Circular Epistle (Encyclical) of the Belokrinitsa Hierarchy – 1862

To the beloved children of the one, holy, catholic, apostolic, ancient-orthodox-catholic Church, abiding everywhere and in all places, who preserve and keep the sacred dogmas of the right faith and the traditions of the holy Apostles and the holy and God-bearing fathers, pastors, and teachers of the ecumene.

Grace, mercy, and peace from God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ and the Most Holy and worshipful Spirit be with you all. Amen.

We must have every diligence and striving, beloved ones, to follow the teaching of the divine Scriptures and to preserve the sacred canons and traditions of the holy Apostles and holy fathers, who gathered at various times in the seven ecumenical and nine local councils for the eradication of God-abhorrent heresies and for the confirmation of right decrees. Concerning these, the Divine Apostle cries out, saying: Remember your leaders, who spoke to you the word of God; considering the outcome of their way of life, imitate their faith; and: Do not be carried away by varied and strange teachings [Hebrews, ch. 13].

Heeding this, we must beware of all heresies and schisms, both manifest and hidden; and hold fast to and preserve the dogmas of the faith and the church traditions whole and unaltered, according to the saying: Do not remove the ancient landmark which your fathers have set [Proverbs, ch. 22]. For this reason, let us diligently search the Scriptures and the traditions of the fathers, and from these let us be zealous: and as we have found the Church from Christ’s descent, so let us preserve it, and so let us hand it down, and not separate ourselves from our fathers, reading some things one way and understanding them another [Sobornik Bol., fol. 337, verso].

Bearing these things in mind, it is fitting for us to walk the middle royal path, deviating neither to the right nor to the left, and to turn away from all blasphemies, shunning crooked teachings and falsely named knowledge. For many false prophets (false teachers) have gone out into the world [1 John, ch. 4], who set their mouth against the heavens, and their tongue struts through the earth [Ps. 72]. Of these, some openly war against the ancient statutes and ordinances of the holy fathers, while others, following ancient church traditions but not thinking rightly, are stolen from the right and, as if out of zeal for ancient church piety—but truly speaking, according to their own false reasoning—compose scrolls of God-opposing wisdom and notebooks of lying teachings, and giving them plausible titles under the names of saints, they corrupt the right teaching of the holy Church, and with the poison of their wisdom they water the hearts of the guileless and draw them to death. To enumerate all these is not the task of the present time; however, it is necessarily needful and highly beneficial to mention some in brief.

There are circulating certain falsely composed notebooks, not only disagreeing with Holy Scripture and contrary to sound reason, but overflowing with blasphemous wisdom, which we here set forth in the midst:

1. The first place is occupied by a notebook under this title: The Seven-Interpreted Apocalypse.
2. A notebook under the title: The Book of Eustathius the Theologian.
3. A notebook containing the false interpretation of Amphilochius on the second song of Moses.
4. A notebook under the title: A Word from the Elder, the Monk Zachariah, to His Disciple Stephen.
5. A falsely composed interpretation of the ten fingers and the ten horns of the beast.
6. A notebook: On the Drunkard.
7. A notebook: On the Creation of Wine.
8. A notebook: On the Potato, Supposedly from Pandok and Other Books.
9. A notebook containing strange reasoning about the spiritual Antichrist.
10. Prophetic notebooks in which the time and day of the end of the world and the second coming of Christ are appointed.

All these are false and fabulous compositions, in which is preached the cessation of the Christ-delivered priesthood, the ending of the new-grace law, the reign of the last Antichrist, who supposedly sits on the thrones of the altars of the Church now dominating in Russia, which as if believes in and worships another god, confessing under the name of Jesus—not Christ the Savior, but His adversary, the Antichrist.

Such baseless and absurd reasonings have been sown maliciously by the priestless ones who have darkened their conscience and imperceptibly creep into the Christ-named people, who breathe simplicity and guilelessness and cannot distinguish truth from falsehood.

Guarding the flock of Christ’s verbal sheep from soul-destroying teaching and to avert such absurd reasonings and all-defiling tares sown in the midst of the pure wheat of true faith, we offer this epistle and beseech all the Christ-named heritage, together with the God-wise philosopher, the Venerable Maxim the Greek, saying: “Do not be carried about by every wind of doctrine, but with much caution and sober reason test the spirits, that is, the books written by certain ones, whether they are truly from God, according to the Divine Apostle and Evangelist John—that is, whether they agree in all things with the prophetic and apostolic and evangelical sacred and right words written by the Holy Spirit, and with the unerring theological dogmas of the God-inspired hierarchs and teachers who shone forth everywhere in the ecumene after them. But if the books written by certain ones do not agree in all things, nor conform with the God-inspired Scriptures, it is fitting to reject and abhor them as blasphemous and defiled and separating us from God… Let us attend to ourselves for the Lord’s sake, and not believe every spirit of teaching without testing, but let us diligently test the Scriptures, whether they agree in all things with the apostolic and prophetic traditions and teaching. For if they differ in any way, let us not receive them, but reject them from ourselves as the evil one’s tares, sown in the midst of the pure wheat of true faith for the deception and destruction of our souls” [Maxim the Greek, Word 10].

