Stone of Faith. Archpriest Nikolai Barinov Metropolitan Stefan (Yavorsky) and the book “Stone of Faith Preface to the modern edition

Stefan Jaworski, metropolitan (1658-11/27/1722), church and statesman, the largest representative of the Western Russian philosophical school, spiritual writer. He was born in the borough of Yavor near Lvov into an Orthodox family, receiving the name Simeon at baptism. Subsequently, the parents, fleeing the Uniate encroachments of the Polish crown, moved to Nizhyn. He was formed as a philosopher at the Kiev-Mohyla Academy, where he studied directly with Varlaam Yasinsky, and at the Jesuit schools of Lemberg (Lviv), Poznan. At the Kyiv Academy he reached the rank of prefect, then was promoted to abbot of the Kiev-Nicholas Monastery. The speech delivered by Stefan at the funeral of Field Marshal Shein made an impression on Peter, at whose insistence he was ordained Metropolitan of Ryazan and Murom in 1700. From 1702 he held the posts of administrator, guardian, vicar and exarch of the Moscow Patriarchal Throne; upon the establishment of the Holy Synod (1721) he was appointed president of the latter.

Traditions of Kyiv and Polish schools 2nd half. XVII century determined the nature of the main philosophical essay Stefan "Philosophical Competition", read at the Kiev-Mohyla Academy in 1693-94. In this work, Stephen summarized the main ideas of the Second Scholasticism. Firstly, this is the recognition of matter and form as equivalent principles of natural things, in contrast to Thomism, which absolutized the meaning of form. Form, understood as the idea and possibility of an object, is considered by Stefan as existing in matter itself and dependent on it. The “common subject” of all changes, present in every object and determining the “mutual transition of sublunar bodies,” is the first matter created by God. Secondly, this is the idea that the existence of a thing is irreducible to either form or matter. Hence, act and potency are considered not as 2 separate realities, but as 2 aspects of a specific thing. Thirdly, for Stephen the difference between essence and existence does not take place in reality, but only in concepts. Fourthly, Stefan, as a moderate nominalist, affirms the primacy of the individual over the universal, believing that “the universal is nothing or secondary.” Hence the conclusion that the subject of knowledge is the concrete existence of things. One of the methodological foundations of Stephen's philosophical views was the theory of “two truths” (religious and philosophical knowledge). Stephen's philosophical views could not but be affected by his adherence to the Western Russian theological tradition. Representatives of this tradition in Russia were called “motley”; they were considered no longer Orthodox, but not yet Catholics. The philosophical principles of this theological school are expressed in the essay “The Stone of Faith” (first published in full in 1728). These include, firstly, a significant expansion of the subject of theology compared to the Byzantine tradition. Stephen did not limit this subject to God in Himself, but included in it all the manifestations of the Divine in the world, as a result of which the subject of philosophy was significantly narrowed. Secondly, Stephen believed that there should be no intermediate disciplines between philosophy and theology. In the 18th century This understanding of the relationship between philosophy, metaphysics and theology formed the basis school programs. Stefan Jaworski's social views were not innovative. He recognized the rights of the king to supreme power in the state, which, in his opinion, should provide the common good to all subjects. Stephen connected his hopes for deliverance from the imperfections of earthly existence with the acquisition of the Kingdom of God. If Feofan Prokopovich subjected to ideological destruction the parallelism of secular and spiritual power, which in modern times. XVIII century eked out at least a theoretical existence in the minds of the princes of the Church and the Orthodox population, then Stephen did everything possible to ensure that this parallelism was preserved in the consciousness of Russian society. Considering Stefan’s activities in the field of Russian culture as a whole, he should be credited with preparing educated cadres of ministers of the Orthodox Church.

Preface to the modern edition

The reason and reason for creating this book

Address to the reader

Advance notice to Orthodox Christians

Preface to the modern edition

For the modern reader We just have to get acquainted with the wonderful work of an outstanding church and statesman, a major representative of the Western Russian philosophical school, a spiritual writer of Peter's times, His Eminence Stefan Yavorsky (1658-1722), Metropolitan of Ryazan and Murom, Locum Tenens of the Patriarchal Throne and First President of the Holy Synod. The book "The Stone of Faith" was last published in 1749. It is published in Russian for the first time.

