Part 1
Professor N. D. Uspensky
Almost all skeptics refer to the speech of Professor N. D. Uspensky, pronounced on October 9, 1949, "On the history of the rite of the holy fire, performed on Great Saturday in Jerusalem." It is replicated on many sites. In the eyes of all unbelievers and doubters, it is significant for two reasons. First, the author is a professor at the Leningrad Theological Academy. Secondly, Ouspensky gave the text of the report a research form.
Against the background of the polemical confusion with which the sites of skeptics are filled, this report is really different. However, a professorship alone cannot lend any particular credibility to statements. It is known that in the 19th century, dozens of European professors (mostly German) who studied Bible books reached the point of disbelief and denial of the inspiration of the Holy Scriptures.
As for the report itself, it would be a mistake to call the proposed text research, because scientific work unambiguously presupposes a search for truth and a creative approach to a still unsolved problem. N. D. Ouspensky, on the other hand, already had a negative view before starting work. All his efforts were reduced to “confirm” his point of view. From a huge array of testimonies about the miracle of the Holy Fire, he found several statements that, as it seemed to him, confirm his position. The author simply ignored dozens of weighty evidence in favor of the miracle. This method is incompatible with science. It is easy to see the techniques that the author deliberately uses. His conclusion is reduced to zero, since he has never been to Jerusalem and was never present during the descent of the Holy Fire in the Church of the Holy Sepulcher.
About the prejudiced attitude of N. D. Ouspensky's statement to this miracle is expressed by the emotionally formulated thesis at the beginning of his speech: "It would be audacity and disrespect to God to expect a sign from Him every year." But what about the Sheep Font? People expected a miracle every year. “The angel of the Lord for every summer will descend into the font and disturb the water: even those who are the first to snatch after the disturbance of the water, are healthy, but we have been possessed with an ailment” (John 5: 4). Is it “insolence and disrespect towards God” that we are waiting for the great consecration of water every year at the same time (the feast of the Baptism of the Lord)? This miracle in its significance is quite comparable with the miracle of the descent of the Holy Fire on Great Saturday.
One of the author's tricks is to identify discrepancies in the historical accounts of this miracle and thereby devalue the evidence. He quotes Abbot Daniel, who saw neither a dove, nor a lightning, but “so invisibly descends from heaven by the grace of God and burns a kandil in the tomb of the Lord”. After that N. D. Ouspensky adds: "Note that Father Superior Daniel traveled to the Holy Sepulcher in 1106-1107." However, even after it, in the letters of our pilgrims, there are similar statements about those images in which the Holy Fire appears, statements that contradict themselves, where this fire seems to descend "like the sun" and spreading on the board of the Holy Sepulcher "like lightning", with our own eyes for all those praying. So, for example, in the "Path" of the hieromonks Macarius and Celivestra, who made pilgrimages in 1704, we read:“On Great Saturday, about the ninth hour, fire descends from heaven invisibly into kandilas, and the fire itself will ignite and immediately enter the sign of God, fire like the sun will come from heaven above the tomb of God, and from that rays the kandilo will light up; and seeing all the people of God, grace descended from heaven over the Lord's Sepulcher in a fiery form, walking on the Lord's Sepulcher on the marble floor with all sorts of flowers from heaven, that lightning, and all people who saw, rejoice in great joy over such love of God. "rejoice in great joy over this kind of love of God. "rejoice in great joy over this kind of love of God."
If the author of the report had a scientific approach, he would allow a variety of forms of the same phenomenon in different years. Pilgrim V. Ya. Gagara, whom we have already quoted, says: “And how 11 o'clock struck, and over the poppy seed of that great church from heaven there will be a thunderbolt of triplets, and the Greeks and Araps began to speak in great voice: agios, agios, agios, but in our opinion it is: holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts, and they began to be baptized. With the same thunder, three gray pigeons flew in and three pigeons sat on that breaking poppy: one sat from the east, and the second sat down from noon, and the third from the west. And the Metropolitan crossed himself, and go to that side-chapel, and be there for a long time."
