Russian saints. Russian Orthodox saints: list. Holy Fools. Language of the case

15.06.(28.06). – Memory of St. Augustine († 28.8.430)

(13.11.354–28.08.430) - Bishop of Hippo, theologian and church leader, the largest representative of the Western patristic tradition. Born near Hippo (now Annaba in Algeria), he was the son of a pagan father and a Christian mother. In Carthage, Rome and Milan, he studied rhetoric, leading an immoral pagan life typical of his environment. Reading Cicero's treatises aroused his interest in philosophy; he passionately wanted to find the truth.

In the end, Augustine found the truth in Christianity, which he came to in 387 primarily under the influence of sermons. After being baptized together with his son, Augustine returned to Africa, having first sold all his property and distributed it to the poor. Augustine was later appointed presbyter, elevated to the rank of Bishop of Hippo, and remained so until the end of his life. During this period, he wrote fundamental works on Christian dogma, history, political theology, and the autobiographical “Confession.” In this city he died on August 28, 430, during the first siege of Hippo by the Vandals.

The relics of Augustine were transferred by his followers to Sardinia to save them from the desecration of the Vandals, and when this island fell into the hands of the Saracens, they were ransomed by Liutprand, king of the Lombards, and buried in Pavia in the church. In 1842, with the consent of the pope, they were returned to Algeria and are preserved there in the church of St. Augustine, erected on a hill above the ruins of ancient Hippo by French bishops.

Modern Judaizers usually distinguish bl. Augustine as the creator of the so-called “theology of contempt” as the basis of “Christian anti-Semitism”. “The essence of it is that the Jews were indeed the chosen people - but only until Jesus came. When Jesus came, the Jews, not accepting his preaching, lost their chosenness, and for this “falling away from God” they were expelled from their country,” the Talmudic author is indignant at this interpretation. However, this was generally accepted even before bl. Avustina is part of the doctrine of the Christian Church, based on the words of Christ and the apostles in the New Testament, which Bl. also wrote about. Augustine: “The Jews, His [Christ’s] destroyers, who did not want to believe in Him... Destroyed and scattered throughout the world, the Jews, who can be found everywhere, give us evidence with their Scriptures that the prophecies about Jesus Christ are not our invention... So , although they do not want to believe in our Scriptures, their own, which they read without understanding them, are fulfilled by themselves.".

Merit of bl. Augustine was different in that era. In his works, he condemned the erroneous teachings that he himself followed for a long time, condemned skepticism, Manichaeism and other heretical teachings. His main treatises include: “On the Trinity” (“De trinitate”, 400–410), which systematizes theological views, and “On the City of God” (“De civitate Dei”, 412–426).

The last treatise, consisting of 22 parts, is considered the most famous work of Bl. Augustine, containing his historiosophical views. In this work Bl. Augustine makes an attempt to embrace the world-historical process, to connect the history of mankind with the plans and intentions of God. To this bl. Augustine was motivated by the very turning point that had then come for the Roman Empire. Under Theodosius the Great, the last state unity of both halves of the Roman Empire was still preserved; in 395 the empire was finally divided into the western part and the eastern; then Rome is captured by the Goths under the leadership of Alaric (410), and the end of Augustine’s activity occurs during the conquest of Roman Africa by the Vandals. The earthly world ordered by Rome was collapsing before his eyes, and only the Church in this catastrophe retained its structures...

According to the teachings of Bl. Augustine, the state is a punishment for man for original sin, for it is a system of domination of some people over others. The state is not intended to save people, not for people to achieve happiness and good, but only for survival in this world. From this point of view, the only just and justified state is a worldwide theocratic Christian one. Accordingly, bl. Augustine argued for the superiority of church power over secular power. In such a state-church, the supreme spiritual power seems to him invested with the strength and power of state power, even to the point of using punitive force against heretics, for “the shepherd must sometimes use a scourge to return lost sheep to the fold.”

This is the teaching of Bl. Augustine formed the basis of the Catholic idea of the relationship between the Church and the state, with the intention of building the “germ of the Kingdom of God” already on earth, headed by the Pope as the infallible “vicar” of Christ, for which the Catholic hierarchy must take on the tasks and methods of political secular power. (As is known, in the Orthodox Byzantine Empire a different ideal was formed: a “symphony” of spiritual and state power, having different tasks and supporting each other in serving the common goal of saving the people for the eternal Kingdom of God, which is “not of this world.”) As the Orthodox noted philosopher, “at that time the features of the two halves of Christianity - Eastern, Hellenic and Western, Latin - were already sharply outlined,” but “they had not yet begun a fratricidal dispute among themselves.”

It is also difficult to understand how this idea of compulsory theocracy was combined with Bl. Augustine with his doctrine of the grace of God (which is very similar even to the future Calvinist and Puritan “predestination” of the Protestant sects). Augustine’s teaching comes from a true, humble awareness of human frailty, admits Trubetskoy. – This can be understood, for humanity, as Augustine observed it, was not healthy, it was too far from the Christian ideal, therefore “salvation seemed to him to be a one-sided action of God’s grace, in which the human element was doomed only to a passive role.” According to his teaching, only the grace of God can save a person, “but it saves only a few, the elect, who are predestined to be saved... From this point of view, of course, one cannot talk about any free cooperation of man in the matter of salvation. Every movement of the human will towards good is only an automatic repetition of the eternal Divine act; grace that saves by predestination is a complete negation of freedom. This is the great imperfection of Augustine’s teaching,” N.E. rightly wrote. Trubetskoy (“The Worldview of St. Augustine”). – For “the Christian ideal requires the perfect reconciliation of human freedom with Divine grace in Christ - the organic unity and interaction of the free Divinity and free humanity. Meanwhile, Augustine’s teaching fundamentally denies human freedom in Christ... The Christian idea of God-manhood, in addition to a gracious action from above, also requires the assistance of human freedom in the matter of salvation,” even if at some moments in history the Lord may provide his own gracious intervention to help those who deserves it. That is, the grace of God and human will act in harmony in the matter of human salvation, and both of these elements are necessary.

These and other contradictions and inaccuracies in the works of Bl. Augustine was repeatedly criticized both by his contemporaries and subsequently by Orthodox theologians. However, we should not see only the mistakes of this great Father of the Church. on Easter 1980 I wrote about Bl. Augustine has such fair words:

“The attitude of the Church towards heretics is one thing; her attitude towards the Holy Fathers, who happened to be mistaken in one point or another, is completely different... Blessed Augustine always belonged to the Orthodox Church, which duly appreciated both his mistakes and his greatness...

[In particular about] the incorrect doctrine of original sin, etc. Yes, indeed, it cannot be denied that St. Augustine approached this dogma with his characteristic excessive logic and set forth an erroneous view of ancestral sin - a view, we note, not so much “unorthodox” as limited and incomplete. Bl. Augustine practically denied that man had any virtue or freedom in himself, and held that everyone was responsible for the guilt of Adam's sin, besides sharing in its consequences; Orthodox theology considers these views to be a one-sided exaggeration of true Christian teaching...