Stefan (Simeon Ivanovich) Yavorsky was born in 1658 into an Orthodox family of small Polish nobles in the town of Yavor in Galicia (today Yavoriv, ​​Lviv region). According to the Treaty of Adrusovo in 1667, this part of right-bank Ukraine remained with Poland. To get rid of the persecution of Orthodoxy, the Yavorsky family and their children moved to the left bank of Ukraine and settled in the village of Krasilovka not far from Nizhyn. Simeon, who had extraordinary abilities, received a comprehensive education. He studied at the famous Kiev-Mohyla Academy, the center of Ukrainian education, from which he graduated no later than 1684. There he attracted the attention of Hieromonk Varlaam Yasinsky, an outstanding preacher, who later became Archimandrite of the Kiev Pechersk Lavra, and then Metropolitan of Kyiv, who sent him to study abroad to complete his education. At one time, Hieromonk Varlaam also made this journey. Simeon studied philosophy at higher Catholic schools in Lvov and Lublin, and then theology in Vilna and Poznan, learned to skillfully compose poetry in Latin, Polish and Russian and write magnificent panegyrics. In 1689 he returned to Kyiv. His patron Varlaam Yasinsky convinced him to become a monk, and he was tonsured by Varlaam himself with the name Stefan.

He underwent monastic obedience at the Kiev-Pechersk Lavra and after some time was appointed teacher at the Kiev-Mohyla Academy; he soon became a professor of philosophy, theology and rhetoric. Stefan successfully combined the activities of a scientist, teacher and preacher. As a preacher, he invariably admired his contemporaries. Even those who considered him their enemy paid tribute to him.

In 1697, he was appointed abbot of the St. Nicholas Desert Monastery near Kyiv. At this time, he often had to visit Moscow on the affairs of the Metropolitan, whose closest assistant he became. During one of Stefan's visits to Moscow, an event occurred that suddenly brought him forward. He was assigned to preach a sermon at the funeral of Governor Shein, and he did it so brilliantly that he made a great impression on the listeners, among whom was Peter I. The king was attracted to Stefan by his brilliant education and deep intelligence. He already saw Stefan as his assistant and like-minded person and gave instructions to Patriarch Adrian to ordain Stefan as a Bishop of one of the Great Russian Dioceses not far from Moscow. Although Stefan, who longed for Kyiv with all his heart, tried to refuse this honor, in April 1700 he became Metropolitan of Ryazan and Murom. Soon after the death of Patriarch Adrian, he was appointed Locum Tenens of the Patriarchal Throne, and some time later his President. He was also appointed president of the Slavic-Greek-Latin Academy and reorganized this educational institution. He took part in the work of the Moscow printing house, was one of the publishers of scientific dictionaries, teaching aids, author of introductory articles and notes to church books. Working successfully in all high positions, Stefan acquired high authority in Russian society. He wrote a lot of works. His works had an undoubted influence on the leaders of the Russian Orthodox Church and served as one of the sources of the philosophical views of the Slavophiles. He created a school of students and followers. Among them was the rector of the Moscow Theological Academy, Feofil Lopashinsky, who subsequently suffered greatly for the publication of the “Stone of Faith.” Stephen was always supported by his friend Saint Demetrius of Rostov.

When the Kiev Metropolitan Varlaam (Yasinsky) died in 1707, Stefan asked the Tsar to release him from Locum Tenens and appoint him Metropolitan of Kyiv, but Peter I did not agree to this.

Stefan initially supported the activities of Peter, his reforms in the army and navy, welcomed the construction of roads and canals, the development of industry, the expansion of trade and concerns about education, but later openly opposed the restrictive tendencies of the tsar in relation to church authority and his favorable attitude towards Protestantism. The story of his opposition to Feofan Prokopovich, a major church figure of that time, who gravitated toward Protestantism and was strongly supported by Peter I, is widely known.

Stefan Yavorsky was a brave and courageous man who acted according to his conscience, although they often tried to present him as indecisive and soft-bodied, whose role in church and administrative affairs was insignificant. Indeed, the power of the Locum Tenens, compared to the Patriarchate, was limited by Peter. But in these difficult and very burdensome and humiliating conditions, Stefan did everything he could to stop the retreat of the Russian people from the Orthodox faith. He filed protests against the “innovations in the spiritual life” of the people to the tsar and openly denounced the tsar in his sermons, without fear of his anger; finally, he wrote his famous book.

During his life, Stefan had to endure a lot of slander. Some blamed him for his Catholic education, others, on the contrary, for “traditionality” and resistance to Peter’s reforms. There were especially many troubles during recent years his life when he became President of the Holy Synod. Seriously ill, he was practically constantly under investigation based on denunciations. Each time he was acquitted, but constant accusations and interrogations shortened the days of his life. He died in Moscow at the age of 64 and was buried in the Assumption Cathedral in Ryazan. Currently, the remains of the Metropolitan rest in the Maloarkhangelsk Ryazan Cathedral. He bequeathed his money and books to the Nezhinsky Mother of God Monastery he founded.

A lot of slander was leveled against him even after his death, including accusations of secret Jesuitism.

