxy was Archbishop Anthony of
Geneva
and Western Europe.
Some
Hierarchs made attempts to use the precedents of rare and irregular
communion
with the “official churches” in the 1930s-50s to justify their striving
to
preserve communion with the ecumenists, referring, among other things,
to the
fact that the ROCA had never broken officially with a single one of the
churches of “World Orthodoxy”. The tacit aim of these Bishops’ activity
was to
attain the recognition by the ROCA of the MP, and to enter into a
certain
communion with her. But Vladyka Philaret truly became for these lovers
of
“World Orthodoxy” a stone of stumbling and a stone of temptation.
In
vain does one of the opponents of his course say today that
Metropolitan
Philaret “understood nothing” about what the position of the Church
Abroad
should be, because he lived the whole of his life far from “the great
world” –
in a word, he was “uneducated”, he did not know “the traditions of the
Church
Abroad” – and for this reason, supposedly, his course was so strongly
distinguished from the course of all the other “official churches”.
Others hint that he fell under someone’s “evil influence”. But it seems
it
would have been correct to say precisely the opposite: the holy
Hierarch
Philaret received an excellent “education”, absorbing the patristic
wisdom from
his youth and acting under its influence; and the ecclesiastical course
that he
chose was so distinct from the course of the hierarchs of “World
Orthodoxy”
because the latter, being the sons of this world, simply trampled on
the
teaching of the holy fathers and canons of the Church, treating them as
“non-existent”
Moreover, the Lord in a
clear way
demonstrated that the path trodden by the holy Hierarch Philaret was
pleasing
to Him: in 1982 there was revealed a miracle of the mercy of God – the
wonder-working, myrrh-streaming icon of the Iveron-Montreal icon of the
Mother
of God, which in the course of fifteen years unceasingly emitted myrrh
and was
hidden from us only in 1997.
While Vladyka Philaret was
first-hierarch,
ecumenism finally showed its true face – the mask of a terrible heresy
uniting
in itself all the earlier heresies and striving to engulf Orthodoxy
completely,
destroying the very concept of the Church of Christ and creating a
universal
“church” of the antichrist.
As a counterweight to the
apostate
“Orthodox churches”, Metropolitan Philaret strove to strengthen the
movement of
the True Orthodox Christians throughout the world. Thus in December,
1969,
under his leadership, the Synod of the ROCA officially recognised the
validity
of the ordinations of Bishop Acacius (Pappas)
and other hierarchs of the “Florinite” branch of the Greek Old
Calendarists,
which Metropolitan Anastasy had refused to do before the end of his
life. This
recognition strengthened the position of the “Florinites”, as a result
of which
the Old Calendarist “Matthewites” also turned to the Synod of the ROCA
– in
1971 Metropolitans Callistus of Corinth and Epiphanius of Cyprus
arrived in New
York with the aim of “establishing spiritual communion for the
strengthening of
the Sacred struggle for Orthodoxy.” Communion was established (although
in 1976
the “Matthewites” broke it, to a significant extent because of the
increasing
numbers of concelebrations with ecumenists in the diocese of Archbishop
Anthony
of Geneva). This rapprochement with the Greek Old Calendarists
went in
parallel with a hardening of relations with the “official churches”.
And it was
about time, insofar as the stormy ecumenist activity of the Ecumenical
Patriarch Athenagoras led, in December, 1965, to a mutual “lifting of
anathemas” between the Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholics, about
which
declarations were made simultaneously in Rome and Constantinople.