Yes, Blessed Augustine (but not Bishop Theophan) suffered from a “Western” attitude to theology and, as a result, from super-logism, excessive trust in the conclusions of our fallible mind - but this is so characteristic of every person living today that it is unreasonable to pretend that this It’s someone else’s problem, and not – first and foremost – our own. If only we all had at least a part of that deep, true “orthodoxy of heart” (the expression) which St. Augustine possessed in the greatest degree, we would be much less inclined to exaggerate their errors and shortcomings, real or imaginary.

Let the correctors of Augustine's teaching continue their work if they want, but let them do it with more mercy, more compassion, more Orthodoxy and more understanding of the fact that blessed Augustine is in the same Heaven where we all strive, if we do not want to deny the Orthodoxy of all those Fathers who revered him as an Orthodox Saint, from the early Fathers of Gaul, through Saint Photius of Constantinople, to our former and present teachers of Orthodoxy, led by . At the very least, it is impolite and presumptuous to speak disrespectfully about the Father, whom the Church and her Fathers loved and glorified...

He was a man of such a noble heart and mind and so zealous in the defense of Orthodoxy that before his death he was not afraid to review everything he had written, correcting the errors he noticed and submitting everything to the future court of the Church, humbly begging his readers: “May all those who read this labor, they imitate me not in my mistakes "..." (Hieromonk Seraphim (Rose). "The taste of true Orthodoxy. Blessed Augustine, Bishop of Ippona")

In conclusion, it is appropriate to provide an explanation from Fr. Seraphim (Rose) of the title "blessed" in this case.

“In the first centuries of Christianity, the word “blessed” in relation to the righteous was used in much the same way as the word “saint.” This was not a consequence of any formal "canonization" - this was not yet practiced - but was based, rather, on popular veneration... By the time the word "blessed" began to be used in relation to the Fathers, whose authority was to some extent less than the great Fathers of the Church; Thus, he wrote “Blessed Augustine”, but “the divine Ambrose”, “Blessed Gregory of Nyssa”, but “Gregory the Theologian, great among the saints”. However, this use was by no means strictly established among him.

Even today the use of the word "blessed" remains somewhat vague. In Russian, "blessed" can refer to the great Fathers around whom there were any disputes (Augustine and Jerome in the West, Theodoret of Cyrus in the East), but also to the holy fools for Christ's sake (canonized or uncanonized), and to the uncanonized holy righteous of the latter centuries in general. Even today there is no clear definition of what the concept of "blessed" means in the Orthodox Church (as opposed to Roman Catholicism, where the process of beatification itself is completely regulated), and any "blessed" in the Orthodox Saints (as it is with Augustine, Jerome, Theodoret and many holy fools for Christ’s sake) can also be called “saints”. In Russian Orthodox practice one rarely hears “St. Augustine,” but almost always “Blessed Augustine.”

Tomb of St. Augustine in the temple dedicated to him in Annaba (Hippo)

Below are several photographs (taken in the fall of 1975 by the author of this note, M.N.) of the Catholic Church of St. Augustine and the ruins of ancient Hippo at the foot of the hill. In this city bl. Augustine lived for 40 years and wrote all his works... Annaba, Algeria, 1975.

When you click the mouse, the photos enlarge.

Foolishness in Rus' is a one-man show, with tears, laughter and the live participation of the public. Chain chains on a naked body and battle with the sinful world.

Misha-Samuel

Time of action: 1848-1907
Scene: Pereslavl
Beatified

The peasant boy Misha Lazarev, born two miles from Pereslavl, began to act strangely from childhood. Once he went to a garden, buried young apples and put a cross on top, for which, of course, he was beaten. They beat him when he began to carry earth to the cemetery, and only a short time later a pestilence occurred in the village. So word spread about Misha that he was a man of God.

As a teenager, he moved to the Pereslavl Troitskaya Sloboda, where he settled with the disabled Simeon Vukolov. The holy fool was tall, with a disheveled white beard, and he was nicknamed Samuel in honor of the deceased monk who greeted the blessed one. It was from this monk that he got his eternal little scarf, and in addition to the little scuff he wore a short jacket and an apron, and for some reason he tied two red armbands on his hands. If we can talk about specialization among the people of God, then Misha was a recognized expert in predicting deaths. It happened that he would approach a new house and say: “It’s a good house, but you won’t be able to live in it for long.” And cries. Surely one of the inhabitants will leave soon. And if he asks for a penny to commemorate a boy who is still alive, it’s a sure thing, the boy will be dead.

It was for these things that the townspeople fell in love with Misha, and the whole city went to his funeral service in a small suburban church when he died in 1907. Misha’s grave still predicts deaths and heals the sick.

Ivan Yakovlevich Koreysha

Time of action: 1783-1861
Scene:Smolensk and Moscow
Not beatified

It so happened that the main holy fool of Russian literature (Dostoevsky brought him out in “Demons”, Tolstoy in “Youth”) Ivan Yakovlevich Koreisha was never beatified.

He was the son of a Smolensk priest, and from childhood he was distinguished by his gentle disposition. He graduated from the seminary and returned to his father’s house, only to soon leave it and go into the forest. Local men found him when he was picking the ground with a stick without any apparent reason. Instantly identifying Ivan Yakovlevich as a holy fool, the peasants built him a hut in the forest, where he labored for several years, and there a pious community gathered around him. Among the visitors there was also a young lady who was about to marry an officer, a hero of 1812. The young lady thought to inquire about the prospects of such a marriage. Well, then Ivan Yakovlevich shouted: “Robbers! The thieves! Hit! Hit! Seeing this as an unkind omen for herself, the girl refused the gentleman and became a nun, and the gentleman broke the holy fool’s legs and committed him to a Moscow insane asylum (there was no one in post-war Smolensk).

In this strange way, real life began for Ivan Yakovlevich: people flocked to the insane hospital from all over superstitious Moscow. Koreisha lay in the ward for several decades, accepted rolls and tobacco from donors and prophesied. He answered questions in multiple meanings and wrote notes in scribbles. Question: “What will happen to the slave Constantine?” Answer: “Life, not a luxurious Maslenitsa.”

In his old age, the blessed one almost did not walk. He mixed hospital grub with gifts, such as cabbage soup with apples, and treated the petitioners with a mixture. He treated for a headache with a strong blow to the forehead with a soaked apple and, no matter how strange it was, he attracted merchants to him and scared away the revolutionary ethnographer Pryzhov, who in 1860 issued an denunciation of him, which became his most detailed biography.

Ksenia Petersburgskaya

Time of action: second half of the 18th century
Scene: Petersburg
Beatified

In St. Petersburg there is a shortage of miracles: there are no miraculous icons here, there has not been a single miracle-working saint in all 300 years. Peter, probably, would not have been upset by this state of affairs; on the contrary, the lines and avenues seemed to be drawn with the expectation that nothing would be overlooked, nothing miraculous, secret, or generally “from the old life” would be allowed in. It was later that Dostoevsky and Andrei Bely would populate this city with secrets, but these would be secrets of a different kind.