Stefan began writing “The Stone of Faith of the Orthodox-Catholic Eastern Church” when the “case of Tveritinov” and his accomplices, who were fond of Lutheranism, began in 1713. Then Stefan made every effort to expose them and - indirectly - the king who condoned them. “The Stone of Faith” is a complete systematic presentation of the Orthodox doctrine, with a detailed explanation of the main provisions of Orthodoxy, a book written in defense of Orthodoxy in the conditions of active propaganda of Protestantism. This is the Stone of Faith “for the Orthodox sons of the Holy Church for affirmation and spiritual creation, and for those who stumble over the stone - for rebellion and correction.” Despite the emotional and figurative presentation, the book has a very clear structure. It includes twelve extensive treatises - Orthodox Dogmas on holy icons, on the sign of the Holy Cross, on holy relics, on the Sacrament of the Eucharist, on the invocation of saints, on the entry of holy souls into the Heavenly abodes, on doing good to the departed, on Traditions, on the Holy Liturgy, about holy fasts, about good deeds, on the punishment of heretics. Each Dogma is stated, then proven, and finally the objections against it are refuted. Evidence is taken from the Old and New Testaments, Council Rules, and the works of the Holy Fathers.

Unfortunately, Stefan Yavorsky himself never had the chance to see his brainchild published during his lifetime. The book was completed in 1718, but was not published under Peter I, since it clearly and convincingly refuted the tenets of Protestantism that Peter treasured.

The Stone was first published in Moscow in 1728 with the permission of the Supreme Privy Council, according to the testimony of His Grace Theophylact of Lopatinsky, Archbishop of Tver, and under his supervision, and immediately became a notable event in the life of society. The first edition was a huge success. Printed in 1,200 copies, it quickly sold out. However, distribution of the book was prohibited, and the remaining copies in the printing house were sealed. “The Stone” was translated into Latin and Polish and became widely known in the West. Protestants in the West and in Russia immediately after the book's publication began a polemic against it. A malicious pamphlet on the “Stone of Faith” called “Hammer on the Stone of Faith” was published in Russia. Works also appeared in defense of Yavorsky, in particular, an essay by Archbishop Theophylact, publisher of “The Stone,” entitled “Apocrisis, or Response to the responsive writing of Francis Buddeus to a certain friend living in Moscow, about the Lutheran heresy, to the book “The Stone of Faith.” .

In total, the book went through three editions and was also published in 1730 in Kyiv and 1749 in Moscow. All publications were printed in Church Slavonic.

For the publication of the “Stone of Faith” by Archbishop Theophylact, the latter was tortured in the secret office of Biron, raised on the rack three times, beaten with batogs, declared deprived of the rank of Bishop and monasticism, and imprisoned in the Peter and Paul Fortress. For the same guilt, Metropolitan of Kyiv Varlaam Vanatovich was summoned to the secret chancellery, deprived of his rank and imprisoned in the Belozersky monastery. Thus, during the reign of Empress Anna Ioannovna and then Catherine II, the retreat from the Orthodox faith continued. Under Catherine the Second, Arseny, Metropolitan of Rostov, ardently spoke out in defense of Orthodoxy and the works of Yavorsky. He drew up an objection to the libel filed by Protestants against the “Stone of Faith” and added...

The figure of the Russian Orthodox Church, Stefan Yavorsky, was the Metropolitan of Ryazan and the locum tenens of the patriarchal throne. He rose to prominence thanks to Peter I, but had a number of disagreements with the tsar, which eventually developed into conflict. Shortly before the death of the locum tenens, a Synod was created, with the help of which the state completely subjugated the Church.

Early years

The future religious leader Stefan Jaworski was born in 1658 in the town of Jawor, in Galicia. His parents were poor nobles. According to the terms of the Andrusovo Peace Treaty of 1667, their region finally passed to Poland. The Orthodox Yavorsky family decided to leave Yavor and move to what had become part of the Moscow state. Their new homeland turned out to be the village of Krasilovka not far from the city of Nizhyn. Here Stefan Yavorsky (in the world his name was Semyon Ivanovich) continued his education.

In his youth, he independently moved to Kyiv, where he entered the Kiev-Mohyla College. She was one of the main educational institutions in Southern Russia. Here Stefan studied until 1684. He attracted the attention of the future Varlaam Yasinsky. The young man was distinguished not only by his curiosity, but also by his outstanding natural abilities - a keen memory and attentiveness. Varlaam helped him go to study abroad.