Following the teaching of the venerable man, let us return to the aforementioned compositions and examine with an impartial eye the false reasonings lying within them. Let us begin thus:

1. The Seven-Interpreted Apocalypse, in which it is inscribed as if printed by the command of the pious sovereign Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich of all Russia, and as if it has four hundred and one chapters, and not twenty-two, as contained in the Apocalypse of Saint John the Theologian, and as if John the Theologian interprets in the Slavic tongue. In this God-abhorrent notebook, so many harmful reasonings are written that it is dreadful not only to speak of them but even to think of them. There (and in other false compositions), the four-ended cross is blasphemed (oh, the audacity!) as the image of the foul God-opposing Antichrist, an idol, the abomination of desolation, a graven image standing in the holy place, and other absurd reproaches are hurled against it: the name Jesus is attributed to the name of the last Antichrist himself; the Eucharist, performed under that name and with the four-ended cross, is called the serpent’s vomit and the lamb of the Antichrist; and finally, the destruction of sacred ordination throughout the entire universe is preached.

Such God-fighting teaching is inconsistent with Holy Scripture and church teaching, cross-blasphemous, heretical, soul-destroying, and utterly false. False, because it is signed as if printed by the command of the sovereign Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich; but there was not only no printed edition of the book, but not even a single sheet of such content anywhere, and there absolutely is none. False, because it declares 401 chapters; but according to its content, it circulates everywhere among its lovers in a small notebook. Moreover, in the Apocalypse of Saint John the Theologian, not 401 but 22 chapters are set forth: whence, then, were 379 chapters added? False, because it fabulously claims that John the Theologian interprets in the Slavic tongue; but John the Evangelist preached Christ in Asia, and there he wrote the Gospel and the Apocalypse by divine revelation; he was not among the Slavs and did not interpret in the Slavic tongue. To the Slavs, Andrew the First-Called proclaimed the saving preaching; but even he did not blaspheme the four-ended cross, concerning which see in his life [Book On Faith, fol. 70, and the Cheti-Menaion, November 30]. From this, it is also clearly seen that this pseudo-named Seven-Interpreted Apocalypse was composed not by John the Theologian but by some utterly audacious fabulist, and it is a falsely woven invention released by the priestless ones for the destruction of Christian souls. Concerning the blasphemies circulated in it, more will be said hereafter in its place.