Promotional video:
Then N. D. Ouspensky resorts to this method. He takes the Holy Sepulcher typicon of 1122, which contains the rite, reflecting the liturgical practice of the Jerusalem Church of the Resurrection of that time: "The people in a continuous voice cry:" Lord, have mercy. " Then the patriarch with his associates enters the Holy Sepulcher, falls prostrate three times and prays and asks (God) for himself and for people. Then he kindles from the holy light and gives it to the archdeacon, and the archdeacon to the people. " This ancient testimony of the miraculous fire is precious, since it is not just a pilgrim's observation. Due to the fact that the miracle is repeated annually, it is even mentioned in the local typicon. Since the light of the lamp is usually not called holy light in the statutory books, any unbiased person will have an unambiguous explanation. However, Ouspensky, who set a critical goal,resorts to twisting logic. He takes the earlier statutory books (the Latala manuscript of the early 9th century and the Kalsky manuscript of the late 10th or early 11th century) and quotes them in detail. Since these manuscripts do not mention the holy fire, but say: "He gives a kiss to priests and deacons, bless candles and light lamps," the author unexpectedly concludes: "A simple and clear answer to the puzzled words of the Holy Sepulcher typicon" then kindles from the holy light " "."A simple and clear answer to the perplexed words of the Holy Sepulcher typicon" then kindles from the holy light. "A simple and clear answer to the perplexed words of the Holy Sepulcher typicon" then kindles from the holy light."
There are absolutely no grounds for such a statement. If we were talking about three editions of one text, then a research problem would arise: why could there be discrepancies and which version is the most authoritative? But we are talking about completely different texts from different times. The author himself admits this: “There are many differences between these manuscripts and the Holy Sepulcher Typicon of 1122. So, if according to the Holy Sepulcher typicon the rite of the holy fire was performed in the center of Vespers, after the reading of the Paremias, then according to the Latala and Kalskaya manuscripts - before the beginning of Vespers. Second. According to the Holy Sepulcher typicon, the rite of the holy fire was preceded by the ritual of washing the lamps and preparing them; Neither the Latal nor the Kalsky manuscripts know such a separate rite. According to the Latal manuscript, the clergy, having come to the temple with its closed doors, "light candles"and according to Kalskaya - “they prepare three censers”. And this preparation for the rank is thus directly adjacent to the latter. Third. According to the Holy Sepulcher typicon, all three censing are performed in silence, and the very rite of receiving the holy fire is accompanied by the secret prayer of the patriarch, with three bows, accompanied by repeated chanting "Lord, have mercy." According to the Latal and Kalsky manuscripts, the circumambulation is accompanied by the singing of a psalm, litany and reading a prayer. Fourth. According to the Holy Sepulcher typicon, during the rite, the people are present in the church, and in order to receive the holy fire, the patriarch and clergy go inside the Kuvuklii, and according to the Latala and Kalsky manuscripts, the rite is performed in the absence of the people and the patriarch does not enter the Kuvukliy for the holy fire, but in the temple itself "They bless the candles and light the lamps."directly adjacent to the latter. Third. According to the Holy Sepulcher typicon, all three censing are performed in silence, and the very rite of receiving the holy fire is accompanied by the secret prayer of the patriarch, with three bows, accompanied by repeated chanting "Lord, have mercy." According to the Latal and Kalsky manuscripts, the circumambulation is accompanied by the singing of a psalm, litany and reading a prayer. Fourth. According to the Holy Sepulcher typicon, during the rite, the people are present in the church, and in order to receive the holy fire, the patriarch and clergy go inside the Kuvuklii, and according to the Latala and Kalsky manuscripts, the rite is performed in the absence of the people and the patriarch does not enter the Kuvukliy for the holy fire, but in the temple itself "They bless the candles and light the lamps."directly adjacent to the latter. Third. According to the Holy Sepulcher typicon, all three censing are performed in silence, and the very rite of receiving the holy fire is accompanied by the secret prayer of the patriarch, with three bows, accompanied by repeated chanting "Lord, have mercy." According to the Latal and Kalsky manuscripts, the circumambulation is accompanied by the singing of a psalm, litany and reading a prayer. Fourth. According to the Holy Sepulcher typicon, during the rite, the people are present in the church, and in order to receive the holy fire, the patriarch and clergy go inside the Kuvuklii, and according to the Latala and Kalsky manuscripts, the rite is performed in the absence of the people and the patriarch does not enter the Kuvukliy for the holy fire, but in the temple itself "They bless the candles and light the lamps."and the very rite of receiving the holy fire is accompanied by the secret prayer of the patriarch, with three bows, to the repeated chanting "Lord, have mercy." According to the Latal and Kalsky manuscripts, the circumambulation is accompanied by the singing of a psalm, litany and reading a prayer. Fourth. According to the Holy Sepulcher typicon, during the rite, the people are present in the church, and in order to receive the holy fire, the patriarch and clergy go inside the Kuvuklii, and according to the Latala and Kalsky manuscripts, the rite is performed in the absence of the people and the patriarch does not enter the Kuvukliy for the holy fire, but in the temple itself "They bless the candles and light the lamps."and the very rite of receiving the holy fire is accompanied by the secret prayer of the patriarch, with three bows, to the repeated chanting "Lord, have mercy." According to the Latal and Kalsky manuscripts, the circumambulation is accompanied by the singing of a psalm, litany and reading a prayer. Fourth. According to the Holy Sepulcher typicon, during the rite, the people are present in the church, and in order to receive the holy fire, the patriarch and clergy go inside the Kuvuklii, and according to the Latala and Kalsky manuscripts, the rite is performed in the absence of the people and the patriarch does not enter the Kuvukliy for the holy fire, but in the temple itself "They bless the candles and light the lamps."and in order to receive the holy fire, the patriarch and clergy go inside the Kuvuklii, and according to the Latala and Kalskaya manuscripts, the rite is performed in the absence of the people and the patriarch does not enter the Kuvuklii for the holy fire, but in the church itself “candles are blessed and lamps are lit”.and in order to receive the holy fire, the patriarch and clergy go inside the Kuvuklii, and according to the Latala and Kalskaya manuscripts, the rite is performed in the absence of the people and the patriarch does not enter the Kuvuklii for the holy fire, but in the church itself “candles are blessed and lamps are lit”.
