Hildebrand's Overthrow of the West

The video linked below addresses more documentary evidence of how the monk Hildebrand (future Gregory VII) overthrew the See of Rome, and eventually the entire western Church, by illegal means:  Peter Crassus’ Defense of Henry, and Bishop Guido of Ferrara’s “On Hildebrand's Schism”.  It also shows that the western mind-set was very much Orthodox at the time of the East-West Schism, such as symphonia between the Emperors and Patriarchs, the ability for Popes to be deposed, and the general rejection of Gregory VII.

"The People vs. Hildebrand", NFTU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M177OGHaLew

WWII Martyrs of Serbia

The following article is taken from Orthodox Life, Vol. 33, No. 1 (Jan.-Feb. 1983), pp. 15-22.  It points out the role Roman Catholic clerics played, during the time of Im-Pius XII, in decimating the Orthodox in WWII Serbia.  Basically, the Vatican unofficially approved of the "war-time" slaughter of Serbian Orthodox, and then stole their church buildings.  This is much like what happened in the Bolshevik Soviet Union, including Jewish backing (if not orchestration).  My opinion is that the Serbs were persecuted and martyred because the King of Serbia sheltered the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, and also opposed the Freemasonic Ecumenical Movement.  

On the Serbian Orthodox New Martyrs of the Second World War

A Brief Historical Background

by Joachim Wertz

The twentieth century has seen the crowning of a multitude of martyrs. Holy Russia, from the time of the Bolshevik revolution to the present, has given us millions of new heavenly intercessors, champions of the faith. This is well known to the entire Orthodox Church. Unfortunately, many Orthodox Christians are ignorant of the sufferings of the nearly 750,000 Orthodox Serbian Christians who gave their lives in the defense and confession of the faith during the time of the last world war in the so-called "Independent State of Croatia" and in other parts of German-occupied Yugoslavia at the hands of the Croatian nationalists and other enemies of the Orthodox Church, at the instigation of and with the open participation of the Latin clergy. This persecution was aimed at the complete elimination of the Orthodox Church in these areas. Attempts at forced conversion to Catholicism were joined to a systematic and completely overt destruction of every trace of Orthodoxy. All of this was done in such a fierce and inconceivably brutal manner and in such a short span of time and relatively small geographic area that it is difficult even to imagine. Indeed the characteristics of this recent persecution are unprecedented in the history of the Church after the persecutions of the first centuries. The sacrifice and memory of these martyrs must not be allowed to remain hidden, known only to their fellow Orthodox countrymen, but should be published and commemorated for the edification of all Orthodox Christians.

Briefly, several points should be kept in mind concerning the history of Serbia and of Yugoslavia between the two world wars. After World War I the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes (later to become the Kingdom of Yugoslavia) was created by the victorious allies out of the former kingdoms of Serbia and Montenegro as well as virtually all of the territory of the former Austro-Hungarian Empire inhabited by the South Slavic peoples. This included Slovenia and Croatia, both predominantly Roman Catholic, as well as Dalmatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, areas of mixed Roman Catholic, Orthodox and Moslem populations. Bosnia, Herzegovina and Dalmatia, as well as parts of Slovenia (the area of north-central Yugoslavia between the historic Croatian and Serbian lands), acquired large permanent Serbian populations during the centuries of Turkish rule. The Serbs in these regions, in the main, settled there after fleeing Turkish oppression, and were granted land and privileges in return for military service in defense of the Austro-Hungarian borders against the Turks. Historically, in these areas the Serbs lived peacefully alongside their Croatian neighbors. They lived, however, in a state of constant harassment on the part of the Austrians, sometimes subdued and at other times violent in character. The Austrians from time to time attempted to impose the Unia on the Serbs. These efforts, for the most part, met with little success, though this did produce several martyrs and heroic confessors of the Orthodox faith. But Austrian and Vatican policy considered it potentially more profitable to devote the full force of the Uniate movement to the western Ukrainian lands. In Slovenia there was no Orthodox populace. Although Roman Catholics, the Slovenes have always been friendly to the Serbs and valued their political union with Serbia in the Yugoslavian kingdom. One must bear in mind that, although Yugoslavia was politically based and founded on the Serbian kingdom, this was not something brought about by Serbian imperialism. It was an arrangement devised by the major world powers after the First World War, and accepted by Serbia and the Serbian king in a spirit of duty and friendship in the hope that the South Slavic peoples could live in peace after many centuries of occupation and oppression. In fact, since the 18th century, this "Yugoslav idea" based on a strong Serbian state was always popular among the Croats and championed by their intellectuals.

Nevertheless, in the 19th century hatred for the Serbs began to be cultivated as part of the policy of the growing Croatian nationalist movement. This hatred, which previously had been more or less confined to the Croatian clergy, Austrian Jesuits and the Austro-Hungarian government, began to infect certain elements of the populace with the rise of various political figures such as Ante Starcevic who claimed that "the Serbs are a breed fit only for the slaughterhouse."

In World War I, the policy of the Austrians was to sow as much discord between the Croats and Serbs living in the Dual Monarchy as possible, since Austria was at war with the two Serbian kingdoms of Serbia and Montenegro. One of the causes of this war, of course, was Austrian attempts to prevent a unified Serbian kingdom which would naturally include the largely Serbian portions of Bosnia and Herzegovina. It must also be remembered that one of Austria's allies in that war was Bulgaria, which, though an Orthodox kingdom, was a traditional enemy of Serbia and was certainly not favorable to a large unified Serbian state on its borders. Also, Austrian policy historically sought to keep Serbia and Bulgaria enemies and to damage any fraternal relations between them.

With this policy of Austria in mind, we see that in 1884 a movement was begun in Croatia, founded by a certain Josip Frank, a Jewish convert to Catholicism, called the Pravasi or the Frankovci. This was an ultra-nationalist Croatian Movement created to foster hatred towards Serbs among Croatians. It was composed of some wealthy residents of Zagreb, clergy, small-townsmen, and certain undesirables of Croatian society who organized local gangs of terrorists. One of its members in the early 20th century was Ante Pavelic, later to become the head of the so-called "Independent State of Croatia." These Frankovci were used by the Austrians for terrorizing the Serbian inhabitants of Bosnia, where they succeeded in murdering quite a few Serbian clergy.

In the 1930's, after the creation of Yugoslavia, this movement was secretly revived in the form of the notorious terrorist organization known as the Ustasi led by Ante Pavelic, who busied himself training his followers in Italy and Hungary. At the same time anti-Serbian and anti-monarchist terrorist groups were formed across the border from Yugoslavian Macedonia in Bulgaria. Some of these groups allied themselves with Pavelic's Ustasi. Also, in 1934, a camp for terrorists at Janka. Puszta in Hungary was founded to train potential assassins of King Alexander of Yugoslavia, while enjoying the protection of the Horthy government in Budapest.

On October 9, 1934, King Alexander was indeed assassinated in Marseilles, France. He suffered a martyr-like death at the hands of a Bulgarian-Macedonian terrorist working in collaboration with the fanatical Ustasi. His murder was a very fortunate occurrence for the enemies of the Serbs and Yugoslavia, since there was no one to take his place as leader of the Serbs and unifier of Yugoslavia.

King Alexander died leaving as his heir his young son Peter. Peter was in his teens and thus a regency was established according to King Alexander's will, headed by his cousin Prince Paul. Prince Paul was not well liked, and he himself felt out of place in Yugoslavia, favoring as he did Western European culture. During the regency two notorious and extremely unwise policies were worked out, the first by the regent and his prime minister, Stojadinovic, a man who earlier advocated the recognition of the Soviet Union. These two agreements, extremely unpopular among the Serbs, were the Concordat with the Vatican, and the Sporazum, creating a virtually autonomous Croatia in a highly preferred position. The Concordat was an attempt by the leader of the Slovene Clerical Party to settle the Croatian problem by appealing to the more conservative Croats and at the same time to gain autonomy for Slovenia. In effect it would have virtually established the Roman Catholic Church in Yugoslavia and granted it privileges denied to the Orthodox Church.

The Serbs felt this to be an attack on the Orthodox Church, and the Church together with virtually all the Serbian people mounted unprecedented resistance to the proposed agreement. In the midst of the crisis Patriarch Varnava died. His health had suffered under the strain of the controversy, and it was even rumored that he had been poisoned. The concordat was passed by the parliament on the very day the patriarch died and was immediately followed by the excommunication of those Serbian deputies who voted in favor of it. There was also a demonstration organized by the Church and headed by bishops and clergy that set but from the cathedral in Belgrade and was violently broken up by the police. The prime minister had a serious crisis on his hands and withdrew the proposal. The Sporazum of 1939 was negotiated by Premier Cvetkovic, who replaced the extremely unpopular Stojadinovic, and the Croatian political leaders. It created an internally autonomous Banovina of Croatia. But most importantly, the Banovina included the territory of the historic Croatian kingdom, including even areas where the majority of the population was Serbian. Even this did not satisfy the demands of the Croats, and the Serbs feared that Srem and all of Bosnia would be given away. Within a week after the Sporazum was signed, war broke out in Europe.

