WE ARE THE CHURCH OF THE LAST TIMES | Alexander Dugin

bonestell_web_med

1. The preparation of the last event

No one knows that day, not even the angels in heaven, not what we do. But the signs it too obviously scattered everywhere. It seems that more and wait for no reason, that’s going to come a terrible moment, the last mystery of iniquity will open and it’s all over. And then such a welcome, such a painfully chemy MiG The glory of the Lord… Remember the solemn words of the Psalter: “the King of Glory. Who is this King of Glory?”

But the Creator knows when to be ordained in accuracy, but absolutely and irrevocably.

One thing is clear – it will come soon. Very, very soon. And we can not be passive doze off in anticipation of this important event. In addition, the exceptional now is the time to re-deliver many of the issues afflicting people before. 2 thousand years of waiting, humanity is destined to the second when time will be faced with eternity, and the created world with its uncreated cause, with its “hidden part”. It’s called “the last act of the Holy spirit,” the detection its house building secrets in history.
From all sides and in all forms to us blow the winds of the End of Times, scaring, brigiba to earth, but inspiring and wonderful joy – that’s all resolved, explained, measured, calculated and counted at the last judgment, Who does not make mistakes and can not deviate from the Truth, being completeness.

Anticipation and preparation for such an Event should not be purely passive. Where we found out that in the latter times no more space left for acts and witnessing, questioning, addressed to the skies and approval aimed to the ground? It is very heavy and intimidating, the power of the Prince of this world huge, and our ranks in disarray and small as ever, but it’s not sufficient reason to give up. And our ancestors in the heavy the times, caught in a terrible situation. And how many made the first Orthodox the martyrs and the righteous, and say no! Made, but did not retreat,did not break, did not submit to the will of the oppressive “common sense”.
And we?

2. Three periods of the Church on Earth

Vladimir Lossky rightly noted that every epoch of Christian history is at the center of theological attention on a different aspect of the teachings, discovered and refined by the Holy Spirit nourished in Church discussions. And at least he is right that at this stage in the theological center attention should be “ecclesiology”, the doctrine of spiritual mysterious the content of the earthly ways of the Church of Christ. It would be possible to add that the first plan there are also questions of Christian eschatology, the problems of the Orthodoxlook at the contents of the prophecies of the Apocalypse, meaning the end of the world. But in strictly theological terms, this addition lacks substance, as all Orthodox doctrine is extended eschatology – and the First and Second The coming of our Lord Jesus Christ lie almost close to the point of the end of Times, although the First precedes the Second Coming of the several. For the non-Orthodox consciousness 2 thousand years, not “several”, but for Christian is a different account, a different time. Moreover, the heavenly worlds, where century people still angelic.

Ecclesiology, the doctrine of the Church, like everything else in Christianity is a part eschatology. But in this case it is associated with the Orthodox understanding of history and its most important essential of the parties.

In the Orthodox ecclesiology there are a few key dates located in between periods having a rotating spiritual meaning. To properly to plan our future understanding of ecclesiology, it is necessary to call these the basic point.

The Church began with Pentecost, since the descent of the Holy spirit on the apostles in the form of flames 50 days after Christ’s Light Resurrection and 10 days after his ascension. Then, for the promise of the Savior was sent to the people the Comforter, Paraclete, the Holy Spirit, “avertically cause”, which was approved the Holy of Holies of the Orthodox Church tinogasta. It’s The Birthday Of The Church Of Christ. One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic. Since it is the Holy descent of the Comforter deployment begins “ekklesiologie,” the dispensation of the Holy spirit in history. This is the 33rd yearfrom the birth of Christ.

The first period immediately following Pentecost lasts from the time Apostolic to the Emperor Constantine, before the appearance in the sky of the cross on the front the decisive battle (” Hoc vince”), to the churching of the Roman Empire, to the formation her Orthodox Kingdom. The key date is 313, the year of publication the edict of Milan. In fairness it should be noted that the first Christians belonged to the Empire with a special a sense of awe, a prophetic knowing her latest Church. This is connected with the ancient Christian doctrine of the mission of the descendants of Japheth, who was destined to lay the Foundation of universeKingdom in which will be embodied by the Savior and which will eventually become a repository His Church. She is often called “the doctrine of the four kingdoms”. The first of them Babylon, the second Medo-Persian, Tretiak – Greek (especially power of Alexander the Great), the fourth – the Roman. Hence, a special the significance of Rome in hristianskoi of eschatology. There is, however, another version a similar exercise, where we are talking about the seven “righteous” kingdoms. The fall the last of them should begin “eighth,” unrighteous Kingdom, the Kingdomof the Antichrist. This is the last of the righteous Kingdom is the seventh – originates with Constantine the Great.

From this early Christian ideas about “the last Kingdom” is evident all kolosalnoe the importance of preaching the gospel “languages”, “Greeks”, its eschatological house-building sense. But during the first centuries when the Church existed close to the world, have not accepted the gospel and remained under the burden of other powers, the Christians were in deep conflict with the essence of the surrounding reality and in public, state, and in the natural sense. The Church of the first centuries was the only Churchthe vehicle of salvation in the muddy waves of reality, still an ass “Prince this world.”

This ecclesiologically the first stage was distinguished by special characteristics special ethics message with the world, and especially ontology, a special the approach to the two drastically different realities – the reality of the Christian The Church, on the one hand, and the reality of the pagan Empire.