I have specially highlighted a part of the last phrase. There is no reason to regard the order of the Latal and Kalsky manuscripts as a description of the same rite, which is mentioned in the Holy Sepulcher typicon. Therefore, the final conclusion is made without any basis.
That's all Ouspensky's arguments to justify his disbelief in a miracle. The rest of the report contains an account of the author's version of the origin of the rite of the Holy Fire. The main idea is that "the Old Testament custom entered the New Testament Church and received a new ideological meaning."
It must be said that the attitude of the author of the report to the miracle of the holy fire is far from accidental. In such a fundamental theological question as the understanding of the sacrament of the Eucharist, he adhered to Lutheran views. Archpriest Valentin Asmus, in his work devoted to the patristic understanding of the doctrine of the Eucharist, writes: “Ouspensky abundantly quotes the Eucharistic passages of Chrysostom with their amazing realism, but he calmly destroys this realism in one phrase, calling them just a“device of oratorical eloquence”. The only theological expression of Chrysostom's views on the Eucharist, Ouspensky recognizes the Epistle of Chrysostom to Caesarea. Unfortunately, this Epistle to Chrysostom does not belong. It was printed both in Minya's Patrology and in the St. Petersburg edition of the Russian translation of Chrysostom in the section of the spuria of the saint's writings. The most authoritative modern index of patristic writings, Clavis Patrum Graecorum (Turnhout, 1974. Vol. 2) also classifies the Epistle to Caesarea as spurious. An unbiased reading of the Epistle, which clearly dates back to the time of intense Christological controversies, is convincing of the same. The message was preserved in full only in Latin. Ouspensky, quoting the passage of the Epistle where the word natura is used, replaces it with the Greek physis, without specifying that he does a reverse translation. Ouspensky, attributing to Chrysostom the teaching of the unknown author of the Epistle to Caesarea and his own view, proves the ecclesiastical nature of this teaching by the fact that he was not condemned by the Council under the oak tree. But that Council could not condemn the teaching of the Epistle to Caesarea, firstly, because he judged Chrysostom, who does not own the Epistle, written more than a dozen years after his death, and secondly,because the Council under the oak tree did not raise a single dogmatic charge at all. Ouspensky's phrase amazes: "If the Church denied the existence of the physical nature of bread and wine in consecrated gifts, this would serve as a good argument for the Monophysites against the Diphysites" (p. 20). In fact, the Orthodox recognized in the Eucharist not the duality of the Eucharistic substances and the Divine hypostasis of the Word, but the duality of humanity and the Divinity of Christ, revealed in the mystery of the Eucharist. With so much freedom in dealing with patristic teaching, Ouspensky is all the more free in his treatment of Catholic authors. Thus, Ouspensky ascribes to Aquinas the statement that "the Eucharist represents the restoration of the essence of the Golgotha sacrifice of Christ and therefore can be called the slaughter of Christ." In fact, Thomas asserts that the celebration of the Eucharist is “a certain image,representing (imago quaedam repraesentativa) the passion of Christ, which is His true slaughter (immolatio)”(part III, quaest. 83, art. 1). Ouspensky's speech did not remain unanswered. Deacon Andrei Yurchenko addressed an alarmed message to the hierarchy. His Holiness Patriarch Pimen instructed the MDA to speak out on the issue raised, and the Academy, represented by Professor V. D. Sarycheva confirmed the Orthodoxy of the traditional teaching of our Church about the Eucharist and the non-Orthodox understanding of the Eucharist proposed by the Leningrad professor. The ideas of Nikolai Dmitrievich were officially refuted, the church teaching remained unshakable”(Eucharist // https://www.patriarchia.ru/db/text/97468.html). Ouspensky's speech did not remain unanswered. Deacon Andrei Yurchenko addressed an alarmed message to the hierarchy. His Holiness Patriarch Pimen instructed the MDA to speak out on the issue raised, and the Academy, represented by Professor V. D. Sarycheva confirmed the Orthodoxy of the traditional teaching of our Church about the Eucharist and the non-Orthodox understanding of the Eucharist proposed by the Leningrad professor. The ideas of