Athengoras recognised
the Catholics as his “brothers in Christ”. Such as flagrantly
anti-Orthodox
deed on the part of the Ecumenical Patriarch could not leave the holy
Hierarch
Philaret indifferent. On December 15, 1965 he wrote to Athenagoras,
protesting
against his actions: “Your gesture puts a sign of equality between
error and
truth. For centuries all the Orthodox Churches believed with good
reasons that
it has violated no doctrine of the Holy Ecumenical Councils; whereas
the Church
of Rome has introduced a number of innovations in its dogmatic
teaching. The
more such innovations were introduced, the deeper was to become the
separation
between the East and the West. The doctrinal deviations of Rome in the
eleventh
century did not yet contain the errors that were added later. Therefore
the
cancellation of the mutual excommunication of 1054 could have been of
meaning
at that time, but now it is only evidence of indifference in regard to
the most
important errors, namely new doctrines foreign to the ancient Church,
of which
some, having been exposed by St. Mark of Ephesus, were the reason why
the
Church rejected the Union of Florence… No union of the Roman Church
with us is
possible until it renounces its new doctrines, and no communion in
prayer can
be restored with it without a decision of all the Churches, which,
however, can
hardly be possible before the liberation of the Church of Russia which
at
present has to live in the catacombs… A true dialogue implies an
exchange of
views with a possibility of persuading the participants to attain an
agreement.
As one can perceive from the Encyclical Ecclesiam Suam, Pope
Paul VI
understands the dialogue as a plan for our union with Rome with the
help of
some formula which would, however, leave unaltered its doctrines, and
particularly
its dogmatic doctrine about the position of the Pope in the Church.
However,
any compromise with error is foreign to the history of the Orthodox
Church and
to the essence of the Church. It could not bring a harmony in the
confessions
of the Faith, but only an illusory outward unity similar to the
conciliation of
dissident Protestant communities in the ecumenical movement.”
Metropolitan Philaret sent a similar address to another leader of the
ecumenical movement – the American Archbishop James. However, the
apostate
hierarchs paid no attention to his exhortations. The ecumenical
movement
continued to gather speed. The holy Hierarch Philaret looked with
sorrow on the
falling away from the faith of the once Orthodox Churches. And he
called the
epistles which he sent to all the hierarchs of the Orthodox Church just
that –
“Sorrowful Epistles”.
In his first Epistle, written in 1969, St. Philaret says that he has
decided to
turn to all the hierarchs, “some of whom occupy the oldest and most
glorious
sees”, because, in the words of St. Gregory the Theologian, “the truth
is
betrayed by silence”, and it is impossible to keep silent when you see
a
deviation from the purity of Orthodoxy – after all, every bishop at his
ordination
gives a promise to keep the Faith and the canons of the holy fathers
and defend
Orthodoxy from heresies. Vladyka quotes various ecumenist declarations
of the
World Council of Churches (WCC) and clearly shows, on the basis of the
patristic teaching and the canons, that the position of the WCC has
nothing in
common with Orthodoxy, and consequently the Orthodox Churches must not
participate in the work of this council. The holy Hierarch Philaret
also
emphasises that the voice of the MP is not the voice of the True
Russian
Church, which in the homeland is persecuted and hides in the catacombs.
Vladyka
calls on all the Orthodox hierarchs to stand up in defence of the
purity of
Orthodoxy.
Vladyka Philaret wrote his
second
“Sorrowful Epistle” on the Sunday of Orthodoxy, 1972. In it he noted
that
although in the last two years hierarchs had made declarations about
the
heterodoxy of the ecumenical movement, not one Orthodox Church had
declared
that it was leaving the WCC. Vladyka placed as the aim of his Second
Epistle
“to show that abyss of heresy against the very concept of the Church
into which
all the participants in the ecumenical movement are being drawn”. He
recalled
the threatening prophecy of the Apostle Paul that to those who will not
receive
“the love of the truth for salvation” the Lord will send “strong
delusion, that
they should believe a lie. That they all might be damned who believed
not the
truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness” (II Thessalonians
2.10-12).
St. Philaret’s third Epistle was devoted to the so-called “Thyateira
Confession”
of Metropolitan Athenagoras, the exarch of the Constantinopolitan
Patriarchate
in Europe – a document written in a completely heretical spirit, but
which did
not elicit any reaction from the leaders of the “official churches”.
Evidently
Vladyka Philaret hoped at the beginning that at any rate one of the
bishops of
“World Orthodoxy” might listen to his words, which is why he addressed
them in
his epistles as true Archpastors of the Church. Besides, attempts at
exhortation corresponded to the apostolic command: “A man that is a
heretic
after the first and second admonition reject, knowing that he that is
such is
subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself” (Titus 3.