In the Church was uncreated Presence of the Holy spirit and in the Eucharist and the Jesus Christ the son of God. The reality of the Church was qualitatively associated with uncreated world, withdrawn from under the yoke of the law that separated the created from uncreated before Christ and outside His Church after Christ. And Christians themselves was essentially different (“new”) people involved in special ecclesiologically anthropology – in contrast to the once-born of the Gentiles or of the Jews, they was born twice – the second time “again” through the Holy sacrament of Holy Baptism. It should be particularly emphasized the mystical meaning of the term “new”in the Orthodox doctrine. It is very important for the understanding of such realities as “the new man” (for a Christian), “the New Testament” (in the case of to the gospel), “new hope” (in relation to the Christian faith). The concept the “new” Church in the sense meant not temporary chronological the sequence shift systems or religious forms. “New” in Christianity – the concept is deeply ontological. It describes the particular Church the modus of being, which, unlike the tragic and the irremovable separation of the Creator and the creature in the old Testament, as well as in contrast to the false, derogatoryfor deity proximity between them in paganism, based on the fertile open the way volitional deification of the creature, which was opened by his sacrifice the Son of God. “New” the name of the person in whose fertile universe the seed of communion with the deity. And by “new life,” based on the “New Testament” means a phased the implementation of the “deification”. Outside the Church of Christ dominate other laws and opportunities collectively defined as “old”. It still has the “old” rules, is “the old man” and “old world”. And compared to grace “newlife” in the Church, this inertial “decay”, it is the perseverance in attachment to a graceless reality takes on a particularly sinister meaning. If Christ “decay” was the sad lot of all, after Christ – this is a willful decision that from now on should be assessed in a completely different ethical and the ontological scale of the coordinates. This position is based Orthodox the doctrine of the Antichrist, the figure to which the pull all the threads of microway “dilapidation”. In this sense, the Antichrist is the chief enemy of the “New” witness in the Orthodox Church the salvific sense.

Between the two realities – the ecclesiastical and the secular, “new” and “old” (decay means paganism, especially in its political, Imperial aspect and Judaism in its religious aspects), the second stage ecclesiological there was no intermediate court. They were opposed to each other, coexist without mixing. But perhaps it the doctrine of the coming (relative to the first Christians) the Church of the Kingdom, the millennial The Kingdom, during which Satan is bound and tied up did the juxtaposition of the original Church and Empire is not as sharp.Hence the otherwise inexplicable loyalty of the early Christians to the Imperial laws and the Roman state. Christians refused only from religious heathen Rome, and was uncompromising in this. Not coincidentally, Christians are distinguished valor in the Roman legions for their death was not the end but the crown of martyrdom was considered a priceless gift. God Christians conquered death. Then the gates were opened all the faithful.
Ecclesiologically the second stage began with Constantine the Great. It the edict of Milan and all the follow – up to the founding of the New Rome, Byzantium – was a confirmation of the eschatological predictions regarding “katechon”, “child restraint” under which the early Christians understood the Roman Kingdom and the King himself, Caesar. From this point on between the Church and the world SIM there is a special mediating the reality of the Orthodox Empire based on the Symphony of powers, where political power was in harmony with the main aspiration of the Church dispensation.

Here we come to the key notion of ecclesiology – to the concept of “ontology and anthropology of the Empire”, to their eschatological meaning. In The Orthodox The Kingdom arose a fundamentally new reality than that which existed in the three preceding centuries. Here, the ship of the Church as a reality directly involving uncreated, eternal deity, and the destiny of the “Prince this world”, “devil”, where he continued to act the old laws, tagcount from century to century the mechanisms of the fall, there is an intermediate region, within the limits of which in nature and in society there was some specialthe gracious freedom, the fundamental freedom from the sovereignty of the devil, withdrawal from his power. This intermediate reality and was “catecholam”, “restraint”, the mysterious obstacle that did not allow the son of perdition, the Antichrist approve the fullness of his rule over the whole world.
In the second Epistle to the Thessalonians the Holy Apostle Paul wrote about the “katechon”: “For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he will not be committed until until he be taken out of the environment holding now – and then shall that wicked be revealed” (2, 7-8). “Holding now”, in Greek “katechon” has been interpreted by tradition as an Orthodox Tsar and the Orthodox Kingdom.
The nature of reality, enclosed in borders of the Orthodox Kingdom, was essentially different beyond. This related to both physics and sociology, as a quality of human nature, and natural phenomena. Socially this was expressed in the grace of the Symphony device. Mystically – the ability cataphaticism of theology, i.e. in the possibility via the review God’s creation (but within the Empire!) closer to understanding the Creator. “Katechon” and was promised “tysyacheletiy Kingdom”, during whichand within which Satan’s power was temporarily cut. Although inconclusive (as is clear from the text of the Apocalypse).

A thousand years of this Imperial, “operatorlogo” period of ekklesiologie corresponds exactly to the Byzantine Empire. New Rome was founded as a starting point “millennial Kingdom” and the entire Imperial Byzantine cycle lasted as time approximately a thousand years. Moreover, it is important that during this thousand ecclesiologically years the emphasis has fallen on the preservation of special political and social system, the nature of which was itself an eschatological house-building the Ordinance directly related to distance “the arrival of the Antichrist.””Antichrist” was to follow “the millennial Kingdom”, and not precede him, although in a sense, to Constantine the power of the devil was much more voluminous. Final (or almost final, as we will see below) his coming after the “millennial Kingdom” was supposed to be in some sense “return”. This observation removes the apparent contradiction between the identification with the Antichrist Nero or Caligula from the first Christians and the expectation of his coming in the future.

“Ontology and anthropology of the Empire” are providentially the expansion of the parameters “new life” possible in the eschatological situation, the volume of existence. The “new” together in the Church of the Empire and subject to availability “katechon” becomes a huge existential layer, much perviouse, to what Constantine meant by the Church. The possibility of deification opens all prostranstve of the Kingdom, for all the reasonable and unreasonable beings, inhabiting it. The Liturgy, the “common cause” is getting being, any action,every – even the smallest event. Thus in contrast to the pagan understanding “the Holy Empire”, we are talking about the job, about the possibility of the willful the aspect of the path. The fact of the Ecumenical announcement means that “many are called”. But it does not mean that the “elite” as much. Hence the allocation the active nature of “Imperial anthropology”. Grace, common on the vast expanse is the “planting opportunities”, the impulse to hristianskogo liturgical and social-of the state at the same timeasceticism. This is a special form of sacralization that differs from the Jewish theocratic pessimism about “the Kingdom” and “Hellenic” Platonic optimism about the notorious “divinity” of the Empire. Orthodox Imperial ontology represents an active action universal for implementation of the seeds of grace, which providentially planted all the spaces Empire. The Church of the Empire implies the perfection and completeness sowing. But the question about the seedlings, nurturing them remains open and depends from strong-willed, collective, liturgical activities, from nationwide asceticism.