Study in Poland

In 1684, Stefan Jaworski went to He studied with the Jesuits of Lvov and Lublin, and became acquainted with theology in Poznan and Vilna. Catholics accepted him only after the young student converted to Uniatism. Later, this act was criticized by his opponents and ill-wishers in the Russian Orthodox Church. Meanwhile, many scientists who wanted access to Western universities and libraries became Uniates. Among them were, for example, the Orthodox Epiphanius of Slavonetsky and Innocent Gisel.

Jaworski's studies in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth ended in 1689. He received a Western diploma. For several years in Poland, the theologian learned the art of rhetoric, poetry and philosophy. At this time, his worldview was finally formed, which determined all future actions and decisions. There is no doubt that it was the Jesuit Catholics who instilled in their student a persistent hostility towards Protestants, whom he would later oppose in Russia.

Return to Russia

Returning to Kyiv, Stefan Yavorsky renounced Catholicism. The local academy accepted him after the test. Varlaam Yasinsky advised Yavorsky to take monastic orders. Finally, he agreed and became a monk, taking the name Stephen. At first he was a novice at the Kiev Pechersk Lavra. When Varlaam was elected metropolitan, he helped his protégé become a teacher of oratory and rhetoric at the Academy. Yavorsky quickly received new positions. By 1691 he had already become a prefect, as well as a professor of philosophy and theology.

As a teacher, Stefan Jaworski, whose biography was connected with Poland, used Latin teaching methods. His “pupils” were future preachers and high-ranking government officials. But the main student was Feofan Prokopovich, the future main opponent of Stefan Yavorsky in the Russian Orthodox Church. Although the teacher was later accused of spreading Catholic teaching within the walls of the Kyiv Academy, these tirades turned out to be groundless. In the texts of the preacher's lectures, which have survived to this day, there are numerous descriptions of the mistakes of Western Christians.

Along with teaching and studying books, Stefan Yavorsky served in the church. It is known that he performed the wedding ceremony of his nephew. Before the war with the Swedes, the clergyman spoke positively about the hetman. In 1697, the theologian became abbot of the St. Nicholas Desert Monastery in the vicinity of Kyiv. This was an appointment that meant that Yavorsky would soon receive the rank of metropolitan. In the meantime, he helped Varlaam a lot and went to Moscow with his instructions.

Unexpected twist

In January 1700, Stefan Jaworsky, whose biography allows us to conclude that life path As he approached a sharp turn, he drove to the capital. Metropolitan Varlaam asked him to meet with Patriarch Adrian and persuade him to create a new Pereyaslav See. The envoy fulfilled the order, but soon an unexpected event occurred that radically changed his life.

Boyar and military leader Alexei Shein died in the capital. He, together with the young Peter I, led the capture of Azov and even became the first Russian generalissimo in history. In Moscow it was decided that the funeral eulogy should be given by the recently arrived Stefan Yavorsky. This man's education and preaching abilities were most evident in the best possible way with a larger gathering of high-ranking officials. But most importantly, the Kyiv guest was noticed by the tsar, who was extremely impressed by his eloquence. Peter I recommended that Patriarch Adrian make the envoy Varlaam the head of some diocese not far from Moscow. Stefan Yavorsky was advised to stay in the capital for a while. Soon he was offered the new rank of Metropolitan of Ryazan and Murom. He brightened up the waiting time at the Donskoy Monastery.

Metropolitan and locum tenens

On April 7, 1700, Stefan Yavorsky became the new Metropolitan of Ryazan. The bishop immediately began to fulfill his duties and immersed himself in local church affairs. However, his solitary work in Ryazan was short-lived. Already on October 15, the elderly and sick Patriarch Adrian died. Alexei Kurbatov, a close associate of Peter I, advised him to wait to elect a successor. Instead, the king established new position locum tenens The adviser proposed to install Archbishop Afanasy of Kholmogory in this place. Peter decided that it would not be he, but Stefan Yavorsky, who would become the locum tenens. The sermons of the Kyiv envoy in Moscow led him to the rank of Metropolitan of Ryazan. Now, in less than a year, he jumped to the last step and formally became the first person of the Russian Orthodox Church.

It was a meteoric rise, made possible by a combination of fortunate circumstances and the charisma of the 42-year-old theologian. His figure became a toy in the hands of the authorities. Peter wanted to get rid of the patriarchate as an institution harmful to the state. He planned to reorganize the church and bring it directly under the kings. The first implementation of this reform was the establishment of the position of locum tenens. Compared to the patriarch, a person with such a status had much less power. Its capabilities were limited and controlled by the central executive. Understanding the nature of Peter's reforms, one can guess that the appointment of a literally random and alien person to Moscow to the place of head of the church was deliberate and pre-planned.

