Cuvânt înainte

Ediția de față urmărește textul manuscrisului românesc “În care se cuprind: Minunile, vedeniile şi cuvintele Preacuviosului părintelui nostru Nil Izvorâtorul de Mir Cavsocalivitul Din Sfântul Munte Athos, Prescrisă la anul 1916, în Colciu, Chilia Sfântului Gheorghe”. Manuscrisul este, la rândul său, o transliterare a unei versiuni mai vechi, în alfabet chirilic, din a doua jumatate a secolului XIX, aflată odinioară în biblioteca Schitului Românesc Prodromu, pe care am avut ocazia să o consultăm la Colciu.

Puteți așadar nota că originalele textelor de referință și-au schimbat sălașul între ele: manuscrisul aflat astăzi la Prodromu este cel originar din Colciu, în vreme ce versiunea prodromită se află în biblioteca Chiliei Sf. Gheorghe.

O verificare suplimentară a acestor traduceri românești este și dactilograma din “Anul Mântuirei 1935, Martie în 29 de zile, Orthodoxul Calendar”, “care s-au prescris în Sf. Skit Pustnicesc al Sfăntului Marelui Vasilie, din acest Sf. Munte al Athonului”, de către monahul Arsenie Cottea.

Despre viața Sfântului Nil Athonitul, Izvorâtorul de mir, prăznuit de Ortodoxie la 12 noiembrie, aflăm puține lucruri din sinaxar. Dacă manuscrisele aghiorite ale Profețiilor spun că sfântul a trăit între anii 1612 și 1692, mineele de astăzi arată că el s-a săvârşit către Domnul în anul 1651.

Acest Sfânt Nil s-a născut în Grecia, într-un sat numit dupa Sfântul Petru, din dioceza Zakoneia. A fost crescut de unchiul său, ieromonahul Macarie. La vârsta bărbăției, a fost tuns în monahism și apoi a ajuns, la rândul său, preot.

Căutând lupta cea bună, cei doi au mers la Sfântul Munte Athos, şi acolo s-au așezat pustnicește la un loc ce se numea „Pietrele Sfinte”. După plecarea la Domnul a unchiului sau, Sfântul Nil s-a nevoit până la capătul zilelor lui într-o peșteră a muntelui. Din sfintele lui moaşte a izvorât şuvoi de mir, care curgea din vârful acelui munte şi se vărsa în mare. Această minune nemaivăzută a adus la acel loc oameni greu bolnavi de pretutindeni. Mulţimea lor a tulburat liniştea unuia dintre ucenicii Sfântului Nil, iar rugându-se acesta Sfântului, mirul a încetat pe dată să mai curgă.

Dezvăluirile făcute de Sfântul Nil monahului aghiorit Teofan au însoțit vremea descoperirii sfintelor sale moaște din anul 1815, prăznuită la 7 mai. Pentru câțiva ani înainte și după această întâmplare minunată, monahii athoniți au avut parte de o părtășie extraordinară cu Sfântul Nil, ca de o călăuză duhovnicească între veacurile marilor căderi și încercări din Sfântul Munte Athos.

Există un rost lămurit al acestor arătări a Sfântului Nil, care încerca astfel să întărească pe “cel ce înțelege” pentru urgiile care urmau să se abată asupra obștei: profețiile sale sunt un îndreptar esențial pentru monahul aghiorit. Deși cuvintele taioase ale Sf. Nil au fost mai degrabă nepopulare pentru unii stareți (“îndumnezeiții în barbă“, despre care știm că au ridicat “război către Sfântul Nil, că numele Sfântului nu vrea să-l audă”), această carte a circulat în manuscris preț de două sute de ani, iar unele profeții sunt astăzi cunoscute de toți athoniții. Un exemplu este pasajul referitor la sfârșitul vieții monahale din Sfântul Munte, pus în relație cu icoana Maicii Domnului “Portărița”, din mânăstirea Ivirului:

O, Preacuvioşilor părinţi! Întâi are să se clătească mănăstirea unde se află icoana puţină vreme. Şi aceasta însemnează că o să simţească nesimţirea, că o să plece păzitoarea ei, care a păzit-o până acum.