This second ecclesiologically period, held under the sign of Empire and the Symphony of powers, under the sign of “katechon” itself is heterogeneous. Already almost at the beginning of the unified Roman Empire, its sacred the axis of Constantinople, the chip in the political sense of the West, including and the first Rome. Between the Western and Eastern halves of the Christian world occurs a nonequilibrium ratio. Not only political, but, most important ontological and anthropological. Byzantine ontology is full Imperial, whereas in the West, gradually the other,disharmonious picture in which the intermediate element or of the Imperial blurred, or distorted, or missing. This means that you start to develop such conditions, which differ from the “total deseandote” and state universal liturgical characteristic of genuine Orthodox Kingdom. Begin to appear or to manifest the ontological and anthropological the Islands, which under the Ecumenical grace appear the “old” laws. This can be called the beginnings of “desacralization”, but understood in a purelythe Christian sense. This phenomenon is accompanied by a spray of liturgical unity, the disintegration of the Cathedral, the collective reality of salvation was the norm and the law of the Imperial Orthodox ontology and anthropology.

The preservation of Orthodox unity of the Church, the preservation of the Byzantine Empire status single and indivisible eschatological power partly corrects this situation compensates for the apparent roll of the Christian West in the direction of apostasy, apostasy, beyond the true Faith and the true Christian Orthodoxy. However, certain disturbing features can be seen in the Western Christian ekklesiologie very early. These traits are visible in the strengthening of “individual” motifs in Western theology, but also in the distortion of the saving of proportions between secular power and spiritual dominion. This distortion occurssimultaneously in two directions – on the one hand, the West is introduced about the doctrine of the strict hierarchy of the apostles that leads to the statement of the advantages of a Dad and a kind of theocracy, on the other hand, unqualified increases the power of individual feudal secular princes whose claims the independence and autocracy restores to some extent pagan principles. Changes in religious and secular life in the West simultaneously reflect and aggravate the underlying processes of the “ontological and anthropological mutation”. Gradually in the West develops a special typeof being and a particular type of person – “person”, “claim the autonomy and sovereignty, to weaken or even broken connection with the liturgical element common house-building work. From the Orthodox the doctrine of “personal salvation” that is associated with the volitional nature of the implementation grace, the West goes to the concept of “individual salvation” that puts this problem outside of the overall context of the Council’s “new life”, incarnate in the Christian Realm. In a sense this means a return to the pre-Imperial, demonstartions forms of existence of the Church, but such a return meansin this context, the real “apostasy”, “falling”, a daring neglect providential grace, as expressed in “the millennial Kingdom” of Byzantium.

Being truly Orthodox Byzantium in Yakovych ontological conditions little by little the old Rome comes to private ecclesiologically the wording, which, while remaining outwardly a Christian, sharply departs from the the proportions of the original Orthodox teachings about “katechon,” from a providential eschatologically loaded ratio worldly power and spiritual dominion. Finally it is shown in the great schism (1054), when the Latin there is no authentic Christianity that insists on incorrect administrativethe primacy of the Roman chair above all other Christian bishops of the East and West in the Nicene creed are dubious from a theological point of view changes (Filioque), says the heretical doctrine of “purgatory.” Question about “purgatory” is significant, and is directly connected with our main theme. Little that mention of “purgatory” is not in the fathers, and consequently, the introduction of this category is not supported by the authority of Tradition. It is also important what “purgatory” is in the view of the Latins posthumous reality intermediate between heaven and hell, which serves to make clearminor transgressions of the dead, not worthy of heaven, but not such a sinner to deserve hell. In a sense, “purgatory” – this is a continuation of our earthly world. But the Orthodox are absolutely fair we are convinced that all events of “purgatory” have a place in earthly life, and that delicate area described by the Catholics, under this name, is not other than one of the dimensions of ordinary earthly existence, although associated with the invisible side. In other words, the earthly reality of the Orthodox includes himself in “purgatory” as a dimension of everyday life. Latinshas about this life on earth is much more narrowed, streamlined, “desacralization” view, and on this basis put a thin the measurement in post-mortem spheres. This is a very expressive example the ontological significance “the great schism”. Orthodox and “Catholic” had dealing with different worlds, two realities, differently arranged. “Catholic the world” cut off “chistilishe” measurement of the earth’s existence, diminished quality the composition of the world and man. This lost made in the post-mortem sphere measurement very close to Imperial ontology. Somewhat crudely, we can say,the Catholic idea of mortal life is “Imperial ontology” minus “purgatory.”
Another essential point of the split was a parody attribution Charlemagne himself and the Frankish dynasty of the role of “katechon” to the detriment of Byzantium. It was pure usurpation.

It is necessary to consider the division of churches in the XI century as a division a single organism into two approximately equal halves, and as the falling away from single – and continues to remain so (ie, a unified and complete) – damaged body part, said not just on its equivalence healthy the whole, but about his superiority. In fact, the split was the confirmation of the final apostasy of the West, its falling away from United Christian Church, its transformation into a new religious education, called the (also unqualified) “Catholicism”, i.e. “complete”.This Catholic (i.e. complete) the Church remained solely The Orthodox Church, and it is not surprising that the fourth crusade was taken by the West against the Byzantine Empire. Then the crusaders blasphemous desecrated the greatest Christian shrines and installed on time for the Orthodox East political and religious dictatorship “had fallen into the heresy of the West.”

Revealing the geography of the events that occurred in the second half “Constantinople” ecclesiological cycle. The Western Church is back in some sense, to the first Rome, to the state when the Empire still was not votserkovleniya that have not yet acquired a special saving ontologies, which began with the era of Constantine the Great.

We strongly emphasize the ontological and eschatological sense the falling away of Rome from Orthodoxy because later in the history of the earth Church, anything to do with “Latins” would be sinister and obvious the seal of the Antichrist.
This is manifested clearly in the moment, the final “Byzantine cycle” ekklesiologie, in the tragic fall of Constantinople. 1453 – accurate date of end of millennial Kingdom.
Constantinople taken by the Turks, the Byzantine Empire fell. All the characteristic signs detected by the tragic eschatological fact: “holding” now “is taken from the environment,” roads and the coming of the “son of perdition” opened. And should soon after the signing of the Florentine Union, i.e. after the recognition of the Byzantine Church and the Emperor of the essential rightness “of the Latins”. (Fatal Florentine Union was preceded by Lyon Union, as well as significant spiritual degeneration of the Greeks, which is most often associated with giveinfluences coming from the West; great harm to the Byzantium caused the company direct the occupation of Byzantium by the Latins in the aftermath of the fourth crusade – with this date begins in Byzantium destructive development processes “feudalism”, social-political form alien to the true Orthodox the doctrine and imposed by the Latins. It is possible that the transition to trooperstown the Greeks owe to this “Westernizing”, “papal” trends, although this the question has not yet received final historic decision).

