Tsarobezhnoe verbiage on the radio. Lectures on Tsarist Power. Transmissions of Zhanna Bichevskaya Conversations with Bichevskaya with v p Kuznetsov

Holy Blessed Tsar John Vasilyevich IV the Terrible (part 1)

Hello, dear friends. You are listening to the author’s program from Zhanna Bichevskaya “From Heart to Heart”. And I am hosting it, People’s Artist of Russia Zhanna Bichevskaya. I invite you to listen to my series of programs about the Russian Tsars. We have listened to slander against them for many years, and slander against God’s anointed is blasphemy against Him who sent them, that is, the Kings, blasphemy against Christ Himself. Today we will talk about a Tsar who evokes especially violent, controversial opinions; this is Tsar Ivan IV the Terrible, Ivan Vasilyevich IV. And to expose all those who slander the Tsar, we will use the works of Bishop Ioann Snychev. We will not say anything on our own, but will use the works of Bishop John Snychev, the late Metropolitan of St. Petersburg and Ladoga. A few years ago, a whole series of his books was published, which reveals to us the true story - not written by random people who use hackneyed stencils and cliches, replete with lies and slander. Vladyka John wrote wonderful book"Autocracy of the Spirit." This is one of his books, and it will help us today in our important and interesting conversation. Actually, we will deal with this great personality - Ivan IV Vasilyevich the Terrible.

This theme is Royal. Our guest (in fact, he will host this program, tell us about it - what I just told you about) is the production editor of the newspaper “Eternal Life” Vadim Petrovich Kuznetsov. Hello, Vadim Petrovich.

Hello. Ivan the Terrible - locally revered Russian saint Orthodox Church. It’s even strange for some Christians to hear about this, because many have now even forgotten and don’t know that he is a saint, locally revered in the Moscow diocese. Although it is enough to look at the “Complete Monthlies of the East” and make sure that where the saints locally revered in the Moscow diocese are listed, the name of Tsar John is there. At one time, Christians honored him, prayed to him, and there was a blessing from the ruling bishop to honor him.

We know that in the Faceted Chamber, in the Kremlin, there is a fresco depicting Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich IV with a halo.

Indeed, quite a large number of icons of Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich are known. Recently we were passing through the city of Vladimir, and the priest, the rector of the temple, showed us right at the entrance an icon (life-size) of ZhB>, where he is depicted with a halo. The fact is that Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich is not just a saint, he is a faithful Tsar. This is a special rite of holiness, which, accordingly, is provided only for Kings in the Church. Who was John Vasilyevich as Tsar? He was the first religious Anointed King in Russia and in general. And this is a special church ministry that we – Russia – received as an inheritance from Byzantine Empire. Unlike secular kings, who exist in different states, Ivan Vasilyevich was the Anointed of God, that is, he was the leader of the people of God. The Church that was founded on earth by Christ for the salvation of human souls, it - its earthly procession, its earthly service to the Church - is headed by the Anointed of God, the King. That is, this is a special church rank, a special person chosen among the people of God in order to be the leader of the people of God and lead the people to God, teach the people the service of God.

Forgive me, Vadim, I know, for example, that some actors who acted and performed the roles of Tsar Ivan the Terrible in theaters and films - they then ended up with their lives rather badly, and very tragically. Maybe you remember such situations, do you know them too?

Recently, a few months ago, there was a TV program where actor Alexander Mikhailov admitted that he was practically the last artist who played the role of Tsar Ivan IV the Terrible and remained alive after that. Because it is known that everyone who played this role before him died suddenly. For example, before him, Evstigneev played a role in the film, and we see that the Lord protects his saints. JB> And people who touch the name, the image of a saint in this way - in an unworthy way - if they do not repent, then, of course, already in this life, punishments begin for them, according to the law of Divine justice.

Vadim, Ivan the Terrible is credited with the sin of polygamy and the murder of his son by himself. Tell us, please, shed some light on this issue.

Yes, there are several versions about the fact that he had 5, 6, 7 wives, but it is no coincidence that in his book, Metropolitan John emphasizes that there is no basis for such versions in the chronicle sources. In fact, his first wife, Anastasia Romanova - the first Russian queen, who was already predicted in childhood that she would be one - she was supposed to give birth to an heir for him, and was already bearing an heir for him, but while the Emperor was busy with Kazan, he destroyed the bridgehead of our enemies to attack Russia (all the slave markets of the Mediterranean were filled with Slavic slaves), and it was necessary to deal with this topic seriously - at this time, behind the back of the Sovereign, his first wife and heir were killed by a conspiracy of the boyars. There is a version that she was poisoned, but Anastasia was not just the first wife of Sovereign Ivan Vasilyevich, but she was the founder of a new branch of the Royal dynasty - the Romanovs. The Holy Reverend Gennady of Kostroma and Lyubimograd, as described in his life, visited the family of Anastasia Romanova when she was still a girl, blessed her eldest sons, who later became close friends of the Emperor, assistants in his public service, in feats of arms, and then he blessed Nastenka, the little girl, and said these words to her: “And you, Anastasia, will be our first queen in Rus' and a fruitful root.” What happened later - by decision of the Local Council of 1613, her great-nephew Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov became hereditary tsar.

The first wife of Ivan the Terrible, Anastasia, along with his heir, was killed as a result of a boyar conspiracy. The fact is that the Emperor at that time was engaged in the capture of Kazan, destroying the bridgehead that the enemies of Russia used to kidnap Russian people into slavery. All slave markets in the Mediterranean were filled with Slavic slaves, and this issue needed to be resolved urgently. So, this conspiracy took place behind the Emperor’s back. The Lord allowed him to lose his wife, whom he loved very much, and to remain without an heir. Therefore, he was forced to marry a second time - which, of course, was not in his plans. Although he is accused of being such a womanizer and so on. Well, this often happens among foreign writers. The second wife turned out to be barren, and the Tsar, in general, needed an heir. He was forced to marry for the third time. The Church allows, has the rite of the third wedding in the Trebnik (his third marriage was also crowned), and, of course, she (the wife) bore him sons. It was predicted to Tsar Ivan the Terrible by the blessed holy fool Vasily of Moscow, a saint, that not his eldest son Ivan would become the heir to the throne, but his second son, Fyodor Ivanovich. And so it happened.

Vadim Petrovich, we know this version, there is a painting by Repin “Tsar Ivan the Terrible kills his son.” Maybe you can tell us something about this?

This version is very common, unfortunately. The artist Repin illustrated the slander of Anthony Possevin - there was such an ambassador under Ivan the Terrible, who came from Poland. After returning to his homeland, he wrote a book where he first put forward this version of the murder. Although he could not be any witness to the murder, he arrived seven years after the death of the eldest son of Ivan the Terrible, which, according to chronicle sources, was not violent, but natural. Firstly, he died from a disease that is now called lung disease, tuberculosis, which was not treated then, and, secondly, his father was far away, he was in Moscow, and his son died in Alexandrovskaya Sloboda.

Vadim Petrovich, who was this Anthony Possevin? Why did he infiltrate so much into Russia, where he came from?

This was not only an ambassador who came for negotiations (Stephen Batory sent him), but he was a spy, first of all, an intelligence officer, an enemy of Orthodoxy, a Jesuit monk. Everyone knows who the Jesuits are and how they relate to Orthodoxy.

Yes, by crusades. That is, he sort of slandered King John, and in history he remained as the king who killed his son, and for some reason they somehow latched on to this story, and it lives on for quite a long time, this lie. It has grown in, and such historians, especially Soviet ones, cling to it very much. Vadim Petrovich?

We are glad that Metropolitan John proposes to reconsider all these slander and calls on us to look into this issue seriously and not participate in this slander.

Vadim, please tell me what kind of phenomenon this is – the “Seven Boyars”? Please illuminate this issue for us.

The very word “Seven Boyars” - it has literally become a household word and has existed for centuries. In principle, we are talking about the fact that among Christians, in a Christian state, there were people who were not completely Christians, who did not fully accept the teachings of the Church, and the will of God on how to build a Christian statehood, what it generally is. And the boyars - as a rule, wealthy people, in power - were often conductors of Western ideas, and in this sense, the Orthodox Autocracy did not quite suit them, did not fit into their plans. Hence the influence through the boyars of all these forces - anti-Russian, anti-Orthodox, and this is natural. There were so many conspiracies throughout the history of the reign of Ivan IV that it is very difficult to list them - specifically boyar conspiracies. There is no point in giving examples, but the most famous, let’s say, traitor is Kurbsky. The Emperor even condescended to arrange a correspondence with him - in order not only to defend Orthodox views, but also to expose him in the enormous amount of lies and slander that this traitor invented for his self-justification.