(…) Şi Athonul o să troznească înfricoşat şi o să scoată sunet subţire. Şi cînd o să iasă icoana Stăpânei noastre Născătoarei de Dumnezeu, o să se facă semn înfricoşat şi încutremurat, că o să se întoarcă toate bisericile din munte spre petrecerea Împărătesei, întru plecarea mântuirii. (…)

Aceasta să se ştie: că în câtă vreme se află icoana Maicii Domnului în muntele acesta, să nu îndrăznească cineva să fugă de aici din munte, pentru că celor ce vor fugi o să le vină osânda sufletească şi trupească. Iar de va fugi icoana Maicii lui Dumnezeu din muntele acesta, atunci vă duceţi şi voi oriunde veţi voi, numai făgăduinţele să le păziţi orişiunde vă veţi afla.

Cum poate fi pregătit cititorul de azi pentru întâlnirea cu Profețiile sfântului Nil Athonitul? Există oare o rețetă care să ofere cititorului din mileniul al treilea după Hristos o legătură cu lumea în care aceste scrieri aveau rostul lor deplin? Poate că una din condițiile necesare este ca cititorul să fie dreptcredincios. Asta fiindcă efortul de acomodare pe care un străin ar trebui să îl facă pentru a înjgheba o punte către lumea Sfântului Munte din veacul al XIX-lea ar secătui probabil înțelegerea întâlnirii propriu-zise cu monahii acelui veac și încercările lor. Din păcate, nici ortodocșii zilelor noastre nu sunt lipsiți de această sleire a priceperii: recursul la trecutul patristic și Tradiție este adesea formal, ca și cum singura valoare a acestei relații este asigurarea unei genealogii glorioase. Un autor contemporan, Arthur Williamson (Apocalypse then: prophecy and the making of the modern world, Praeger 2008) descrie acest fenomen, în Apus, într-o singură frază: “Căutarea unui pedigree confesional și a legitimității doctrinare a șters pur și simplu percepția complexității generațiilor de odinioară și a sărăcit capacitatea noastră de a înțelege dinamica și resorturile vremurilor de atunci.” Nu e mai puțin adevărat că există un duh de risipire al teologiei de azi care invită la o imersiune completă într-un nor de arabescuri și detalii care ocultează la fel de bine rostul mântuitor al Bisericii și moștenirea Sa de sânge.

Această stare de îndepărtare de noima rădăcinilor duhovnicești, interpretată drept răcire, lenevie, împietrire, apostazie, perplexitate, mândrie sau ignoranță, poate trece drept un semn al vremurilor. Într-o spirală a căderii duhovnicești, neputința de a înțelege semnele este un semn în sine. Sf. Nil descrie această cheie soteriologică astfel: “pentru aceea zic că nesimţirea o să simţească, dar înţelegerea o să se întunece şi nu o să cunoască că se duce mântuirea din întunecarea celor pământeşti.”

Deși poate trece drept o piesă de senzație pentru colecționarii de interpretări si avertismente în registre apocaliptice, cartea de față nu reprezintă mărturia athonită a vreunei numărători inverse marcate de accidente nucleare, conspirații bancaro-corporatiste, asteroizi și politici dictatoriale. Pentru monahul athonit de astăzi și de acum două sute de ani, semnele sfârșitului nu se citesc numai în zvărcolirea patimilor lumii, ci mai cu seamă în încercările din obștea din Grădina Maicii Domnului.

Dimpreună cu monahul aghiorit Teofan, primim în Profețiile sfântului Nil Athonitul o mărturie frățească despre pericolele din calea spre mântuire. O certare pentru neghiobie, înstrăinare și minciună. O îndreptare la adevăr și păzirea minții. Un semn al veacului de acum, cititorului cu înțelegerea neîntunecată.

Fragment dintr-un articol aparut pe site-ul Mitropoliei Slatioara

A much-awaited moment has arrived of the conciliar examination of the dispute that took place on the Holy Mountain concerning the Name of the Lord, and the Holy Synod is expected to deliver its decisions on the following issues:

I. Is it fitting to offer divine worship to the Name of God, just as it is expressed by St. Tikhon of Zadonsk: “to give all worship as to God Himself“, without separating in our mind the Name of God from God? Or is it fitting to render to it only relative worship, as it is demanded by the decree of the Holy Synod of 29 August 1913?

II. Is it fitting to worship the Name of God as divinely revealed, and in this sense as a Divine Energy and Divinity, or is it enough to consider it only a linguisticsymbol of material origin, which merely reminds us of God?