Anyway, ecclesiological and eschatological sense is detected a direct relationship between deviation from the strict teachings of Orthodoxy by Constantinople, and in favor of the reality, which is uniquely bound to the Orthodox with “Antichrist,” and the political fall of the Eastern Roman Empire, with a symbolic the trampling foot of the infidel shrines. Byzantine supporters of Union with Rome refused, in fact, it is from “katechon”, features “Imperial ontology”, and soon “holding”, the Basileus was, indeed,”taken from the environment” together with the political and religious independence huge Orthodox State.

This ends the second ecclesiologically period.

More precisely, almost over. To some its “Orthodox Imperial ontology” moves to the North, passed lost in Eurasian the vastness of the Moscow Kingdom. Here, after the end of Byzantium found all the components of a full-fledged Imperial Orthodox world, removed to time, under the dark laws of reality affected by apostasia. Byzantium falls and retreat, but raised a New Byzantium, the Third Rome. This is a new (and last – “the fourth is not alone”) the phenomenon of “katechon”its most Orthodox sense, as a direct legacy of the “Imperial ecclesiological period.” “Millennial Kingdom” of thought is extended in the Third Rome, where are stored all the fundamental dogmatic the proportions of a Genuine Faith in combination with political independence, Symphony ratio between the spiritual power and secular power. Muscovy – as the fulfillment of prophecies about a special bogoizbrannosti Russian people and the Russian Sovereign, contained in the “sermon on law and grace” MetropoliteHilarion, and received its development in “the tale of the white cowl” times Novgorod Archbishop Gennady of St .. and St. Joseph of Volokolamsk, and finally enshrined in the doctrine of the Pskov elder Philotheus of “Moscow-the Third Rome” – fully takes on eschatological and ecclesiologically the mission of Byzantium. Russia becomes a Saint in the truest sense, ie with the sole reality that extends to the outdoors, and society, and the ontology, and anthropology. The God-chosen Russian people as people of the Third Rome lies in the basis of special national and religiousanthropology, never expressed in a clear formula, but felt by all. Many of the provisions of this doctrine of “Moscow the ontology” indirectly contains in paragraphs Stoglavy Cathedral, which recognized his authority Moscow ecclesiologically period of Orthodoxy.

It is important to note that the new role of Moscow and the Russian Church not been canceled the values of the Patriarch of Constantinople in purely religious matters, but in “eschatology” and “Imperial ontology” (and this could not affect and Church Affairs) the Greek Patriarch clearly lost its critical justified earlier, all the weight of the homebuilding mission of Byzantium to Dodge themselves garkov and the victory of the Turks.
“A thousand years” the second ecclesiological period – Imperial period – had thus providentially increment in a two hundred year period Holy Russia (1453 – 1656).
The way the Latins have long shied away from Orthodoxy and to speak about “Imperial ontology” here was pointless (although we note that this “kategoricheski” aspect was the basis of gabalinskoi Shtaufeniv opposition to the omnipotence of the papacy and gulfsol party).

The late Moscow period means the merciful end of the add period to the eschatological Millennium. At this point you have Russian split the meaning of which was strastoterpets the testimony of the believers the catastrophic nature of the reforms, starting with the Nikon right up to the terrible the finale in the Cathedral 1666-67, where the official Church formally anathematized the eschatological doctrine of Moscow the Third Rome: the house-building of God’s chosen people The Moscow Kingdom, leveled items Stoglav with the ashes. The Eastern patriarchs, authorizing and encouraging such innovations may have guided the specifics of their own ecclesiological position. Informed linking “Imperial ontology” exclusively with the Second Rome and lost it along with military-political the collapse of Constantinople, the Greeks suffered its own catastrophic already post-Imperial, postcategoryicon experience and the Russia, having rejected even the possibility that there could be fully maintained the conditions that previously existed in the Byzantine Empire. Hence an arrogant contempt for the the Russian rite, which, as today proved impartial historians of this issue was fully and perfectly undistorted continuation the Byzantine Orthodox tradition, solidified, however, we have that the moment when Constantinople went into a treacherous Union, and later fell. Russian rite, anathematized the reformers the fatal Cathedral 1966-67, was the archaic form of the Byzantine rite and nothing else (this was the basis of its ancient Charter of the Studite monastery, the most common in the Byzantine Empire, with some additions of the Charter of Jerusalem, while the Greek Churchby the seventeenth century, the Charter of Jerusalem, completely supplanted the Studite). And old believers belief in his superiority over the modern Greek form was justified eschatological doctrine of “katechon”, and the spiritual deterioration of tradition, lost their “chiliastic” quality.
The passionate reaction of conservatives to the reform, up to the most radical forms (Gary), was driven by a deep and natural sense of complicity all the Russian people and the Russian Church in the second ecclesiological the period of Orthodoxy and penetrating awareness of the ontological and anthropological consequences of refusal full missions of Russia “holding”. Here it is a fair expectation of the coming of Antichrist.

Now around the world (except for the mysterious “Kamiccolo Belovodsk Kingdom”, not existing on the map where, in the opinion of believers, even authentic aparcana hierarchy, i.e. “Imperial ontology”) to make the transition to the new ecclesiological period – the third. Church here again, almost as in the days of the early Christians, turned out to be graceless the world subjected to lead-foot “the Prince of this world”. Intermediate reality Imperial chiliasm disappeared. Between the Church and the world is once again opened up the abyss.