2. The notebook under the title: The Book of Eustathius the Theologian—or truly speaking, of a marketplace babbler—in which it is preached that the Antichrist will kill three great kings: faith, love, and hope, and that the remaining seven, the seven church sacraments, have their origin (oh, dark delusion!) from the beast of the sea (which Daniel [ch. 7] saw having ten horns), from which the Antichrist himself will also come forth, and for this reason they will be near and akin to the Antichrist, as sprouting from the same root and perishing by the same offspring. And what could be more baseless than this vain and mad notion!
3. The notebook containing the false “Interpretation of Amphilochius on the Second Song of Moses” is inconsistent with Holy Scripture and therefore is not accepted by the Orthodox Church.
4. The notebook under the title “A Word from the Elder”. In it, as if the monk Zachariah conversed with his disciple Stephen about the Antichrist and announced to him that the priestly and monastic orders will be utterly destroyed to the end, and other false fabrications are seen there, which are nothing else but fables repulsive to the hearing of the reasonable.
5. The notebook, the falsely composed “Interpretation of the Ten Toes of the Body Shown to Nebuchadnezzar and the Ten Horns of the Fourth Beast Seen by Daniel”, applied to the tsars of the God-preserved Russian state, is inconsistent with the book of the holy prophet Daniel and the interpretation of the holy fathers, full of untruth and false prediction, in which nothing is true, but all is vain and false; for the ten toes and ten horns signify the division of the Roman monarchy into ten parts, and not ten tsars of the Russian power succeeding one another.
6. The notebook “On the Drunkard”, falsely signed as if from the Gospel conversations, in which it is fabulously told how a drunkard caroused on earth, and after death, standing at the gates of holy paradise, reproached the holy King David and Solomon, together with the Apostle Peter and John the Theologian, and thus entered paradise. Likely composed by some blasphemer and serving as a stumbling block to a corrupt life.
7. The notebook “On the Creation of Wine”, as if the devil taught a man to brew intoxicating drink, and that man earned honor from the tsar for it, falsely signed as if from the Stoglav of Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich. But this is not in the Stoglav. Moreover, the blessed kyr Zinovii the monk, disciple of the Venerable Maxim the Greek, refutes such reasoning in the 45th word of his book, saying: “Hops are not from the devil, for the devil cannot create anything, he can only create illusions: hops are God’s creation, of Him who said: let the earth bring forth grass; it is manifest, then, that hops also sprouted then by that command of God.” (Further) “And concerning monks not drinking with hops, this is not a law, nor do I think it worthy of much condemnation, for to devise to keep what is not commanded to monks, to pretend not to drink, and for this reason to bring about such a rule” [Book of Zinovii the Monk, Word 45]. From this, it is evident that if hops are not from the devil, then neither did the devil teach to make that drink, but men themselves invented it. We say this to refute false fables, and not to open the door to drunkenness. For we know the Apostle crying out: Food (and drink) will not commend us to God [1 Cor., ch. 8]. And again: Do not get drunk with wine, in which is debauchery [Eph., ch. 5]. And the wise Solomon saying: Wine is not to blame, but drunkenness is cursed [Prov., ch. 2], from which every Christian must flee and avoid: for drunkards will not inherit the kingdom of God [1 Cor., ch. 6].
8. The notebook “On the Bulb or Potato”, as if from Pandok and other books, and hiding secretly forged extracts of the dove, imposing heavy prohibition on those who use it, which is neither in the Kormchaia nor in the Nomokanon. And this reasoning is heretical, since it calls unclean a God-created herb given for food to men and used according to nature, and falsely refers to books in which there is not even a trace of this: but every lie is from the devil, for he is the father of lies and does not stand in the truth.
9. The notebook “On the Spiritual Antichrist”, a God-opposing composition intolerable to pious hearing, and the blasphemies circulated in it are not fit even to commit to writing.
10. The notebook composed by a false-prophetic spirit, appointing the time and day of the end of the world and the second and fearful coming of Christ, is truly filled with God-fighting teaching, as produced by the audacious contrary to the most pure words of Christ God Himself [Matt., ch. 24; Mark, ch. 13; and Acts, ch. 1].

These aforementioned and other similar compositions, compiled by brazen ignoramuses, are false and alien to the Church. Having set them forth and exposed the false teaching contained within them, which we reject and cast aside, and for the guidance of sound reasoning, we briefly propose here to all followers of ancient church piety:

First The holy orthodox-catholic Church and the priesthood, together with the offering of the bloodless sacrifice, will endure until the end of the age and until the day of judgment, according to the unfailing promise of the Lord, as He Himself said with His most pure lips: On this rock (of Peter’s right confession) I will build My Church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it [Matt., ch. 16]. And: “As Christ does not die, so His priesthood according to the order of Melchizedek will not cease forever” [Kirillova fol. 77].

Second The Church now dominating in Russia, as well as the Greek one, believes not in another God, but in the one with us: “Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible” [Symbol of Faith]. I speak of the Holy Trinity, consubstantial and undivided: the Father without beginning, the Son co-beginningless, and the Holy Spirit co-enthroned. It confesses also the fleshly dispensation of Christ, accomplished for the redemption of the human race. It honors the honorable dominical feasts together with us (according to the ancient calendar) not in appearance but in deed: the Nativity of Christ, the Presentation, Theophany, the Crucifixion, the Burial, the three-day Resurrection, and the most glorious Ascension into the heavens, and others; likewise those of the Most Pure Theotokos and of God’s holy saints. It bows down to the holy icons of ancient depiction, with the inscription of Christ’s name: IC XC. It kisses the honorable nail and tunic of Christ, the holy and wonderworking icons, the relics of God’s holy saints. And by all these it is clearly proven that it believes in one and the same God, confesses one and the same Christ with us. And for the sake of such faith of hers, the baptism performed by her in three immersions—in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit—and the ordination, on the basis of the sacred rules and holy-fatherly precedents, are accepted without repetition.