Of the traditional miracles in St. Petersburg, there is only one locally revered saint, who appeared in the city shortly after the death of Peter (“the cat is out of the house and the mice are dancing”). After the death of her husband, the young colonel’s widow changed into his dresses and in this form walked around the St. Petersburg side, not answering her name. She distributed her property to the poor, accepted alms herself, and more often than not, she was bullied by local boys. The holy fool went into the fields at night, and when a church was being built on the St. Petersburg side, she carried bricks until dawn, helping the workers. From the miraculous - Ksenia predicted the death of the merchant Krapivina, saying: “The nettle is green, but will soon wither.”

The cult of Xenia and its center - the chapel at the Smolensk cemetery, which is on Vasilyevsky Island, across the Smolenka River, has been flourishing for a hundred and fifty years now. They tried to close the chapel in Soviet times, but this did not bring success - pilgrims still left notes with requests to the blessed one. Minibuses going to Kamskaya Street still take devout old women to Ksenichka.

St. Basil the Blessed

Scene: Moscow
Time of action: OK. 1468-1552
Beatified

The Life of St. Basil, written shortly after the discovery of his relics and known from the oldest copy of 1600, consists almost entirely of common passages and references to other works of ancient Russian literature, and we learn about the life of the saint mainly from surviving legends and traditions. It seems he was born under Ivan III, some even specify - in 1468, not far from the capital, in the village of Elekhov. Then he went to Moscow, where, according to one version, he became an apprentice to a shoemaker. It was there that an incident happened to him, after which they started talking about Vasily: a certain merchant, who was transporting bread along the Moscow River, came into the workshop and ordered boots. The future saint, instead of immediately fulfilling it or at least starting to fulfill it, grinned: “Sir, we will sew you boots such that you will not wear them out.” He smiled and shed a tear. And when they asked, he said this: he smiled because the merchant would soon die - and it turned out that way a few days later.

From then on, Vasily began to do weird things. He began to walk around Moscow naked (“All naked, with a curly hair, a cloth in his left hand, a prayer on the right” - this is how it is prescribed to depict the blessed one) both in the heat and in the cold, and especially took a liking to Red Square and the tower at the Varvarsky Gate. With all available means, the holy fool denounced the sinful life of his fellow citizens: either he broke a tray with Easter cakes, or the image of the Mother of God on the Barbarian Gate, for which they brutally beat the Blessed One (they beat him in vain, the holy fool turned out to be right - the icon was hellish).

They buried Vasily, who died in 1552, in the cemetery near the Trinity Church in the ditch, and later, in 1588, after canonization, in honor of Vasily they erected a boundary in the Church of the Intercession of the Virgin Mary on the Ditch, built quite recently on the occasion of the victory over the Kazan Khanate .

Together with the holy fools, the new order of lay holiness has been included in the Russian Church approximately since the beginning of the 14th century. Its heyday falls in the 16th century, somewhat lagging behind monastic holiness: the 17th century still writes new pages in the history of Russian foolishness. By centuries, the revered Russian holy fools are distributed as follows: XIV century - 4; XV – 11; XVI – 14; XVII – 7. The appearance of the holy fool coincides with the extinction of princely holiness. And this coincidence is not accidental. The new century demanded new asceticism from the Christian laity. The holy fool became the successor of the holy prince in social service. On the other hand, it is hardly by chance that the holy trampling of everyday life in foolishness coincides with the triumph of Orthodoxy. The holy fools restore the disturbed spiritual balance.

It is generally accepted to think that the feat of foolishness is the exclusive calling of the Russian Church. This opinion involves an exaggeration of the truth. The Greek Church honors the six holy fools (!!!Greek!!!). Two of them, St. Simeon (VI century) and St. Andrei (maybe 9th century), received extensive and very interesting lives, known in Ancient Rus'. Our ancestors especially loved the life of St. Andrew, who was considered a Slav among us, for the eschatological revelations that it contains. And the beloved holiday of the Intercession made the Constantinople saint close to everyone in Rus'. It is the Greek Lives that, in their rich material, provide the key to understanding foolishness. It would be in vain that we would look for the clue to the feat in Russian lives. And this poses a difficult problem for the researcher of Russian foolishness.

We rarely find hagiographies for Russian holy fools, and even more rarely do we find modern biographies. Almost everywhere, an unskillful hand, accustomed to literary templates, has erased the originality of the individual. Apparently, religious reverence also prevented hagiographers from depicting the paradox of the feat. Many holy fools in Rus' walked naked, but hagiographers sought to throw a cloak of church splendor over their nakedness. Reading the lives of the Greek holy fool Simeon, we see that the paradox of foolishness covers not only the rational, but also the moral sphere of the individual. Here Christian holiness is hidden behind the guise of not only madness, but also immorality. The saint constantly commits reprehensible acts: he causes chaos in the temple, eats sausage on Good Friday, dances with public women, destroys goods in the market, etc. Russian hagiographers prefer to borrow from the life of St. Andrei, in which the element of immoralism is absent. Only folk legends about St. Basil and scanty references in chronicles show that the Russian holy fools were not alien to the affectation of immoralism. Their lives chastely cover this entire aspect of their feat with the stereotypical phrase: “Creating lewd things.” “Fool” and “obscenity” - epithets indifferently used in Ancient Rus' - apparently express two sides of outrage against “normal” human nature: rational and moral. We could easily refer to modern Russian foolishness as evidence, but this would be methodologically incorrect. Deprived of church recognition and blessings since the 18th century, Russian foolishness could not help but degenerate, although we are deprived of the opportunity to determine the degree of its deviation from ancient models.

The unusual abundance of “Christ for the sake of the holy fools”, or “blessed” in the calendar of the Russian Church and the high popular veneration of foolishness until recently, indeed, gives this form of Christian asceticism a national Russian character. The Holy Fool is as necessary for the Russian Church as his secularized reflection, Ivan the Fool is for the Russian fairy tale. Ivan the Fool undoubtedly reflects the influence of the holy fool, just as Ivan Tsarevich reflects the influence of the holy prince.

This is not the place to dwell on the very difficult spiritual phenomenology of Russian foolishness. Quite schematically, let us point out the following points that are combined in this paradoxical feat.

1 . Ascetic trampling of vanity, which is always dangerous for monastic asceticism. In this sense, foolishness is feigned madness or immorality for the purpose of reproach from people.

2 . Revealing the contradiction between deep Christian truth and superficial common sense and moral law with the aim of ridiculing the world ().

3 . Serving the world in a kind of preaching, which is performed not by word or deed, but by the power of the Spirit, the spiritual power of a person, often endowed with prophecy.

The gift of prophecy is attributed to almost all holy fools. The insight of spiritual eyes, higher reason and meaning are a reward for trampling on the human mind, just as the gift of healing is almost always associated with asceticism of the body, with power over the matter of one’s own flesh.

Only the first and third sides of foolishness are feat, service, labor, and have a spiritual and practical meaning. The second serves as a direct expression of religious need. There is a vital contradiction between the first and third. Ascetic suppression of one’s own vanity is bought at the price of introducing one’s neighbor into temptation and condemnation, and even cruelty. St. Andrew of Constantinople prayed to God for the forgiveness of the people to whom he gave reason to persecute him. And every act of saving people evokes gratitude, respect, and destroys the ascetic meaning of foolishness. That is why the life of a holy fool is a constant swing between acts of moral salvation and acts of immoral mockery of them.