10-11). It
was fitting, before accepting an anathema against the apostates, to try
and
convert them from their error. Alas, no conversion took place, and the
ecumenical impiety continued to pour out. Vladyka addressed his word
not only
to bishops, but also to their flock, untiringly explaining the danger
of the
new heresy. While telling about the zeal of St. Nicholas the
Wonderworker, who
slapped the face of Arius when he blasphemed against the Son of God,
Vladyka
said: “O how often we do not have enough of such zeal when it is really
necessary
to speak for the insulted and trodden-on truth! I want to tell you
about one
incident that took place not long ago and which it would have been
difficult
even to imagine several years ago – and now we are going further and
further
downhill all the time. One man came from Paris and said that the
following
incident had taken place at a so-called “ecumenical meeting”. Of
course, you
know what ecumenism is; it is the heresy of heresies. It
wants to
completely wipe out the concept of the Orthodox Church as the guardian
of the
Truth, and to create some kind of new, strange church. And so there
took place
this “ecumenical meeting”. Present were a so-called Orthodox
protopriest from
the Paris Theological (more exactly, heretical) Institute, a Jewish
rabbi, a
pastor and a Catholic priest. At first they sort of prayed, and then
began the
speeches. And then (forgive me for saying such things from the holy
ambon, but
I want to show you what we have come to) the Jewish rabbi said that the
Lord
Jesus Christ was the illegitimate son of a dissolute woman…
“But that’s not the main
horror. The
Jewish people has opposed God for a long time… - so there’s nothing
surprising
in this. But the horror was that when he said this everyone was
silent. Later, a man who had heard this terrible blasphemy asked the
“Orthodox”
protopriest: “How could you keep silent?” He replied: “I didn’t want to
offend
this Jew.” It’s wrong to offend a Jew, but to insult the All-Pure
Virgin Mary
is permitted! Look at the state we have come to! How often does it
happen to us
all now that we do not have the zeal to stand up, when necessary, in
defence of
our holy things! The Orthodox cleric must zealously stand up against
blasphemy,
just as the holy Hierarch Nicholas stopped the mouth of the heretic…
But now,
unfortunately, we have become, as the saying goes, “shamefully
indifferent to
both the evil and the good”. And it is precisely in the soil of this
indifference, of a kind of feeling of self-preservation, that the
heresy of
ecumenism has established itself – as also apostasy, that falling away
which is
becoming more and more evident… Let us remember, brethren, that
Christian love
embraces all in itself, is compassionate to to all, wishes that all be
saved
and is sorry for, and merciful to, and love every creature of God; but
where it
sees a conscious assault on the truth it turns into fiery zeal which
cannot
bear any such blasphemy… And so must it always be, because every
Orthodox
Christian must always be zealous for God.”
At the beginning of the
1970s there arose
within the Church Abroad a powerful movement in support of the Soviet
dissidents. When the Third All-Emigration Council took place in 1974, a
significant part of the participants headed by Archbishop Anthony of
Geneva
spoke in favour of the ROCA giving unqualified support to the
dissidents in
spite of their membership in the Moscow Patriarchate and their
ecumenist
ideology, which was foreign to the spirit and teaching of the ROCA.
However,
the traditionalists, while giving due respect to the boldness of the
dissidents, objected to their recognition, which could lead believers
in Russia
into error, devaluating the witness of the true catacomb confessors and
creating the impression that one could be a true confessor from inside
a
heretical church organisation. Significantly later, in 1980, after one
of the
dissident leaders, Fr. Dmitri Dudko, had been “broken” and offered
“tele-repentance”
for his
“anti-soviet activity”, Vladyka Philaret wrote to one liberally-minded
priest
of the ROCA
that it
could not be otherwise, insofar as Fr. Dmitri’s activity had taken
place inside
the MP, that is, outside the True Church, “the church of the
evil-doers”,
and therefore the God’s help did not come to him. If Fr. Dmitri had
joined the
True Church, Soviet power would have dealt cruelly with him, but at the
same
time the Grace of God would have strengthened him for the exploit of
true
martyrdom. Thus the holy hierarch spoke out already at that time
against the
now very widespread ideology of “the struggle from within” for the
regeneration
of the Church, when the “fighters for Orthodoxy” carry on their
activity within
church organisations that have fallen away from Orthodoxy and that have
preserved only the external shell of the True Church. Vladyka Philaret
always
warned his flock and priests against any communion with the MP, not
only in
prayer, but also in daily life, emphasising that such an instruction
was contained
in the Testament of Metropolitan Anastasy.