On August 25, 1939, Prince Paul's government, bowing to German' pressure, signed the Three-Power Pact with Germany and Italy. Intense indignation arose in Serbia. Two days later a coup d' etat was carried out by a group of officers, who in noble Serbian tradition preferred destruction and martyrdom to treachery and dishonor. King Peter was declared of age, and Prince Paul fled the country. One week later, on Palm Sunday morning, German planes bombed Belgrade. The war had now come to Yugoslavia.

On April 10, as the German troops were being welcomed into Zagreb, the independent state of Croatia was proclaimed. Many Croats, blinded by chauvinism, enlisted in the service of the invading armies. Croatian militia units joined the Ustasi in attacks on isolated Yugoslavian army units, after which they handed over the Serbian officers and soldiers to the Germans.

Yugoslavia formally capitulated on April 18, and the country was immediately carved up. The provinces of Slavonia, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Srem were given to the Croatian state. During the first days of the occupation, the most prominent Serbs, at the head of whom stood the patriarch, Gavrilo, and the renowned bishop of Zica, Nikolai (Velimirovich), both of whom had sought refuge in the monastery of Ostrog in Montenegro, were arrested. They were later taken to the concentration camp of Dachau in Germany, where they were interned until the end of the war, and where they suffered and endured much abuse and indignities. Later, after their arrests, Bishop Irinej (Djordjevic) of Dalmatia another prominent hierarch, was seized by the Italians and imprisoned in a camp in Italy until the end of the war.

Very revealing as to the utter fanaticism that gripped the Roman Catholic Church in Croatia during these early days of the war and the infant Croatian state, is this excerpt from the diocesan newspaper of the archdiocese of Sarajevo: "Until now, God spoke through papal encyclicals. And? They closed their ears... Now God has decided to use other methods. He will prepare missions. European missions. World missions. They will be upheld not by priests, but by army commanders. The sermons will be heard with the help of cannons, machine guns, tanks and bombers." The Ustasi were known to have publicly taken oaths in the Catholic churches, pledging to work for the eradication of the Serbs and Orthodoxy. Especially militant and very prominent in the Ustasi were members of the Franciscan Order. Immediately after the proclamation of the Ustasi state, the Croatian primate, Archbishop Alojzije Stepinac of Zagreb, gave his blessing in the name of the Roman Church to the Croatian state and established "close collaboration." (It should be pointed out, however, that the Croatian Catholic Church was, at least officially, speaking for itself at that time. The procedure for obtaining recognition by the Vatican was in full progress, but officially the Vatican still recognized the Kingdom of Yugoslavia and had diplomatic relations with the government-in-exile. In short, the Vatican gave de facto recognition to the Ustasi regime, together will full diplomatic protocol at state occasions, though never official recognition.)

The massacres of Orthodox Serbs began shortly after the creation of the Croatian state. In the Serbian villages in the Bjelovar region 250 people were buried alive. In the village of Otecac some 331 Serbs were slain together with their priest who was tortured to death. In Kosinj the Ustasi assembled about 600 Serbs and slaughtered them. In a similar manner in these first months alone hundreds were massacred and forced to undergo horrible tortures, both physical and psychological, in scores of villages.

Soon both the private and public use of the Cyrillic alphabet was prohibited, and the Serbs were required to wear the letter "P" (for Pravoslavac — Orthodox) on their arms.

The Ustasi plan called for the extermination of one portion of the Serbian population and for the forced conversion to Roman Catholicism of the other. in either case, the Serbs, as an Orthodox people, had no place in the Catholic Croatian state. This shows that in spite of the presence of widespread National Socialist "Aryan" racist propaganda in Croatia, the hatred for the Serbs was based on their being Orthodox. One Catholic periodical in lauding the head of the Ustasi state, Pavelic, praises the Ustasi "Crusader" (Krizar) organization as "Raised in the spirit of radical Catholicism, which knows no compromises so far as principles are concerned, that never knew what it meant to give in and abandon any part of the program of Croatian nationalism." Thus the program of Serbian conversion and/or liquidation, can be viewed as being in the tradition of the medieval crusades which were launched to stamp out the enemies of the Roman church. Archbishop Stepinac saw the Serbs as being schismatics and an evil "almost greater than Protestantism." Croatia was viewed as a bastion of Roman Catholicism in the Balkans. In 1944 a Berlin newspaper wrote: "An extraordinary ecclesiastical struggle is going on in Croatia. The Ustasi government is persecuting the Orthodox Church and is trying to convert as many Orthodox people as possible to Catholicism by means of intimidation and all kinds of devices. At the opening of the so-called Croat Assembly, Pavelic said that religious freedom did exist in principle, but it did not include the Orthodox Church. Apart from nationalistic reasons, Pavelic endeavored to represent himself as a missionary by virtue of his work on behalf of the church, thus desiring to acquire greater prestige. We still recall his visit to the pope at the time when he was just organizing his 'State'."

On May 8, 1941, the infamous martyrdom of the Serbs of the Glina region began. The Ustasi began by killing seven Serbs. In the short time that followed, they arrested and murdered 560 people from that region. Then on May 11 a train carrying 120 Serbs stopped at Glina. They were then removed to the courtyard of a local Jewish merchant, where a number of them were killed, and the rest taken to an unknown destination.

On May 4, the Orthodox bishop of Banja Luka, Platon, was ordered by the Ustasi to leave town immediately. He then appealed to the local Catholic bishop to intercede with the authorities to grant him several days to prepare. The Catholic bishop gave him his word, but during the night six Ustasi terrorists came and arrested the hierarch. Then, together with Father Dugan Subotic, he was led some six kilometers away to the village of Vrbanja, where they were all killed. Their bodies revealed how they had been tortured. They were shaved with a blunt knife, their eyes were put out, their ears and noses cut off, and fires were lit on their chests. Their remains were found in the Vrbanja river on May 23.

A few days later the eighty-year old metropolitan of Bosnia, Peter (Zimonjic), was arrested by an Ustasi cleric. He was ordered to forbid the use of the Cyrillic alphabet, and when he refused, he was taken to Zagreb and later to the infamous concentration camp of Jasenovac, where he perished.

On May 21, Bishop Sava (Trlajic) of Karlovac was arrested at his home. He was taken, together with three priests and thirteen other Orthodox Serbs, in a truck to Ogulin. There they were locked in a stable, beaten and tortured, and then taken to Gospic, from where on August 15, they were sent together with 2,000 other Serbs to the Adriatic island of Pag, where they were all killed.

The metropolitan of Zagreb, Dositej, is also numbered with those who suffered martyrdom, having been beaten and tortured before his death.

The martyrdom of these hierarchs and other clergy, the imprisonment of others, as well as the conditions of the occupation in general, caused the disintegration of all Orthodox ecclesiastical administration and open Church life in the territories of Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and the Vojvodina from 1941 to 1945.

In many villages the massacres followed a certain pattern: The Ustasi would arrive and assemble all the Serbs. They would then order them to convert to Catholicism. Those who refused, as the majority did, were told to assemble in their local Orthodox parish church. They would then lock them in the church and set it ablaze. In this manner many Orthodox men, women and children perished in scores of Serbian settlements.

In the area between Gospic and Velebit, where the terrain is rocky with many canyons and ravines, the Ustasi would take their Orthodox Serbian prisoners in long convoys on foot, two-by-two and all linked by a' long chain, to the edge of a cliff, where they would kill them and then throw their bodies into the ravine. Thousands were killed in this manner in that area alone.

Even more horrible, in the same general area, in village after village, children were found impaled on stakes, all the rest of the inhabitants having been already slaughtered.

On August 3, 1941, all Orthodox between the ages of sixteen and sixty from the villages of Virgin Most and Cemernica were assembled to be forcibly proselytized. There were about 3000 in all. But instead of Croatian clerics, trucks arrived and the Serbs were herded into them and taken to Glina, where they were told that a priest was waiting to convert them to Catholicism, after which they would be returned home. In Glina they were joined by Serbs from Topusko. But instead of being converted they were put in jail, from which every night a thousand of them were taken to the local Orthodox church and there stabbed one-by-one. In this manner 2000 were put to death in the Glina church, while the last group of a thousand was burned to death, together with the church itself and its pastor, Father Bogdan Opacic.

Massacres of the Serbian Orthodox population were also carried out in the Vojvodina, a region under Hungarian occupation. In the town of Curug, Serbs were rounded up and gunned down on the Feast of the Nativity of Christ in 1942. But the most numerous massacres occurred in Novi Sad from January 21-23 of the same year, when nearly a thousand Serbs were martyred. Some of them were even thrown into the ice-covered river while still alive.

As the tide of the war began to turn, and the Ustasi regime began to lose control of the mountainous regions, it became more difficult to continue to carry out village massacres. The Ustasi were afraid to enter certain areas without the support of the German army, and the Germans could not spare the troops to help in, this kind of madness. Therefore the regime began to put all their efforts into centralized concentration camps. These camps became nothing less than slaughterhouses for Orthodox Serbs. The camps began to multiply rapidly. There were many but for brevity we will discuss only the most infamous, that of Jasenovac. in all, hundreds of thousands perished in these camps.