It is unlikely that Stefan Yavorsky himself sought this honor. Uniatism, which he went through in his youth, and other features of his views could cause a conflict with the capital’s public. The appointee did not want major troubles and understood that he was being placed in a “execution” position. In addition, the theologian missed his native Little Russia, where he had many friends and supporters. But, of course, he could not refuse the king, so he humbly accepted his offer.

Fight against heresies

Everyone was unhappy with the changes. Muscovites called Yavorsky a Cherkasy and an Oblivian. Patriarch Dosifei of Jerusalem wrote to the Russian Tsar that it was not worth promoting natives of Little Russia to the top. Peter did not pay the slightest attention to these warnings. However, Dositheus received a letter of apology, the author of which was Stefan Yavorsky himself. Opal was clear. The Patriarch did not consider the Kievite “completely Orthodox” because of his long-standing collaboration with Catholics and Jesuits. Dositheos' response to Stefan was not conciliatory. Only his successor Chrysanthos compromised with the locum tenens.

The first problem that Stefan Yavorsky had to face in his new capacity was the issue of the Old Believers. At this time, schismatics distributed leaflets throughout Moscow in which the capital of Russia was called Babylon, and Peter was the Antichrist. The organizer of this action was the prominent book writer Grigory Talitsky. Metropolitan Stefan Yavorsky (the Ryazan see remained under his jurisdiction) tried to convince the culprit of the unrest. This dispute led to the fact that he even published his own book dedicated to the signs of the coming of the Antichrist. The work exposed the mistakes of schismatics and their manipulation of the opinions of believers.

Opponents of Stefan Jaworski

In addition to Old Believer and heretical cases, the locum tenens received the authority to identify candidates for appointments in empty dioceses. His lists were checked and agreed upon by the king himself. Only after his approval the chosen person received the rank of metropolitan. Peter created several more counterweights that significantly limited the locum tenens. Firstly, it was the Consecrated Cathedral - a meeting of bishops. Many of them were not Yavorsky’s proteges, and some were his direct opponents. Therefore, he had to defend his point of view every time in open confrontation with other church hierarchs. In fact, the locum tenens was only the first among equals, so his power could not be compared with the previous powers of the patriarchs.

Secondly, Peter I strengthened the influence of the Monastic Prikaz, at the head of which he placed his faithful boyar Ivan Musin-Pushkin. This person was positioned as an assistant and comrade of the locum tenens, but in some situations, when the king considered it necessary, he became the direct superior.

Thirdly, in 1711 the former one was finally dissolved, and in its place arose His decrees for the Church, which were equal to the royal ones. It was the Senate that received the privilege of determining whether the candidate proposed by the locum tenens was suitable for the place of bishop. Peter, who was increasingly drawn into foreign policy and the construction of St. Petersburg, delegated the powers of managing the church to the state machine and now intervened only as a last resort.

The case of Lutheran Tveritinov

In 1714, a scandal occurred that further widened the gulf, on opposite sides of which stood the statesmen and Stefan Jaworski. Photographs did not exist then, but even without them modern historians were able to restore the appearance of the German Settlement, which especially grew under Peter I. Foreign merchants, craftsmen and guests, mainly from Germany, lived in it. All of them were Lutherans or Protestants. This Western teaching began to spread among the Orthodox residents of Moscow.

The free-thinking doctor Tveritinov became a particularly active promoter of Lutheranism. Stefan Yavorsky, whose repentance to the church occurred many years ago, remembered the years spent next to Catholics and Jesuits. They instilled in the locum tenens a dislike for Protestants. The Metropolitan of Ryazan began persecuting Lutherans. Tveritinov fled to St. Petersburg, where he found patrons and defenders in the Senate among Yavorsky’s ill-wishers. A decree was issued according to which the locum tenens had to forgive alleged heretics. who usually compromised with the state, this time did not want to give in. He turned directly to the king for protection. Peter did not like the whole story of the persecution of Lutherans. The first serious conflict broke out between him and Yavorsky.

Meanwhile, the locum tenens decided to present his criticism of Protestantism and views on Orthodoxy in a separate essay. So, he soon wrote his most famous book"Stone of Faith" Stefan Yavorsky in this work preached his usual sermon on the importance of preserving the former conservative foundations of the Orthodox Church. At the same time, he used rhetoric that was common among Catholics at that time. The book was filled with rejection of the reformation, which then triumphed in Germany. These ideas were propagated by the Protestants of the German Settlement.

Conflict with the king

The story of the Lutheran Tveritinov became an unpleasant wake-up call, signaling the attitude of the church and the state, which held opposing positions regarding Protestants. However, the conflict between them was much deeper and only expanded over time. It worsened when the essay “The Stone of Faith” was published. Stefan Jaworski tried to defend his conservative position with the help of this book. The authorities banned its publication.