Nikolai Dmitrievich were officially refuted, the church teaching remained unshakable”(Eucharist // https://www.patriarchia.ru/db/text/97468.html). Ouspensky's speech did not remain unanswered. Deacon Andrei Yurchenko addressed an alarmed message to the hierarchy. His Holiness Patriarch Pimen instructed the MDA to speak out on the issue raised, and the Academy, represented by Professor V. D. Sarycheva confirmed the Orthodoxy of the traditional teaching of our Church about the Eucharist and the non-Orthodox understanding of the Eucharist proposed by the Leningrad professor. The ideas of Nikolai Dmitrievich were officially refuted, the church teaching remained unshakable”(Eucharist // https://www.patriarchia.ru/db/text/97468.html).proposed by the Leningrad professor. The ideas of Nikolai Dmitrievich were officially refuted, the church teaching remained unshakable”(Eucharist // https://www.patriarchia.ru/db/text/97468.html).proposed by the Leningrad professor. The ideas of Nikolai Dmitrievich were officially refuted, the church teaching remained unshakable”(Eucharist //
The above lengthy quotation does not directly relate to the topic we are discussing, but well characterizes an important feature of N. D. Uspensky - to arbitrarily interpret the texts. The entire lecture "On the History of the Rite of the Holy Fire", which skeptics value so much, is based on this.
This year, during Holy Week, a new, perhaps the largest wave of publications arose against the miracle of the descent of the Holy Fire. Deacon Andrei Kuraev caused this wave. A year ago, he commented on a live television broadcast and spoke of it as a visible confirmation of the truth of Orthodoxy.
What happened in a year? Why did his faith in the miracle of the Holy Fire disappear?
It turns out that the reason is the English word representation, which Patriarch Theophilos used in conversation. The Patriarch was asked a question: “Your Beatitude, you are one of the real witnesses of the greatest miracle of the descent of the Holy Fire. Directly present at this. I would like to know how this happens? What is your first impression when you witnessed this miracle? What happens to the person? And describe this process itself, please."
Patriarch Theophilos' answer consists of two parts. In the first, he talks about the ritual side. Therefore, the terms ceremony (ceremony) and representation (image, image) are used.
What is a ceremony? “A ceremony (from Latin caermonia, literally reverence, reverence) is a solemn performance of something, a ceremony according to the established rules” (DN Ushakov Big Explanatory Dictionary of the Modern Russian Language). And the concept of representation also indicates an external mode of action. Any sacrament, for example, baptism, besides the real action of Divine grace, has a visible ritual side, that is, ceremony, representation. Having said this, Patriarch Theophilus further speaks about the spiritual side of this event: “Now the second part of your question; it's actually about us. It is an experience that, if you like, is analogous to the experience that a person has when he receives the sacrament. What is happening there also applies to the ceremony of the holy fire. This means that a certain experience cannot be explained, expressed in words."
Deacon Andrew gave a completely arbitrary interpretation of this passage, ignoring the words that convince the primate of the Jerusalem Church to speak of the authenticity of this blessed event: "This is an experience (experience), which, if you like, is analogous to the experience that a person experiences when he receives Holy Communion." … It is extremely clear, because in the sacrament of the Eucharist we accept the true body and the true blood of our Lord Jesus Christ: “If, being invited to marriage, He performed this glorious miracle, all the more so,“giving the sons of the bride chamber”(Matthew 9:15) His body and his blood for salvation, does he require our faith? Therefore, we will accept it with full confidence as the body and blood of Christ. For in the form of bread is given to you a body, and in the form of wine is given to you blood, so that, having partaken of the body and blood of Christ, you become to Him co-bodily and blood. In this way we become Christ-bearers when His body and blood are united with our body and blood. Thus, according to Blessed Peter, we become “partakers of the Divine nature” (2 Pet. 1: 4) … So, do not consider bread and wine simple, for they are the body and blood of Christ, according to the dictum of the Vladyka”(Saint Cyril of Jerusalem).