By the way, Vadim Petrovich, I think he wrote three books, these books are being read now, but they contain slander against Tsar John. But he was a traitor, he fled to Lithuania, sold himself to the Lithuanian king, and betrayed Russia and the Tsar.

Yes, that's it, prince! Indeed, he fought at the head of the army, went against his homeland, against the Russian Orthodox people. But he needed to somehow cover up his meanness, and hence all his writings. But it’s better to read not Kurbsky’s letters, but better – the response letters of Tsar Ivan the Terrible, there detailed analysis there is all the slander. This is a very edifying read. And, accordingly, Tsar Ivan the Terrible, according to his position, according to his religious duty, had to react to all these betrayals, which led not only to the destruction of statehood, but also harmed the faith, because Christian statehood had as its goal the defense of the faith - Russia became a stronghold of Orthodoxy , defense of Ecumenical Orthodoxy. ZhB> And precisely because the Sovereign reacted and punished the traitors, that is why for the dismemberers of Russia he became “Terrible”. The people did not consider him “Terrible”.

Here is the oprichnina - what is this interesting phenomenon during the reign of Tsar Ivan the Terrible?

Let me briefly remind you that the Emperor divided his entire state, all of Russia, into “oprichnina” and “zemshchina”. Oprichnina - it was new way state management. People were recruited there regardless of their class and financial status, and the zemstvos who remained in the zemshchina were people who lived under the previous system of administrative management. And to manage the zemstvo workers, the Tsar installed Tsar Simeon Bekbulatovich in Moscow. This is a former Tatar king who converted to Christianity, and the Emperor entrusted him, literally, for a long period of time, that is, several years, with governing the state, which many did not quite understand. The Tsar himself, at the head of the oprichnina - becoming the oprichnina king - retired from the capital.

This is where Alexandrovskaya Sloboda is, this is the 101st km. from Moscow, right, Vadim Petrovich?

Yes, it was the oprichnina capital. And together with the guardsmen, he literally visited different places in Russia in order to carry out “spiritual cleansing” of the entire body, literally, he cleaned the capillaries of the entire state organism.

What were the guardsmen like? These are people who, firstly, underwent double tonsure - the rank of tonsure as a monk and the rank of tonsure as a prince. This double combination of angelic and officer ranks made them literally similar to archangels, as Metropolitan Philaret called them - “earthly archangels.” Their charter in the Alexandrovskaya Sloboda, according to which they lived and prayed, was very strict, one of the strictest - in my opinion, the Sinai Charter. These are hours-long services, with thousands of bows. Moreover, the Tsar, having divided Russia into zemshchina and oprichnina, introduced a fairly strict rule so that zemstvo workers and oprichninas would not communicate. Even for the fact that they were talking, it could have been the death penalty. ZhB> The appearance of the guardsmen resembled a monastic robe - black, the headdresses also looked like monastic caps, and a large golden eagle was embroidered on the back of the back. Therefore, the guardsmen were seen from afar, they could even be distinguished by appearance.

Do you mean the Byzantine coat of arms?

The double-headed eagle, which the heirs, like the Third Rome, received from Byzantium. You can also recall that there was a sign of the guardsmen - they had dog heads and brooms tied to their saddles. This was explained quite clearly at the time. Those who remember the Gospel parable about the swept out upper room know that sedition had to be swept out of Russia, but it itself was not swept out. And dog heads are also a sign of loyalty to the Sovereign, because, in principle, very loyal people were selected as guardsmen of the ZhB>, there was a very strict selection. They built the Church of the Cross in the settlement, especially by the guardsmen themselves, with their own hands, each brick was made separately with the image of a cross, so it was called “Krestovaya”.

And during the three years of their life in the Alexandrovskaya Sloboda, Tsar John IV formed his army, as if his army, consisting of such “earthly archangels” that you are talking about, and at this time in Moscow the Tsar appointed, as it were, “and. o.”, his manager, installed the “acting king” Prince Bekbulatovich. Well, as for the religious and mystical side of their activities, maybe you can tell us something?

Indeed, the bishops did not oppose the fact that a “two kingdom” suddenly appeared. The oprichnina tsar ended up in Aleksandrovskaya Sloboda, and Simeon Bekbulatovich was sitting in Moscow. The clergy and bishops at that time understood the division of meaning of this “two kingdom”. The mystical side of the issue is this: since our Sovereigns foreshadow the service of the last Tsar, who will carry out the last battle with the Antichrist, and, naturally, accumulate spiritual experience for him, for that last battle. The Last King is the Victor, he is called that way in the Bible - “The rider on a white horse, and he will go out to win.”

This is exactly the image of our last Russian Tsar for the last times, right? VK> Who will defeat the Antichrist? How interesting!

John Vasilyevich IV also understood perfectly well that he was creating an icon, a model - so to speak in secular language - of that future battle and victory. Hence the division into two parts, which awaits all of humanity and the whole world, into two camps - the kingdom of Christ and the kingdom of the Antichrist. In principle, this prototype associated with the two kingdoms existed before Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich. Even in the Old Testament we see the first two kings, Saul and David. David just had “oprichniki”, then called chelethea And felethea , that is, these are two rings of guards, which had other functions of managing the people, administrative functions, military, etc. They consisted of Hittites, Eastern Slavs, just like David’s wife Bathsheba, who bore him a son, Solomon, who was also of Hittite origin, had Slavic roots.

That is, the wife of King David of the Old Testament was a Slav, a Hittite - Bathsheba?

Of course. He himself was an Ephrathite by nationality - David, as his father’s nationality is written in the Bible.

What is an “Ephrathite”?

This is a Semitic people, along with Arabs and Jews. And on the basis of this we can assert that the Mother of God had, among other bloodlines, Slavic blood, because She was from the line of David.

Sovereign Ivan the Terrible with his oprichnina army prefigures the last Tsar and the feat that was entrusted to him for the last times. After all, it is the last King, according to God’s plan, who must achieve the final, not only spiritual, but also historical victory over evil - universal, universal, world evil. That is, on the scale of all humanity. And the previous Sovereigns - they are preparing this victory. As it were, we are talking about modeling it in parts. The Last Tsar - this is in a collective sense - will use all this experience accumulated over centuries and implement...

And in recent times the states will also be divided into zemshchina and oprichnina, right?

The whole world will be divided into two parts. Maybe they won’t be called “zemshchina” and “oprichnina”, because just like chelethea And felethea, these names, they have a specific historical character, and are already gone. But the division into two parts based on religious principles is a significant issue. And the struggle between good and evil is the main content of life in general for humanity on earth. This is the meaning of the existence of all humanity. As long as this struggle continues, the world will not cease to exist.

Vadim Petrovich, we are now moving on to a very interesting personality, an odious personality. We know that Malyuta Skuratov was the closest guardsman to Tsar John IV. Please tell us about this person, Malyuta Skuratov. Since Metropolitan of Moscow Philaret (Drozdov), a saint, said that they were “earthly archangels” - it means that Malyuta Skuratov was, being the closest to Tsar John IV - in terms of duty, in spirit - he was probably the brightest personality, the brightest “earthly archangel.” Please tell us about it.

The image of an archangel close to God is, in the Orthodox tradition, such a mystical side, it has a place to be. But as a person he is interesting because of his loyalty to the Emperor. His whole life, which very rarely happens, is permeated with this Christian humility, and he understood his loyalty to the Emperor as the fulfillment of a religious duty. In this sense, he was one of the exemplary guardsmen.

The task of the oprichnina is to give the people knowledge that the state is a means of serving the ways of the Lord. And the future servants of the last Sovereign promised to us will really need such examples as the monk Gregory with the triple surname Malyuta-Skuratov-Belsky. The guardsmen themselves took part in some wars. For example, they defeated the army of Devlet-Girey, in general with a smaller number, and even took one guardsman of this khan prisoner. Just one captivated him. They also took part in Western campaigns, when there were very serious disputes with the Livonians. They also managed to recapture with fewer numbers - a very serious expansion was being prepared there, the capture large territory could have happened. It was thanks to the oprichnina army, very well organized and very loyal, spiritually inclined, that the Livonian Order was able to be put in place. By the way, in this military campaign, the monk Gregory, Malyuta Skuratov-Belsky, gave his life for the Faith, the Tsar and the Fatherland. That is, this person is before God, perhaps even a saint, who laid down his soul for the Faith, the Tsar and the Fatherland.

Yes, I fulfilled, as it were, three Christian duties.

There was, as we remember, Abishai, the most faithful of the servants and warriors closest to King David, who is also a model of fidelity. Thus, we see that the oprichnina service of our Sovereign, and oprichnina service in general, has become a form of church obedience. That is, there was a struggle for the churching of all Russian life. Apparently, the enemies of Orthodoxy, the enemies of Russia, also know and understand that our past has a direct bearing on our future. He who kills our past threatens our future.