Jasenovac was made up of wooden huts built on damp marshy land on the banks of the river Sava. The conditions were unsanitary, and it was plagued by famine. In all, during 1941 and 1942 about 200,000 people died or were killed there. The commander-in-chief of the Croatian concentration camps boasted with pride: "We have slaughtered here at Jasenovac more people than the Ottoman empire was able to do during its occupation of Europe." In 1942 alone some 12,000 children were murdered at Jasenovac. Most of those who survived the camp later perished from weakened health. Utterly indescribable tortures have been reported by foreign observers as having been inflicted on Serbian women and children at Jasenovac. Most are too terrible to recount. The Ustasi even killed, in a horrible fashion, babies just about to be born, right in the very wombs of their mothers.

An example of the character of the fanatically clever thinking of the Ustasi is provided in this quote from a communication of a Franciscan to the Ustasi commander at the village of Derventa, from whence 500 Serbs were deported to the camps: "There are 500 widows in the five villages who could marry Catholics, for there are no more Serbian Orthodox. This would be an excellent chance to indoctrinate them, and they in turn would indoctrinate their families with Catholicism and Croatism." The fanatics would stop at literally nothing to erase all traces of the Orthodox Serbs and at the same time increase the numbers of Croatian Catholics.

It should be emphasized that the Ustasi program was a total one of either the extermination or complete assimilation of the Orthodox. Thus for the most part the Unia, which existed in Croatia, did not seriously enter into their considerations. This was still too "eastern" for them and too much of a reminder of Orthodoxy. The regime, if it could, would probably have decreed its complete Latinization. But the Unia was too valuable an institution to the Vatican for its own purposes for this to have been attempted.

It must also be pointed out that of those Serbs who were coerced into accepting Catholicism and who survived the war, most did in fact return to Orthodoxy after the war. However, during the persecutions, many Serbian children were taken from their parents or "rescued" from the camps. Many of these orphans still remain unaccounted for. They were taken to be raised as Catholics, and no doubt they grew up as Catholics, not knowing their true identity or their original faith.

After the surrender of Italy, the Ustasi regime's days were numbered. In May, 1945 Pavelic, his deputies and about 500 clerics fled to Austria after entrusting what was left of the government and their wealth stolen from their victims, to Archbishop Stepinac.

During the time of the persecution, nearly 300 Orthodox churches in the territory of the Croatian state were destroyed. In the diocese of Karlovac 173 out of 189 temples were demolished. Others were desecrated by being turned into slaughterhouses, stables and latrines. Still others were given over to the Roman Catholics, as were several of the historic Orthodox monasteries. Many of the damaged churches have been restored by the Serbian Church since the war. Others are still to be repaired and can be seen crumbling and abandoned in Yugoslavia today.

The new Serbian martyrs of World War II included five bishops and at least 177 other clergy martyrs. In all, both clergy and lay, they number about 750,000. The late Bishop Nikolai (Velimirovich), over a quarter of a century ago, inscribed into the Church calendar by his own hand the following notation for the date August 31 (0. S.): "The 700,000 who suffered for the Orthodox faith at the hands of the Roman crusaders and Ustasi during the time of the Second World War. These are the New Serbian Martyrs."

Through their prayers may all the Orthodox be saved and strengthened in the defense of the Faith! Amen.

References

1. Paris, Edmund; Genocide in Satellite Croatia, American Institute for Balkan Affairs, Chicago, 1961.

2. Martyrdom of the Serbs, Serbian Eastern Orthodox Diocese for the United States and Canada, 1943.

3. Alexander, Stella: Church and State in Yugoslavia since 1945, Cambridge University Press, London, 1979.

Note: All dates in this article were new style [Gregorian calendar], unless otherwise indicated.

Answering Objections to the Most Holy Theotokos' Entrance into the Temple

"Obedience to the Church and Pride of the Mind, or About the Dispute about the Entry of the Most Holy Theotokos into the Temple"  

--- by Deacon Sergiy Agu (schismatic), Toronto, July 2020

Is there evidence in the Church that the Orthodox Feast of the Entry of the Most Holy Theotokos into the Temple with all its liturgical sequences accurately narrates and glorifies the miracle of this event?

...at the 4th Ecumenical Council in Chalcedon in 449, when 630 Fathers decided the issue against the Monophysite heresy, the Holy Great Martyr Euphemia the All-Praised (who appeared as a martyr of the Lord in 303) stretched out her hand as if alive and gave the Tsar and Patriarch a scroll with the correct confession (commemorated on July 11). 

And the Mother of God appeared and explained to people the foundations of faith or the subtleties of dogma. For example, the Mother of God said to Abba Kyriakos, a priest of the Koloman Lavra, “You have My enemy in your cell, how can you then express the desire that I come to you?” It turned out that Abba Kyriakos had a book by the blessed Jerusalem priest Hesychius, which he took to read, and after the appearance of the Most Pure One, he found [inserted] at the end of the book, Spiritual Meadow, two words of the impious Nestorius, and thus, learned what kind of enemy the Most Holy Lady had in his cell. 

Another example directly related to our topic, including the “wrong views of St. John Chrysostom” is described in the Life of St. Cyril, Archbishop of Alexandria (commemorated on June 9). “Saint Cyril of Christ – this great saint of God… was angry with John Chrysostom without reason – a saint against a saint… not only during the latter’s life, but even after his death, and did not want to remember him as a saint.” St. Cyril realized his wrongdoing and completely repented when he was frightened by the following vision. It seemed to him that he was in a certain very beautiful place filled with indescribable joy. Here he saw wonderful men - Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and other saints, both of the Old Testament and the New Testament. At the same time, he saw there a very spacious and bright temple, the beauty of which human language is not able to depict, and he heard the singing of sweet-sounding voices in it. Entering this temple and amazed at its beauty and magnificence, Cyril saw in it in the radiance of glory the Most Pure Lady Theotokos, surrounded by a multitude of angels. Among those standing around the Mother of God, in a place of honor was St. John Chrysostom, shining like an angel of God with a miraculous light and holding a book of his writings in his hand; a multitude of wonderful men surrounded him like servants. They were all armed, as if preparing for an attack. And so, when Cyril wanted to fall at the feet of the Mother of God to worship Her, Saint John and the armor-bearers who were with him immediately rushed at him, forbidding him to approach the Most Pure Mother of God and driving him out of the miraculous temple. Cyril, seeing John indignant against him and himself being driven out of the temple, began to tremble. But suddenly he heard the Most Pure Virgin Mother of God, turning to John with a petition that he forgive Cyril and not drive him out of the temple, since he had sinned against him not out of malice, but out of ignorance. But John seemed to not want to forgive Cyril. Then the Most Holy Mother of God said: "Forgive him for My sake, for he has labored much for My honor - he has glorified Me among people and called Me the Mother of God.  When the Most Holy Mother of God uttered these words, John immediately took pity and answered the Mother of God: "By your intercession, Lady, I forgive him." Then, approaching Cyril in a friendly manner, he embraced and kissed him, and thus they were reconciled with each other in a vision.  After this vision, Saint Cyril began to repent often and condemn himself for having up to that time in vain held anger against such a saint of God.  Then, having gathered all the Egyptian bishops, he celebrated a solemn celebration in honor of Saint John Chrysostom and recorded the latter in the church books among the host of great saints.  In this way the stain that lay on the holy man Cyril, who was at enmity with Saint John, was removed, and the enmity between Her servants was dispelled by the Most Pure Mother of God Herself.  From the time that Saint Cyril lived, he blessed Saint John Chrysostom with laudatory speeches” [Lives of the Saints. Saint Demetrius of Rostov] 

The Mother of God herself, who appeared to people hundreds or even, perhaps, thousands of times, would have announced her will regarding the truth. After all, it is impossible to even imagine that the Mother of God would not have intervened if the Tradition set forth in the Service for the Feast were incorrect, if it contradicted the Holy Scripture and belittled or insulted her son, the God-man Christ. Moreover, the Mother of God quite clearly explained her attitude toward this Feast by the appearance of her miraculous icon of the Entry into the Temple, 14th century, Serpukhov:  “The miraculous icon “The Entry of the Most Holy Theotokos into the Holy of Holies”, painted in 1377 with the blessing of St. Alexia, based on the vision of St. Varlaam, which occurred before the foundation of the monastery: 

“…I saw… Zachariah standing at the doors of the church and the Mother of God entering with Her parents; Zachariah received the Mother of God and seated her on the third step. ” 

This is the plot of the twelve great feasts of the Entry of the Mother of God into the Temple.  The third step refers to the third section of the Jerusalem temple – the Holy of Holies , which is why the icon has a second name. As a result of this revelation, the monastery was named Vvedensky Vladychny, the first church in it was consecrated in the name of the Entry of the Virgin Mary into the Temple, and the icon “Entry of the Most Holy Theotokos into the Holy of Holies” began to be revered as miraculous from the moment it was painted”  [The old description of the icon “Entry of the Virgin Mary into the Holy of Holies ]  In addition, there is a miraculous 'Icon of the Entry of the Holy Mother of God into the Temple' from the village of Yarskoe, which appeared in the 17th century (see description below) and “one of the most revered shrines of Crete – the miraculous icon of the Entry of the Most Holy Theotokos into the Temple (evidence of the destroyed original small temple).  