At the Council of 1974 many
voices were
heard in favour of the union of the ROCA with the schismatic Paris and
American
jurisdictions – “in the spirit of love”, without emphasising
differences of opinion.
But these voices were forced to fall silent when Metropolitan Philaret
underlined the fact that love which does not wish to trouble one’s
neighbour by
pointing out his error is not love, but hatred,
as St. Maximus the Confessor wrote: “I want and pray you to be wholly
harsh and
implacable with the heretics only in regard to cooperating with them or
in any
way whatever supporting their deranged belief. For I reckon it
misanthropy and
a departure from Divine love to lend support to error, that those
previously
seized by it might be even more greatly corrupted.”
After the death in 1976 of
the catacomb
Archbishop Anthony (Galynsky-Mikhailovsky), the holy Hierarch Philaret
accepted
under his omophorion fourteen hieromonks of the Catacomb Church who had
been
left without archpastoral care. Vladyka had a lofty estimate of the
exploit of
the catacombniks and used to cite the example of the catacomb nuns who
refused
to carry out the commands of the godless authorities and received for
their
firmness the miraculous help of God – they did not freeze after several
hours
in the icy wind which the chekists had put them with the intention of
killing
them thereby. He used to say: “If the whole multi-million mass of
Russian
people were to display such faithfulness as these nuns displayed, and
refused
to obey the robbers who have planted themselves on the Russian people –
communism would fall in a moment, for the people would receive the same
help
from God as miraculously saved the nuns who went to certain death. But
as long
as the people recognises this power and obeys it, even if with curses
in their
soul, this power will remain in place.”
Time passed, and it became
clearer and
clearer that it was impossible for the Orthodox to have any kind of
communion
with the “churches” of World Orthodoxy, let alone be in them: at the
beginning
of the 1980s there took place the transition from inter-Christian to
inter-religious ecumenism. In 1980 the ecumenical press-service (ENI)
declared
that the WCC was working out a plan for the union of the all Christian
denominations into one new religion. In 1981 in Lima (Peru) an
inter-confessional eucharistic service was devised – at a conference
during
which Protestant and Orthodox representatives in the WCC agreed that
the
baptism, eucharist and ordination of all the denominations was
valid and
acceptable. But the greatest scandal was elicited by the Vancouver
General
Assembly of the WCC in 1983. Present at it were representatives of all
existing
religions, and it began with a pagan rite performed by the local
Indians.
Orthodox hierarchs took part in the religious ceremonies together with
representatives of all the world’s religions.
In the same year the
Hierarchical Council
of the ROCA pronounced an anathema on ecumenism: “To those who attack
the
Church of Christ by teaching that Christ’s Church is divided into
so-called
‘branches’ which differ in doctrine and way of life, or that the Church
does
not exist visibly, but will be formed in the future when all ‘branches’
or
sects or denominations, and even religions will be united in one body;
and who
do not distinguish the priesthood and mysteries of the Church from
those of the
heretics, but say that the baptism and eucharist of heretics is
effectual for
salvation; therefore to those who knowingly have communion with these
aforementioned heretics or advocate, disseminate , or defend their new
heresy
of Ecumenism under the pretext of brotherly love or the supposed
unification of
separated Christians, Anathema.”