By the way, don’t you think that our Duma is now making such a decision - in my opinion, it has already been signed - in order to remove from general education program two school subjects. And what do you think, no more, no less - literature and history! That is, our children will never know our literature and our history. What, only lawyers and economists will be trained, or what?

Indeed, these are practically the two main humanities subjects in the general education curriculum.

That is, in Russia they are training professionally such “professional ignoramuses” who will not know - it’s even scary to imagine! - such writers as Pushkin, Dostoevsky, Gogol, Turgenev will not know our history. It’s just scary to imagine what we have to go through, but well, it’s all providential.

Our guest today, in my author’s program Zhanna Bichevskaya “From Heart to Heart,” was wonderful, very interesting person, our interesting interlocutor, publishing editor of the newspaper “Eternal Life” Vadim Petrovich Kuznetsov. I know that you were blessed to create this newspaper by the elder from the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, elder Kirill, archimandrite. It was he who suggested this name - “Eternal Life”. We thank you all who listened to this program. Of course, the attitude towards her will be uneven. In any case, those who want to know the truth, I think they have discovered and received something interesting for themselves. Vadim Petrovich, what would you like to say finally to our radio listeners? After all, the whole world is listening to us?

I want to tell the Russians Orthodox people so that they correctly understand why Tsar Ivan is called, precisely by the Church, “The Terrible.” The fact is that when the crowning of the Sovereign and his anointing to the Kingdom take place, the Metropolitan reads a special prayer - the all-kneeling prayer. Everyone is on their knees at this time. And the Metropolitan, on behalf of the Church, turns to the Lord - “make him (that is, the Sovereign) merciful to the merciful and formidable to the enemies of the Church.” Therefore, Tsar Ivan is the same Tsar whom, through our prayer, according to the faith of the Church, he made - for the enemies of Russia and the faith - the Terrible Tsar.

Well, I want to believe that the Lord through the books of Bishop John, Metropolitan of Ladoga and St. Petersburg John Snychev, put to shame all the slanderers and enemies of Russia. Read his books, especially this book - “Autocracy of the Spirit.” I don’t want us to look like Ivans in the eyes of Russia’s enemies, not remembering not only our kinship, but also our history. I say goodbye to you. Happily.

Archpriest Peter ANDRIEVSKY, Evgeniy YAMSHCHIKOV

It is painful to feel and realize the danger that pseudo-Orthodox and pseudo-Christian radio broadcasts may contain for the faithful children of our Mother, the Russian Orthodox Church, both in Russia and abroad.

Undoubtedly, many understand that radio broadcasts are a powerful propaganda weapon in the hands of those who use it. We will not evaluate the use of airtime by non-church people here. According to the Apostle: God judges the external. Let us dwell only on the use of the time provided on the radio by those means mass media, who expect that Orthodox Christians will hear them. Let's say right away that there are unfortunately very few genuinely Orthodox programs on the air. The most significant radio station on Orthodox radio is the Radonezh radio station, and Orthodox Christians love the broadcasts of this radio station.

There is another radio station, “Sofia,” which is an outspoken mouthpiece for Catholic and ecumenical propaganda in Russia. This radio station broadcasts what they call themselves “Orthodox clergy”: Archpriest Ioann Sviridov, Priest Vladimir Lapshin, Abbot Innocent (Pavlov). In fact, any Orthodox person, having listened to the radio speeches of these “pastors,” will come to the unequivocal conclusion that such smerdyakovism and undisguised hatred of the Russian Orthodox Church and the Russian people, which these “progressive” apostate priests allow themselves to spew, is difficult to find even in the most anti-church-minded secular media.

However, let’s leave “Sofia” and move on to main topic our narrative.

Every week the program “From Heart to Heart” is broadcast on the waves of the largest World Radio Company “Voice of Russia”. Its presenter, the famous singer Zhanna Bichevskaya, and others performing in the program (for example, schema-nun Nicholas - Tatyana Groyan) talk about church history, about the monarchy and the Russian tsars, and at the same time about pseudo-elders (for example, the “great martyr” and the secret “hieromonk” (!) Grigory Rasputin, who, according to the schema-nun, allegedly cared for royal family), about numerous miracles, most often completely unreliable. Under the outwardly Orthodox shell of the program, its non-Orthodox content is revealed, rather sectarian in nature, like the “Virgin Center”. Frankly heretical statements are often heard, since the speakers in this program often touch on the most important dogma of our Orthodox faith - the redemption of mankind by Christ the Savior.

Periodically, a certain Vadim Petrovich Kuznetsov, better known as one of the author-editors of the newspaper “Eternal Life” (he usually signs his articles with the pseudonym K.V.P.), appears on the “From Heart to Heart” program. The magazine “Blessed Fire” (No. 8 for 2002) is already about his work.

Also Kuznetsov V.P. known as the leader of the pseudo-Orthodox “Brotherhood of St. Tsar-Redeemer Nicholas II."

In the program “From Heart to Heart,” Vadim Kuznetsov introduces himself to listeners as an Orthodox writer, historian and theologian, which sounds very strange.

I would like to hear from Vadim Kuznetsov himself, what religious institutions did he graduate from that would give him the right to be called a church historian and theologian? Unfortunately, V. Kuznetsov’s “theology” can have sad consequences not only for himself, but also for those who listen to him and believe his pseudo-theological nonsense.

Vadim Kuznetsov and the host of the program in their radio speeches are indignant that St. Tsar Nicholas is not served in some places with prayer services, which is, according to the “theologian” Kuznetsov, "heresy". But at the same time, Kuznetsov is silent that he and his “brotherhood” consider the glorification of Tsar Nicholas II in the guise of an old bearer to be wrong. He believes that it would be correct to glorify St. as a martyr king "redeemer", which is already heresy undoubted.

And for the veneration of St. Vadim Kuznetsov has a “theological” understanding of Tsar Nicholas II as a “redeemer”. No, not the teaching of the Church, but his own “theology” invented by him.

V. Kuznetsov expounds it on the air of the program “From Heart to Heart” as follows: Our Lord Jesus Christ was the King of the earth before Gethymania, holding(I would like to ask V. Kuznetsov himself, what or who was held on earth by the Lord Jesus Christ?). Then the Lord Jesus Christ in the Garden of Gethsemane relinquishes His authority as the King of the earth, holding, which He allegedly was before according to Vadim Kuznetsov. And then Jesus Christ, having accepted the so-called “impoverishment of power,” ascended to the highest level of His royal ministry, becoming the King “in full” (V. Kuznetsov’s terminology), that is, the King-Redeemer of the sins of the human race. The same thing happened with the last Russian Tsar Nicholas II. According to the false teaching of V. Kuznetsov, the Lord from time immemorial distributed the various ministries of Jesus Christ among the Russian Sovereigns. And supposedly Nicholas II got the most difficult stage of such Christ’s service - the atonement of human sins.

As V. Kuznetsov says, the violation of the 1613 oath of allegiance to the house of the Romanovs reached its apogee by February 1917, and then our Tsar Nicholas II, becoming like Christ the Savior and being earthly icon of Christ(!), resigns from the role of king- holding at the moment of his abdication of the Throne and takes on the mission redeemer the sin of infidelity of the Russian people to the house of the Romanovs, that is, the oath of 1613. Thus, from this moment of abdication, according to V. Kuznetsov, our Tsar Nicholas II becomes king-redeemer, that is, the king “in full” (terminology by V. Kuznetsov) and redeems on his “Calvary” the “sin” of unfaithfulness to himself.

It is very important to note that according to V. Kuznetsov and his “Orthodox brotherhood of St. Tsar-Redeemer Nicholas II" Our Lord Jesus Christ atoned for all the sins of mankind on Golgotha, except one— the sin of the Russian people’s deviation from the oath of 1613, which from centuries(!) was destined to redeem Tsar Nicholas II. And that he is the only king in the entire history of mankind who was destined by God to be redeemer.

All these pseudo-theological nonsense of V. Kuznetsov stem from his complete ignorance of Orthodox doctrine. According to the unanimous teaching of the Church Fathers, the redemptive feat of Christ began not with Gethsemane, but with Incarnation. This redemptive feat of Christ continued throughout His earthly life and ended on Calvary with the death of the Savior on the cross. In Gethsemane, the redemptive feat of Christ only continued. As the Holy Fathers teach us, in Gethsemane the Lord was pleased to assure us of the truth of His humanity. And it’s not at all accidental. Subsequently, as is known, the Gethsemane Prayer of Christ greatly helped the Orthodox in denouncing the heresies of Monophysitism and Monothelitism. Kuznetsov’s likening of Tsar Nicholas II to the Savior is real blasphemy. Was Christ, the King of kings and Lord of lords, a simple earthly king? Christ Himself resolutely rejected Satan’s offer to become the head of earthly kingdoms, he also evaded those who wanted to make Him their king, and said that My kingdom is not of this world, and Kuznetsov, like the ancient serpent, stubbornly wants to present Christ as an earthly king.