Answer to the objections that the Blessed Virgin could not enter the temple, since the guards would have prevented this

To the argument that the Blessed Virgin could not physically enter the Holy of Holies, let us ask, How was Enoch “translated so that he did not see death”? And how was the Prophet Elijah taken alive to heaven? And how did the water of the Jordan “which came down from above stood still and became a wall for a very long distance, to the city of Adam, which is near Zarathtan; and that which came down to the sea of the plain, to the Salt Sea, went away and was dried up” [Joshua 3:16] so that the priests with the Ark of the Covenant and the people following them could cross? And how could the walls of the fortress in Jericho fall, when they went around it 7 times with the Ark of the Covenant, from the sound of trumpets and the shouts of the people? And could the Apostle Peter free himself from the bonds of 4 soldiers who were chained to him, when even the servant did not believe his voice and did not want to let him in, how can we believe the letters? And the Apostle Philip, who was lifted up by the air after enlightening the Ethiopian nobleman - is that also an allegory? And will we now believe the tradition that the clouds brought the Apostles to say goodbye to the Mother of God before her departure to her Son in the Kingdom of God? So how can we not accept the two-thousand-year-old Church belief about the joyful miracle of the Entry of the Most Pure Maiden into the Temple to prepare for the reception into the womb of the Holy Spirit?  

Did the High Priest have the right to bring the Most Pure Maiden into the Holy of Holies?

The high priest was given great powers. According to the interpretation of Philo of Alexandria (an early Jewish writer who expounded the symbolism of the Temple service), the high priest was " an appointed judge and mediator " (Questions and Answers on Exodus, II.13), "a second God in his earthly manifestation, ascending to the presence of God as a mediator." "was" in a sense the great archangelic mediator.  

Why is Bishop Ambrose’s opinion that “neither the Virgin Mary nor the priest Zachariah, the father of the Forerunner, would ever have dared to violate the law of the Son of God in such a way” erroneous?

The fall of man occurred because of the violation of the Commandment, the violation of the Law of Love, which most closely connected Adam with God. All the laws that God gave to man were intended to teach man to distinguish good from evil, and the concept of "sin" in Russian, Greek and Hebrew is a miss, a failure to hit the target, a crossing of the line of what is permitted by the law of love. Could the High Priest sin? The gap between God and man was outlined by the veil that separated the Holy of Holies from the second part of the Temple. And so, the God-chosen Maiden was born to serve the purpose of destroying this veil. And not just a Maiden, and not the Mother of Christ, but the Mother of God. What law did she violate when, by God's command, she was led behind this veil by Zechariah? The same as the Lord, when, violating the Sabbath, he healed the sick, made the blind seers and resurrected the dead Lazarus. Grant us, Lord, the heart and mind to correctly understand Your Holy Scriptures!  

"The most complete theological interpretation of the Entry of the Mother of God into the Temple is given by Gregory Palamas in his Sermon "On the Entry of the Most Holy Mother of God into the Temple." In it, the saint tells the history of the feast, gives his opinion on the reasons for God's choice of Mary as the mother of Jesus Christ, and in conclusion explains the reason for her introduction into the Holy of Holies of the Jerusalem Temple:     ... why the One chosen from the beginning of the century among the chosen turned out to be the Holy of Holies. Having Her body purer than the spirits themselves purified by virtue, so that it could accept the very Hypostatic Word of the Pre-Eternal Father, the Ever-Virgin Mary, as the Treasure of God, was now rightfully placed in the Holy of Holies, so that in due time, as it was, she would serve for enrichment and for the pre-worldly adornment." “She, without casting a glance at any of this (because such an infant age does not yet allow this), knows God, and rejoices being brought to Him; or rather, She approaches by Her own impulse, as if by nature herself inspired by sacred and divine Love; and then the High Priest of God saw clearly that the Virgin had in Herself from childhood what had been scarcely possible to attain in the rarest of cases during many ancient centuries for some chosen ones, and that she would possess it throughout Her entire life, having risen high above all, (therefore) and more than was customary with regard to all other people, He honored Her and placed Her in the Holy of Holies, and then convinced everyone to lovingly agree to what was coming to pass, with the assistance and support of God, who acts in the most just way: because She was to become His Chosen Vessel, not like the (Old Testament) Ark, full of shadows and images, but full of the Truth Itself, and was to bear the Divine name not before kings and nations, as was later the case with Paul (Acts 9:10), but to bear in Her womb Himself, God and “a name that is wonderful” (Ps. 8:1), and thus to do this in order to show the most famous Paul instead of Saul, who is not inferior to any of the most famous men of all time, and who is deemed worthy to carry it (this Divine name) with boldness.” Saint Gregory Palamas, Homily 55: “19. Therefore, if anyone will pay due attention not only to the beginning of those who have ever shone forth in virtue, but also to the whole field of virtue of these ascetics, as well as to the final rewards and crowns from above, he will find that they are inferior to the beginning of the Virgin Mary, which the whole human race now celebrates, at the same time recalling with inexpressible joy Her transference from among men to the very Holy of Holies. Once upon a time, Enoch was transferred from among men, but this does not cause a national holiday. After him, Elijah was taken in a fiery chariot, but this did not become the basis for such a great holiday for the whole world, and does not encompass all with some divine delight and does not respond from heaven to those living on earth. After them, the three-year-old Virgin Mary was transferred, and, behold, the whole world rejoices and everything is filled with joy, filled with divine inspiration. Ah! What a miracle is this!? What power does this Maiden have, what perfection of inspiration, what excellence of majesty?! Who is this “She who has overcome the world” (John 5:4), who has renewed the human race, who has taken away from among men the sorrow which was the result of the ancestral curse, and (instead of this) has planted in the earth this divine and pure joy: this general and recurring joy from year to year, unfading, ever abundant (or: flourishing), stronger than the flow of all-destroying time? But we have strayed a little from the subject. Thus, Enoch, having pleased God, was removed (from among men); but, on the other hand, it must be taken into account that he was 365 years old and had spent his whole life according to his own will; But the Maiden, of whom we speak, was scarcely three years old when, having begun to do works surpassing nature, and on the basis of this (Her exploit) having become the Cause of joy on earth, She immediately afterwards established a calling from earth to heaven, a calling which embraces everything. But God transferred him (Enoch); therefore, did He transfer him to heaven? Away with such a thought! Because, as the Gospel says: “No one has ascended to heaven, except He who came down from heaven and for our sake after us (as a Man) was born of this Holy Virgin,” “Who is in heaven” (John 3:13). So, if it is written that Enoch, while on earth, was transferred by God, however, of course, he was transferred to a less significant place than that which has now become the lot of the Virgin, because there was nothing more sacred on earth than the Holy of Holies. And despite such significance, it did not help the human race in any way, and did not abolish sin, and did not contribute to righteousness; so that in the third generation after it, that Flood occurred (Gen. 6 and Gen. 7). But now, on the basis of Her and thanks to Her, the renewal of the world has appeared, and thanks to Her, Heaven has opened the gates for us, pouring down not a swift and terrible rain, bringing destruction to every breath, but - the dew of the words of the teaching of the Spirit, the common delight of our souls, surpassing the mind and the great and "unapproachable Light" (1 Tim. 6:16), "enlightening every man coming into the world" (John 1:9)."

Where should the Ark of God be, if not in the Holy of Holies, and once a year in the history of the human race? And what is greater – the Temple of Jerusalem made with hands, or the temple of the body of the Mother of God, created by God according to humanity and prepared for sanctification by the visitation of God? After all, “ Without all controversy the lesser is blessed by the greater ” [Heb. 7:7], as the Apostle Paul explained about Melchizedek and Abraham. And if the Jordan opened its waters before the priests carrying the Ark of the Covenant, why could not the curtain that separates our earthly world from the image of the heavenly one, let the Ever-Virgin into the Holy of Holies, more honorable than the Cherubim and beyond compare more glorious than the Seraphim? “ And who are you, O man, that you talk back to God? » [Romans 9:20] And Christ himself justified David, saying to the Jews, “ Have you not read what David did when he and they with him were hungry? How he went into the house of God and took the shewbread, which no one was supposed to eat except the priests only, and ate it and gave to those with him?”   What is spiritually illogical in the fact that the ark of God, the Mother of God, had to be prepared not only by the long history of nurturing the entire Jewish people, but also by a gradual approach to the Holy Place through her introduction into the Holy of Holies, where she was nurtured and prepared with heavenly bread? Isn’t this how our gradual ascent to God, to union with God in the footsteps of the Most Holy Theotokos, occurs? What a contradiction in the gradual preparation of the Virgin Mary, when everywhere, both in nature and in the interaction of man with nature, and in the education of man by man, we see the need for a long time for change. And metal is heated and forged in order to prepare it for union with another metal, how then was it necessary to prepare the human nature of the Mother of God in a supernatural way, so that she could receive the Fire of the Divinity! Or do the priests, bishops and clergymen who read this and enter the Altar consider themselves worthy to do this, and have they always been worthy? And have they always entered without sin? No and no; that is why deacons and priests confess at the Holy Table, and therefore entered the Altar with sin! How did the Church establish such a rule? The future Mother of God was dedicated to God from birth, and the High Priest Zechariah dedicated himself to the same, and this was not done by any self-will, but by the guidance of the Holy Spirit, in fulfillment of the promise given by God when Adam and Eve were expelled from Paradise. And how can the commandment, or “the teaching about the Temple” be contrasted with the fulfillment of God’s promise about the salvation of mankind [Genesis 3:15]? “Then the word of the Lord came” to the prophet Jeremiah: “ Can I not do with you, O house of Israel, as this potter? says the Lord. Behold, as the clay is in the potter’s hand, so are you in My hand, O house of Israel .” [Jeremiah 18:5-6]. We know that ““the priests brought in the ark of the covenant of the Lord to its place, into the oracle of the temple, into the Most Holy Place, under the wings of the cherubim ” [1 Kings 8:6] and “ And when the priests came out of the holy place, the cloud filled the house of the Lord; and the priests were not able to stand to minister because of the cloud, for the glory of the Lord filled the temple of the Lord .” And as the glory of the Lord did not hinder the high priest from entering once a year with the blood for sprinkling, so it did not hinder Zechariah from entering and bringing in the Virgin.   Gates of heaven, receive the Virgin into the Holy of Holies, the undefiled tabernacle of God Almighty. [ Stichera of the Feast at Vespers]    

Why is Bishop Ambrose’s opinion that “all events in the sanctuary of the earthly temple were only a reflection of what was to happen in the heavenly sanctuary” so controversial?