It was obvious against whom
this anathema
was directed. After all, there are no heresies without heresiarchs,
heretics
and their practical activity. Therefore all the participants in the
ecumenical
movement who recognise it to be ecclesiastical and useful are in heresy
and are
subject to the condemnation of those canons which the Church from of
old
applied against heretics – that is, to excommunication. Also, those in
communion with heretics become participants in the same heresy.
Factually
speaking, they have already fallen away from the Church, and the
anathema only
witnesses to the fact that they are outside the Church. The opponents
of the
break with “World Orthodoxy” said and say much about the “invalidity”
of this
anathema – to the extent of saying that the hierarchs of the ROCA
accepted no
anathema at all, but that certain “evil-minded people” simply
introduced it
into the text of the Acts of the Council. However, this seems
improbable: after
all, none of the hierarchs later renounced the anathema, none of them
said that
he had not signed it; the anathematisation of ecumenism was introduced
into the
Synodicon of the Sunday of the Triumph of Orthodoxy… Thus the work of
Vladyka’s
whole life found its highest expression in a historical act having
universal
significance for the whole Fullness of Orthodoxy – in the official
anathematisation of the ecumenical heresy of heresies and the
apostates
of our age. It is evident that no exhortation directed at the
“Orthodox”
ecumenists could have any effect, and a very powerful cauterisation was
necessary in order to halt the general infection. In one of his sermons
Vladyka
spoke about those who transgress the teaching of the Church, explaining
the
significance of the anathema: “the Church declares that they have cut
themselves off from communion with the Church, having ceased to listen
to her
maternal voice. And this is not only for the information of others, so
that
they should know this, but also for the good of the excommunicates
themselves.
The Church hopes that this threatening warning, at any rate, will act
upon
them…”
Vladyka Philaret suffered
many insults
for his activity. It got to the point that a certain archimandrite in
the presence
of Vladyka declared to the other hierarchs that it was necessary
quickly to
remove “such an unfitting Metropolitan”… However, the holy hierarch
paid no
attention to such insults, remembering that he would have to give an
account to
Christ the Chief Shepherd and that of him, as a Bishop, would be asked
first of
all how he preserved and defended the Orthodox Faith. He showed no
partiality
before anyone. Thus when in 1970 Archbishop Averky, the former rector
of Holy
Trinity monastery in Jordanville, who in his views concerning the
apostasy of
the contemporary world was very close to the holy hierarch Philaret,
suddenly, in 1970, permitted Monophysite heretics to serve in the
community’s
church ouf of some kind of “pastoral condescension”, Vladyka Philaret,
on
hearing of this, ordered the church to be immediately closed and
hallowed as
having been defiled by heretics, and also in a letter to Vladyka Averky
pointed out all the anticanonicity of this act, emphasising that it
could be
justified by no economy and expressing the fear that the faithful
children of
the ROCA would turn away from her if similar incidents were repeated…
In spite of the opposition
of individual
bishops and clergy, Vladyka was loved by the broad masses of the church
people.
As during his life in Harbin, the holy hierarch refused nobody help on
his
becoming First-Hierarch. He took special care over the spiritual
enlightenment
of the young people, whom he very much loved and by whom he was always
surrounded. He taught people true humility and repentance:
“Sometimes people say about
themselves:
“Oh, I’m very religious, I’m a deep believer,” – and they say this
sincerely,
thinking that can in actual fact say this about themselves with good
reason…
From the life of the Church we see that those who really had true faith
always
thought about themselves and their faith in a very humble way, and
always
considered and were conscious of themselves as being of little faith…
He who
really believes does not trust his faith and sees himself as being of
little
faith, who in essence does not have the true faith thinks that he
believes
deeply…
“We see a similar ‘paradox’
in the moral,
ethical and spiritual evaluation of a person;… righteous men see
themselves as
sinners, while sinners see themselves as righteous.