The reasons, however, for our not following the pastors of that church are weighty and well-founded. For by God’s permission, through Nikon the former patriarch, the ancient church traditions were altered. And subsequently, by a council (with the presence of the Greek patriarchs) in the year 1667, the most terrible curse and anathema were pronounced upon those who hold to the ancient holy-church traditions, and strict persecution and hunting were raised up with torment. And after this, polemical books were issued by the pastors contending for the newly set forth dogmas and traditions, in which the most holy and worshipful name of our Savior Christ (Jesus) was blasphemously reviled, as if it does not signify the Savior and Healer of our souls, but some other Jesus of equal ears [Rozysk, part I, ch. 15, fol. 18]. Moreover (oh, the audacity!), they called it monstrous and signifying nothing [Nikifor Astrakhansky, p. 87, edition 1854]. The two-fingered folding for depicting the sign of the cross was likewise reviled: Arianism, Macedonianism, Nestorianism, wicked division, Armenianism, Armenian heresy, Armenian fig, Arian abyss, gates of hell, magical sign, demon-slaying, and devilish tradition! [Nikifor Astrakhansky, p. 336]. But even in their three-fingered folding, their teaching is inconsistent with itself. For in the Skrizhal, in the Prashchitsa, and in the prefaces to the Psaltyrs, it is commanded in the three fingers to confess both mysteries: the mystery of the Trinity together with the dispensation; but the last two fingers to hold empty [Skrizhal, 805; Prashchitsa: answer 54; fol. 116; Psaltyrs of various editions]. In other books—in the three fingers the mystery of the Trinity, in the last two the mystery of the dispensation [Ob licheniye: fol. 24. Uveshchaniye of Metropolitan Platon, fol. 45; and Nikifor Astrakhansky, p. 121]. To these are added other changes and adaptations, subtractions and additions, which it is not convenient to enumerate here. Let him who wishes read in the Answers of Hierodeacon Alexander, in the 50th answer of the Pomorskiye Otvety, and in the composition of the monk Nikodim, in the six articles and thirty indications.

For these reasons, our conscience does not allow us to be in submission to the pastors of that church, who, to the extreme regret of the sound-minded, do not pay due attention to the correction of their polemical books and do not abolish the indicated harsh-verbal reproaches—reproaches that are repulsive, intolerable to pious hearing, and utterly improper for Christian pastors.

But if someday, illuminated by the grace of God, they lay aside the aforementioned reproaches and conciliarly abandon their new dogmatizations, and “love and accept the holy antiquity and command those entrusted to them to preserve it” [Book On Faith, ch. 25, fol. 195 verso], and begin to follow all the ancient church traditions unchangingly, and the Church is arranged in such exactness of dogmas and traditions as it was from the years of the equal-to-the-apostles Prince Vladimir and until the years of Nikon the former patriarch: “then the whole rampart of that boundary will turn into a level plain, and hearts will come together one with another” [Book On Faith, fol. 185 verso; words of St. Maxim the Confessor: Cheti-Menaion, Jan. 21]. And we, without any human persuasion, will go to communion with her. But as long as the scandals and stumbling blocks remain that disturb our conscience, we cannot, contrary to the conviction of our conscience, follow the newly set forth dogmas and traditions.

And for this reason, we are not schismatics and dividers, but children of the one holy, catholic, apostolic, ancient-orthodox-catholic Church.

Having declared, therefore, our confession and sacred desire, witnessed before the all-knowing God—that as we distance ourselves from those who revile the ancient church traditions, so we do not ally ourselves with the priestless blasphemies circulated in the aforementioned notebooks, against which we now make refutation. And we pray the One who dwells on high, the one beginningless King of glory, that this may serve as an example to the learned pastors of the Church now dominating in Russia, so that they too may turn due attention to the aforementioned harsh-verbal reproaches composed by their predecessors and published to the world. But we turn away from all blasphemy and reason thus:

Third Concerning the most holy and worshipful name of Christ, Jesus.

The most holy, most sweet, most beloved, and most desired name of our Savior Christ we write and pronounce in reading and singing thus: Jesus (Isus), as it was translated from the beginning into our Slavic language by the ancient holy translators. And thus it was written and pronounced until the years of Nikon the former patriarch, as is clearly seen in the Slavonic-Russian handwritten and ancient printed books and on countless holy and wonderworking icons. Therefore, henceforth it is fitting to hold to this ancient spelling and pronunciation unchangingly, unalterably, and inviolably, accepting no innovations or syllogistic suggestions, and to preserve it without addition or diminution. For this, according to the testimony of the holy fathers, signifies: Savior, Deliverer, Physician, and Healer of our souls and bodies. Thus confessing, we say with the Apostle: this is the most holy name besides which there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved [Acts, ch. 4]. And this is the worshipful name at which every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, and every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father [Phil., ch. 2].