III. Is it fitting to believe in the Energetic Power of the Name of the Lord in the mysteries, in miracles and in prayer, or to see in it a mere human word, which does not possess in itself any Divine power and that does not give to them that call upon His Name any real contact with God Himself? As from the very beginning of the dispute, we were unjustly accused of deifying “the very” created name according to its outward appearance and even of “equating” this “very” name “with the very essence” of the One Who Is and of “merging” them. Therefore we feel obliged to declare that we never deified “the very name” and nowhere in our confessions of faith can be found the expression “the very Name of God is God“. But rather, in our confessions of faith starting from 1909, we said it very clearly, that by calling – together with Father John of Kronstadt – the Name of God “God Himself”, we do it in the same sense as did Father John of Kronstadt, believing in the inseparable presence of God in His Name, but never in the sense of deification of the name in its material, outward appearance and separately from God.  Because if we understand God to be present in His Name, then we ought to relate to It as to God Himself.

We are also innocent of what we are accused of in the [Ecumenical] Patriarch’s decree of April 5 1913, “of equating Hypostatically the Name of Jesus with Jesus Himself”. Likewise, we are innocent of the accusation of ascribing to the name of the Lord magical power, as though this power consisted in the pronunciation of verbal combinations. But from the very beginning, we unwaveringly repeated, that if we allow to call the Name of God – God Himself, we do it not in its outward, vocal aspect, but by understanding that it is a Divine revelation, behind which the Church recognizes the Divine dignity, in accordance with the Catechesis, which says the following concerning the Name of God: “It is Holy in Itself“, or as St. Cyril of Jerusalem expressed it  -”The Name of God is holy by Its nature” and St. John Chrysostom – “There is no doubt, that It is wondrous by Its nature.” But our opponents, with means that we are unable to comprehend, have been transforming an absolutely Orthodox veneration of the Name of God in God Himself and our expression “the Name of God is God Himself” – into an expression that is unacceptable to us: “the very Name is God” – something we have never said. Our opponents also have attributed to us the opinion according to which we consider that the very name Jesus is God, when taken separately from Him and with no relation to the Person of the God-man, even when this name was used by the sons of Sirach, Josedech and Navi.

In the same manner did our opponents mock our confession of the inseparable presence of God in His Name, so much that we find it expedient to make it clear what exactly we understand by this “inseparability.” It is not the people that gave Name to God, it is He Who revealed it about Himself to the people and it is His personal possession in the world, His inheritance, being constantly recognized by Him as His own, and He – being the All-seeing Eye and All-hearing Ear, always listens to every utterance of His Name, no matter who, where and how called upon it, and He always recognizes it as His Possession. God also has on earth hand-made holy things that are dedicated to Him, which have become Holy not by themselves, not by their nature, but because people have consecrated them to God by calling upon them the Name of the Lord, and because of this they have come to belong to God. God recognized them as such, because of the calling of His Name upon them and consequently He hallowed them. But the Name of God was not invented and offered to Him by people, but God Himself revealed it about Himself and He Himself assumed it and therefore hallowed it. This is the reason why it is impossible to separate the Name of God from God either in our consciousness (for by consciously calling the Name of God, we cannot be unaware that we are naming God Himself, and no one else), or in relation to God, because God always recognizes his name as belonging to Himself and as He is inseparably and incomprehensibly present everywhere with all His being, He reveals Himself with grace and power in thisinheritance of His.

This inseparability is accepted by our catechesis: “God is being named by diverse and all-glorious names, and no one can separate them from Him” (p. 256, ed. 1878). For the exposition of our understanding of inseparability see “My thought in Christ” [by Hieromonk Anthony Bulatovich], p. 115-117 and 164, 172. For Father John of Kronstadt’s understanding of inseparable presence of God in His Name see “Apology of Faith” [by Hieromonk Anthony Bulatovich], p. 164.