The Pharisees and scribes were unable to read the Scriptures with human conjectures to come to the recognition of God and Christ. How can we follow their path to come to the knowledge of the essence of the spiritual through the building of the Temple? That is, the method of knowledge itself was chosen incorrectly; we cannot, through a shadow limited by the physical world, that is, through the Temple, erect a model of knowledge of the incomprehensible plan of the Salvation of Mankind with limited human logic. That is, the methodological approach itself is incorrect; this is the stone that they stumbled over and which crushed those who did not recognize the Savior. That is why “ the people were astonished at His teaching: for He taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes and Pharisees ” [Matthew 7:28-29]. Christ is the Firstborn in the Heavenly Tabernacle, according to the vision of the prophet Daniel, and the heavenly tabernacle is spoken of here, and the earthly one is only an image, not a mathematical model. And if we accept this controversial opinion of Bishop Ambrose, and literally connect the Temple on earth with the Heavenly Tabernacle, then how were the repeated plunderings of the First Temple (Solomon's), including by Nebuchadnezzar; the robbery and desecration of the Second Temple (Zerubbabel's) possible at all? Could the Heavenly Tabernacle have been subjected to such desecrations? Of course not, this is absurd; so why then introduce the appropriation of the dignity of the Heavenly to the earthly? We know that the early "pattern of the tabernacle and the pattern of all its vessels" was created "according to that [heavenly] pattern which was shown ... on the mount" (Ex. 25:9, 40; cf. Ex. 26:30; 27:8; Num. 8:4; Heb. 8:5; 9:23-24). Saint Ephraim the Syrian explains: “ God says to Moses: “You shall do… according to all that I show you… the image of the tabernacle” (Ex. 25:9), then He preliminarily calls the tabernacle an image and a temporary tabernacle , thereby making it clear that it will pass away and give place to the Church of Christ, which, as the most perfect, will remain forever. And so that the Jews would honor the tabernacle as an image of the heavenly tabernacle, He says: “There I will appear to you “and I will speak to you from the top of the mercy seat” (Ex. 25:22). From above, from the midst of the two cherubim, the voice of God came to the priest, who entered there once a year.”   An image, by definition, is incomparably smaller than a prototype, and a prototype does not depend on an image in any way. And the Old Testament images did not represent a thorough depiction of the events of the salvation of mankind. For example, the Lord said, ““And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up” [John 3:14] “The story of this serpent is this: Once upon a time in the wilderness, serpents were destroying the Israelites by biting them; therefore God commanded Moses to make a bronze serpent and put it on a tree, so that those who were bitten might look at it and live. (Numbers 21:8-9) The bronze serpent served as a type of the hard and sin-proof body of Jesus Christ; this serpent, having no poison, served as a type of Jesus Christ, who has no poison of sin, lifted up on a tree, a type of the Cross lifted up on a tree, giving life to those bitten by serpents and to those who look at it, a type of Him who gives eternal life to those bitten by spiritual serpents and to those who look at Him with faith. Because of this similarity, the Evangelist said: Moses lifted up the serpent, etc. Then he also indicates the reason for such an ascension. As Moses lifted up the serpent so that those who looked at him would preserve life, so Jesus Christ was lifted up so that those who looked at him, or believers, would have eternal life. There was a serpent because serpents were biting, but here a man because people were bitten. Since there the harm came from serpents, then through the serpent there was also healing, but here, since death came into the world through man, then through man comes life, and through a dead man, to kill that which kills. " [Euphemius Zigaben]. But there is no further development of this image, that is, nowhere in the Old Testament is it said, for example, that this copper serpent was taken down from the cross and placed in a coffin... The prototype is free to dispose of the image as it wishes, therefore icons both stream myrrh and even bleed, warning us with threatening signs of impending disaster. But it is incredible even to speak of the opposite. The "idolization" of the image violates the law of love for the prototype and insults God. Hence - "Ritualism".  The Holy of Holies is an image for people, God does not need man-made temples. God gave the commandment to serve with the High Priest as a prototype of Christ, but this does not mean that God limited his omnipotence in the implementation of the Household by this. There is neither dogma nor logic for an image to influence the prototype, be it an icon or the Sanctuary of the Old Testament Temple. The Gospels (Matt. 27:51; Mark 15:38; Luke 23:45) report that the veil was torn in two at the moment of Christ's death, which serves as a convincing illustration of the identity of the flesh of Christ and the veil, but not vice versa.  

Why is the opinion of Bishop Ambrose: “the assertion taken from the apocrypha of the Protoevangelium of James” that the Virgin Mary warned of this entry of Jesus into the Holy of Holies of the heavenly tabernacle, refutes not only this entry of Jesus, but also the entire narrative of the Word of God given in the Bible” is erroneous?

1. The statement that this " statement is taken from the apocrypha " and not from Church Tradition, which was simply reflected in the Apocrypha, is highly controversial and unproven; it is only an assumption. Therefore, this statement, as not having solid historical evidence, cannot be used by a scholar to substantiate the subsequent thought.

The Apocrypha were rejected by the councils, but at the same time, the Writings of the Church Fathers, liturgical texts, lives of saints and other texts, attributed to the Holy Tradition by the Catholic, Orthodox and ancient Eastern churches, do not belong to the apocrypha. 

2. "The Virgin Mary anticipated this entry of Jesus into the Holy of Holies of the heavenly tabernacle" - this thought contains an internal contradiction. The Virgin Mary entered the Holy of Holies of the earthly -2nd Temple, and not the heavenly tabernacle. 

3. “ refutes not only this entry of Jesus ” this conclusion is based on a logic of thinking that does not exist in Orthodoxy 

4. “ refutes … the entire narrative of the Word of God given in the Bible. ” There is no logical connection and references to the Patristic understanding of the Old and New Testaments in their internal connection God was not obliged to report in the order of the succession of events that reveal the fullness of the mystery of the Economy of the Salvation of mankind. On the contrary, this secret was carefully hidden from people and, first of all, from the devil, which clearly follows from the Gospel events, including the mystery of the Entry into the Temple, and the mystery of the Annunciation, and the mystery of the birth of the Lord from the Virgin in a manger, and the flight to Egypt, and the temptations of the Lord by the devil in the desert, etc. All these events, consistent with the spirit of humility of the God-man and his life, were so opposed to the proud spirit of the devil and his spiritual followers that the long-awaited Messiah was not recognized by any of them. And, as a result, the devil even began to doubt the Divinity of Christ, seeing his humility, and incited people to crucify Christ, not realizing that he was accelerating his own destruction (being “caught by the snare of His incarnation”). Therefore, even “the angels were perplexed, seeing the ascent” of the God-man to heaven.

Why is Bishop Ambrose’s opinion that “For this reason the Holy of Holies of the earthly tabernacle was built, so that this prophecy about the redemption of mankind by Jesus would be fulfilled: ‘where Jesus entered as a forerunner for us, having become a High Priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek’ (Heb. 6:20)” is erroneous?