In Russian foolishness, the first, ascetic side initially predominates; in the 16th century, the third side undoubtedly predominates: social service.

In Kievan Rus we do not meet holy fools in the proper sense of the word. But we hear about some saints that they act like fools temporarily: Isaac, the recluse of Pechersk, and Abraham of Smolensk. However, regarding Abraham, there is no certainty as to whether his biographer calls the poor, wandering life of a saint foolishness. Social humiliation, the “thin vestments” of St. Theodosius also border on the foolishness of humility. The Monk Kirill of Belozersky also temporarily bore the heavy burden of foolishness. Like Isaac, his foolishness is motivated by the desire to avoid glory. That it had a moral (immoral) character - at least a violation of discipline - is evident from the punishments imposed on him by the abbot. However, in the foolishness of the saints we should not look for sharp features of the classical type: for them a distant approximation to it is enough. This is not a special form of service, but an incidental moment of asceticism.

The first real holy fool in Rus' was Procopius of Ustyug. Unfortunately, his life was compiled (XVI century) many generations after his death, which it itself dates back to 1302, placing some of its events either in the XII or in the XV century. This life brings Procopius to Ustyug from Novgorod and, what is most striking, makes him a German. From his youth he was a rich merchant “from Western countries, from the Latin language, from the German land.” In Novgorod, he learned the true faith in “church decoration,” icons, ringing and singing. Having been baptized by Saint Varlaam of Khutyn (anachronism) and giving away his property, he “accepts the foolishness of Christ for the sake of life and turns himself into violence,” according to the Apostle. What his rampage consisted of is not indicated. When he began to “bliss” in Novgorod (the author should have said about “bliss” before accepting foolishness), he asks Varlaam to go to the “eastern countries” and goes through cities and towns, impenetrable forests and swamps, “seeking the ancient lost fatherland.” His foolishness brings upon him from people “annoyance and reproach and beating and puffing,” but he prays for his offenders. He chose the city of Ustyug, “great and glorious,” for his residence also for its “church decoration.” He leads a cruel life, which the harshest monastic feats could not equal: he has no roof over his head, sleeps naked “on a dunghill”, and then on the porch of the cathedral church. He prays secretly, at night, asking for “benefit to the city and people.” He accepts food little by little from God-fearing people, but never anything from the rich.

The first Russian holy fool apparently managed to mislead the people of Ustyug. The imaginary “fool” did not enjoy authority, as can be seen from the episode about the fiery cloud. One day, Procopius, entering the church, proclaims God’s wrath on the city of Ustyug: “For lawless and incomparable deeds, evil will perish by fire and water.” No one listens to his calls to repentance, and he alone cries all day long on the porch. Only when a terrible cloud came over the city and the earth shook did everyone run to the church. Prayers before the icon of the Mother of God averted God's wrath, and a hail of stones broke out twenty miles from Ustyug, where centuries later one could still see the fallen forest.

Procopius also demonstrates the prophetic gift inherent in foolishness in the second episode of his life, from which we learn that he also had friends in Ustyug. In a terrible frost, such as the residents of Ustyug will not remember, when people and livestock froze, the blessed one could not stand being on the porch in his “torn robe” and went to ask for shelter from the clergy member Simeon, the father of the future Saint Stephen. In this house, he predicts to Mary the birth of a holy son from her. The way his appearance is depicted here in his interactions with people, there is nothing stern and gloomy about him. He is "bright vision and sweet laughter." He greets the owner, who hugs and kisses him, with the words: “Brother Simeon, from now on have fun and don’t be discouraged.”

In this Ustyug story, traces of the influence of the Greek life of Andrei the Fool are clear, especially in the description of the frosty patience of the saint.

It is not for nothing that the Ustyug legend brings the first Russian holy fool from Veliky Novgorod. Novgorod was the birthplace of Russian foolishness. All famous Russian holy fools of the 14th and early 15th centuries are associated with Novgorod. Nikola (Kochanov) and Fedor went on a rampage here in the 14th century, parodying the bloody clashes of the Novgorod parties with their fights. Nikola lived on the Sofia side, Fedor lived on the Torgovaya side. They quarreled and threw themselves across the Volkhov. When one of them tried to cross the river on the bridge, the other drove him back: “Don’t go to my side, live on yours.” The legend adds that after such battles the blessed ones happened to return not over the bridge, but directly across the water, as if on dry land.

Fifteen miles from Novgorod, in the Klopsky Trinity Monastery, St. asceticised. Michael († 1453), called the holy fool (or Salos), although in his lives (three editions are known) we do not see foolishness in the proper sense of the word. St. Michael is a seer, and his life is a collection of “prophecies”, probably written down in the monastery. Only the whimsicality of form, the symbolic theatricality of gestures with which some of his prophecies are associated could be interpreted as foolishness. The biggest story about foolishness is the beginning of the life, which depicts its extraordinary appearance in the Klopsky monastery.

On the night of Midsummer (1409), during the all-night vigil, an old man who came from nowhere appeared in the cell of one of the monks. “Before him the light burns, and he writes the Acts of the Apostles.” The unknown man answers all the abbot's questions with a literal repetition of his words. He was mistaken for a demon, they began to burn incense with “thyme”, but the elder, although “he closes himself from the thread”, repeats the prayers and makes the cross. In church and the refectory, he behaves “according to rank” and displays a special art of sweet reading. He just doesn't want to reveal his name. The abbot fell in love with him and left him to live in the monastery. It is not said whether or where he was tonsured. He was an exemplary monk, obeying the abbot in everything, being in fasting and prayer. But his life was “very cruel.” He had neither a bed nor a headboard in his cell, but lay “on the sand,” and he drowned his cell with “ground and horse dung” and ate bread and water.

His name and noble origin were discovered during a visit to the monastery by Prince Konstantin Dmitrievich, son of Donskoy. In the refectory, the prince looked closely at the elder, who was reading the book of Job, and said: “And behold, Mikhailo Maximov is the son of a princely family.” The saint did not deny, but did not confirm, and the prince, leaving, asked the abbot: “Take care, fathers, of this old man, we have that man of his own.” Since then, Mikhail lived in the monastery, surrounded by universal respect. Under Abbot Theodosius, he is depicted next to him as if he were the ruler of a monastery... He breaks his silence for the mysterious prophecies that make up the entire content of his life. Either he indicates the place where to dig a well, or he predicts famine and teaches how to feed the hungry with monastic rye. Severe towards the powers that be, he predicts illness for the mayor who offended the monastery, and death for Prince Shemyaka and Archbishop Euthymius I. In these prophecies of Michael there is a lot of politics, and, moreover, democratic and Moscow, which puts him and the abbot in opposition to the Novgorod boyars. Later legends attribute to him the foresight of the birth of Ivan III and the prediction of the death of Novgorod freedom.