II

We ask our judges to make the effort and read with attention the texts collected by us, which we bring as a proof of our absolute oneness in thought with the Church, and thereby be convinced what “a cloud of witnesses” indisputably support the absolute Orthodoxy of the divine veneration and of faith in the power of the Name of the Lord. In a leaflet “Name-fighting Propaganda” we bring forward both understandings of the Name of the Lord: ours and of our opponents. There we also include 72 main texts in support of our conviction. But even if we did not have this “cloud” of unquestionable proofs from the Holy Scripture and the Holy Fathers about the genuineness and the Orthodoxy of our understanding, only the words God uttered in the Old Testament: “I live, and My Name is living” (Num. 14:21), and the words of our Lord Jesus Christ: “In My Name shall they cast out devils” (Marc, 16:17) would have been sufficient for the Church to recognize the necessity of divine veneration of the Name of the Lord as His Living Word, and not to consider it as a mere human word and to venerate it as aDivine Power, and therefore as Energy and Divinity, and not to consider it a created matter. When Pharaoh had pushed the Israel at to the shores of the Red Sea and the unarmed people were facing inevitable destruction, then Moses prayed fervently to God, so that He should save the people for the sake of nothing other than His Own Name, because the worshippers of the hand-wrought gods, knew that Israel did not possess any hand-wrought sacred things, and their only sacred thing was the Name of the Lord (not wrought by hands), given to them by God Himself, would not mock this sacred thing, unless the people that possessed it were to be destroyed by them. As an answer to this fervent prayer of Moses God said: “I live, and My Name is living” and for the sake of his Name he drowned Pharaoh and saved Israel.  So, as you can see, God himself absolutely indisputably testified that His Name “is living“, and consequently it cannot in any way be numbered among the created verbal symbols, but must be recognized as Living and Eternal “Word” (John 3:34, 12:46-50) of His Revelation and therefore  – His Energy.

Also, in the New Testament: if the Lord says that by His “Name” will the demons be cast out, than what kind of an Orthodox can dare to contradict the direct meaning of these words, which do not contain any kind of parable nor do they allow any other interpretation, and to claim in defiance of our Lord that it is not by the Name that the demons are cast out but by something else.

If according to the testimony of God Himself, His Name is “living” and it is His Power, then it inevitably follows that it is His Energy (as understood according to its inner, mystical aspect and not as mere letters and sounds or some abstract idea). But if it is His Energy, then the Church, in the Councils of Constantinople in the 14th century recognized the Divinity of all Divine energies and has anathematized Varlaam and all those at one mind with him, who did not accept this.

At the same time, God Himself revealed to Moses the greatest importance that His name has for His Church. Moses called it “zealous”, “wonderful”, “eternal”, “that which ought to be feared” “laid over the people” for their blessing, that with which the Holy Tabernacle was made holy, “by the very calling of the Name of God upon it”, that which “is living” in the temple (see “The Orthodox Church and veneration of the Name of God”, p. 31-36).  And therefore all the subsequent generations of the people of God, unwaveringly continued to pay divine veneration to the Name of the Lord and always prayed, just like Moses did, for their salvation for the sake of nothing other, but His Holy Name, which was revealed to them, by which they were named and which they confessed. Divine veneration of the Name of the Lord by Israel is most vividly illustrated in the Psalter: “Holy and terrible is His Name” (Ps. 110:8), “Praise ye the Name of the Lord” (Ps. 112:1) “Blessed be the Name of the Lord from henceforth and for evermore” (Ps. 112:2) “before the sun doth His Name continue” (Ps. 71:17) “O God in Thy Name save me” (Ps. 53:1) “chant unto His Name” (Ps. 67:4) and etc. (see also “The Orthodox Church and veneration of the Name of God” p. 40). The tradition in the Old Testament Church to pray for salvation for the sake of the Name of the Lord is most clearly testified by the prayer of Maccabees “And withal besought the Lord to deliver them…for His holy and glorious name’s sake, by which they were called” (2 Mac. 8,15), (see also “The Orthodox Church and veneration of the Name of God”, p 42).

The Song of Three Children in Babylon confirms with exceptional irrefutability that the Old Testament Church together with God also blessed His Name. This Song starts with a prayer before they were cast into the furnace: “Blessed art Thou, O Lord, the God of our Fathers, and praised and glorified is Thy Name unto the ages.” Then they prayed thus: “Rescue us according to Thy wondrous works and give glory to Thy Name, O Lord.” And when they were delivered from the fire and were filled with the grace of the Holy Spirit, then with more exultation did they sing unto the Lord and His Name: “Blessed art Thou, O Lord God of our fathers, and to be praised and exalted above all for ever. And blessed is Thy glorious and holy Name, and to be praised and exalted above all for ever.” So it is in the New Testament Church, where to this day we unwaveringly continue to pray that God may save us for the sake of nothing other than His Name, as its is said in the prayer: “All-Holy Trinity have mercy on us…for Thy Name’s sake;” and in another prayer: “Lord have mercy on us for in Thee we have hoped; for Thou art our God, and we are Thy people (that is – we have been made Thine own by being called by Thy Name) and we call upon Thy Name.” To this day we hope to be granted that what we ask “for blessed is ThyName“, “for Holy and Glorified is Thine All-Honourable and Majestical Name“. And let us remember exclamations of the Liturgy: “Blessed be the Name of the Lord, from henceforth and forevermore;”And grant us with one mouth and one heart to glorify and hymn Thine All-Honourable and Majestical Name.” By calling on us the Name of the Holy Trinity and of the Name of Jesus Christ in the Mystery of Baptism we have become God’s own, have been called His sons, and having believed in His Name we have received the Holy Spirit. And of the immense significance that the calling of the Name of God has in this Mystery is testified by the following words: “Thou art justified, thou art illumined, thou art sanctified, thou art washed, in the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by the Spirit of our God” and with this the activity of the Name of Jesus Christ in the Mysteries is proven irrefutably.