“… In the soul of a sinner
unenlightened
by the Grace of God, who does not think about the spiritual life, who
does not
think about correction, who does not think about how he will answer for
himself
before God, everything has merged together, and he himself can make out
nothing
in it; only the all-seeing God sees the pitiful condition of the soul
of this
man. But he himself does not feel it and does not notice it, and think
that he
is not that bad, and that the passages in the Gospel that talk about
great
sinners have no relationship at all to him. Perhaps he does not think
of
himself as holy, but he supposes that he is not that bad…
“Those who were pleasing to
God thought
of themselves in a completely different way and saw themselves and
their
spiritual nature in a completely different light. One ascetic wept all
the
time; his disciple asked him: “Father, what are you weeping about?”
“About my
sins, my son,” he replied. “But what sins can you have? And why do you
weep
over them so much?” “My son,” replied the ascetic, “if I could see my
sins as
they should be seen, in all their ugliness, I would ask you to weep for
my sins
together with me.” That is how these extraordinary people spoke about
themselves. But we, being ordinary people, do not see our sinfulness
and do not
feel its weight. Hence it turns out as I have just said: a person comes
to
confession and does not know what to say. One woman arriving for
confession
just said: “Batyushka, I’ve forgotten everything.” What do you think:
if a man
has a painful hand or leg or some inner organ, and goes to the doctor,
will he
forget that he has a pain? So is it with the soul: if it really burns
with a
feeling of repentance, it will not forget its sins. Of course, not one
person
can remember all his sins – all to the last one, without
exception. But
true repentance unfailing demands that a man should be conscious of his
sinfulness and feel sincere compunction over it.
“We pray in the Great Fast
that the Lord
grant us to behold our sins – our sins, and not other people’s. But it
is
necessary to pray about this not only in the Fast, but at all times –
to pray
that the Lord may teach us to see ourselves as we should and not think
about
our supposed “righteousness”. But we must remember that only the mercy
of God
can open a man’s eyes to his true spiritual condition and in this way
place him
on the path of true repentance.”
It is interesting that
Vladyka imitated
the Apostles of Christ not only in their pastoral labours and zeal for
the
faith. He also very much loved fishing, and often went fishing. With
this aim
he even had a special “fisherman’s cassock” into which he changed when
he went
fishing.
We know of cases of healing
through
Vladyka’s prayers. But if another holy hierarch of the Russian
Emigration,
Vladyka John, was glorified by a multitude of miracles, of healings and
similar
signs, the holy hierarch Philaret was in this respect more “unnoticed”;
the Lord
counted him worthy of another gift – that of standing for
ecclesiastical
righteousness, of reproaching the impiety of the apostates of our age
and of
calling on all the faithful who really wish, not in words but in deeds,
to be
Orthodoxy, to turn away from the new heresy of ecumenism and from
communion
with the false Orthodox. The Apostle Paul says: “But the manifestation
of the
Spirit is given to every man to profit withal. For to one is given
wisdom; to
another the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the
same
Spirit; to another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of
healing by
the same Spirit; to another the working of miracles… And God hath set
some in
the Church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers,
after that
miracles, then gifts of healing, helps, governments, diversities of
tongues…” (I
Corinthians 12.7-10, 28). And in truth the Lord gave to the holy
hierarch
Philaret flaming faith, the word of wisdom and reason to confirm it,
and placed
him as an apostle and teacher of His Church.
Throughout his life the holy
hierarch
Philaret was a fighter for the truth and called on Christians to love
the
truth, to value it, to defend it and to place nothing in life higher
than it.
“The distinguishing characteristic of our time,” he used to say, “is
that
people are now more and more possessed by indifference to the Divine
truth.