Just as the great predecessor in the Jerusalem See, Patriarch Theophilos also understands the sacrament. Would His Holiness the Patriarch compare the great sacrament of the Eucharist with that which is invoked by the "lighter"? Absurd! The word "lighter", which is completely arbitrary and far-fetched, seduced the spiritually weak and weak in faith, and gave the atheists a new impetus for zeal beyond reason.
The miraculous origin of the Holy Fire is proved by the fact that in the first minute it does not burn. You can "wash yourself" with this fire. How many tricks have been invented by skeptics to refute this property, which tens of thousands of pilgrims could be convinced of in recent years.
“Yes, and I, a sinful servant, from the metropolitan's hands lit 20 candles in one place and burned my brace with all the candles, and neither a single hair grimaced nor burned; and put out all the lights and then. lit up by other people, I kindled those lights, and in the third, those lights were kindled, too, and I did not touch anything, the same hair did not scorch, nor grumbled, and I, accursed, did not believe that the heavenly fire and the message of God, and so three times lit your lights and hasisha, and before the metropolitan and before all the Greeks forgiven that he blasphemed God's power and heavenly fire by the names that the Greeks make magic, and not God's creation; and the Metropolitan of me in that in all simple and blessed (Life and walking to Jerusalem and Egypt of Kazan Vasily Yakovlevich Gagara (1634-1637) // Orthodox Palestinian collection. St. Petersburg, 1891. Issue 33, p. 37).
“When I entered, he said, inside to the Holy Sepulcher, we see light on the entire roof of the sepulcher, like scattered small beads, in the form of white, blue, scarlet and other colors, which then, copulating, blushed and transformed over time into matter fire; but this fire, in the course of time, as soon as one can read slowly fourty times "Lord, have mercy!", does not burn, and from this fire the prepared candles and lights are kindled. But however, he added, how and where this phenomenon happens, I can not say. " (Hieromonk Meletius. 1793-1794).
“I quickly found myself on the site near the temple, where many of our pilgrims surrounded me. All of them, in tears of complete emotion, joy and happiness, pointed out to me that the Holy Fire does not burn. Many of them, even in my presence, circled their necks, arms and bare breasts with this fire, and it really did not burn, it begins to burn only when the bundle ignites with a bright flame. Following the example and instructions of my fellow pilgrims, I personally experienced all this. Circling my neck and arms with this Holy Fire, I did not feel any pain. " (Konstantin Rostovtsev, member of the Imperial Orthodox Palestinian Society (1896). - "Orthodox Life". 1962. No. 4).
“This fire has special wonderful properties: in the first minutes it does not burn, it can be applied to the face, as if washing with it. I leaned the fire to my face myself. It is pointless to talk about self-hypnosis here: I cannot inspire my hair so that it doesn’t catch fire from fire”(Archimandrite Raphael (Karelin). - karelin-r.ru/faq/answer/1000/753/index.html).
Sister Photinia from the monastery of St. Mary Magdalene Equal to the Apostles in Gethsemane. 2007 year
While living in the monastery of St. Mary Magdalene, Equal to the Apostles in Gethsemane, I specifically asked the sisters who had repeatedly visited the Church of the Holy Sepulcher on Holy Saturday. They all tested this property of the Holy Fire on themselves.
Skeptics are trying to collect statements from individuals who claim that the fire burned them. Perhaps it was, but the whole question is how much time has passed. Just as the image of the convergence and the duration of waiting is not the same in different years, so the length of time when the fire retains this wonderful property is different. Archimandrite Raphael (Karelin) writes: "When, after some time, perhaps five minutes, I decided to repeat the same thing, I felt different - the fire was already burning." Sister Elizabeth from Gethsemane says that 15 minutes have passed, and the fire still has not burned. There is no contradiction. If you do not look specifically at the clock, then the perception of time is very subjective. The fact itself is important.
When skeptics collect "evidence" to question this wonderful property of the Holy Fire, they again reveal scientific and methodological illiteracy. In science, generalizations are made on the basis of firmly established positive facts. The presence of negative facts prompts only to research (as far as possible) the reasons for their appearance.
Disbelief and skepticism are fruitless. “As he who moves away from the light does not harm the light at all, but very much to himself, plunging into darkness, so one who is accustomed to neglecting the Almighty Power does not harm her in the least, but causes himself extreme harm” (John Chrysostom).
Hieromonk Job (Gumerov)
Part 1