If Tsar Nicholas II, after his abdication of the kingdom, embarked on a redemptive feat, as V. Kuznetsov imagines, then what was this feat expressed in? Did he himself read the letters of the royal martyrs from captivity, published, by the way, by the famous Orthodox historian O.  A. Platonov?

“In the evenings we all sit together, some play bridge or bezique, we work, and dad reads aloud. Sometimes he plays, and someone else reads” (Grand Duchess Tatyana Nikolaevna, November 29, 1917).

“...Yesterday I played a French play with Tatyana and Zhilik (P. Gilliard). Everyone is preparing other comedies…” (Heir Tsarevich, Tobolsk, January 22, 1918).

“...We live okay, thank God. They staged “performances” - plays and, of course, played for entertainment themselves” (Grand Duchess Anastasia Nikolaevna, Tobolsk, January-February 1918).

By citing these quotes, we do not at all want to cast a shadow on the bright appearance of the Tsar-Martyr Nicholas II. We just want to emphasize once again that he was a simple, down-to-earth person and a wonderful family man.

Speaking about the “unatoned sin of the Russian people,” Mr. Kuznetsov introduces the second hereditary a sin that weighs only on the Russian people. However, the Church only knows one hereditary sin - firstborn. Kuznetsov’s teaching is in clear contradiction with the statement of the Creed: I confess one baptism for the remission of sins, for from the teachings of Mr. Kuznetsov it follows that the sacrament of baptism is not able to wash away any sin (the supposed “hereditary perjury”). And, finally, this teaching smacks of complete Russophobia.

Thus, we see the emergence in our Church of a new Tsarist heresy, although in the program “From Heart to Heart” you can hear, on the contrary, about the spread of the royal heresy in the Church, which, apparently, the royal redemptive brotherhood is going to fight in the most decisive way. They are probably waiting for their “king” to finally appear, who will restore order in our Church and remove all the bishops who are heretical, in his “royal” opinion. But God forbid that we Orthodox Christians should bring such an “autocrat” who clearly has the appearance of the Antichrist and behind his back the bestial grin of the “prince of this world.”

The trouble is that these lost sheep of Christ’s flock, that is, Kuznetsov and his “brothers,” deceived by the charm of their wisdom, do not see this, but stubbornly persist in their “theology.” The Orthodox Tsar is the head of their Church (as British Queen in the Anglican Church), who has the power to remove both the Patriarch and bishops and appoint them at his own discretion (according to V. Kuznetsov, all Russian patriarchs were only “slaves of the kings”). The Tsar, after his victory over the Antichrist (!), will first carry out his royal judgment on the enemies of Orthodoxy, and only after that will there be the Last Judgment of Christ. And before him is the universal Orthodox Kingdom. But the Holy Church at the end of times does not know the “worldwide Orthodox kingdoms,” but she knows for sure that the world kingdom will then only be the kingdom of the Antichrist, and faithful Orthodox Christians, in anticipation of the Second Glorious Coming of Christ, will hide in “gorges” and mountains, clefts of the earth, in general, wherever God leads. And that there will be no victory of the Orthodox king over the Antichrist, no Orthodox or other kings and rulers, and the power of the Antichrist and his kingdom will be abolished only by the Second Coming of Jesus Christ, in order to judge the living and the dead at His last Judgment, called the Terrible, for it will be terrible to fall then in the hand of the Living God are those who seduce the faithful children of the Church with pseudo-church wisdom, for which, according to the word of the Gospel, a millstone is placed on the neck.

By distorting the Orthodox teaching about the Church, about redemption, about the last times and the Last Judgment, V. Kuznetsov hypocritically exposes himself to his listeners as a kind of unbending fighter for Orthodoxy. He says: “we need to return to patristic, pure, undamaged Orthodoxy.” He teaches: “First of all, everyone needs to maintain the purity of faith. Of course,” he adds, “morality is all very good, but in Orthodoxy morality is in second place, and in first place is the purity of faith and the fight for it.”

As we see, in his imaginary struggle for Orthodoxy, V. Kuznetsov is even ready to sacrifice morality. In this he is similar to the Jesuits, who also placed morality in second place in their struggle for Catholic teaching. In fact, morality is in no way separable from right faith. Show me your faith without your works, says the Apostle, and I will show you my faith through my works(James 1:18). However, the importance of confessing pure patristic Orthodoxy for all of us cannot be denied. In confirmation of this, St. The Apostle commands us that even if we or an angel from heaven were to preach to you a gospel different from what we preached to you, let him be anathema(Gal.1, 8). Therefore, in full agreement with the holy Apostle, we must utter anathema to all the numerous distortions of the Orthodox faith by Kuznetsov himself and his like-minded people. This commandment of the Apostle is a methodological guideline for our attitude to those prophecies on which he bases his false teachings, in particular, the prophecies of the monk Abel. If on these prophecies heretics like Kuznetsov base their false opinions about the atonement of human sins by earthly man, about the victory of the Orthodox Russian Tsar over the Antichrist and other similar delusional delusions, then such “prophecies” let him be anathema.

If many Orthodox Christians, based on various kinds of prophecies, expect the return of the Orthodox Autocrat to the Russian Throne again, then Vadim Kuznetsov with his “brotherhood” teaches that the last Tsar will no longer be called the retainer, but the winner. The winner of the Antichrist himself! Kuznetsov teaches that the last Tsar in Russia will appear as an alternative to the Antichrist and his power throughout the world, throughout the entire territory of the earth, except for Russia and the Slavic lands, where the Orthodox Autocrat will appear again. For how can he hold back the Antichrist if he has already come? And that is why the Russian Tsar is called winner Antichrist, according to Kuznetsov’s false interpretation.

Well, we can agree that it looks very tempting. The very idea of ​​a future Orthodox Russian victorious tsar now in Russia may appeal to many believers. This looks like some kind of panacea for ills, some kind of rose-colored dream that the king will come, will finally restore order in the plundered country, and at the same time in the Church, then unite all the Slavs, and since this will be just at the time of the Antichrist, the king will lead his mighty army of Slavic tribes against the Antichrist, defeat him and defeat him, and enter victoriously into Jerusalem , will deal with the Antichrist, execute all traitors to Russia and enemies of Orthodoxy: here is the Kingdom of God already here on earth. After all, this is exactly how Kuznetsov is taught. and his "brotherhood". And who among the believers would not want it to be so? But faithful Orthodox Christians are taught to believe not as Kuznetsov would like, but as the Church teaches. Many of us want to celebrate the victory of good over evil here. But Christ did not promise us victory here on this sinful earth, but only sorrow and suffering, which, having complacently endured here, we will inherit victory there, in His Kingdom, which is not of this world. The Kingdom of God on earth was usually promised to us and is still promised and will be promised in the future by many, starting from the devil in the form of a serpent, who deceived Adam and Eve in paradise, then the builders of the Tower of Babel, then the false teachers of the Jewish people, who to this day promise it , though only for themselves and their fellow tribesmen, heretics-chiliasts, then the builders of the communist “paradise”, after them the democrats. And the culmination of these promises in earthly human history will be the promises of the Antichrist himself, who will come like Christ with even greater deceptions and promises than all previous promises of earthly blessings, in order to deceive, if possible, the elect. Let us base our faith, first of all, not on dubious prophecies about the last times, but on the Holy Tradition of the Orthodox Church and the teachings of its Holy Fathers. And against them all the given prophecies can be verified. And if we find in them disagreement with the Holy Fathers, then we should believe not in these prophecies, but in the voice of the Mother Church.

Which of St. Fathers, touching on the main Orthodox dogma - our redemption by Christ the Savior, mentioned the coming “Tsar-Redeemer” Nicholas II? The Holy Fathers all unanimously taught that all the sins of the human race without exception (including the so-called “sin of perjury of the Russian people”) were atoned for by Jesus Christ at Calvary. Kuznetsov, however, argues that the teaching of the Church is revealed gradually in history. But this is absolutely not Orthodox, but Catholic false teaching about the “development of dogmas.” Christ redeemed All sins of humanity, both past and future.

Various pseudo-theological theories about the “king-redeemer”, blasphemous in their meaning in relation to the atoning sacrifice of Christ the Savior and His boundless love for us, manifested in His redemption of the human race, testify only to the revival of Khlyst and chilialist views. Christ is the true God, and as God He is sinless. Only the sinless could redeem sinners. Any king is not sinless and therefore cannot be the redeemer of anyone’s sins. V. Kuznetsov apparently does not consider St. Tsar Nicholas II is a sinner, which allows him to attribute to the tsar a redemptive feat equal to the feat of Christ the Savior. In one of the Radio Radonezh broadcasts, Deacon Andrei Kuraev said that the “brotherhood of the Tsar-Redeemer” teaches that if a Tsar is born from a truly royal couple of the royal family, then he sinless in their actions towards their subjects in the state (why is this not the papal infallibility of the Latin Church transferred to Russian soil?). Kuznetsov claims that the Tsar’s actions cannot be discussed!