Many beautiful words are spoken, but in fact – in reality – people are
completely indifferent to the truth. Such indifference was once
displayed by
Pilate, when the Lord stood before him at his trial. Before Pilate
stood the
Truth Himself, but he sceptically declared: “What is truth?” – that is,
does it
exist? And if it does, then it is a long way from us, and perhaps does
not
exist. And with complete indifference he turned away from Him Who
announced the
truth to him, Who was the Truth Himself. And now people have become
similarly
indifferent. You have probably more than once heard supposedly
Christian words
about the union of all into one faith, into one religion. But remember
that
what lies behind this is precisely indifference to the truth. If the
truth were
dear to a man, he would never go on this path. It is precisely because
the
truth is of little interest to everyone, and they simply want somehow
to make
simpler and more convenient arrangements in matters of the faith, too,
that
they say: ‘Everyone must unite’…
“Brethren, we must fear this
indifference
to the truth. Our Lord Jesus Christ in the Apocalypse clearly indicates
to us
how terrible indifference to the truth is. There he turns to the Angel
standing
at the head of the Laodicean Church and says: ‘I know thy works. Thou
art
neither cold nor hot. Oh if only thou wast hot or cold! But since thou
art
neither cold nor hot (but lukewarm – neither the one nor the other, the
truth
is not dear to thee), I will spue thee from My mouth!’ As an organism
cast out
of itself something which is absolutely repulsive and harmful to it.
“Let
us
remember that this indifference to the truth is one of the main woes of
our age
of apostasies. Value the truth, O man! Be a fighter for the truth…
Place the
truth higher than all else in life, O man, and never allow yourself to
decline
in any way from the true path.
“… There are now many
attacks on the
Church Abroad. Not one Church is reviled as much today. And the servers
of
other Churches are not revile as much as the servants of the Church
Abroad.
What does this mean? This is the most reliable sign that our Church
stands in
the truth, and therefore every lie, every unrighteousness has taken up
arms
against her in war… She stands in the truth and preaches this truth,
announces
it and defends it – hence all these attacks on her.
“Let us remember and value
the fact that
you and I belong to the Holy Church, which in no way sins against the
truth,
but contains it in such a way as our Lord Jesus Christ and the holy
apostles
commanded. Amen.”
The holy hierarch Philaret
always used to
say that Christians who are indifferent to the truth are precisely
those who
are called the Laodicean Church in the Apocalypse, who think: “I am
rich, and
increased in goods, and have need of nothing” (Rev. 3.17), and
who, if
they do not repent and acquire zeal for the Truth, will be cast out of
the
Heavenly Kingdom as being offensive to the Lord. It seems that we can
compare
Vladyka Philaret himself with the Angel of the Philadelphian Church, of
whom it
is said in the Apocalypse: “And to the Angel of the Church in
Philadelphia
write: These things saith He that is holy, He that is true, He that
hath the
key of David, He that openeth, and no man shutteth, and shutteth, and
no man
openeth: I know thy works: behold, I have set an open door before thee,
and no
man can shut it: for thou hast a little strength, and has kept My word,
and
hast not denied My name… Because thou hast kept the word of My
patience, I also
will keep thee from the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all
the
world, to try them that dwell upon the earth. Behold, I come quickly:
hold that
fast which thou hast, that no man take thy crown” (Rev. 3.7-8,
10-12).
In truth, the Lord opened before Vladyka a door for preaching and
reproaching
the apostates of this age, and no one was able to shut this door.
Vladyka “had
a little strength” – he did not have a multitude of helpers and those
who
thought as he did; and although he always insisted on the complete
cessation of
concelebrations with clerics and bishops of ecumenist “Orthodox”
churches,
nevertheless he did not have enough strength completely to attain this
end – in
the West European diocese such concelebrations continued. However,
there can be
no doubt that Vladyka Philaret’s inestimable merit consists in the fact
that he
did not allow all the Church as a whole to go along “the path of
compromise”
between Orthodoxy and ecumenism. The holy hierarch Philaret kept the
word of
the Lord and did not reject His name and the true Orthodox confession
before
the face of the falling away into ecumenism of the majority of the
Orthodox
hierarchs, which already in itself was a wonderful example of firmness
and
determination – after all, we know that bad examples are infectious,
that “evil
conversation corrupts good manners”, and that when there is nobody
around you
who really cares for Orthodoxy it becomes very difficult to stand in
the truth…
Vladyka “kept what he had” – Orthodoxy, and was not deprived of his
crown: the
Lord made him one of the pillars in His Heavenly Church and “a pillar
of fire
and a pillar of cloud” showing the way to all the Orthodox living upon
the
earth.