If we develop this opinion that the PURPOSE of the Holy of Holies of the Temple is the FULFILLMENT of the prophecy, that is, without the Holy of Holies, the Salvation of man is impossible... This thought is contradicted by the Apostle Paul, when he says to the Hebrews: “ And the first covenant had a decree about divine service and an earthly sanctuary ” “By this the Holy Spirit shows that the way into the sanctuary is not yet revealed, as long as the first tabernacle stands. It is a type of the present time , in which gifts and sacrifices are brought that cannot make the one who brings them perfect in conscience, and which with food and drink, and various ablutions and rites related to the flesh, were established only until the time of correction " 9:1, 9:8-10 And now the time of correction is coming , the tabernacle as a type of the present time still stands, and the Most Pure Maiden, by God's Providence, is brought into this tabernacle, laying the beginning of the time of correction in fulfillment of God's promise. And the interpretation of Hebrews 6:20 must be considered in the context of the previous text: “ In chapter 6, the Apostle exhorts the Jews to strive for perfection on the basis of faith, hope in God’s promise, which “Heb. 6:19. is as an anchor of the soul, sure and steadfast, and enters into what is within the veil,” that is, “ The Apostle called heaven the veil , because the Lord promised to give the Kingdom of Heaven to those who believed in Him. We hope for those good things, says the Apostle, we hold to this hope as to a sacred anchor. For even the anchor hidden in the depths does not allow our souls to be tossed hither and thither. But the Apostle proves in another way the incontestability of the hope of good things .” [Blessed Theodoret of Cyrus] “ Heb. 6:20. Where Jesus entered as a forerunner for us, having become a High Priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek. ” «« Where Jesus, the forerunner, entered in for us. For our sake, says the Apostle, He became man, for our sake He gave up His body to death and, having crushed death, ascended into heaven , «He became the firstfruits of those who slept» (1 Cor. 15:20). And He increased our confidence with the name: forerunner. For if He is our «forerunner» and ascended for us, then it is necessary for us to follow and receive the right to ascend. The Lord also said this to the apostles: «With My Father are many mansions; and if not, I would have told you: I go and prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again to you and receive you to Myself, that where I am, you may be also» (John 14:2-3). So He said here: where Jesus, the forerunner, entered in for us. But the Apostle again turns to the word about the high priesthood. "According to the order of Melchizedek, He became a High Priest forever." He took this from the prophetic testimony. It is said: "You are a High Priest forever, according to the order of Melchizedek" (Ps. 109:4). Christ is "a High Priest forever," not as the one offering the sacrifice, because He offered His body once, but as the Intercessor, bringing the faithful to the Father. For it is said: "By this we have both to bring to the Father" (Eph. 2:18). And the Lord Himself says in the Holy Gospel: "No one comes to the Father except by Me" (John 14:6). It is necessary to know that the divine Apostle mentioned the oaths given to Abraham as proof of the "immutability of God's counsel." He does this so that the firmness of the High Priesthood according to the order of Melchizedek may be visible. For as soon as he touched upon it, an oath is added to the word. The comparison which the Apostle was often ready to make is made only now, and first of all he brings to mind the history of Melchizedek. " Blessed Theodoret of Cyrus] Thus, the quotation (Heb. 6:20) does not in any way serve to prove Bishop Ambrose's postulate about the PURPOSE of the Holy of Holies for the FULFILLMENT of the prophecy. Of course, it is impossible to argue with the fact that many Old Testament events served as prototypes of New Testament events and sacraments. But this is also in the Will of God, and what He deigned to reveal through prototypes, He revealed, creating the beauty of the symphony of Scripture. And whoever waited for the Messiah according to the Letter did not recognize him, only the prophets saw Him through the ages according to the Spirit.  

St. Ephraim the Syrian: Heb. 9:3-5. And in the inner tabernacle, which was called the Holy of Holies, under the veil, ... a golden censer and an ark, covered with gold inside and outside, and other things. But there is no need to speak now in detail and in order (about these objects); for, although each of these objects was placed in its place for the performance of certain services, nevertheless all these were only mystical prototypes of this heavenly mystery, so that when the truth was revealed, then there is no longer any need for us to turn to shadows. Into that outer Heb. 9:6. tabernacle the priests always entered, performing their services, Heb. 9:7.   into the second only once a year entered one… the high priest, – and moreover “ not without blood, which he offered first for his own , and then for the people’s sins… of ignorance . In this, the Holy Spirit figuratively Heb. 9:8 pointed out the way into the sanctuary , that is, through the law about the high priest’s entry into the Holy of Holies, the Holy Spirit figuratively pointed out the gospel that was to be revealed to the people. So, the outer tabernacle was a likeness and a “parable” or symbol, relating to a certain time, since Heb. 9:9. in it gifts and sacrifices… were offered such as could not make perfect… the people, as well as the “conscience” of those who performed the service, but they consisted Heb. 9:10. in food and drink and various washings of hands and vessels and other objects, – for “these were statutes (concerning) the flesh” or commandments priesthood, and not divinity . And all this, as I said, was thus fulfilled above the law by weak priests even “until that time” (Heb. 9:10) when God made correction – when Heb. 9:11 came. Christ, the high priest not of sacrifices, but of good things. And He entered the tabernacle , not small and made with hands, but great and perfect , which was not made with human hands, that is, not of this [such] creation , since it too was created out of nothing, and not like that tabernacle, which was built from things stolen from the Egyptians (Ex. 12:35–36, 25:1–2).

Conclusion

In matters of intellectualism, one must remember that there is always an invisible enemy nearby, the fallen mind, which, although it could not recognize its Conqueror with its own strength, and was therefore deprived of its strength, will nevertheless, in its impotent malice, strive to the last day to entrap the “smart” with confusion. And we see how modern Protestants, not recognizing the Holy Church and not believing its centuries-old treasure, the Conciliar mind, attested by a host of Saints and miracle workers, carefully study the authenticity of both the Gospels and the Apostolic Epistles, and some, like “clouds and mists driven by a storm” [2 Peter 2:17], even seek evidence of whether Christ was the God-man! The enemy sows the seeds of doubt and reaps the harvest of unbelief. But "with the heart man believeth unto righteousness" (Rom. 10:10), and therefore the Lord at first, preaching the Gospel to the world by His works, chose simple fishermen, and not scribes, as assistants of the Good News; and only after His Ascension did He call the Apostle Paul to preach to "His own" and to other difficult people. Faith is as much higher than the mind, as the heavenly, spiritual world is higher than the visible, material world, as the Apostle himself said, "1 Cor. 13:12. Now we see through a glass, darkly." Intelligent beings, fallen spirits, seek interlocutors for themselves, and catch them in skillfully set nets. And "who can escape them," asked Anthony the Great, and heard in response "a voice which said: "humility." Humility before the Lord, before the Church, preserving the God-revealed Truth. And here is not even a net, but a pit with a trap - a task set by the questioner of this world; a question that contrasts the Mother of God and her Son; a question "resolved" for Protestants, and more sharply than a dagger wounding the Orthodox heart that accepts such doubt, a question that follows with iron logic from an attempt to reduce the Sacrament of God's Economy to the primitivism of a "dynamic mathematical model" embodied in the Holy of Holies of the Old Testament Temple. The evil one knows how to catch a mind entrenched in the paradigm of logical and linguistic fabrications. God save us from self-confidence in such wisdom: "And wisdom is justified by all her children" [Luke 7:35].  

It is difficult to kick against the pricks. It is terrible and soul-destroying to find yourself outside the Church with its Saving Sacraments.

To those who do not believe that the Holy Spirit made the prophets and apostles wise and through them revealed to us the true path to eternal salvation, and confirmed this with miracles, and now dwells in the hearts of faithful and true Christians and guides them to all truth: anathema. To those who reject the councils of the Holy Fathers and their traditions, consistent with Divine Revelation, and piously preserved by the Orthodox Catholic Church: anathema. (Text of the anathema from the rite of the Triumph of Orthodoxy)

APPLICATIONS

Commentary on the 1st Epistle to the Corinthians by Blessed Theophylact of Bulgaria

  1 Cor. 13:9-10. And knowledge will be done away. For we know in part, and we prophesy in part: but when that which is perfect shall come, then that which is in part shall pass away.   If knowledge be done away, shall we live in ignorance? Far from it! But he says that knowledge "in part" will be done away, when perfect knowledge shall come, that is, that which is proper to the future life. For then we shall know not as much as we now know, but much more. For example, we know now that God is everywhere, but how this we do not know; that the Virgin gave birth, we know, but how this we do not know. But then we shall know something greater and more profitable about these mysteries.   1 Cor. 13:11. When I was a child.   Having said that with the coming of that which is perfect "that which is in part" will be done away, he at the same time gives an example by which he explains how great is the difference between present and future knowledge. For now we are like children, but then we will be men.   1 Corinthians 13:11. He spoke as a child.   This corresponds to tongues.   1 Corinthians 13:11. He thought as a child.   This corresponds to prophecies.   1 Corinthians 13:11. He reasoned as a child.   This corresponds to knowledge.   1 Corinthians 13:11. But when I became a man, I put away childish things.   That is, in the age to come I will have more mature knowledge; then the little and childish knowledge which we have here will be done away.   1 Corinthians 13:12. Now we see through a glass, darkly.   He explains what was said about the child, and shows that our present knowledge is kind of dark, but then it will be clearer. For, he says, we now see in a mirror. Then, since the mirror quite clearly shows the object reflected in it, he added: “in a riddle,” in order to show with the greatest precision the incompleteness of this knowledge.   1 Cor. 13:12. But then face to face.   He says this not because God has a face, but in order to show through this the clarity and visibility of knowledge.   1 Cor. 13:12. Now I know in part, but then I shall know even as I am known.   He doubly humbles their pride, showing that their present knowledge is incomplete, and that it is not our own. Not I, he says, have known God, but He Himself has known me. Therefore, as He Himself has now known me, and has Himself condescended to me, so I will then attain to Him much more than now. As one who sits in darkness, while he does not see the sun, does not himself strive for its beautiful ray, but the ray shows itself to him by its radiance, and when he receives the radiance of the sun, then itself strives for the light. So the words, "just as I am known," do not mean that we know Him as He knows us, but that as He has now condescended to us, so we will then attain to Him. A similitude: someone found an abandoned child, noble, comely; for his part he acknowledged it, raised it up and took it to himself, took care of it, brought it up nobly, finally, endowed it with wealth and brought it into the royal chambers. A child, while it is young, feels none of this, and does not recognize the humanity of the person who raised it. But when it grows up, it immediately recognizes its benefactor and loves him worthily. Here is an example for you in explanation of what is hiddenly expressed in what has been said.   1 Cor. 13:13 But now abide faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love.   There are also gifts of tongues, prophecy, and understanding, although they are illusory; however, with the spread of faith among all, they will utterly disappear. Faith, hope, and love are more lasting than these (for this is signified by the words, “but now abide,” that is, the duration of these three); but even of these, love is the greatest, because it continues also in the age to come.        