Meanwhile, Peter moved the country's capital to St. Petersburg. Gradually all the officials moved there. The locum tenens and Metropolitan of Ryazan Stefan Yavorsky remained in Moscow. In 1718, the Tsar ordered him to go to St. Petersburg and start working in the new capital. This displeased Stefan. The king responded sharply to his objections and did not compromise. At the same time, he expressed the idea of ​​​​the need to create a Spiritual College.

The project for its discovery was entrusted to the development of Feofan Prokopovich, a longtime student of Stefan Yavorsky. The locum tenens did not agree with his pro-Lutheran ideas. In the same 1718, Peter initiated the naming of Theophan as Bishop of Pskov. For the first time he received real powers. Stefan Yavorsky tried to oppose him. The repentance and fraud of the locum became the topic of conversation and rumors that spread throughout both capitals. Many influential officials who had made a career under Peter and were supporters of the course of subordinating the church to the state were opposed to him. Therefore, they tried to tarnish the reputation of Metropolitan of Ryazan using a variety of methods, including recalling his connections with Catholics during his studies in Poland.

Role in the trial of Tsarevich Alexei

Meanwhile, Peter had to resolve another conflict - this time a family one. His son and heir Alexei did not agree with his father's policies and eventually fled to Austria. He was returned to his homeland. In May 1718, Peter ordered Stefan Yavorsky to arrive in St. Petersburg to represent the church at the trial of the rebellious prince.

There were rumors that the locum tenens sympathized with Alexei and even kept in touch with him. However, there is no documentary evidence of this. On the other hand, it is known for sure that the prince did not like his father’s new church policy, and he had many supporters among the conservative Moscow clergy. At the trial, Metropolitan of Ryazan tried to defend these clergy. Many of them, along with the prince, were accused of treason and executed. Stefan Yavorsky was unable to influence Peter’s decision. The locum tenens himself performed the funeral service for Alexei, who died mysteriously in his prison cell on the eve of his execution.

After the creation of the Synod

For several years, the draft law on the creation of the Theological College was being worked on. As a result, it became known as the Holy Governing Synod. In January 1721, Peter signed a manifesto on the creation of this authority, necessary to control the church. The newly elected members of the Synod were hastily sworn in, and already in February the institution began permanent work. The patriarchate was officially abolished and left in the past.

Formally, Peter put Stefan Yavorsky at the head of the Synod. He was opposed to the new institution, considering him the undertaker of the church. He did not attend meetings of the Synod and refused to sign the papers issued by this body. In the service of the Russian state, Stefan Yavorsky saw himself in a completely different capacity. Peter kept him in a nominal position only in order to demonstrate the formal continuity of the institutions of the patriarchate, locum tenens and the Synod.

In the highest circles, denunciations continued to spread, in which Stefan Yavorsky made a reservation. Fraud during the construction of the Nezhinsky monastery and other unscrupulous machinations were attributed to the Metropolitan of Ryazan in evil tongues. He began to live in a state of constant stress, which significantly affected his well-being. Stefan Yavorsky died on December 8, 1722 in Moscow. He became the first and last long-term locum tenens of the Patriarchal Throne in Russian history. After his death, a two-century synodal period began, when the state made the church part of its bureaucratic machine.

The fate of the "Stone of Faith"

It is interesting that the book “The Stone of Faith” (the main literary work of the locum tenens) was published in 1728, when he and Peter were already in the grave. The work, which criticized Protestantism, was an extraordinary success. Its first edition quickly sold out. Later the book was reprinted several times. When during the reign of Anna Ioannovna there were many favorite Germans of the Lutheran faith in power, the “Stone of Faith” was again banned.

The work not only criticized Protestantism, but, more importantly, became the best systematic presentation of Orthodox doctrine at that time. Stefan Jaworski emphasized the places in which it differed from Lutheranism. The treatise was devoted to the attitude towards relics, icons, the sacrament of the Eucharist, sacred tradition, attitude towards heretics, etc. When the Orthodox party finally triumphed under Elizabeth Petrovna, “The Stone of Faith” became the main theological work of the Russian Church and remained so throughout the entire 18th century .

“The stone of faith, the holy son of the Orthodox Church - for affirmation and spiritual creation, but for those who stumble over the stone of stumbling and temptation - for rebellion and correction,” an extensive work by Metropolitan Stefan (Yavorsky) (+ 1722) against the Lutherans.

The book has specifically in mind Orthodox Christians leaning towards Protestantism, and embraces all dogmas disputed by Protestants. Each dogma is stated, then proven, and, finally, objections to it are refuted. The author takes evidence from Holy Scripture, cathedral rules, St. fathers. In challenging Protestant opinions, the author draws heavily from the Catholic system. The Catholic element entered into articles on justification, on good deeds, on merit beyond what was required, and on the punishment of heretics. Metropolitan Stefan followed the opinions expressed in the article on the punishment of heretics in life, for example. He treated schismatics like an inquisitor.