It is important to note, however, that in addition to the similarities between pre-Imperial and polimernoi The Church has significant differences. In the first case, the Roman Kingdom has not yet become Orthodox, have not yet adopted the mission of “holding”. In the second the case of the Kingdom was no longer complete, has not played this role. Between “still” and “already” is the line of the ontological fault. When something not subjected to the transforming influence, but he was destined to be he is one thing. Here internally I behold the righteous path, even though external can be sinful. It is – “not yet”. “Not” means that the positiveand righteous has ceased to be essentially what it remains to them only outwardly, and the content is permanently damaged. The facade remains Holy, inside also piled apostasia. “If the salt will go bad”…

Ecclesiologically third period puts the problem of the relation of the Church and the world in a new light, and that there is no adequate analogy in the preceding era. And here we are faced with incredibly loaded with spiritual content the question – whether in this period the Church itself, which in certain aspects be terrible Laodicean sentence, “is not”, “remember from where you have fallen” – whether it is large-scale, unified and unanimously ecclesiologically to give a General picture of this began a terrible cycle definitely to put in the accents, to fairly evaluate the positions of allforces and trends that continue to call yourself Christian? And what is will obosnovannosti as a support of the transformed element. From now on, “new life” is not the norm, but the exception, preobrajenski peace in the Holy The Kingdom is minimized, as burning skies Apocalypse and becomes the property of the individual fragmented parts. This is based on numerous legends early old believers, that “somewhere there are still places where swisstool intact the true Orthodox hierarchy.” This “somewhere” has colossally the ontological sense. Authentic Imperial reality of everyday realitygoes into the region of myths and legends, it becomes difficult, exceptional, category Givens goes to the quality of the job. Now is not the rescue itself and “deification”, “Holiness” becomes a “job” but more background such opportunities have become themselves problematic. And the tragic and catastrophic understanding of irreversibility and apocalyptic load this event – the deeper and longer the faith, a clearer understanding ecclesiologically perspective of the Church, the fuller and truer theological impulse.

3. Civilization of the Antichrist

The problem of the world which begins outside the Church, and the second ecclesiologically period beyond the Orthodox Kingdom, and is strictly speaking “problem of the Antichrist.” The Antichrist is on the opposite pole from the Church of the dispensation unfolding between points the first and Second Comings of our Lord. Consequently, the world takes here a special quality. “This world”, actively marinavi the Good News and saving Truth becomes strictly negative category. He’s not just not yet churching, i.e. as if unaware of the Good News,he’s already anti-Catholic. So he interfaced directly with the Antichrist, and the devil is called the “Prince of this world”.

The Antichrist provokes persecution of the first Christians. He encouraged heretics to break away from the Church. It’s right behind the defection of the West (Latins) from Orthodoxy. He cites Constantinople to crash. He contributes to Russian disaster 1666-67 years. Further, it reigns everywhere, and in those areas which were previously reclaimed by the Church from the world. The Antichrist is the one being a single action that should finally crystallize into a human personality in the last moment of history. But this personality will be no more than a signature that binds a print to a centuries-old actions.

This “action” has three different forms depending on the three ecclesiologically stages.

In the first case the members of the Church prevents the Antichrist Empire, ie the extension transformed the Christian soteriological ontology and anthropology at the universal social and geographical space. During this period, when the Church needs to move to a new chiliastic conditions of existence, any obstacles along the way – and from the outside and from the Christian (directly or indirectly anti-Imperial) sects clearly bear the mark “Duke this world.”

Later, the Antichrist is compressed, it loses its control over large expanses of being (internal and external). His action forced to split up and crushed. His power restrained by the bridle of the Fishery. This is the period of domination “Imperial ontology”.

Now the second phase actions of the Antichrist to oppose her the destruction of “katechon” as obstacles to his ultimate reign.

We can say that aktivizatsiya (later anti -) line this stage produces the most aggressive aspects of the “son of perdition” in it may occur – in theology, politics, life, culture, and mysticism etc.

Finally, the third phase of the reign of the Antichrist, the corresponding third ecclesiologically period, marked by the unification of its forces, consolidation the spaces and realities that he controlled. The Antichrist now begins to build their civilization, negative, “subversive” nature of which gradually increasingly obscured, and the destruction begins to be given for the “creation”, lawlessness – “the law”, sin for virtue, etc.

The peak of the construction of the “civilization of the Antichrist” must come in the moment of his final volovicheva when all the preparatory work to be completed.
From this we can draw an important conclusion: ecclesiology directly associated with the theme of “the Antichrist”, since this question is Central for the Church is to identify its features, to understand the logic and mechanisms of action “the son of perdition”, to show true to its distinctive features, to identify the main directions and methods of struggle with him, so dependent on nature or that ecclesiological cycle that is most urgent theological task.

Indicative in this respect is the statement of one old believer, a representative of extreme priestless old consent “strangers” (successor of the famous a “runner” Antipas Yakovlev): “Hear, brethren, that these flatterers saith, thou need to know about the Antichrist. Yes, we have all the faith in the Antichrist is”. In a sense, this limiting wording in the mouths of the vulgar believer, from the point of view of the third ecclesiological period is more consistent theological truth than a soothing complex of building officialthe Saint Petersburg theology. The most important thing here is perfectly justifiable the belief that in extreme historical conditions depending on determine the quality of the Antichrist, the limits of its influence, shape and intensity his actions, based on its identification of all other dogmas Faith, theological, ethical, ritual and social norms will be to have a completely different meaning, as a formal approach, adequate in the previous era, now no longer applicable, and even for full the prerequisites of salvation, you need the finest “discernment of spirits”, without whicheven the most outwardly pious and dogmatically justified Christian the path will be false. If the “mystery of iniquity” was accomplished, and “holding now” is taken from the environment, nothing prevents sitting “son of perdition” in the Church, and this in turn requires true Christians this vigilance and this severity, who had previously been not only need, but frankly harmful.
Therefore, the question of the “Antichrist” is for Christians first and foremost.

4. Heaven against Earth

There is some reason to anticipate a speedy end of the third ecclesiological period. It is impossible not to admit that all the plans of the Antichrist true on the eyes, and the path to its final realization all the more and more cleared. With it not only a full “restraint” in the form Orthodox Kingdom “is now taken from the environment”, but all the other partial barriers to short-term, but a terrible celebration of the “son of perdition” fall.

Most likely the story of the Church on earth is nearing completion.
We know that “the gates of hell will not prevail against the Church” and that the sacrament of the Eucharist will continue until the end of time, despite the “abomination of desolation”, which is subjected to (exposed to) the Church in apocalyptic times. The secret essence of the Church is not subject to the power of the “Prince of this world”, it is always transformed and directly relate to the uncreated reality of the Holy Trinity. But this secret essence is the Church of Heaven, coupled with the earthly Church, but not identical to it. Heavenly Church – the redeemed always and always all-conquering, regardless of the state of the Earthly Church, which belongsa historic slice of ekklesiologie. The Church in Heaven is permanent. The earthly Church varies from rotations providential sacred history becoming in a position in relation to the external (world) and domestic (the Heavenly Church). And at the end of the third “postilaatikko” the period in which we are, Earthly Church is in a very complex, contradictory and ambiguous situation.