The Name of God is given to us as means by which we can have real contact with God Himself, as a beam of His Divine Light for the illumination of our soul, from the very beginning of the existence of the Church, from the days of Enos: “then began men to call upon the Name of the Lord” (Gen. 4:26). And for this reason, the Lord Jesus Christ put as the first petition in the Lord’s Prayer – “Hallowed be Thy Name“, He commanded us to Baptize “in the Name”, to ask for everything “in the Name“. All the aforementioned does not permit the limiting of the importance of the Name in our piety, by associating it with a mere verbal symbol, upon which the mystery of our relationship with God cannot in any way depend. Rather it obliges us to see in the Name of the Lord a most indispensable and real divine link, which unites us with God – a real and divine beam of His light of revelation, in which we can contemplate, to the degree of the purity of the eye of our heart, the Triple-Illuminating Sun of Godhead.

Examination of the Theological aspect of the debate can also demand the examination of the much-argued depths of philosophy, psychology, ontology, gnosiology etc. However, at the same time we must not forget the words of that great exegist of the mysteries of the Church, St. John Chrysostom, who says that the Name of God “…too requireth faith, neither can one grasp aught of these things by reasoning” (Homily on the Epistle to the Romans, Homily 1).

Monastics – Confessors of the Name of the Lord

Source: Credo.ru

from the clergy of the Izhevsk and Udmurtia Diocese:

Archpriest Sergey Kondakov
Director of the Armed Forces Liaison Department
and Law-enforcement Office of the Izhevsk and Udmurtia Diocese;
Rector of the St. Nicholas Church in Zavyalova;
Member of the Civic Chamber of the Udmurtia Republic.

Archpriest Mikhail Karpeev
Rector of the Transfiguration Church in Yagul
and the St. Basil the Great Church in Khokhryak.

Reverend Aleksandr Malikh
Priest at the St. Alexander Nevsky Cathedral in Izhevsk;
Candidate of Theological Studies

Though we are unworthy, we are moved by our love of our flocks and our personal salvation to write
this open letter to you.

With God’s mercy and the prayers of the Holy New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia, atheistic
communism has been overcome and millions have returned to the Mother Church.  Sadly, a complete
rebirth of our nation has not occurred.  On the contrary, a majority of our people find themselves in
conditions that are worse than 20 years ago.  Russia is threatened by ruin, caused by a spiritual and
moral crisis.  One can ask, “Perhaps the reason there was no accompanying rebirth within the Russian
government, military, culture and families when the Orthodox churches were restored was that the stain
of 70 years of servitude to the Bolsheviks was not removed from life within the Church?”
Your Holiness, in recent years as the vertical power structure has been established in the Church, it has
engaged in missionary work that is reminiscent of the “missionary work” which swept the West after
Vatican II.  What good is our “missionary to Russia,” Fr. Andrey Kuraev, when he mocks the canons
and traditions of the Orthodox Church without any punishment?

We cannot hope but be embarrassed when we see how easily the Church awards medals with the
likenesses of saints to representatives of governments and businesses.  We are compelled to ask, “What
medal would King Herod receive from the Moscow Patriarchate of the Russian Orthodox Church?”
After all, he did much to rebuild and decorate the temple in Jerusalem.

Unfortunately, cheap methods of false preaching have become the norm for our Church.  Why do we
need to repeat the tragic mistakes of Catholic false missionary work?  Indeed, “the harvest is great, but
there are few workers.”  Our people need real preaching, but we do not need priests who are karate
experts, or soccer players, weight-lifters, celebrities, rock singers, or bankers.  We critically need pastors
who would give their lives for their flock, who would be a witness of Christ not only in word but in
deed.  That is why it is so important that we free ourselves of the web which ensnared our Church during
the years of the communist dictatorship.