Again, it is clear from this that Kuznetsov does not correctly understand the concept of the tsar’s accountability to God alone. After all, it is known that to whom more is given, more will be required. And if the people do not have the right to demand from the tsar an account for the management of the Orthodox monarchy, then God will undoubtedly demand this account from the tsar, which should make any tsar, both pagan and Orthodox, tremble.

If our Tsar Nicholas II did not make any “redemption”, but, having suffered torment with his family in captivity, was shot, without wanting it and without supposing it, at the hands of his political opponents, as stated in the report of the Theological Commission of our Church, then it is correct and the glorification of St. The royal family in person passion-bearers. Vadim Kuznetsov, teaching that our Tsar Nicholas is not glorified correctly, but should be glorified for his feat as a “tsar-redeemer”, thereby brings confusion and schism into the church environment, sows distrust among believers in the voice of the Mother Church and the person of its hierarchy , which blessed and approved for the entirety of the church the veneration of St. royal family in the face of the passion-bearers.

It seems to us that it would be of undoubted benefit for the Church if our hierarchy made a judgment on these issues, which could protect the Orthodox from the self-invented teaching of the home-grown pseudo-theologian Vadim Kuznetsov, so that the faithful children of the Church would not fall away from it into a new heresy or sect, and their and without this there is enough on Russian soil.

To be convinced of the wisdom of V.P. Kuznetsov, which is completely alien to the Church, is helped by the theological work of the truly famous twentieth-century theologian of our Church, Archbishop Seraphim (Sobolev) - “Russian Ideology,” which allows the Russian person to form truly correct concepts about the Orthodox monarchy, the power of the Church and the Tsar.

Unfortunately, the program “From Heart to Heart” can be listened to not only in Russia, but also abroad. And this program is intended not only for Russian radio listeners, but mainly for our compatriots abroad. What kind of idea about the state of Orthodoxy in Russia can our compatriots abroad form after listening to the pseudo-church nonsense of newly-minted “theologians”, “schema-nuns” traveling around radio studios, and the outright hysteria on the air of the host of the radio program - a formerly talented singer who imagines herself now to be a “preacher” "Orthodoxy, which, however, does not have the slightest idea about it!?

In conclusion, we will say that spiritual poison can be poured out on Orthodox Christians not only from ecumenical, renovationist and Catholic sources (for example, Radio Sophia), but also from pseudo-Orthodox radio broadcasts and relevant literature.

The conversation is about the reason for the abdication of the Tsar, our holy Tsar Nicholas II.

J.B. Hello, dear friends. You are listening to the author’s program from Zhanna Bichevskaya “From Heart to Heart”. And I am hosting it, People’s Artist of Russia Zhanna Bichevskaya.

Hello, dear friends, brothers and sisters, ladies and gentlemen. Today we continue the topic that we touched on last time. Last time our guests were Tatyana Mironova and Vadim Kuznetsov. Today we continue our conversation about the reason for the abdication of the Tsar, our holy Tsar Nicholas II. And, in fact, from what point of view should we consider it, so as not to make a mistake and not fall into temptation - from what point of view should we consider the Tsar’s feat, from the theological one? So as not to make a mistake? So, our guest is Vadim Petrovich Kuznetsov. Hello, Vadim Petrovich.

V.K. Good evening.

J.B. The fact is that there are many different explanations for attempts to explain this document (we are talking about the abdication of Nicholas II), which Nicholas II himself called, of course, a “manifesto”. The fact is that people are trying to explain it from completely different positions. Historians - accordingly from a historical perspective, lawyers - from a legal one, etc. Well, for people of faith there is a method that is simplest, most accessible, understandable and acceptable, this is the spiritual, that is, the substantive, side of this document. That is, the event itself was of a spiritual nature, and this document can be explained correctly only with the Gospel in hand. And, of course, with the Holy Fathers who interpret this Gospel. And, in principle, Nicholas II as the Anointed of God, like other Tsars - they are historical icons of Jesus Christ in the service of the Tsar. In this sense, Nicholas II was precisely invited by God’s Providence to become like the very difficult feat of Jesus Christ, which St. The Fathers of the Church call it a “redemptive feat.” And the Redeemer King, he, of course, in his feat, in his service, stands above the Holding Kings. The prophecies of the saints said that Nicholas II “will be above all the Tsars.” What was meant was precisely that he would be the “King in fullness,” he would be the Redeemer King. And Jesus Christ began this redemptive feat in Gethsemane.

J.B. Let us recall that the Venerable spoke about this. The seer Abel, who lived in the 18th century, and many others.

V.K. Yes, their prophecies came true in detail, as is known.

J.B. It was the Tsar who was called the “redeemer”, the Redeemer King. But why now he is canonized, glorified with the rank of martyr - I cannot understand this.

V.K. Well, this is, to put it mildly, due to a misunderstanding, of course, and in general, this is due to the lack of faith of some hierarchs. They also do not believe in the meaning of these events, which was explained in advance and predicted in prophecies. Although, it would seem, here they are, the prophecies, here are the events that show that the prophecies come true, and such complete lack of faith among believers is surprising. Of course, we have rulers who understand everything, and even insist on glorifying Nicholas II as the redeemer of the sin of Russia, the sin of the people.

J.B. The sin of perjury, the sin of treason is meant.

V.K. Betrayal by Romanov. Among them are such as Archbishop Melchizedek and others.

...like Jesus Christ, gives consent to the fulfillment of God’s plan. In order for the people in the future to have the opportunity to repent, which consists in glorifying the Redeemer. Sin must be atoned for, and this redemptive feat was offered from above, through the saints, to Nicholas II from God, to which he gave his consent, as we read in many books. Through living saints, and even through some deceased saints, like Abel of the 18th century, St. Seraphim - these saints had already died by the time of the reign of Nicholas II. But they addressed him in writing, and the Tsar personally read their handwritten addresses to himself. The letter of Seraphim of Sarov ended with the words “Sovereign, come down from the throne yourself.”

J.B. And Pasha of Sarov, blessed Diveyevo, said the same thing.

V.K. That is, he had to become like Jesus Christ, who came into the world for this reason, in order to save all humanity through redemption.

J. B. A prpb. The seer Abel said: “And the second King, the Redeemer, will replace the royal crown with a crown of thorns.” This type of redemptive feat was also predicted.

V.K. Yes, that is, in many books, spiritual authors, elders, our saints, New Testament prophets, directly paralleled Jesus Christ and Nicholas II in this feat as the prototype and image. Nicholas II in this sense is a historical icon of Jesus Christ.

J.B. So, we see that the Tsar’s abdication of the Tsar’s throne, from Tsarist power, was predestined? That is, this was prepared by the Lord himself, and the King was warned about this through his saints. And he was already ready for this. This means that what we are now saying is “here, Tsar, renunciation, how bad it is, how terrible it was, if only the Tsar had not renounced.” We begin to name those traitors who, in fact, came to him and said - “Tsar, abdicate, come down from the throne, renounce the Royal power.” So, now we need to somehow look at this from a different point of view - not from the point of view of emotions and documents of renunciation, but from a theological point of view? Let's get a look.

V.K. Of course, there are our human reasonings, views, passions, good intentions, and there is God’s plan.

J.B. God's Truth.

V.K. Which is revealed to us through the saints. And therefore it is better to look at the events of world history through the eyes of the Church, through the eyes of God. And therefore, we must, of course, take this aspect into account - that New Testament history is an icon of Holy Scripture. And I do not entirely agree with this formulation, although it is most often found - that the Tsar renounced Royal power. No, he renounced the lowest level of the Royal service, which is called the “King-Retainer,” in order to become the “King in fullness,” in order to become the King-Redeemer. Therefore, this, one might say, is an abdication of the throne, or, in the language of the Church, “descending from the throne,” just as Sovereigns perform “ascension to the throne” at the beginning of their reign, so “descending from the throne” is possible. But why did he come down from the throne, from this lowest level of the Royal service? Precisely in order to begin the redemptive feat. And it begins precisely with “enrichment by the sin of others,” as St. wrote. John Chrysostom about Jesus Christ in Gethsemane, that He “became so impoverished in power - that is, he stopped working miracles, showing His power as God - in order to become rich in our sins.”

J.B. Perhaps you can then explain to us precisely this historical and iconographic meaning of the renunciation of our holy Tsar Nicholas II from the Royal power, and, precisely, the parallel of Gethsemane? Can you explain please.