On the one hand, deeper into it as the actions of the Antichrist, all more drops it in its human and organizational context. Placement in the Holy of Holies of wickedness in the last days as predicted in the Holy Scripture. This decline of the worldly Church the Orthodox tradition calls the collective the term “Church of Laodicea”, “the Church is not cold and not hot”. In The Laodicean Church in the end time is reached the highest stage of alienation the earthly from the heavenly, earthly, and gradually begins to enter into an open conflict with heaven. This is most clearly seen in marginal degenerationthe Latin Church and Protestant denominations, where genuine Christianity almost nothing at all left. Step by step absorb the Western denominations in itself, openly anti-Christian currents imposed on the elements of apocalyptic world. But “Laodicea” are not only “the Church” of the West have done a huge and shameful way on the path of treachery and perversion. Already at the logic ecclesiologically stages we have identified above, it is clear that Orthodox could not avoid, although in different form and in a lesser extent, a similar negativethe phenomena expected by the vector of ecclesiastical history. The first decisive a step to the side of the Antichrist was made by the Greek Church in the time of the final the conclusion of the Union of Florence. In this and only in this sense we must understand and consequences of book of right and the act of the Cathedral 1666-67 years (despite deeply Patriotic and Orthodox-Messianic goal which the Patriarch Nikon initially subjectively set for ourselves). The Petrine reforms and the Synodal kazanlykskoj Stroy Romanovsky period also had little to do with true Christianity, with the Orthodox Symphony and “restraint”.Although gradually the original purely negative “novobratcevo” and overcome most people’s element (it was not destroyed until the end of monasticism don’t end up exhausted Hesychasm, returned to the Russian Church anathematized Russian eight-pointed cross, was established, although for pragmatic purposes, edinovercheskoe, etc.), yet from the authentic Holy Byzantium and Moscow Rus in St. Petersburg-Romanov Russia remained only fragments and individual fragments. Are unable to overcome the “Laodicean spirit” the Russian Orthodox Church and in 1917, when the Patriarchate was restored and madeserious steps to apocalyptic revival of Russian Orthodoxy before face of the monstrous turmoil that has engulfed Russia and the whole world (especially important now re-experience those adherents of the Orthodox Renaissance, which advocated at this time for the radical overcoming of the consequences of a split and “Romanowsky” – the Patriarch Tikhon, Metropolitan. Antony (Khrapovitsky), Bishop. Andrew (Ukhtomsky)

Highly symbolic events were closely adjacent in time to the restoration of the Patriarchate – the transfer of the capital from St. Petersburg to Moscow and the miraculous finding of the icon “sovereign” in the sense ecclesiologically was identical to the establishment in Russia eschatological forms of the monarchy, which came in place of the fallen House of Romanov: the blessed virgin Mary became the Queen Russia.

It is also important to note that the first refutation of the fatal Cathedral 1666-67 years preparing on the eve of the restoration of the Patriarchate in 1917. Even more symbolic that the Metropolitan. Sergiy (Stargorodsky), known for its extreme loyalty to the Soviet government, “the Act of the bishops” from 1929 year on behalf of himself as the “Deputy Locum Tenens of the Patriarchal the throne” (as the highest spiritual authority in Russia at that time) and on behalf of other legitimate bishops, metropolitans and bishops of the Moscow Patriarchate, officially rejected the decision of the ill-fated “the robber Council” has comeon the fatal date, and “counted as not the former”. It is significant that this “Act”, dared exactly Pro-Soviet hierarchs, and finally it was confirmed already in 1971, when Patriarch Pimen, also quite loyal to the Soviet Government. All this indicates that it is in the “polaromonas”, “poslepechatnogo”, again “Moscow” Russia Mature spiritual eschatological tendencies to to overcome the apocalyptic catastrophes of the seventeenth century.
But divine Providence was pleased to overcome the “Laodicean beginning” in the Russian Orthodox Church was not committed to the end. Moreover, the historical the situation in the Bolshevik Russia was for believers is extremely difficult. In the beginning our century is the true theological consciousness in Russia is trying to Wake up seeks again to give unbiased, drawn from the depths of Church dogma and the tradition of response to pressing issues, wants to formulate a clear position The Church in the new historical period, marked by a clear seal of the Antichrist,but … it stops mid-sentence, the last formula does not work, high dedication the desire does not reach the required threshold.

And again for several decades questioning is replaced by hasty, didactic and unconvincing, a vague answer is theological thoughts everywhere dominate considerations of a strictly moral or ritual character, the Church refuses to clearly define his attitude to the world, to make a clear assessment to the process of apostasy which identify certain the modern reality with the “Antichrist.” You can’t blame the Church, persecuted and pursued formally atheistic, anti-religious, brutal power. We are just stating this fact. But it is impossible not to recognize that typicalthe Laodicean attitude with which the congregation takes a hesitant, cautious the position of their pastors. In a different situation things would be different.
Whatever it was, and in the bosom of today’s official Orthodoxy only in feeling, but not dogmatically it could be that harmonious solidarity and the relationship between the Heavenly Church and Earthly Church, which took place up to a certain historical moment of the greatest apocalyptic values.

We have been under the rule of the Antichrist and his servants. And from spirit no one free and no one is clean, except for the righteous and of the saints (secret or explicit).

5. “And unto the angel of the Church of Philadelphia write”

It is clear that to avoid a terrible ordained by God the ultimate interchange the history of the world impossible (and why?). The second Coming and preceding catastrophe as irrevocable as the facts of the past. In a sense, all it was already done, because in eternity all things and all events are present at the same time, and only in time follow each other sequentially. Of course, the Antichrist of the modern world denies the eternity. He can’t to do otherwise, because in this case the ephemeral moment of his triumph will only be chimerical brief episode, while he himself wished to stretch histime and everything is subject to his time, for an indefinitely long time. After for the Antichrist curve of the lips at the word “eternity” ordinary people for whom this is at best an abstraction and at worst nonsense.
But we are ready for the Second Coming, we know and happily accept it. In the end, for a Christian is the greatest joy – grief of separation peace with the Creator ends, the end being transformed, the dead are raised, time disappears, and with it disappears and death.