Continuation of the explanations of Metropolitan Macarius Bulgakov about the Holy Tradition

§ 131. b) The Holy Tradition has indeed been preserved to us in its entirety. Now we can already determine the sources in which the Apostolic Traditions have reached us. These are: 1) The ancient symbols, which, as an image of sound words, as the first need for believers, undoubtedly appeared from the time of the Apostles themselves and have constantly existed in all churches from their very institution. There are quite a few such Symbols known, used by Christians in the first three centuries before the Nicene-Constantinople Symbol, and all of them, completely similar to each other in spirit, although often different in letter, contain the most important members of the dogmatic teaching, which were later included in the Nicene-Constantinople Symbol 596. 2) The Rules of the Holy Apostles. The respect with which these rules were used even in the first centuries of Christianity, and were used not in some local church, but in the whole universal Church - a respect that extended to the point that the Councils themselves, local and ecumenical, placed them as the basis of their definitions and were guided by them as a law having a universal and indisputable force of obligation - all this places the Divine importance of the Apostolic Rules above all doubt. But, it is also certain that the Holy Apostles handed them down to the Church not in writing (otherwise they would have entered the canon of the New Testament books from the very beginning), but orally. These rules were written and put into a certain order either by the Apostolic men or by their immediate successors 597 . There are 85 known Apostolic Rules, and they contain the traditions of the Apostles, concerning, primarily, church administration and decorum. 3) Definitions and rules of the Councils: a) local, to which, according to the 37th rule of the Holy Apostles, bishops from different places gathered twice a year to discuss matters of faith and piety, and brought with them, preserved in their churches, one or another tradition; and especially b) ecumenical Councils, to which, in the person of their primates, the whole Church of Christ , the keeper of traditions, gathered. This source is all the more precious because the Councils, as we have noted, really always turned in their discussions not only to Scripture, but also to Tradition. And that in the definitions and rules of these Councils traditions have been preserved to us not only dogmatic, but also moral, and ritual, and in general concerning all subjects of the Christian faith and the Church. 4) Ancient liturgies. There are very many such liturgies, used, or still used, in various churches of the East and West 598, and many of them, known under the names of the Apostles and Apostolic men, go back to immemorial times, or even to the times of the Apostles themselves, such as, for example, the liturgy of the holy Apostle James. These liturgies can be considered one of the most important repositories of the Apostolic tradition and the true faith of the early Church, judging, on the one hand, by the antiquity of their origin, and on the other, by their high purpose and use in the Church. At least in those features of doctrine in which all these ancient liturgies are completely in agreement with each other, their voice must have the force of incontestability. And there are quite a few such features: thus, in all liturgies the dogmas of the Holy Trinity, of the Divinity of the Son of God and the Holy Spirit, of the true incarnation of God the Word, of the ever-virginity of the Mother of God, of the necessity of grace, of the actual change or transubstantiation of bread and wine in the sacrament of the Eucharist, of the invocation of the Saints, etc. are confessed. 599 . 5) The most ancient acts concerning Christian martyrs, such as: the acts of St. Ignatius the God-Bearer , St. Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna and many others, written by contemporaries of these men and even witnesses of their tortures 600 . Going to a voluntary death for the name of Christ, the holy martyrs clearly and openly confessed their faith before their tormentors, and often explained to them in considerable detail various truths of Christianity. These confessions and explanations, without a doubt, were the most sincere and true. And therefore, being written down by direct witnesses, they now serve as a precious monument of the then belief of the Church and the Apostolic Tradition used in it. This is all the more certain because, in ancient times, the acts of martyrs did not come into use among believers before they had been previously examined and approved by the local bishop, and were read in public assemblies of Christians also under the supervision of the heads of the churches, who could not allow anything inconsistent with the general belief of the Church to creep into these acts 601 . Among other confessions found in such acts, we find the clearest confessions of the Holy Trinity, the Divinity of Jesus Christ, the invocation of the Saints, etc. 6) Ancient church histories, among which the history of Eusebius Pamphilus , who made use of the most ancient and reliable documents, deserves special respect. Here are collected many traditions of the times of the Apostles, not only purely historical, ritual and similar, but also dogmatic, such as, for example, the tradition of the canon of the sacred books of the Old and New Testaments. 7) In general, the works of all the ancient Fathers and teachers of the Church. They wrote either private confessions to testify to their own faith before the Church (such as the expositions of faith of St. Athanasius the Great , Pope Pelagius and many others), or explanations of the truths of faith for the detailed instruction of Orthodox Christians (such as the Catechism of St. Cyril of Jerusalem, Theology of St. John of Damascus , countless church teachings, commentaries on the books of Holy Scripture, etc.), or, finally, denunciations against pagans, heretics and schismatics, just as numerous and varied. In all these cases, the ancient pastors, naturally, had to conform invariably to the Apostolic Traditions preserved and used at that time in the Church; and therefore they can rightly be called witnesses of these traditions, and traditions of every kind: dogmatic, ritual, and historical. In all their forms. The patristic writings are the richest source of Tradition 602 . 8) Finally, all the ancient practice of the Church, which includes a) sacred times: fasts, Sundays and holidays; b) sacred places: the structure of churches with its details, and c) sacred actions, rites and ceremonies. And since the manner of sanctifying the times and performing the sacred rites is set forth in the liturgical books, then here we must also include - d) these books, or church rites 603 . But, without any doubt, not everything that is contained in the sources or repositories of the Apostolic Tradition that we have listed is already the Apostolic Tradition itself; on the contrary, they contain very much that cannot in any way be called by this name. The true Apostolic Tradition must have its own special signs by which we could distinguish it from all other truths, from all errors and, in particular, from all false traditions.  

Metropolitan Philaret Drozdov, Metropolitan of Moscow (whom Bishop Ambrose respects as a biblical scholar) on Holy Tradition:

Metropolitan Philaret Drozdov, Metropolitan of Moscow, "A Sermon on the Consecration of the Church of the Life-Giving Trinity in the Moscow Danilov Monastery, Delivered on September 13, 1838" " I praise you, brethren, for you remember all that I have done, and hold fast the traditions as I delivered them to you. (1 Cor. 11:2)" "In order to verify the authenticity and worthiness of traditions, it would be best to know their beginning with precision, but it is often hidden in the misty distance of the past. Now what to do? Before we say what should be done, let us see what is being done. Some pay all attention to what is dark and unreliable in the traditions, and from this they draw a guess whether this matter is not, if not simply human, then at least given over by Providence to the arbitrariness of people and the accidents of the times, and whether it is not permissible to free oneself from further concern about traditions, while we have the most famous prophetic and apostolic word in the God-inspired Scripture, which can make one wise for salvation, so that the man of God may be perfect, prepared for every good work. Others, paying attention only in general to the commandment to observe traditions, without research, without reasoning, blindly adhere to traditions that somehow fell into their hands, without trying to find out their authenticity, dignity and purity. What should be done? One must beware of both extremes now indicated."