There is no real foolishness in all this, but there is a whimsicality of form that captures the imagination. Predicting the death of Shemyaka, he strokes his head, and promising Bishop Euthymius consecration in Lithuania, he takes his “fly” from his hands and places it on his head. The abbot follows the coffin accompanied by a monastery deer, which he lures with moss from his hands. One could say that only the general respect for foolishness in Novgorod of the 15th century imparts the halo of the holy fool to the stern ascetic and seer.

The life of the Rostov holy fool Isidore († 1474) was compiled largely according to Ustyug and Novgorod legends. He lives in a “booth,” in a swamp, plays the fool during the day, and prays at night. They persecute him and laugh at him, despite miracles and predictions, the fulfillment of which earned him his nickname Tverdislov. And this holy fool “is from Western countries, of the Roman race, of the German language.” These words - a direct borrowing from the life of Procopius - are not reliable evidence. The removal of holy fools from German soil could be an expression of their alienation from the surrounding life, their wanderings on earth. Rejection of the homeland is an ascetic feat, especially associated with foolishness. But for another Rostov holy fool, John the Vlasaty (or the Gracious, † 1581), his non-Russian origin seems likely. At his tomb in the church of St. Blasius until recently preserved the Psalter in Latin, which, according to legend, belonged to him. In the inscription on the sheets dating back to the time of St. Dmitry of Rostov (1702–1709), it reads: “From the time of the repose of blessed John the Hairy and the Merciful, even until now, this little book, very old, was on his tomb, the Psalter of David, in the Latin dialect, which the saint of God prayed to God.” It is known that the Catholic West did not know foolishness. No matter how strange it may seem that a German who converted to Orthodoxy chose this feat, the experience of our time shows that Orthodox Germans often reveal the maximum of Russianness: both in Slavophilism and in religious zeal. But the foreign origin of the first Russian holy fool, St. Procopy is doubtful.

The series of Moscow holy fools begins with Maxim († 1433), canonized at the Council of 1547. His life has not been preserved. The 16th century gave Moscow St. Basil and John, nicknamed the Big Cap. The verbose and florid life of St. Vasily does not give any idea about his feat. His image is preserved in a folk Moscow legend, also known in later records. It is full of historical fables, chronological inconsistencies, and in some places direct borrowings from the Greek life of St. Simeon. But this is the only source for getting acquainted with the Russian folk ideal of the “blessed one.” We just don’t know to what extent he corresponds to the Moscow saint of the 16th century.

According to popular legend, Vasily was sent to a shoemaker as a child and then he already showed his foresight by laughing and shedding tears at the merchant who ordered boots for himself: the merchant was expecting a quick death. Having abandoned the shoemaker, Vasily began to lead a wandering life, walking naked (like St. Maxim) around Moscow, spending the night with a boyar widow. Like the Syrian holy fool, he destroys goods on the market, bread and kvass, punishing unscrupulous traders. All his paradoxical actions have a hidden wise meaning associated with an objective vision of the truth: they are not committed out of the ascetic motive of holy foolish self-humiliation. Vasily throws stones at the houses of virtuous people and kisses the walls (“corners”) of houses where “blasphemy” took place: the former have exorcised demons hanging outside, the latter have angels crying. He gives the gold given by the king not to the beggars, but to the merchant in clean clothes, because the merchant has lost all his wealth and, being hungry, does not dare to ask for alms. He pours the drink served by the king out the window to put out a distant fire in Novgorod. The worst thing is that he breaks the miraculous image of the Mother of God at the Barbarian Gate, on the board of which a devil was drawn under the holy image. He always knows how to reveal the devil in any form and pursues him everywhere. So, he recognized him in a beggar who collected a lot of money from people, sending “temporary happiness” as a reward for alms. In dealing with the demonic beggar there is a morality, the edge of which is directed against pious greed: “When you gather Christian souls with happiness, you are caught in a money-loving disposition.”

More than once the blessed one appears to be an accuser – albeit a meek one – of the Terrible Tsar. So, he reproaches the tsar for the fact that, standing in the church, his thoughts were on the Sparrow Hills, where the royal chambers were being built. Died in the 50s. 16th century, St. Vasily did not witness the oprichnina terror of Grozny. But the legend forces him to be transported to Novgorod during the executions and pogrom of the city (1570). Finding himself under the bridge near Volkhov in some cave, Vasily invites John to his place and treats him to raw blood and meat. In response to the king’s refusals, he hugs him with one hand and with the other shows the ascending souls of innocent martyrs in heaven. The king waves his handkerchief in horror, ordering the executions to be stopped, and the terrible dishes turn into wine and sweet watermelon.

About the veneration of St. Basil, canonized in 1588, is indicated by the dedication of churches to him back in the 16th century and the very renaming by the people of the Intercession (and Trinity) Cathedral, in which he was buried, into St. Basil's Cathedral.

Under Tsar Theodore Ivanovich, another holy fool, nicknamed the Big Cap, worked in Moscow. In Moscow he was an alien. Originally from the Vologda region, he worked in the northern saltworks as a water carrier. Having moved to Rostov (he is actually a Rostov saint), John built himself a cell near the church and was saved in it, hanging his body with chains and heavy rings. When going out into the street, he put on his cap, that is, clothes with a hood, as is clearly explained in the life and depicted on ancient icons. It was perhaps Pushkin who was the first to call this cap iron in Boris Godunov. As a special feat of John, it is told that he loved to look at the sun for a long time, thinking about the “righteous sun.” Children and crazy people laughed at him (weak echoes of real foolishness), but he did not punish them, as St. Basil punished them, and with a smile he predicted the future. Before his death, the blessed one moved to Moscow, but we know nothing about his life here. He died in a movnitsa (in a bathhouse), and during his burial in the same Intercession Cathedral where Vasily was buried, a “sign” occurred: a terrible thunderstorm, from which many suffered. We read from the Englishman Fletcher that in his time “a naked holy fool walked the streets and turned everyone against the Godunovs, who are revered as the rulers of the state.” This holy fool is usually identified with John, although his nakedness seems to contradict Kolpak’s clothing.

But denunciation of kings and the powerful in the 16th century had already become an integral part of foolishness. The most striking evidence is provided by the chronicle in the story of the conversation of the Pskov holy fool, St. Nicholas with Ivan the Terrible. In 1570, Pskov was threatened with the fate of Novgorod, when the holy fool, together with the governor, Prince Yuri Tokmakov, ordered tables with bread and salt to be placed along the streets and to greet the Tsar with a bow. When, after the prayer service, the tsar came to him to be blessed, Nikola taught him “terrible words to stop the great bloodshed.” When Ivan, despite the warning, ordered the bell to be removed from the Holy Trinity, then at the same hour his best horse fell, “according to the prophecy of the saint.” This is what the Pskov chronicler writes. A well-known legend adds that Nikola presented raw meat to the king, despite Lent, and in response to John’s refusal: “I am a Christian and don’t eat meat during Lent,” he objected: “Do you drink Christian blood?” This bloody treat of the Pskov holy fool, of course, was reflected in the folk legend of Moscow Vasily.