And in the face of this long-awaited moment we can establish a kind of “Manifesto to the Church of Philadelphia”, i.e. ecclesiologically reality owned awake and already foresaw the end to the wandering of the Church graceless postelections the desert.
What is the ideal structure of the Philadelphia Church?

First, it is clear that such a Church is only and exclusively Orthodox. We cannot and must not judge and condemn individuals of the Catholic and even the Protestant religion, which personal zeal and steadfastness in the ways of Christ could acquire salvation. “The spirit blows where it wishes,” and the Lord your account. But this assumption in no way the measure does not reduce the depth of the apostasy of Latin, which was the more criminal that occurred in the period when along with the unnatural conditions of the West blossomed Imperial Byzantium and firmly stood millennialOrthodox Kingdom, genuine restraint (in comparison with which even gablinske projects were only distorted approach based on voluntarism and usurpation, not to mention absolutely neempiricheskoe, heretical positions The Roman Curia). So, a direct connection of the Church of the Heavenly with the Earthly Church was available for in the most perfect and harmonious way in the Byzantine Orthodoxy. Going from this position, you should clarify the background of the fourth ecclesiological period features and limits of the Philadelphia Church, remaining faithful to the spiritand the letter of Faith in Christ in spite of the hardest times of trial.

Secondly, a major element of the economy of salvation in history is Moscow Kingdom in 1453 1656. Despite the turmoil and the strife, although on the most complicated political and moral trials that fell in this the era of the Russians, this period is a unique time a pause, within which continued tion of the transition from the second Imperial period to the third, graceless, was characteristic of the Russian old believers movement, rebellious spiritual disaster and refused to bowbefore the inevitable rock. Conservatives were (and are) heroes ecclesiological Resistance, the last faithful of Holy Russia, defenders of the “Imperial ontology”, you do not have to compromise with the spirit of this world under what specious pretexts did not pass. Believers are not conservatives and archaic, not supporters “of the past at any price” and not all opponents of change, as they are often incorrectly portrayed. The meaning and essence of the Russian schism was that part of the Orthodox rebelled against antichristos contentreforms, and they all recognized the catastrophic situation of the the beginning of the book right, long before passed the cursed Cathedral 1966-67 years, long before Peter I, zaharkovo in one fell swoop, Russia, Moscow, The Patriarchate, “katechon” genuine Orthodoxy. Hence, the issues Russian old believers have in our priority, and all this complex topic needs to be placed in the center of attention.

These three positions can not be questioned. Everything else is more problematic. But still try to make some suggestions.

The division of believers into several divergent persuasions and consents can not talk about that in this camp there is definitely true, very close to the truth ecclesiologically theory, straightening in which the other positions we could come to reality The Philadelphian Church. Private views on the underlying theological issues opposed a consent to each other and in the heart of old believers camp, and later they were fixed, becoming a non the development or revision of dogmas. This is an extremely important point becausefrom this it follows that the correctness of the eschatological positions of conservatives does not mean even their direct identity of the Philadelphia Church. The plurality rumors and consents explicitly speaks against this assertion, as the Church One. And if so, then you should turn to other branches of Russian Orthodoxy.

In the Romanov period was a process of constant unspoken return of the Russian Orthodoxy to the pre-Petrine times, but it was the way revolutionary (as the old believers), and evolutionary, owes its existence, first turn archaic County small and medium-sized clergy and the many ordinary Russian Christians. In a sense, the sitting of the Antichrist in the Church to the end never happened, despite the fact that in some periods of the reign Peter had the impression that this is happening. And yetsome higher reasons, the final chord was pending, although the forces of the Antichrist increased tenfold.

Let price compromise and opportunism, but Russian Orthodoxy maintaining its unity, the legitimacy of hierarchy, Eucharistic continuity loyalty to the basic norms of patristic tradition. The St. Petersburg stage was characterized by a certain dichotomy of the official Church – in the lower she gravitated to the provisions of the Old Faith, i.e. Orthodoxy in its most pure form. At the top it was focused on Westernizing installation and norms of official theology repeated Catholic-Protestant doctrine, the General spirit was quite the apostate.

It is also important that Russia has maintained political independence, and Christianity remained the state religion. This adds to the whole situation of ambiguity, which there is, for example, in Byzantium, the lost politically from after it is finished religious apostasy. And not by accident never ceased in the Orthodox Russia movement, called for the restoration of Of the Patriarchate (line Dashkova), i.e. for a return to pre-Petrine structure of the Church. There have been numerous attempts to establish “edinovercheskoe”, i.e.merge “nikonian” and the old believers in one Church (about the sincerity of such of attempts we will not argue). Quite typical was the Russian clergy and a furious anti-Western, anti-Catholic motives, who claimed to be inertial rooted in Byzantium and the second ecclesiological period. We can say, as in the Russian Orthodox Church had a deep craving for “Philadelphia formation”, understanding the need to give new theological ecclesiologically the answer greatly increasing the power of Antichrist to its penetration deeper into social and natural reality. On a secular level and in a ratherthe approximate shape similar sentiments were common among the Slavophiles and their followers (Dostoevsky, Leontiev, Danilevsky, some directions the populists and the socialists-revolutionaries, and later Eurasians and national Bolsheviks).