V.K. Nicholas II not only after his abdication did not cease to be a Tsar - we, by the way, glorify him as a holy Tsar, and not as a holy “former Tsar”, he remains in the rank of Tsars - here the parallel is very appropriate, but, unfortunately , St. Few people read the Fathers who interpret the Holy Scriptures, and therefore we will have to recall something, literally some patristic quotes.

From a dogmatic point of view, Jesus Christ began His ministry as the Redeemer in the Garden of Gethsemane, and completed His redemptive ministry at Calvary. That is, at the beginning of the redemptive feat, in Gethsemane, He took the sins of the whole world upon Himself, which is what happened...

J.B. That is, he renounced earthly Royal power, because He was the last King in the line of David.

V.K. He did not renounce Tsarist power. He remained the King. I just insist on other formulations. He not only remained the King, but, having begun the redemptive feat, He finally became the King in full. After all, the very peak, the very top of the Royal service is redemption.

J.B. That is, as John Chrysostom writes, “He took on the form of a slave.” That is, he stopped being a King for others and took on the “form of a slave.”

V.K. It is written in the Gospel that the God-man Jesus Christ, as the King of the earth, took on the “form of a slave,” that is, “pretended to be a slave,” while in fact remaining the King from the line of David. And besides, he became like a simple man, although in fact He was God, but He pretended to be a simple person, stopped calling Himself God, because others demanded from Him that He stop calling Himself both God and King.

J.B. So this is essentially not a renunciation, but an “impoverishment” of the Tsarist power?

V.K. Absolutely right. He “took on the form of a slave and in appearance became like a man,” Jesus Christ, and Nicholas II too, remaining Tsar before God, at the request of crazy, unbelieving people who did not believe that the Tsar, the Anointed One, could no longer not be Tsar, this impossible, just as a person ordained as a priest or bishop can never become a layman, so is the Tsar.

J.B. The Sacrament happened, of course.

V.K. Not only until death, but also in the future life before God remains the King, for which he is anointed by the Holy Spirit from conception, from the womb, this is a grace-filled election. And so the Apostles, even the closest disciples of Jesus Christ, were at a loss when, for the sake of taking the sin of all mankind into Himself, and the subsequent atonement for it on Calvary, He voluntarily surrendered himself into the hands of the crucifiers. After all, earlier, we read the Gospel, in past years the Apostles saw the opposite - that offenders came, even with the intention of killing Jesus Christ, but He was not given to them, He literally passed through them, and they could not do anything to Him. And He always explained this to the Apostles in the same way - that “My hour has not yet come.” And about this hour He repeated and said a lot of things. And after they received communion in the upper room of Zion, He told them for the first time: “let us go towards this hour.” And he led them to the Garden of Gethsemane, where he began, in the presence of three chosen disciples who had been with Him on Tabor before, to prepare in their presence for the meeting of this hour. That is, if they had not overslept - and He warned them that “if you oversleep, you will fall into temptation,” that is, you will simply go against the will of God, this is the worst thing that can happen, to fall into temptation - they listened, having overslept, words of the preparatory prayer, did not understand the meaning of this hour, and, of course, everyone fell into temptation, as St. Fathers. That is, they began to prevent Him, who had just taken the sin of all mankind into Himself, from carrying this sin to Calvary, to the New Testament altar, in order to atone for the sins of all mankind there. That is, it’s scary to think - He began to save us all, all of humanity, and they began to interfere with Him! He immediately stopped and stopped this outrage. He told them to put their knives in their sheaths and go home. And to those who came to grab Him, he said, “Take me and let them go, they don’t understand anything at all what’s happening.” And indeed, the Apostles understood only when the Holy Spirit visited them on the fiftieth day, Pentecost, and they understood everything that happened. Before this, they misunderstood - because there was no cooperating grace that revealed to them from the inside the essence of what happened.

J.B. And when Christ was taken and arrested, they all fled, and Peter denied three times. That is, this suggests that they really fell into temptation, fell into what the Lord warned about.

V.K. Psychologically, one might say, even as non-believers they can try to justify the Apostles - well, of course, they offend their Teachers...

J.B. Whom they believed so much

V.K. ...why not fight Him off from the offenders, take out the knives - they had two knives there.

J.B. But Peter took out a knife and cut off the ear of one of the soldiers.

V.K. Yes, and the Lord showed the last miracle.

J.B. “Put it in the sheath,” said the Lord.

V.K. He made the ear instantly grow back.

J.B. And the Lord also said: “He who takes the sword will perish by the sword.”

V.K. Here he rephrases the phrase of Christ, Alexander Nevsky repeats it.

So, He reproached the Apostles that “if you wanted to protect Me earlier, then this should have been done earlier, while I was the Sustaining King, and now I, as the King, began the redemptive feat. And now to prevent Me from saving you is a sin.” And they thought that they were performing virtue by defending their Teacher. And He told them that this is a sin, that is, “you have fallen into temptation.” And here the Apostles were confused - because they thought that they were doing virtue, but He explained to them that they had fallen into grave sin. Many people still don’t understand that Nicholas II had to be protected before that, how he renounced while he was the Holder.

J.B. Remain faithful to him.

V.K. That would be a virtue. But suddenly, for some reason, many wanted to defend him, to show some kind of loyalty, already belated, when he had already renounced. And here it was precisely to defend him, Nicholas II, that meant preventing him from saving us like the Redeemer.

J. B. Interfere with his redemptive feat.

V.K. Absolutely right. This was also a fall into temptation. People, as it were, are non-believers, do not understand Orthodox dogmas, do not have dogmatic thinking - it is difficult for them to use these logistical schemes in order to think exactly in the Orthodox way. “Be wise by faith,” like St. Fathers speak. But for unbelievers, everything is simple; according to their passions and lusts, what they like, from the point of view of the old man, they accept, what they don’t like, they reject. But in this way it is possible to reject all of Christianity, because everything that happens, the described events of the Gospel, they can also be taken and rejected, because they have contradictions with each other, such external, visible, “meaningless”, etc. But on In fact, the strength of Christianity lies precisely in the fact that, on the contrary, everything goes towards the glory of God.

J.B. How important it is for us to try to understand everything connected with the atoning sacrifice of our Tsar Nicholas II today, because without understanding this, we will really fall into temptation and not get out. How important wisdom and reasoning are for us today - let us remember how the wise Solomon said - “blessed is the man who exercises wisdom and learns holiness in his heart.” Let's remember what the wise Solomon said, and let's learn this wisdom, let's try to understand phenomena, after all, from the point of view of God's Truth, and not by comparing some documents, one or another. Because, after all, there is a theological point of view on all earthly events that occur; academician Shapunov once said that “all sciences, in principle, converge at one point, then it’s up to theologians.” And of course, it is not the job of sciences, neither philological nor historical, to study the Tsar’s redemptive feat. Namely, try to understand it from a theological point of view. Today our guest is the editor-in-chief of the Orthodox newspaper "Eternal Life" Vadim Petrovich Kuznetsov, he helps us understand this parallel between the redemptive feat of our Lord Jesus Christ, His Gethsemane, His Golgotha, and the redemptive feat of our Tsar, and also his Gethsemane .

So, once again, if possible, repeat this parallel between the Gethsemane of our Lord Jesus Christ and the Gethsemane of Tsar Nicholas, so that we understand this theological basis of the Tsar’s feat.

V.K. Well, if we speak in such an impeccable theological formulation, then we believe that the redemptive feat of our Sovereign Nicholas II is an exact and absolute likeness of the redemptive feat of Jesus Christ, that is, it has the same connection as the image with the Prototype. There is a resolution of the 7th Ecumenical Council “On the creation and veneration of the image.” That's what we're talking about. Those who do not recognize, for example, that the Earthly King is the image of the Heavenly King are people who in the Church are called heretical iconoclasts, and are excommunicated from the Church, subject to anathema, and the Lord, as they say, will be a strict judge for them in due time. And as for Nicholas II, and not only him, but today we are talking about him, then, indeed, only the Gospel will help us find the correct answer to any question, only with the Gospel in hand - of course, interpreted by St. Fathers of the Orthodox Church.

J. B. So, Gethsemane of the Lord and Gethsemane of the King, Golgotha ​​of the Lord and Golgotha ​​of our King. It is not for nothing that it is called “Ekaterinburg Calvary”. Once again, please tell us more specifically about this.