Work on the book began in the year, during the trial of Tveritinov and others who were carried away by Lutheranism, and is also a hidden polemic with Tsar Peter I, who favored Protestants. The book was completed in the city, but during the life of Peter the book could not be printed and was published only under Peter II in the city, with the permission of the Supreme Privy Council, according to the testimony of Theophylact (Lopatinsky) and under his supervision.

Protestants immediately after the book's publication began a polemic against it (review in the Leipzig Scientific Acts of 1729, Budday's book of 1729, Mosheim's dissertation of 1731, etc.). Catholics took it under their protection: the Dominican Ribeira wrote a refutation of Buddeus’ book. In Russia, a malicious pamphlet was published on “The Stone of Faith”, “Hammer on the Stone of Faith”, with antics against Metropolitan. Stefan.

"The first of them, - says Yu. Samarin, - borrowed from Catholics, the second - from Protestants. The first was a one-sided opposition to the influence of the Reformation; the second with the same one-sided opposition to the Jesuit school. The Church tolerates both, recognizing this negative side in them. But the church did not raise either one or the other to the level of its system, and did not condemn either one or the other; Consequently, the church excluded the concept of the church system that lies at the basis of both from its sphere and recognized it as alien to itself. We have the right to say that the Orthodox Church does not have a system and should not have one."

Literature

• Barinov Nikolai, archpriest, Metropolitan Stefan (Yavorsky) and the book “Stone of Faith” // Website of priest Nikolai Barinov

Materials used

• Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron. Stefan Jaworski

Stone of Faith(full title: " Stone of faith: the Orthodox Church saints son for affirmation and spiritual creation. Those who stumble over the stumbling stone are tempted to rise up and correct themselves.") is a polemical work by Metropolitan Stefan Yavorsky, directed against Protestant preaching in Russia.

The book is primarily intended for Orthodox Christians leaning towards Protestantism. Metropolitan Stephen examines the dogmas that were disputed by Protestants at that time.

History of creation

The reason for writing the book, as stated in its preface, was the case against the heresy teacher Dimitri Evdokimov in 1713. Demetrius was born and raised in Orthodoxy, but in adulthood he adopted Protestant views from a Calvinist; he abandoned the worship of icons, the Cross and holy relics; Evdokimov spread his teachings and gathered around him people who shared his non-Orthodox views. One of Evdokimov’s followers, the barber Thomas Ivanov, reached such insolence that he publicly blasphemed Saint Alexis the Metropolitan in the Chudovo Monastery and cut his icon with a knife. . In 1713, a council was convened at which the apostates were tried and anathematized. Foma Ivanov repented for his act, but he was still tried in a civil court and sentenced to death. The remaining followers, since they did not change their views, were left under church ban. Soon Evdokimov became a widower and decided to remarry; he repented and was accepted back into church communion, where he entered into marriage with his new wife.

Metropolitan Stephen worked on compiling his famous “Stone of Faith,” which, in his opinion, was supposed to serve as the main weapon of Orthodox polemics against Protestantism. Stephen himself only decided in 1717, after many corrections, to begin printing the “Stone of Faith.” In his letter to Archbishop Anthony of Chernigov (Stakhovsky), Metropolitan Stefan asked the latter, “if anywhere [in the book] cruel annoyance with opponents is found, it must be removed or softened.”

As Anton Kartashev wrote, “Of course, Stefan was told in time that such an essay, harmful to the state, which needed to attract foreigners, would not be published.” On November 27, 1722, Metropolitan Stefan died without ever seeing his work published.

book chapters:

1. about holy icons
2. about the Sign of the Holy Cross
3. about Holy Relics
4. about the Most Holy Eucharist
5. about the calling of saints
6. about the entry of holy souls leaving the body into the heavenly abodes and the participation of heavenly glory before the second coming of Christ
7. about doing good to the deceased, that is, about prayers, alms, fasting and especially bloodless sacrifices made for the dead
8. about legends
9. about the Most Holy Liturgy
10. about Holy Fasts
11. about good deeds that contribute to eternal salvation
12. on the punishment of heretics

Stephen defends icons on the grounds that they are holy not materially, but figuratively. Unlike idols, icons are not the body of God. They serve to remind us of biblical events. However, Stephen admits that only Calvinists are extreme iconoclasts. Lutherans “accept some icons” (the Crucifixion, the Last Supper), but do not worship them. At the same time, Stephen notes that not every image of God is worthy of worship. So at the Sixth Ecumenical Council it was forbidden to depict Christ in the form of a lamb. At the same time, Stephen believes that the worship of the Jews of the Brazen Serpent (from Moses to Hezekiah) was pious.