The next thing, even more sections of the Russian Orthodox was the October Revolution. This regime was completely abolished and demolished everything what is at least nominally still in Russia from “Byzantium” and Holy Russia. He did overthrow the monarchy and put the Church virtually outside the law. But here again was manifested a complicated and often beyond the modest human mind the providential idea of the Bolsheviks on a secular level and under deep alien to the people slogans in an extreme form installed deep anti-Western system, and the contradiction of the Eastern Roman Empire and the West broke out with renewedforce in the confrontation of socialism and capitalism. On the one hand, the Bolsheviks was even worse than the Romanovs, thus, atheism, mechanism, materialism and Darwinism spaced much farther from the truth than let truncated, but Orthodoxy. On the other hand, through the Bolsheviks acted strange force, surprisingly resembling in some of its aspects the reign of Ivan the terrible, the oprichnina, strange, the return to archaic popular-religious elements. Not by chance in the first stage of the Bolsheviks (and other revolutionaries) quite activelysupported by some leaders of the old believers (particularly netovskih mentor Dorotheus Utkin, the famous merchant Savva Morozov believer, etc.) and part Orthodox (indicative of the relative loyalty to the Advice of not only “Renovationists” that significantly depart from the norms of Orthodoxy, but such “Starocherkassk” as the EP. Andrew (Ukhtomsky) and the movement “Christian socialists”). In addition, perhaps you should consider in a new light the so-called “Sergianist” line of the Moscow Patriarchate. From a certain point of view “Patriotic” and “Pro-Soviet” position of Metropolitan Sergius (Stargorodsky)and the other patriarchs of the Soviet period is not so different from the choice made by the supporters of Nikon and especially by the Russian hierarchs, who took resolution of the Council of 1666-67. Remember the words of Patriarch Joachim in the answer to the query of the king about his “faith”: “AZ de sovereign does not know of any Starya or new, but told the boss, and ready to do and listen to them in everything.” Can the heirs of the traditions of such spiritual conformity to condemn actions in such a complex and paradoxical situation of Metropolitan Sergius?!
Anyway, after the defeat of the whites in the Russian Church again showed up the duality of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad (“Karlovci”) recognized the Bolsheviks, “the coming of the Antichrist”, and on this basis equated the position of the Moscow Patriarchate (and somewhat Metropolitan. Eulogia) into apostasy. Hence the derogatory term “Sergianism”. But this Church has preserved faithfulness that is the Synod-the Petersburg way of life, remained in the theological and socio-political framework of the Romanov period, despite the fact that personally met. Anthony (Khrapovitsky), still being in Russia was a supporter of”the spiritual overcoming the split” extremely critical “Romanovna”

The Moscow Patriarchate, in turn, remained loyal to the Soviet power. We have already mentioned the symbolic traits associated with Bolshevism – the transfer of the capital to Moscow in 1917, the restoration of the Patriarchate in Russia, finding the “Sovereign”, the “Acts” of 1929, etc. If any signs pointed on challenging and exceeding my mind, the plan of the Lord about the Church and humanity.
Whatever it was, “[the ROCA]”, which, by the way, being in an extremely difficult situation, remember about the importance of the role of “katechon” ( this is linked to the canonization of Nicholas II), and “Sergianism” was its ecclesiologically truth. so, here you can find “Fi to not through the eyes of “progressive of mankind”, which is obvious for the Orthodox, the throng obedient and voluntary, arrogant and aggressive “servants of the Antichrist.” And from the standpoint of Romanov’s way of final judgment to make it is not necessary, if you remember on what Foundation rested himself this way. So here we go forthe face of unambiguous evaluations. It is only important that [the ROCA], and perhaps with even larger base of “Sergianism” was its providential truth to be Philadelphia approval.

To summarize: the Church of Philadelphia is designed to give the latest and decisive battle the Antichrist, has the following ecclesiologically characteristics.

1. She is Orthodox and recognizes the identity of the Byzantine Empire “Millennium the Kingdom.”

2. She insists on apostasy of the West (especially after the schism), and is convinced that the Western world first came under the rule of the “son of perdition”.

3. She regarded Muscovy as the extension of Byzantium on some time with all the ensuing ecclesiologically (and ontological) consequences.

4. She was aware of the tragedy and the permanence of the Russian division, taking old believers ‘ understanding of the theological and eschatological significance of this phenomenon.

5. All three major current trends in today’s Russian The Orthodox Church – old believers, members of the ROC and “[the ROCA]” – she considers inadequate separately, but bearing in itself some aspects ecclesiologically the truth.

Conservatives the true rating of a split. The ROC is the existence of the Russian Of the Patriarchate, a hierarchical completeness and national solidarity with the fate of the The Russian State at any cost. “[The ROCA]” – emphasis on the eschatological the role of the monarchy as “katechon”.

6. These three important elements of Truth, scattered at different currents Russian Orthodoxy, and some aspects of the Greek Church, especially associated with the monastic clever doing, and Hesychasm mount Athos and other Orthodox Churches (Serbian, Bulgarian, Romanian, Moldavian, Macedonian, etc.) are theoretical and theological ecclesiologically limits, which may be held by the Philadelphia revival directly before the End point date where you know no one can but wait and passionately to desire which is our religious duty.

 

The Message to Philadelphia

“And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write:

These are the words of the holy one, the true one,
    who has the key of David,
    who opens and no one will shut,
        who shuts and no one opens:

“I know your works. Look, I have set before you an open door, which no one is able to shut. I know that you have but little power, and yet you have kept my word and have not denied my name. I will make those of the synagogue of Satan who say that they are Jews and are not, but are lying—I will make them come and bow down before your feet, and they will learn that I have loved you. 10 Because you have kept my word of patient endurance, I will keep you from the hour of trial that is coming on the whole world to test the inhabitants of the earth. 11 I am coming soon; hold fast to what you have, so that no one may seize your crown. 12 If you conquer, I will make you a pillar in the temple of my God; you will never go out of it. I will write on you the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem that comes down from my God out of heaven, and my own new name. 13 Let anyone who has an ear listen to what the Spirit is saying to the churches.

6. Judgment

There are many reasons why the “Philadelphia plan” apocalyptic the restoration of Church Unity, understood solely in the Orthodox sense, may seem utopian. The Church today like never before far away not only from enterprises, but is constantly under the threat of further fragmentation and progressive collapse. Dark heresy liberal reforms, blatant aggression of the West antichrist fall on this ship of Salvation with a new unprecedented power. It seems that would be enough forces to preserve what is left, where there is dreaming of Rebirth…

But it is a too human approach. It gives the coolness of faith.

Need only to think seriously about the fiery reality of the last judgment, about the yawning mouth of hell and a dizzying flash of Light, the glory of the Lord, once understood, to what order and what values we inexorably nigh as irresistible seem unimportant, impossible turn easy to enforce, solid becomes pliable and transparent.

The face of the Second Coming has no constant values or irrevocable evidences. Everything trembles and melts like a thin, consumed otherworldly flame scroll.
The inevitability is not. There is a possibility.

The rest depends on those who kept no matter what loyalty The true Church and the True Kingdom, the Last Kingdom unassailable, indestructible Holy Russia, alarming bells calling out from the depths of our soul. Russian Soul. The Soul Of The World.

Advertisements

Stauffenberg was Right!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s