For obvious reasons, foreign travelers pay more attention to the political service of holy fools than Russian hagiographers. Fletcher writes (1588): “In addition to monks, the Russian people especially honor the blessed (fools), and here’s why: the blessed, like lampoons, point out the shortcomings of the nobles, which no one else dares to talk about. But sometimes it happens that for such daring freedom that they allow themselves, they also get rid of them, as happened with one or two in the previous reign because they had already too boldly denounced the rule of the king.” Fletcher reports about St. Basil that “he decided to reproach the late king for cruelty.” Herberstein writes about the enormous respect Russians have for holy fools at the beginning of the 16th century: “The holy fools walked naked, the middle of their bodies were covered with a rag, with wildly flowing hair, and an iron chain around their necks. They were also revered as prophets - those who were clearly convicted by them said: “This is because of my sins.” If they took anything from the shop, the merchants also thanked them.

From these descriptions of foreigners, we conclude, firstly, that the holy fools in Moscow were numerous, constituted a special class, and that the Church canonized very few of them (However, in view of the predominantly popular veneration of the blessed, establishing an accurate list of canonized saints of this rank encounters many difficulties.) Secondly, the general respect for them, which did not exclude, of course, individual cases of ridicule on the part of children or mischievous people, the chains themselves, worn for show, completely changed the meaning of ancient Christian foolishness in Rus'. Least of all is this a feat of humility. In this era, foolishness is a form of prophetic, in the Hebrew sense, service, combined with extreme asceticism. What is specifically foolish consists only in ridiculing the world. It is no longer the world that mocks the blessed one, but they that mock the world.

It is no coincidence that the prophetic ministry of holy fools received social and even political meaning in the 16th century. In this era, the Osiphlian hierarchy weakens in its duty of mourning for the disgraced and exposing untruths. The holy fools take upon themselves the ministry of the ancient saints and ascetics. On the other hand, this lay order of holiness occupies a place in the Church that has been empty since the time of the holy princes. The difference in the conditions of state life gives rise to completely opposite forms of national service. The holy princes built a state and sought to implement truth in it. The Moscow princes built this state firmly and firmly. It exists by force of compulsion, by the duty of service and does not require holy sacrifice. The Church transfers state building entirely to the Tsar. But the untruth that triumphs in the world and in the state requires an adjustment of the Christian conscience. And this conscience makes its judgment the more freely and authoritatively, the less connected it is with the world, the more radically it denies the world. The holy fool and the prince entered the Church as champions of Christ's truth in social life.

The general decline in spiritual life since the middle of the 16th century could not but affect foolishness. In the 16th century, holy fools were less common; those from Moscow were no longer canonized by the church. Foolishness - like monastic holiness - is localized in the north, returning to its Novgorod homeland. Vologda, Totma, Kargopol, Arkhangelsk, Vyatka are the cities of the last holy fools. In Moscow, the authorities, both state and church, are beginning to be suspicious of the blessed. She notices the presence among them of false holy fools, naturally insane or deceivers. There is also a derogation of church festivities for already canonized saints (St. Basil). The Synod generally ceases to canonize holy fools. Deprived of the spiritual support of the church intelligentsia, persecuted by the police, foolishness descends among the people and undergoes a process of degeneration.

“They love holy fools in Rus'” is a common saying, but in the mouths of compatriots it increasingly sounds like “They love fools in Rus'.” The Church prays to these “fools,” that is, holy fools. Why? Who is the holy fool and what is his feat?

Saint St. Basil the Blessed. Icon, late 16th - early 17th century. Moscow

Blessed is discord with the blessed!

Saint Basil the Blessed (16th century) threw stones at miraculous icons and argued with the formidable king; Blessed Simeon (6th century) pretended to be lame, tripped up the townspeople hurrying past and knocked them to the ground. Procopius of Ustyug (13th century) did not knock anyone down, bite or scold anyone. But under the guise of a crippled beggar, he slept on a pile of garbage and walked around Ustyug in rags, despite the fact that he was a rich German merchant. In similar rags, Xenia of Petersburg many centuries later wandered around the sovereign Petersburg. Why did they do all this?

“A holy fool is a person who voluntarily chooses the path of hiding his abilities, pretends to be devoid of virtues and denounces the world for the absence of these very virtues,” this definition is offered by Andrei Vinogradov, candidate of historical sciences, associate professor at the Orthodox St. Tikhon’s Humanitarian University. “Sometimes they were called blessed. . In the modern use of some terms associated with this face of holiness, there is ambiguity. We often call ascetics “blessed” who have no experience of exposing the world. Why? This is largely the result of Catholic influence. For the Catholic Church, blessed is the lowest rank of holiness. With This is due to the fact that in our Church, ascetics are sometimes called blessed, whose feat belongs to an atypical, “peripheral” type. In the East, the term “blessed,” that is, “makarios,” was traditionally used as a complete synonym for the word “saint.” But in In the first centuries, most saints were either martyrs or apostles. Over time, the number of “types” grew: from the fourth century, holy (blessed) monks appeared - “venerables”, holy bishops - “hierarchs”. And at this time the term “blessed” begins to be applied to some unusual types of holiness, such as foolishness. “God’s people” are also called blessed, who lead a life similar to the holy fools, but whose feat is not entirely equal to the feat of the holy fool.”

The feat of the holy fool, in contrast to the “Man of God,” has a clear social orientation. “He not only hides his talents from the world (like Alexius the Man of God, whose Byzantine life is widely known), but pretends to be insane, “violent” - hence the Greek term “salos”, which is used to call holy fools (in ancient Slavic - ugly or deformed). This term comes from the verb “saleuo” - “to waver, to swing.” “Salos” is a crazy person, a person who behaves inappropriately, continues Andrei Vinogradov. “By means of imaginary madness, the holy fool denounces the world of its sins, tries to instruct it in path of correction. Foolishness is internally connected with the feat of the “man of God”, typologically these are similar faces of saints, and they are distinguished only by the element of exposure, the outward focus of the holy fool’s feat.”

Extreme asceticism

It is difficult to say when this type of ascetic feat first appears. “The emergence of foolishness was associated with the flourishing of spiritual life,” says Hegumen Damascene Orlovsky, member of the Synodal Commission for the Canonization of Saints, head of the Foundation “Memory of Martyrs and Confessors of the Russian Orthodox Church,” cleric of the Church of the Intercession of the Mother of God on Lyshchikova Hill (Moscow). “We are not We know foolishness in the very first times of Christianity, then Christianity itself was perceived by the world as foolishness. When the Apostle Paul called his accusers to faith in the resurrection of Christ, they told him: you are crazy, Paul. But in the traditional understanding, foolishness appears when the hermits and ascetics had little and fasting and prayer, and they turned to extreme means of acquiring humility - reproach from the world for their very way of life. And, conquering their pride, they achieved perfect humility." “The spiritual foundations for foolishness were laid down in the New Testament, these are the famous words about foolishness for the sake of Christ (see 1 Cor. 4:10). Already early Christian communities put themselves in a certain conflict with the world and, like the later holy fools, they denounce the world for its sins. - Andrei Vinogradov sees the continuity of the feat of the first apostolic disciples and later ascetics. - At the same time, the phenomenon of foolishness in the literal sense could only appear in Christian society. The holy fool denounces society for not following Christian norms, but this appeal is only possible if if Christianity is a generally accepted norm for society. And as a state religion, Christianity was established only in Byzantium at the end of the 4th century."