“You want to base everything on the unshakable foundation of Holy Scripture. Very well. That is as it should be. But how do you know which books are sacred and why this or that one of them definitely belongs to the number of sacred books? This is known mostly from tradition. So, Holy Scripture itself makes use of tradition. If true tradition is so important, before Scripture and together with Scripture, then when could its importance diminish? Would it be when Scripture, taking the place of tradition, would tell us that we no longer need to worry about tradition? But Scripture says the opposite: Stand fast and hold the traditions which ye have learned, whether by word or by letter (2 Thess. 2:15). However, if even the apostles had to be tested to see whether they were true apostles, as is evident from the fact that in the Revelation of St. John the Lord Himself approves of the work of the angel of the Ephesian church, who tested those who said they were apostles and found them false , then how much more after the apostles, through so many hands, through so many centuries of past traditions, must we test whether they are true apostolic and patristic and have not been subjected to unjust changes and alien applications. Without this caution, our service to God can be subject to the same condemnation with which the Lord struck the Pharisees and scribes of the Jews, who held the traditions of the elders: In vain do they worship Me, teaching with doctrine the commandment of men. For having forsaken the commandment of God, ye hold the traditions of men (Mark 7:7-8). It will be asked, perhaps, how to protect ourselves from this condemnation? How can we test traditions and distinguish what is beyond doubt? I draw the most reliable and convenient rule for this from the saying of the Lord just cited: test tradition by means of the Word of God and by means of the commandments of God. If a tradition contradicts the Word of God, if it leads you to violate the commandments of God, then know that this is a human, not a true tradition, that you would observe such a tradition in vain, while the violation of the commandment of God would condemn you. Another rule for testing traditions can be drawn from the following saying of the holy Apostle Paul to Timothy: That ye may know how ye ought to conduct yourself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth (1 Tim. 3:15).  If the Church is the pillar and ground of the truth, then truth must be sought in it, and by it one can verify the truth that requires investigation, and especially the truth of traditions, of which the Church is the only faithful repository. Receiving the tradition from the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, stand firm in it, not wavering with vain doubts, hold it with the hope of pleasing God. Let us hold, - the apostle teaches, - the confession of hope unwavering... not leaving our assembly(Heb. 10:23, 25), that is, the assembly of the Universal Orthodox Church, as is the custom of some. Note, brethren, that even in apostolic times there were some who had the custom of leaving the assembly of the Universal Church; do not be surprised if even now you meet some who have this unfortunate custom. And if such people begin to offer you their tradition, then you can know in advance that people who have left the Church, the pillar and ground of the truth , will certainly offer you a tradition that is either false, or corrupt, or at least stolen and unblessed; and, of course, the false will not save, the corrupt will not heal, the stolen will not enrich, the unblessed will not bring a blessing. Let us glorify God, brethren, who has deemed us worthy to be children and members of the true and holy Church, in which the true and holy tradition is not simply a visible and verbal tradition of teaching, rules, regulations, rites , but along with this, an invisible, real impartation of grace and sanctification, which descends from heaven to earth, like the dew of Hermon on the mountains of Zion (Ps. 132:3), flows continuously and inexhaustibly and waters the hierarchy and the sacred rites, like myrrh on the head, coming down on the beard, the beard of Aaron, coming down on the hem of his garment (Ps. 132:2), so that the apostles, anointed by the Holy Spirit, anoint with the same spiritual myrrh the holy fathers, and these their successors from century to century; The saints give sanctification to the temples and sacraments, and in turn the temples and sacraments give sanctification to the saints, therefore, touching the present shrine, you touch the same grace that was poured out in the descent of the Holy Spirit on the apostles. Let us hold fast to this pure and living source. As children of obedience , let us with zeal and love receive from the lips and hands of our mother the Orthodox Church the pure teaching of faith and life, the true grace-filled sanctification, the true guide to eternal life. Amen.  

Historical Background of the Temple

Solomon's Temple was, in turn, " a likeness of the holy tabernacle which thou didst prepare at the beginning " [Wisdom of Solomon 9:8]. Then there was the 2nd Temple, " rebuilt by Zerubbabel in the same place and in the same form, but far from its former splendor by 516 BC. Since the ark of the covenant was no longer in the 2nd Temple, a stone was placed in its place in the Holy of Holies, on which the high priest placed the censer once a year, on the great day of atonement. Then, the 2nd Temple was robbed and desecrated by Antiochus Epiphanes in 167 BC, which led to the revolt of the Jews under the leadership of the Maccabees, which ended with the expulsion of the Syrians and the restoration of the temple after three years of desecration ." Therefore, the Temple of the time of the Virgin Mary is sometimes called the second, sometimes the third.

Ancient description of the icon "The Entry of the Virgin Mary into the Holy of Holies"

The miraculous temple icon of the Entry of the Most Holy Theotokos into the Temple is in a special icon case, behind glass; its height is 1 arshin 3 vershoks, its width 141/2 vershoks. In the monastery inventory of 1649 it is described as follows: “an image of the local Most Pure Mother of God of the Entry, a silver frame, chased, gilded, two crowns with crowns and chased tsatas, in the crowns and in the tsatas there are thirty stones and beryuses, and two laliques, but two stones are missing, and an azure yakhont stone, underneath and a pearl necklace, two cassocks, and in them twelve strands of small pearls, and five gold chervonets, and on the fields of the icon there are ten fine stones, at the tsata there is a gold coin, and five gilded kopecks, but two gilded kopecks are missing, two small crosses - one gilded and the other white; The same icon has a golden velvet veil, on it a pearl cross, near that veil words are embroidered with drawn gold, the same icon has another festive veil, and on it is embroidered the image of the Entry of the Most Pure Mother of God in gold and silver from silk, on green satin and studded with small pearls. The icon case is wooden, covered with tin, basma, at the top of the icon case is the image of the Savior Emmanuel, the crown is gilded basma, and on top of the icon case is a gilded cross, and the shutters of the icon case are covered with silver, gilded, and saints are written on them. The writing on the icon has been preserved ancient - experts date it to the 14th century. The icon case has also been preserved ancient; but of the ancient ornaments only the robe of the Mother of God entering the temple, embroidered entirely of pearls with precious stones, and the veil, which are now kept in the sacristy, have survived. The other ornaments have been partly changed, and mostly added anew. In 1857, as stated in the monastery inventory, a crown with precious stones was placed on the crown of the Mother of God entering the temple, the crown itself and the pearl robe are also decorated with various precious stones; on the head and shoulder of the Mother of God are two stars made of precious stones, etc. Recently, a rich diamond necklace was hung on the Mother of God, and above her face a rich pectoral cross was set, made of diamonds, with emeralds, with a crown on top, and in the middle, on a large emerald, the Crucifixion of the Lord was carved, with those standing before it, and around the middle is a radiance of diamonds. This cross was sent to the monastery through the Serpukhov post office in 1832, from an unknown person (according to guesses from Count A. A. Orlova-Chesmenskaya), with a note attached: “To the Moscow diocese, to the Serpukhov convent for women, hang a diamond cross with emeralds on the holy icon, revered as miraculous in the convent, and keep it on the holy icon, and not in any other place, fearing: The Lord says: I am with you, and no one is against you! By the prayers of the Holy Mother of God and Ever-Virgin Mary, all the Saints and the saint Barlaam, his cell-attendant who was with St. Alexis, may He preserve and intercede for everyone and everything with His holy grace. Unworthy maiden, seeking the lost kingdom of God.” Both citizens of Serpukhov and the surrounding area especially revere this icon and take it into their homes. (source: V.A. Rozhdestvensky, Historical Description of the Vladychnya-Nagodevchy Monastery, 1866).  

Icon of the Entry of the Most Holy Theotokos into the Temple from the village of Yarskoye

  The lithograph by P. M. Kosharov has brought to us the appearance of this miraculous icon, revered no less than the previous ones. It was also covered with a silver gilded frame. The history of the miraculous icon from the village of Yarskoye was first described in the Tomsk Provincial Gazette for 1858. The village is located 45 miles from Tomsk on the steep bank of the Tom River, a ravine, hence the name - Yarskoye. Legend has it that the appearance of the icon of the Entry of the Most Holy Theotokos into the Temple dates back to the middle of the 17th century. It was found by residents on the branches of a large bird cherry tree. The peasants decided that the icon had been placed there by someone, did not dare to take it for themselves, and sent the icon down the Tom River a mile above the village. When they returned, they saw the icon in its original place, sent the icon down the water again and found it on the bird cherry tree again. And finally, for the third time, the peasants went downstream and sent the icon down the Tom, but again found it on a tree. Having thus made sure that there was no human trickery in the appearance of the icon, the villagers petitioned the archimandrite of the Bogoroditse-Alekseevsky Monastery (at that time, the Tomsk Diocese did not yet exist and the monastery's abbots, acting as customers, governed the Tomsk region on behalf of the Tobolsk Archpastor) for permission to build a chapel in honor of the icon of the Mother of God at the site of its appearance. The residents of Yarskoye chose a trustworthy person to collect funds for the construction, and he set off east with the revealed icon, moving from the city to the village. Tradition says that the collector had already reached Lake Baikal, but there, in one of the villages, he fell ill and died. Then the owner of the house where the icon was located saw the Mother of God in a "dream vision" and was ordered to deliver the icon to the parish church, which he did. The Queen of Heaven similarly appeared to the priest of this church with instructions to send the icon to the Tomsk region, to the village of Yarskoye. Soon it was brought back to the place of its appearance. At that time, a chapel was built on the site of the icon's appearance, and in 1726, the first wooden church. In 1773, a two-story stone church was erected. On the cold ground floor there was a church with a side-chapel in the name of St. Nicholas the Wonderworker, on the second floor - a warm church with a side-chapel in the name of the Entry of the Most Holy Theotokos into the Temple. The church was destroyed around 1937. Many tales have been recorded about the miraculous help from the holy icon of the Mother of God from Yarskoye and about its appearance in dreams and in reality. In 1814, the residents of Yarskoye were saved from a terrible contagious disease (apparently cholera) through prayers before the icon, and in 1850 – from a fire. Many believers were healed from serious illnesses. In 1854, the Mother of God appeared to workers from remote gold mines with the command to give part of their righteous labors for the restoration of the church in Yarskoye, which had repeatedly burned down, and led them to a collection box. The icon of the Entry of the Most Holy Theotokos into the Temple from Yarskoye, like the three previous ones, was brought annually with a religious procession to Tomsk. The religious procession was established in 1857 by Tomsk Bishop Parthenius (Popov, 1854-1860). On May 25, it was lifted from its place and brought to Tomsk on May 27,on the same day as the image of the Savior Not Made by Hands from Spasskoye. On the road not far from the city, the icons met and bowed to each other. Behind the John the Baptist Convent on May 26, the united procession was met by the Tomsk Bishop with priests and numerous townspeople. Wherever the miraculous icons appeared, they were surrounded by universal love, worship and veneration, which we need to revive in ourselves, in relation to the shrine.