“The confessor of Orthodoxy
and defender
of the Church of Christ from the heresy of heresies,
Metropolitan
Philaret, passed away to the Lord on November 8/21, 1985, on the day of
the
Chief Captain of God Michael – the warrior against the very first heresy
since the creation of the world, as a result of which a part of the
angels fell
away from the Grace of God and became demons…
On October 28 / November 10, 1998 the incorrupt relics of the
holy
hierarch Philaret were revealed – “it may be that they will reverence
him” on
seeing that he whom they considered “an unfitting metropolitan” has
turned out
to be a holy one pleasing to God…
It was arranged that the
remains of
Vladyka Philaret would be transferred from the burial-vault under the
altar of
the cemetery Dormition church of the Holy Trinity monastery in
Jordanville into
a new burial-vault behind the monastery’s main church. In connection
with this,
it was decided, in preparation for the transfer, to carry out an
opening of the
tomb. On November 10 Archbishop Lavr of Syracuse and Holy Trinity,
together
with the clergy of the community, served a pannikhida in the burial
vault; the
coffin of Vladyka Philaret was placed in the middle of the room and
opened. The
relics of Vladyka were found to be completely incorrupt, they were of a
light
colour; the skin, beard and hair were completely preserved. Vladyka’s
vestments, Gospel, and the paper with the prayer of absolution were in
a state
of complete preservation. Even the while cloth that covered his body
from above
had preserved its blinding whiteness, which greatly amazed the
undertaker who
was present at the opening of the coffin – he said that this cloth
should have
become completely black after three years in the coffin… It is
noteworthy that
the metal buckles of the Gospel in the coffin has fallen into dust on
being
touched – they had rusted completely; this witnessed to the fact that
it was
very damp in the tomb; and in such dampness nothing except these
buckles
suffered any damage! In truth this was a manifest miracle of God.
The news of the incorruption
of the
relics of Vladyka Philaret quickly spread around the world. However,
judging
from later events, not everyone rejoiced at this; Archbishop Lavr’s
reaction
was quite reserved…
… The coffin with the relics
was again
closed. On the eve of the reburial of the relics, November 20, at the
beginning
of the fourth hour of the day, the coffin of the holy hierarch was
taken from
the Dormition church to the monastery church of the Holy Trinity in a
car. The
serving of the pannikhida was led by Archbishop Lavr, with whom there
concelebrated 20 clergy. None of the other hierarchs of the ROCA came
to the
translation of the relics of the holy hierarch Philaret (only Bishop
Gabriel of
Manhattan wanted to come, but he was hindered by a sudden illness).
After the
pannikhida the coffin with the body of Vladyka Philaret was placed in
the side
wall of the church, and at 19.00 the All-Night Vigil began. The next
day,
November 21, Archbishop Lavr headed the celebration of the Divine
Liturgy in
the church. With him concelebrated 18 priests and 11 deacons, several
more
clergy who had arrived prayed with the laypeople in the church itself.
About
400 people gathered in the over-crowded church. All those present were
greatly
upset and grieved by the fact that during the pannikhida, as during the
All-Night Vigil and the Liturgy, the coffin with the relics of the holy
hierarch Philaret remained sealed. In spite of the numerous requests of
clergy
and laity, who had specially come to Jordanville so as to kiss the
relics of
the holy hierarch, Archbishop Lavr refused to open the coffin. He also
very
strictly forbade making photocopies from the shots that had already
been taken
of the incorrupt relics of Vladyka or even to show them to anyone.
Archbishop
Lavr called on those assembled to pray for the peace of the soul of the
reposed
First Hierarch until the will of God would be revealed concerning his
veneration among the ranks of the saints… After the Liturgy a panikhida
was
served, and then the coffin with the relics of the holy hierarch
Philaret were
taken in a cross procession around the Holy Trinity cathedral and taken
to the
burial vault to the prepared place, where Archbishop Lavr consigned the
honourable relics of the holy hierarch to the earth.
A year has passed since
then. However,
there has been no decision taken concerning the lot of the relics, and
the
question of the canonisation of the holy hierarch has not even been
raised.