Stephen rejects Protestant ecclesiology, arguing that the church could not turn into the Whore of Babylon, despite the fact that Ancient Israel departed from God many times. Stephen uses the word “latria” to describe the service, and he calls the characteristic practice of remembering the dead “hagiomnisia.”

In challenging Protestant opinions, Stephen draws heavily from the Catholic system, although he rejects some Catholic dogmas (for example, purgatory). The Catholic element was included in articles on justification, on good works (“salvation requires good works as well as good faith”), on supererogatory merits, on the Eucharist as a sacrifice, on the punishment of heretics. Archpriest John Morev analyzed the book “The Stone of Faith” and drew attention to the fact that Stefan simply translated, rewrote, or retold entire huge chunks of texts from Latin Western authors: Bellarmina and Becan. Among such borrowings from the above-mentioned authors was the text of the apologetics of the Inquisition.

The fate of the book

The first edition of the book, printed in 1200 copies, sold out in one year. The book was republished in 1729 in Moscow, and in 1730 in Kyiv.

The book caused strong displeasure among court circles oriented toward German Protestants. The publication of the book offended many, including Feofan Prokopovich, whom many accused of sympathizing with Protestantism and even of heresy. German Protestants perceived the publication of the book “The Stone of Faith” as a challenge that required an immediate response. Information about the book already appeared in the Leipzig Scientific Acts in May 1729, and then in the same year a polemical treatise by the Jena theologian Johann Franz Buddeus, “Apologetic Letter in Defense of the Lutheran Church,” was published. What most offended opponents of the book was that it repeated Catholic views on the Inquisition and justified the death penalty for heretics.

At this time, a malicious pamphlet was anonymously published in Russia, which later became known as “Hammer on the Stone of Faith,” the author of which deliberately created an offensive cartoon libel with elements of a political denunciation against his opponent. Metropolitan Stefan Yavorsky is presented as a secret Catholic agent acting in the interests of the pope, consciously opposing the church policies of Peter I and harboring ambitious plans for the restoration of the patriarchate. The locum tenens is accused of all sorts of sins: disobedience to the tsar and sabotage of his orders, passion for acquisition and luxury, simony, sympathy for the political conspiracies of Mazepa and Tsarevich Alexei against the tsar. Actions that are moral and not subject to condemnation are presented as a manifestation of Jesuit cunning. The author treats the Russian people, the Orthodox clergy and monasticism with open contempt. In general, the work is not distinguished by its theological depth; attacks on Metropolitan Stephen take up more space than criticism of his theological views. At the end of his essay, the author of “The Hammer...” expresses confidence that the reigning Empress Anna Ioannovna, “like Peter in everything, the true heir of Peter,” will not tolerate the triumph of the opponents of Tsar Peter I, and the book “The Stone of Faith” will be banned. The hopes of the author of “Hammer...” were justified. By the highest decree of August 19, 1732, the book “The Stone of Faith” was banned.

The question of authorship still remains unambiguously unresolved. The author of the libel is a man, of course, informed about many circumstances of the personal life of Metropolitan Stephen, including in Kyiv, his relationship with the higher clergy and priesthood of the Ryazan diocese. He is also well aware of the relationship between the Locum Tenens and the Emperor, and understands the circumstances of palace intrigues during a change of power. There is almost no doubt that this is not a foreigner, and not a simple pastor who lived in Russia, but a person included in the highest circles of government of the Church or state. Modern researchers agree that its publication was beneficial specifically to Theophanes; Moreover, it contains a flattering review of him. Modern researcher Anton Grigoriev calls the most likely candidate for the authorship of Antiochus Cantemir.

In 1730, Archbishop Varlaam (Vonatovich) of Kiev was defrocked and imprisoned in the Cyril Monastery for not serving a prayer service on time for the Empress’s accession to the throne; but most of all he was guilty of poorly restraining his clergy from talking about Theophan’s heresy and allowing a new edition of the “Stone of Faith” to be published in Kiev.

In 1735, Theophylact was also arrested, who was responsible for the important guilt of publishing the “Stone of Faith” and who, in addition, due to his sincere frankness and trust in those around him, more than once allowed himself unnecessary speeches about the patriarchate, and about Theophan, and about the Germans, and that Empress Anna sat on the throne, overtaking the crown princess.

During the reign of Elizabeth Petrovna, the book was published again in 1749. Then it was published several times in the 19th century: in 1836 and 1843.

Notes

1. // Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron: in 86 volumes (82 volumes and 4 additional). - St. Petersburg. , 1890-1907.