We earnestly ask you to have the Moscow Patriarchate of the Russian Orthodox Church leave the World
Council of Churches.  Many of us do not understand why our episcopate does not make this decision.
Membership in this Council was forced upon the Church by the persecutors of the Khrushchev regime, whose appointed task was to destroy Orthodox Russia.  Remember the words of the great theologian of
the 20th
century, St. Justin (Popovich), who said that it is not possible on the basis of the canons for the
Orthodox to participate in organizations such as the World Council of Churches and in the ecumenical
movement as a whole.

We earnestly ask that our episcopate decisively disentangle itself from the contemporary heresy of
heresies – ecumenism.  May those bishops and clergy who participated in joint prayers with heretics ask
for forgiveness, as it is written in the Apostle’s Rule: “If a bishop or priest or deacon prays with heretics,
he will be cast out.  If they are allowed to continue to serve, they will be expelled.” (45-e Apostle’s
Rule)  We categorically ask that all theological conferences and other such ecumenical activities leading
to union with the Vatican, which is sullied by heresy, cease.

We earnestly ask that our Russian Orthodox Church and You personally, Your Holiness, defend the holy
memory of the Holy Royal Martyrs from the despicable lies that are spread to one degree or another in
our country and the entire world.  We earnestly ask that the practice of blind agreement with the
government and indulging the thick-headed among the people of our country cease.  We earnestly ask
that You, Your Holiness, make an effort that our people see you not only blessing and fraternizing with
representatives of the administration, but also rebuking them.

We categorically ask that You arrange for all clergy who collaborated with the KGB during the years of
communist dictatorship to repent before God and the nation.

We categorically ask that that attention be paid to the amoral behavior of clergy, including even senior
clergy, who indulge in the shameful mortal sin, the Sin of sodomy, which has crept into the ranks of
clergy of the MP and flourishes with the help of intelligence services, destroying our Church from
within.

We categorically ask that attention be paid to the impoverished condition of many village priests, while
a large percentage of the clergy, who are coddled by the powerful of this world, are drowning in luxury.

We earnestly ask that You hearken to the voice of our brothers and sisters who remained in the part of
the Russian Church Abroad who did not agree to union with the Moscow Patriarchate.  There is much
truth in their criticism.  If we listen to them, it will lead to a complete union of the two parts of the
Russian Orthodox Church based not on compromises, but on Truth.

We also earnestly ask that You be the first among those who refuse to accept the Universal electronic
identification card, which poses a threat to our country and nation.

Your Holiness, pardon us for our boldness, but liken yourself to Holy Martyr Patriarch Germogen, Holy
Patriarch Tikhon and St. Mark of Ephesus.  Lead our nation and strive to cleanse us of ecumenism,
sergianism, defects and all that which hinders us from following Christ and His Virgin Mother.

But You, Holy Bishop, must first ask for forgiveness personally before God and the flock of the Church
for these sins.  We, the sinful, with humility will stop commemorating You during the services in
accordance with the 15th
Rule of the Double Council and the 3rd
Rule of the Third Ecumenical Council.

Our Most Reverend cannot be someone who leads us on the path to apostasy and union with the papists.
Our father cannot be someone who violates the canons of the Church and the rules of the Holy Fathers.

PS. We clearly understand the sad reality of life in today’s Russia, that there will be an onslaught of
denigration, slander and persecution after this letter, but we are guided by our Christian conscience and
cannot do anything else.  May God help us!

Great Lent 2011, the week of the Veneration of the Cross.

Sursa:

Sua Beatidudine Evloghios ha celebrato la Divina Liturgia nella Parrocchia di Como. Comunicando ai fedeli presenti che la nostra chiesa di Como sarà concessa alla Chiesa Ortodossa Moldava posta sotto l’Omoforion di S.E. Metropolita Vladimir di Chisinau (del patriarcato di Mosca).

In zi de praznic, la Slatioara, un oaspete, politicianul Corneliu Vadim Tudor, e invitat sa tina cuvânt credinciosilor. Nu am fost in anul acela la Slatioara, si cind am auzit despre asta, am izgonit repede din gând imaginea politrucului calcând in curtea Sfantului Glicherie. Azi e pentru prima oara cind vad si aud ce a rostit Vadim Tudor acolo.