V.K. And Jesus Christ, of course, there was no signing of any documents. As we see, Tsar Nicholas II had his Manifesto drawn up in such a strange way. From a legal point of view, it was executed incorrectly, because there were no details or forms at hand; they remained in the palace. In addition, the Manifesto had to be sent using the only method of communication at that time - it was the telegraph, so the Manifesto was in the form of a telegram from the boss General Staff. And at that time, according to the law, the Sovereigns just announced in manifestos, for many centuries, about such important events- accession to the throne, the birth of one of the members of the dynasty, death, descent from the throne, etc. Accordingly, therefore, the form was precisely traditional for the time. But you need to look not at what form this document is from a legal, legal point of view, because this document itself, it was not provided for by the current legislation. And from his point of view, it was illegal, and even from the point of view of the legislation on succession to the throne, the abdication itself could not have happened.

J.B. Well, the Tsar couldn’t have “smeared himself” himself? He is the Anointed One.

V.K. Not provided. And he didn’t need to “smear himself,” because his renunciation makes him a doubly King, a King in full. If Jesus Christ, just after Gethsemane, went with the sin of all mankind, which He took upon Himself, to Calvary to save us, then He went there to reign - after all, as St. Fathers, John Chrysostom, in particular, and as the liturgical texts say that Jesus Christ “reigned on the Cross” - as soon as the Atonement took place, as soon as He paid for our sins with His death - and this is precisely the price of sin - so immediately He realized Himself as “King in fullness.” Because the atoning Sacrifice itself, the atonement itself - the King-Redeemer is the fullness of the Royal service. Again, “paganized” people do not quite understand what a King is from a Christian point of view, because pagans have their own concept of a king. The pagans think that they will sin left and right, live according to passions, and the tsar, which translated into Russian from Hebrew, Aramaic, Sanskrit means “defender” - he will perform the function of protection, that is, protect them from those who would harm them prevented me from sinning. In Orthodoxy, the word “Orthodox Tsar” is exactly the opposite. The Tsar is not a protector of our sinful life from any interference, but, on the contrary, a protector of us from sin. And in this sense, John Chrysostom says: “how do you know that Jesus Christ is the King? And it's very simple. After all, the Tsar must protect his subjects. And now I see that Jesus Christ protected me from death, from damnation, from sin, from hell, and in this sense He is a true King for me.” And how can we, seeing someone who voluntarily paid for ours, so to speak...

J.B. Our betrayal

V.K. ... our sin is conciliar, the voluntary atonement of Nicholas II ...

J.B. Let us remind you once again that in 1613 on the Great Zemsky Sobor all of Russia, the entire Russian people, swore allegiance to the Royal Family of the Romanovs until the Second Coming of Christ. We must still have a Tsar to rule over us. But we, having fallen into the sin of unbelief, into the sin of apostasy, that is, deviation from the Orthodox faith, from the purity of the Orthodox faith, from the Orthodox life, began to live ungodly, to sin, and then the Masons invaded us, they did not keep us waiting for long, Having seen this gap, the impoverishment of faith in Russia - sin was accumulating - and they entered their beds into us in Russia, and thus our sin increased, and God's punishment increased. And in the end, this spread of Freemasonry here in Russia was, indeed, God’s punishment for the distortion of the faith, for an unrighteous, sinful life, and departure from Orthodoxy. This was God’s punishment, which, in general, ended with precisely this perjury, that is, the betrayal of the Tsar. What happened to the Russian people is precisely this perjury, betrayal. And the sin of betrayal is higher than any sin, even the sin of murder.

Yes, what you say today is very important. So, our Lord Jesus Christ had Gethsemane, where the impoverishment of the earthly Royal power occurred, and our Tsar Nicholas II had Gethsemane at the Dno station, when the Masons came to him and demanded that he renounce the Royal power. It was here that this Gethsemane of our holy Tsar Nicholas II, the Redeemer, took place. He “became impoverished” by this earthly power of ours in order to take this sin, the sin of perjury, the sin of betrayal, upon himself, to atone for this sin by giving himself up to be mocked by murderers and bandits.

So, the Holder was taken from us. The one who holds back is the Tsar, he kept the world evil in Russia. The Tsar passed away - and evil poured out of all the cracks into Russia, and to this day we have not stopped disentangling it. This is already evil that has turned into a snowball.

Please tell me, Vadim Petrovich, how, after all, can we explain this terrible betrayal - after all, we know that the clergy and the army swore an oath of allegiance to the Tsar twice, and swore on the Bible, kissed the cross, swore on the Holy Gospel, before God? How can we explain what happened - specifically from a theological point of view?

V.K. Such classes as the military class and the clergy - they belonged to the hierarchical ladder, were close to the Emperor, were “neighbors,” so to speak in the language of the Gospel. Not some “distant” ones, but “nearby” ones. Indeed, these two classes were bound by a double oath of allegiance to the Sovereign. But here we need to remind you of this - that, firstly, the Gospel says that “all have sinned.” That is, before God there was not a single person on earth who did not need redemption.

J.B. All are sinners, “every man is a lie.”

V.K. So, one can and should say something about the Russian people. Because from the moment of the vow of loyalty to the Romanov dynasty, which was given at the Council of 1613, from that very moment the process of accumulation of this sin of infidelity began. It is precisely this question that needs to be understood correctly, otherwise it is not clear what kind of sin Nicholas II atoned for. In general, it is impossible to fantasize about this topic. And the sin was that a conciliar vow of allegiance was given to the Romanovs, which means sin, as a violation of the vow of allegiance, can be called infidelity Romanov. So or synonymous series here such as “betrayal of the Romanovs, betrayal of the Romanovs” and so on. But in general this is a sin infidelity, how all humanity sinned by being unfaithful to God, but in a variety of forms of sins. But in a collective sense, this is all unfaithfulness to God. So here too - all Russian people over the centuries, over these 300-odd years, even well-intentioned ones, have accumulated, wittingly or unwittingly, some kind of infidelity towards the Sovereign - even if someone’s morning prayers, which talk about The anointed one, he missed it out of laziness - this was already a drop in the cup of treason. And this betrayal, figuratively, in this cup of infidelity, grew and multiplied, accumulated from generation to generation, under different Sovereigns. And by the reign of Nicholas II, this cup was already filled to the brim. By the providence of God, Nicholas II was offered to drink this cup, to which he gave voluntary consent, like Christ, who also voluntarily went to the Cross according to the will of his Father. And Nicholas II also told many people - in particular, Stolypin wrote down in his memoirs after a conversation with the Tsar the following phrase from the Tsar: “if God needs an atoning sacrifice for the zemstvo sin of my people, I agree to be it. May God's will be done." From here we see that the Sovereign himself perfectly understood that this was a plan from God, to which he voluntarily, that is, to become like Christ the Redeemer, agrees that the atonement is precisely the conciliar sin of Russia.

J.B. Yes, because all this, of course, happens at the level of will, and the Lord does not trample on our will, does not force us, he gives us the right to choose, and the King was also offered this choice.

V.K. Theoretically, he could refuse. But practically, his love for God and for the perishing people was so strong that he could not refuse. And our sins prompted him to take this voluntary step; with our sins we pushed him onto the atoning cross, Christ-like.

J.B. The highest type of love is sacrifice.

V.K. But there was also internal violence. It was his love for us and for God that forced him to undertake such an unprecedented feat. There is, of course, an example—there is only one precedent here, the God-man Jesus Christ. There have been no more redeemers in the history of the Church, the history of the world. Well, however, it’s okay that there is only one saint in the Church who will be glorified in the future, as the prophecies say, “in the rank of redeemer,” because this is a feat of exceptional importance, and he is earthly history there is one, the so-called “single sacrifice”. If we speak the language of liturgical theology, priests, I think, will understand what we are talking about. This is precisely in earthly history the so-called iconic one-time victim.

So, you need to correctly understand what sin is the sin of infidelity to the Romanovs. It was carried out not only by those generations who lived more than 300 years before the revolution, but also continues to accumulate and is carried out now, by the current generations. And just as Jesus Christ atoned for the sins of all generations who lived from Adam to Him, so forward 2000 years until His Second Coming, and even us living who were not yet born then, that is, past and future generations, of all humanity The Savior of the world atoned for the sins - in the same way, Nicholas II atoned for the conciliar sin of Russia, of all generations, starting from 1613, that came before him, and, meaning, the following generations, the present time.

J.B. That is, I want to say that our Tsar-Redeemer, Nicholas II, did not atone for all sins, namely the sin of perjury, the sin of betrayal.

V.K. There is only one conciliar sin - the sin of infidelity, because a vow of fidelity was given. Betrayal is, in general, one of the forms of this infidelity. After all, the sin of infidelity can be present and manifest in a variety of other forms. But in terms of content, this is one sin, it is called “conciliar sin.” Therefore, conciliar repentance for this conciliar sin is also provided.

J.B. That is, the sin has already been forgiven. Our holy Tsar, Nicholas II the Redeemer, accomplished this feat of atonement for this sin of infidelity. The sin has already been forgiven.