In our usual understanding, the phenomenon of holy foolishness appears only in the sixth century in Syria, where the famous Simeon the Holy Fool labored. “Syria in general was a unique region from the point of view of the ascetic tradition that developed there. Christianity was perceived very warmly there, and therefore such “extreme” types of asceticism arose, such as, for example, pillarism (this is also a product of Syria), and foolishness,” notes Andrey Vinogradov.

Language of the case

“In each specific situation, the holy fool selects his own images and methods for “scolding the world,” denunciation, but the most important element of this language is the moment of revolution,” says Andrei Vinogradov. The holy fool does what a normal Christian should not do: eats meat during Lent, throws stones at icons, like St. Basil. He attacks the norm of behavior - but with these actions he reveals the deviation of his contemporary society from the norms that he “attacks”. Obeying the idea of hiding his virtues, the holy fool not only gives someone spiritual advice, as other saints do, he provokes a person to actions that can reveal his secret vices. Thus, St. Basil the Blessed, having overturned a tray of rolls of bread at the market, was first beaten by angry traders, and only after some time the merchant whose rolls were scattered admitted that he had mixed chalk into the flour, which the saint tried to point out by overturning the stall.

“Reproach with words is the language of the world, which becomes dull over time,” explains A. Vinogradov. “The holy fool denounces with deeds; by demonstrating social vices to society, he, as it were, accepts suffering for these vices, is subjected to reproach and thereby turns the situation around. By attacking established forms social behavior or piety, the holy fool pays attention to the inner essence, actualizes the forgotten inner content of these forms."

Difficult diagnosis

In life, it can be very difficult to distinguish a holy fool from a madman. “It’s easy for us to see his holiness in the ancient holy fool, because we look at him through the prism of hagiography, the church’s understanding of his feat,” says Andrei Vinogradov.

“Every business is tested by time. As Gamaliel, the teacher of the Apostle Paul, said in the Sanhedrin, when the apostles were brought there, trying to forbid them to talk about Christ, “if this enterprise and this work are from men, then it will be destroyed, but if from God, then you If you cannot destroy it, beware lest you turn out to be enemies of God" (Acts 5: 38-39). Just as there are old men, and there are young men, false elders, so there are true holy fools, and there are cliques. The inner life of a person is a mystery. Therefore, during canonization, questions often arise related to the fact that the inner is known only to God, says Archpriest Valerian Krechetov, confessor of the Moscow diocese, rector of the Intercession Church in the village of Akulovo. Father Damascene (Orlovsky) also agrees with him: “Since this feat is extreme, very It is difficult to determine and accurately evaluate the foolishness of Christ. This is perhaps the only form of achievement that is spiritually so difficult to discern.”

Both in Byzantium and in Synodal Russia there were even laws directed against false foolishness, which, however, could also be applied against true holy fools. “For example, Theodore Balsamon, the famous canonist who lived in Constantinople in the 11th century and became the Patriarch of Antioch, put on a chain two people whom he considered false fools, and only after some time, having sorted it out, was forced to admit that these were real ascetics, and let them go,” says Andrei Vinogradov. “The behavior of a holy fool may not be outwardly different from the behavior of a sick person. I witnessed a scene when an elderly woman stood at the entrance to the Yelokhovsky Cathedral, loudly denouncing the episcopate who had come to the cathedral for worship: for Mercedes and etc. Judging by her behavior, I would say that she is crazy, but I wouldn’t rule out the possibility that she is a holy fool. This woman was driven away at some point, but the holy fool’s acceptance of the backlash from society, in conflict with which he goes - this is part of the feat of foolishness.Exceptions are rare: in Rus' of the 16th-17th centuries, the holy fool was such an important phenomenon that he was extremely rarely subjected to aggression from society. One English traveler testifies that in Moscow at that time a holy fool could denounce any person, regardless of his social status, and the accused humbly accepted any reproach. Why? This is connected to a certain extent with temperament: the Russian people are lovers of truth, they love all kinds of accusations. The Russian man of that time was ready to endure public ridicule in the hope of forgiveness for the sins of which he was accused, unlike the Greek, who grew up within the framework of an agonistic, competitive culture. For the Greeks, with their thousand-year history of Orthodoxy, the forms of holiness were thought of very conservatively. They knew how a holy person should behave, and any deviation from their usual behavior was perceived painfully by them. Fools who behaved defiantly from the point of view of moral standards could even be beaten or killed. Rus', which had a less strict church culture, more easily tolerated the interference of the “fools.” Moreover, the existence of a person who denounces everyone from a beggar to a king was a kind of engine of social dynamics, which society at that time lacked. And of course, a special type of Russian religiosity mattered, which, like the Syrian, was prone to extremes."

It is difficult to talk about the typology of Russian holy foolishness, because it is such a specific phenomenon that it is very difficult to identify its “national features,” researchers shrug their shoulders; each holy fool is unique in his own way. Some, like Simeon the Fool-for-Christ, threw stones during worship, others simply stood on a stone, prayed and denounced with words, like Procopius of Ustyug. In addition, all hagiographers used the same Byzantine life of Simeon the Holy Fool as a model and, explaining the spiritual meaning of the feat of foolishness, largely repeated each other.

***

Orthodox Church and sectarians. Heavenly Church: veneration of saints, prayerful invocation of saints, veneration of the Mother of God, veneration of holy angels- Archpriest Dmitry Vladykov

Blessed is discord with the blessed!

Icon – Procopius of Ustyug, coming to the Mother of God

Saint Basil the Blessed (16th century) threw stones at miraculous icons and argued with the formidable king; Blessed Simeon (6th century) pretended to be lame, tripped up the townspeople hurrying past and knocked them to the ground. Procopius of Ustyug (13th century) did not knock anyone down, bite or scold anyone. But under the guise of a crippled beggar, he slept on a pile of garbage and walked around Ustyug in rags, despite the fact that he was a rich German merchant. In similar rags, many centuries later she wandered around the sovereign Petersburg. Why did they do all this?

“A holy fool is a person who voluntarily chooses the path of hiding his abilities, pretends to be devoid of virtues and exposes the world in the absence of these very virtues,” this definition is offered by Andrei Vinogradov, candidate of historical sciences, associate professor at the Orthodox St. Tikhon’s Humanitarian University. - Sometimes they were called blessed. There is ambiguity in the modern usage of some of the terms associated with this face of holiness. We often call ascetics “blessed” who have had no experience of exposing the world. Why? This is largely the result of Catholic influence. For the Catholic Church, blessed is the lowest rank of holiness. This is connected with the fact that in our Church, ascetics whose feat belongs to an atypical, “peripheral” type are sometimes called blessed. In the East, the term “blessed,” that is, “makarios,” was traditionally used as a complete synonym for the word “saint.” But in the first centuries, most saints were either martyrs or apostles. Over time, the number of “types” grew: from the fourth century, holy (blessed) monks appeared - “venerables”, holy bishops - “hierarchs”. And at this time the term “blessed” begins to be applied to some unusual types of holiness, such as foolishness. “God’s people” are also called blessed, who lead a life similar to the holy fools, but whose feat is not entirely equal to the feat of the holy fool.”