Sinistru, de pilda, ca a putut fi evocat in acel context Miron Constantinescu, unul din stalpii criminalului regim comunist. Vai de capul meu. Bataie de joc:

Mii de oameni in dreapta credinta, batjocoriti in numele interesului politic, la praznicul Schimbarii la Fata. Caci ce altceva decit batjocura sint ereziile si nazbitiile indrugate in altar si in fata obstei de invitatul la praznic, care a vorbit despre centre energetice ale planetei, civilizatia galactica a lui Dumnezeu, partidul lui Isus Hristos si a doua venire a Domnului, care, ostenit de 2000 de ani de suferinte, va trebui sa bata la cele 18 usi ale marilor denominatiuni ale lumii, daca nu-l ajutam noi prin unire.
Dezolanta si dezarmanta, usurinta cu care aceasta descindere tovaraseasca a ajuns sa maculeze praznicul Schimbarii la Fata. Sigur, nu sint socat de discursul lui Vadim tudor, care nu si-a facut decit numarul, ca de obicei, un politruc saltimbanc in exercitiul functiunii. Ci de primirea lui in altar intr-un moment pivotal al Sfintei Liturghii, precum si de usurinta cu care a fost invitat sa bata cimpii dupa voia inimii, cu o Biblie sub brat, deopotriva cu ierarhii.

Ma socotesc ultimul dintre pacatosi, si imi cunosc caderile, pe care le pun inaintea lui Dumnezeu, si ma rog pentru ingaduinta la Judecata din urma. Iertati-ma daca va tulbura aceste imagini. Dar ele sint de folos, ca sa ne amintim de ele atunci cind vom vorbi despre raznele altor credinte.

Mânăstirea Hozeva

IS HS

NI KA

14/27 mai 1983

Hristos a Inviat!

Blagosloviți, prea cuvioase părinte Dionisie și cuv. părinte Ioane. Când am închis scrisoarea, să vă trimet în acel moment am primit scrisoarea pe care ați trimes-o acum cu data 28 aprilie de care foarte mult m-am bucurat, dar m-am și întristat.

Un bătrân de 80 de ani a venit să vadă cele auzite, cuv. părinte Gherasim de la Sf. Ana din Sf. Munte, care începuse să scrie slujba cuv. părinte Ioan și eu l-am oprit, acum știe ce va scrie, că a văzut cu ochii și m-a întrebat și i-am spus în scurt că adevărul nu pot să i-l spun, decât ce a văzut să creadă. Egumenul l-a îngropat pentru că era egumen și l-a desgropat pentru că el era egumen. Dar celelalte toate numai cu minuni s-a făcut. Istoria trebue să scrie adevărul.

Despre Păsărele e drept că vreo cinci soiuri de Păsărele le hrăneam cu bucăți mici de stafide și posmag pisat mărunt. E drept că după ce l-am pus în mormânt când ședeam toți pe scaune, o păsărică mică din care le hrănea pr. Ioan, a venit și s-a așezat în mijlocul nostru jos la picioare și se uita la noi și aștepta ca de obicei să mănânce, dar mai mult e o economie să vadă și egumenul, dându-i pricină să spue la lume cele ce a spus, nu ca să laude pe pr. Ioan, că a fost cât a trăit dușman, a spus cu scopul pe care nu-l pot spune prin scris.

Și cu judecățile care le știe numai Bunul Dumnezeu ca să dea pricină la lume să se intereseze de viața lui plăcută lui Dumnezeu și mai ales că e de crezut că însuși Egumenul le-a spus de aceea sunt adevărate, zice lumea. Dar fiindcă s-au scris, trebue să scrim și noi ceva în scurt să fie de crezut:

După ce l-am pus în mormânt și când ne odihneam pe scaune, a venit și păsărelele pe care le hrănea cuv. pr. Ioan și zburând printre noi ciripind (ca semn) îi dădea ultimul salut. Și complectați-o cât mai frumos cum vă va lumina Bunul Dumnezeu.

Văd că te doare inima și te sârguești să se facă ce e de folos, dar a veni nu poți, deaceia să știi că avem să ne lipsim de toatepentru că aici nu mai este nici o siguranță pentru ziua de mâine. Trăim zilele apocaliptice. Este o vorbă: când auzi sau vezi ursul la vecini să știi că vine și la noi. (…) Sunt multe de vorbit, prin scris am terminat. (…)