V.K. Here you need to answer this question this way - yes and no. Again, dogmatic theology helps us understand why. But the fact is that Jesus Christ - He made a sacrifice for all humanity, redeemed in Himself all people, the sins of all people, that is, in Him everyone is saved - in Him, Jesus Christ, inside Him, so to speak. But only those who believe in His atoning sacrifice are given this holiness by grace. And those who did not accept, rejected - then no. They will just die, that’s the whole point. We see the same thing in the example of Nicholas II - in him all of Russia was redeemed, all generations in him. But only those Russians who accept his atoning sacrifice receive forgiveness by grace.

J.B. Look how interesting it is - we have now drawn an analogy between the Gethsemane of our Lord Jesus Christ, the impoverishment of earthly power - and the feat of the King, his atoning sacrifice. The atoning sacrifice of our Lord Jesus Christ - and the atoning sacrifice of Tsar Nicholas II. Please explain why, after all, it’s really called - on Golgotha, we understand the Cross, there is Golgotha ​​- and why in Yekaterinburg is it also called “Golgotha”? In Yekaterinburg, the capital of the Urals, is it called “Golgotha”? Explain this to us. Why were there three crosses like on Golgotha, in Jerusalem - and here, we also have three crosses?

V.K. In Yekaterinburg there is the so-called “middle” cross. After all, Golgotha ​​is a combination of three crosses, it is not one Cross. There were three crosses on Calvary. The middle Cross is for the Redeemer, the King of Heaven and the King of Earth, as we read in the Gospel, and the left and right crosses are for thieves. One is prudent, the other not so much. That is, the first is a repentant thief, the second is one who refused to believe, who refused to repent and accept his fate, according to his sins, from the hand of God. So is Russia - indeed, we see that the Middle Cross ended up in Russia, geographically in Yekaterinburg. It was our Anointed One, the Sovereign, Saint Nicholas II Alexandrovich. Together with his family, he made up - all seven, according to the laws of the Orthodox Church, a single whole.

J.B. But those crosses that were on Golgotha, where on the right is the prudent thief and on the left is the unreasonable one? This is probably us?

V.K. There are two more crosses left - left and right. All of Russia spiritually diverged along these two crosses. And these two crosses - they were located all over Russia. Where, after the overthrow of the Tsar, Orthodox Christians were caught, tortured, killed, both faithful to the Tsar and infidels who simply did not like the new regime. And thus, all of Russia dispersed along these two crosses that remained - left and right.

J.B. So maybe now it will diverge, for the last times?

V.K. And Russia never left these two crosses. Just as she then ascended, together with the Tsar, next to her left and right two crosses, she remains on them.

J.B. But even now those who revere our holy Tsar Nicholas II the Redeemer, who pray to him, order prayer services for him - are they, as it were, on the right side of this main cross in Yekaterinburg? And those who do not honor, fight with the King, hate the King - will they be on the left side of him? It’s these two crosses that will be built, they already exist now, and will this become more and more visible in the last times?

V.K. This kind of spiritual division has been going on for a long time in Orthodoxy.

J.B. Please tell me, some priests told me that since our Soviet times, from the moment the revolution took place, after 1917, two topics have been closed in our theological seminaries and academies.

The theme of the Apocalypse - the theme of the Apocalypse was not taught to our priesthood, they did not know the prophecies of John the Theologian about the future of Russia and the world, and therefore were deprived of the opportunity to determine all these signs by what was happening - signs of the last times.

And the second theme is the Royal theme. It was not allowed to talk about the Kings at all. All the Tsars were slandered, and even more so about the last Tsar and his family, about the holy Royal martyrs, it was impossible to utter a word at all. Tell me, please, won’t this lead us now, precisely to this, for the last times, the royal heresy allowed to us by God?

V.K. Theological schools - seminaries, academies - certainly reflect the official position of the Synod, the church hierarchy. And there most people...

J.B. Do they not respect the Tsar’s power at all?

V.K. She does not adapt to the existing regime. And we know that after the revolution, the Church tasted it in full, and even those who tried to adapt to the new regime still suffered, very many, they failed, no matter how hard they tried to please. And therefore, since they “flogged” the clergy, especially, and monasticism, since then they have been trying not to touch on certain topics, so that again, as Lenin said, “we will teach this public a lesson for a long time, we will discourage them from speaking about this topic at all.” , even “for decades,” he says, “so that they remember.” And indeed, decades have passed, and we see that we remember how they were “beaten” then. Of course, they “flogged” first of all because the Church had Anointed Ones, had a teaching about who the Anointed One of God is - a special church rank. This doctrine had to be emasculated, according to the plans of those who captivated The Church - after all, we must not forget that not only was it captured then, it is still not free. The so-called “godless yoke” predicted 200-300 years ago has not ended yet. It will end only when the Church again finds the Anointed One of God.

DVD audio disc with sermons and prayers about the Coming King.

DVDCD Audio lectures "On Kings and the dogma of Royal power", includes CD materials:
Disc 1(what is posted on the Russian sky)
Author's programs by Anna Bichevskaya “From Heart to Heart” and ch. editor of the almanac "Eternal Life" Kuznetsov Vadim Petrovich
1. St. Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich the Terrible (John IV) Blasphemy against the Kings - blasphemy against Christ
2. St. Tsar Fyodor Ioannovich. Liar Boris Godunov - "the Tsar's brother-in-law." Wives of St. Tsar John IV. Moscow - Third Rome. Three Jerusalems.
3. Throne (Tomb) of the Lord. Crusaders. Reasons for the fall of Byzantium. Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich. Nikon.
4. About obedience to authorities and husband. Obedience to the King is a form of obedience to God. Is it possible to pray for the health of modern authorities? Emperor Peter the Great and slander against him.
5. Emperors Peter III, Catherine II, Paul I, Alexander I
6. Holy Tsar - Redeemer Nicholas II. Abdication of the Tsar. Apocalypse. Signs of the end times. The doctrine of royal power.
7. Prophecies about the Resurrection of Russia.

Disc 2

1. St. Tsar Nicholas II is the redeemer of the sin of infidelity of the Russian people to the vow of 1613.
2. God's plan for Russia
3. St. Pelagius on the Psalter - read by Fr. Alexander. (unfortunately not completely)
4. Listening program, font for covers, electronic calendar.

Disc 3 audio lectures by the editor-in-chief of the almanac "Eternal Life" Vadim Petrovich Kuznetsov

1. About the sacred space of Russia
2. About digital numbers (to accept or not to accept the TIN? Or maybe it will bring the king to power and forget about the TIN:)
3. ZhV?5 Elder Sampson - The Truth about Peter the Great
4. Text materials on the dogma of Tsarist power

Disc 4 audio
Author's broadcasts by Anna Bichevskaya “From Heart to Heart” on the topic of serving God and the Tsar.

1. Schema-nun Nikolai Yusupov’s Diaries Monasticism of Gregory (37:04)
Schema-nun Nicholas About Grigory Rasputin (38:51)
2. About alcoholism, smoking, etc. Zhdanov 1 (39:23)
About alcoholism, smoking, etc. Zhdanov 2 (39:34)
3. Peter Glazunov - godson of St. Pelagia of Ryazan (38:12)
4. Roman Bogdasarov About Diveevo (39:16)
Roman Bogdasarov About heaven and hell 1 (36:32)
Roman Bogdasarov About heaven and hell 2 (38:58)
5. Schema-nun Nicholas about Elder Nikolai Guryanov (38:44)
Tatyana Mironova about Elder Nikolai Guryanov (38:02)
Tatyana Mironova - Temple of the Royal Martyrs (39:39)
6.Roman Sergiev - On obedience to authorities 1 (41:37)
Roman Sergiev - On obedience to authorities 2 (43:55)

AUDIO LIBRARY
1. CD mp3: 1) “Averky Taushev. Interpretation for 4 Evangelists"
2) “Liturgical texts”
2. DVD mp3: 1) Academician Shipunov.
2) Apology of the Terrible Tsar.
3) Deacon Alexander Mumrikov.
4) Lives of saints.
5) Hieromonk Sampson Sievers.
6) Art. Nikolay Guryanov.
7) About Art. Grigory Rasputin.
8) About false eldership.
9) The truth about the death of the Kursk submarine.
10) Babkin. About betrayal of the Tsar.
3. DVD mp3: 1) History of the Universal Church.
2) History of the Russian Church.
3) New Testament for children.
4) Psalter in Church Slavonic.
5) Art. Paisiy.
4. DVD mp3: 1) Old Testament.
2) New Testament.
3) Right John of Kronstadt “My life in Christ”
4) Rev. Seraphim of Sarov.
5) Bl. Theophilus.
6) Dimitry Rostovsky.
7) Art. Silouan.
5. DVD mp3: 1) The Old Testament in its entirety.
2) Theophan the Recluse.