The feat of the holy fool, in contrast to the “Man of God,” has a clear social orientation. “He not only hides his talents from the world (like Alexius the Man of God, whose Byzantine life is widely known), but pretends to be insane, “violent” - hence the Greek term “salos”, which is used to call holy fools (in ancient Slavic - ugly or deformed). This term comes from the verb “saleuo” - “to waver, to sway.” “Salos is a crazy person, a person who behaves inappropriately,” continues Andrei Vinogradov. “By means of imaginary madness, the holy fool exposes the world of its sins and tries to set it on the path of correction. Foolishness is internally connected with the feat of the “man of God,” typologically these are similar faces of saints, and they are distinguished only by the element of exposure, the outward focus of the holy fool’s feat.”

Extreme asceticism

It is difficult to say when this type of ascetic feat first appears. “The emergence of foolishness was associated with the flourishing of spiritual life,” believes Hegumen Damascene(Orlovsky), member of the Synodal Commission for the Canonization of Saints, head of the “Memory of Martyrs and Confessors of the Russian Orthodox Church” fund, cleric of the Church of the Intercession of the Mother of God on Lyshchikova Hill (Moscow). - We do not know foolishness in the very first times of Christianity, then Christianity itself was perceived by the world as foolishness. When the Apostle Paul called his accusers to faith in the resurrection of Christ, they said to him: you are crazy, Paul. But in the traditional understanding, foolishness appears when fasting and prayer were not enough for hermits and ascetics and they turned to extreme means of acquiring humility - reproach from the world for their very way of life. And, conquering their pride, they achieved perfect humility.” “The spiritual foundations for foolishness were laid down in the New Testament; these are the famous words about foolishness for the sake of Christ (see 1 Cor. 4:10). Already the early Christian communities put themselves in a certain conflict with the world and, like the later holy fools, denounced the world of its sins. — Andrei Vinogradov sees the continuity of the feat of the first apostolic disciples and later ascetics. - At the same time, the phenomenon of foolishness in the literal sense could only appear in a Christian society. The holy fool denounces society for not following Christian norms, but this appeal is only possible if Christianity is a generally accepted norm for society. And as a state religion, Christianity was established only in Byzantium at the end of the 4th century.”

In our usual understanding, the phenomenon of holy foolishness appears only in the sixth century in Syria, where the famous Simeon the Holy Fool labored. “Syria in general was a unique region from the point of view of the ascetic tradition that developed there. Christianity was perceived there very warmly, and therefore such “extreme” types of asceticism arose, such as, for example, pillarism (this is also a product of Syria), and foolishness,” notes Andrei Vinogradov.

Holy fools. Language of the case

“Reproach with words is the language of the world, which becomes dull over time,” explains A. Vinogradov. “The holy fool denounces with deeds; by demonstrating social vices to society, he, as it were, accepts suffering for these vices, is subjected to reproach, and thereby turns the situation around. By attacking established forms of social behavior or piety, the holy fool draws attention to the inner essence and actualizes the forgotten inner content of these forms.”

Difficult diagnosis

“Every business is tested by time. As Gamaliel, the teacher of the Apostle Paul, said in the Sanhedrin, when the apostles were brought there, trying to forbid them to talk about Christ, “if this enterprise and this work is of men, then it will be destroyed, but if it is of God, then you cannot destroy it, beware lest you also prove to be enemies of God” (Acts 5:38-39). Just as there are old men, and there are young men, false elders, so there are true fools, and there are cliques. The inner life of a person is a mystery. Therefore, during canonization, questions often arise related to the fact that the internal is known only to God alone, he believes confessor of the Moscow diocese, rector of the Church of the Intercession in the village of Akulovo, Archpriest Valerian Krechetov. Father Damascene (Orlovsky) also agrees with him: “Since this feat is extreme, it is very difficult to determine and accurately evaluate the foolishness of Christ for the sake of it. This is perhaps the only form of achievement that is spiritually so difficult to discern.”

Both in Byzantium and in Synodal Russia there were even laws directed against false foolishness, which, however, could also be applied against true holy fools. “For example, Theodore Balsamon, the famous canonist who lived in Constantinople in the 11th century and became the Patriarch of Antioch, put on a chain two people whom he considered false fools, and only after some time, having sorted it out, was forced to admit that these were real ascetics, and let them go,” says Andrei Vinogradov. — The behavior of a holy fool may not differ in any way from the behavior of a sick person. I witnessed a scene when an elderly woman stood at the entrance to the Yelokhovsky Cathedral, loudly denouncing the episcopate who had come to the cathedral for worship: for Mercedes, etc. Based on her behavior, I would say that she is crazy, but exclude that she is a holy fool, I wouldn't either. This woman was driven away at some point, but the holy fool’s acceptance of the backlash from the society with which he is in conflict is part of the feat of holy foolishness. Exceptions are rare: in Rus' of the 16th-17th centuries, the holy fool was such an important phenomenon that he was extremely rarely subjected to aggression from society. One English traveler testifies that in Moscow at that time a holy fool could denounce any person, regardless of his social status, and the accused humbly accepted any reproach. Why? This is connected to a certain extent with temperament: the Russian people are lovers of truth, they love all kinds of accusations. The Russian man of that time was ready to endure public ridicule in the hope of forgiveness for the sins of which he was accused, unlike the Greek, who grew up within the framework of an agonistic, competitive culture. For the Greeks, with their thousand-year history of Orthodoxy, the forms of holiness were thought of very conservatively. They knew how a holy person should behave, and any deviation from their usual behavior was perceived painfully by them. Fools who behaved defiantly from the point of view of moral standards could even be beaten or killed. Rus', which had a less strict church culture, more easily tolerated the interference of the “fools.” Moreover, the existence of a person who denounces everyone from a beggar to a king was a kind of engine of social dynamics, which society at that time lacked. And of course, a special type of Russian religiosity mattered, which, like the Syrian, was prone to extremes.”

Back to the Future?

Russian foolishness is concentrated in a very short time period from the 16th to the 17th centuries. The exploits of modern holy fools are still closer to the life of the “man of God” than to the classic “riot”: this is Ksenia of Petersburg, and Matrona Anemnyasevskaya, and Matrona of Moscow. “In their feat there is no such attack, exposure, characteristic of holy fools,” notes Andrei Vinogradov, “since the holy fool in the classical sense can only live in the society whose values he calls to observe.”

Andrei Vinogradov reflects on the relevance of the feat of holy fools in modern Russia: “It is known that many elders of the 20th century - St. John of Shanghai, Archpriest Nikolai Zalitsky - in some situations adopted models of behavior characteristic of holy fools, but for such a feat to be permanent, a certain state of society is required . Is it possible to revive this feat in the future? Judging by the processes that are now taking place, when society is outwardly becoming churched, often just outwardly, and in the future a new traditional society based on Christian values can be created, there will also be a need for new holy fools who will denounce society and actualize the inner for ordinary people. the content of accepted norms of behavior and Christian values.”