Nevertheless, the name written and pronounced by the present-day Greeks and Russians thus: Iisus, we dare not blaspheme or call the name of another Jesus or the name of Christ’s adversary, as certain priestless ones wickedly reason. For the Church now dominating in Russia, together with the Greek one, under this name confesses the same Christ the Savior, according to the flesh the descendant of David, the son of Abraham, born of the tribe of Judah, from the Most Pure Virgin Mary without seed, by the descent of the Holy Spirit, who received circumcision on the eighth day, was then taken into the arms of Simeon the God-receiver, went into Egypt and returned from there, was raised in Nazareth, was baptized in the Jordan by the Forerunner, thereafter gathered the company of apostles, preached the Gospel of the kingdom of God, was betrayed by a disciple, crucified, buried, rose on the third day, ascended into the heavens on the fortieth, and sits at the right hand of the Father. We believe also that He will come again with glory to judge the living and the dead. From all the above-mentioned, it is most clearly shown that it confesses the same Christ the Son of God, consubstantial with the Father, and there is here no possibility of understanding another god or another “Jesus” in any way.

Moreover, it is seen in certain ancient books printed thus; as, for example, at the end of the Ostrozh Bible of the printing of the year 7089, on the last leaf arranged in two columns, where in the Slavic dialect it is printed IC (Jesus), but in Greek Iisus (Ιησοΰς).

It is further fitting to know: the Metropolitan of Kiev, Peter Mogila, in the year 1646 issued a small Katekhizis, into which he newly introduced the three-fingered folding, sprinkling baptism, and the name of Christ the Savior, instead of IC (Jesus), printed Iisus. This Katekhizis the most holy Joseph, Patriarch of Moscow, in the year 7157 issued a second time and excluded from it the opinions inconsistent with church tradition, such as the three-fingered folding, sprinkling baptism, and the newly introduced name Iisus; but he did not at all pronounce the judgment of blasphemy that Iisus should be called another god or another Jesus. Likewise, the entire consecrated All-Russian Council, gathered in the reigning city of Moscow in the tsar’s chambers [Sluzhebnik in the 10th year of Patriarch Joseph, in the preface, fol. 7 verso], referring for the correction of church singing to the Apostolic Discourses issued in Kiev by Zakhariy Kopystensky in the year 7131, in which in many places the name of Christ is printed Iisus, saw this and did not accept it into church use, yet not only did they not pronounce the judgment of blasphemy that Iisus should be called another god, but they did not even speak of this. But if the fathers of the All-Russian Council had understood Iisus to be another god, then certainly, for the sake of precaution before future generations, they would have declared this: for this matter is great and utterly unworthy of silence. But since they did not declare it, it is evident that the name Iisus is not the name of another god and is not the name of Christ’s adversary. And the entire error consists only in the addition to the name IC (Jesus) of one vowel letter I, which having added, they print and pronounce Iisus.

And since the most holy Moscow patriarchs—Job, Ermogen, Filaret, Ioasaf, and Joseph—did not introduce this name into use, neither do we introduce it, and just as they did not lay blasphemy and reproach upon it, neither do we lay such: moreover, we annul and reject the priestless blasphemy, not wrought by the Spirit of God, as well as the God-opposing mockery of the most holy and worshipful name IC (Jesus) circulated in the Rozysk, Prashchitsa, and other books, and serving as the greatest scandal and stone of stumbling; we repel and refute it, and hand over all blasphemers of the name of Christ to the judgment of that same almighty Jesus, who, when He comes in His glory, will render to each according to his deeds and to each according to the intent of his heart.

Fourth Concerning the honorable and life-giving cross.

We believe and confess that the honorable and life-giving cross of Christ, from three woods—cypress, pine, and cedar—was made for the three-day death of our Lord Jesus Christ, as Isaiya the God-seer foretold of this from the Lord’s person, saying: and the glory of Lebanon shall come to you, the cypress, the pine, and the cedar together, to glorify My holy place, and I will glorify the place of My feet [Isaiya, ch. 60]. For according to the testimony of the church teachers, the upright beam of the cross was of cypress, the crossbeam of pine, on which the hands of Christ were nailed, and the footrest of cedar, as the Church also sings [Oktoikh: on Wednesday and Friday at matins, tone 3], crying out: “on cypress and pine and cedar You were lifted up, Lamb of God.” On it also the titulus (according to the testimony of certain ones [Grigoriy of Omirot, discourse with Ervan, third day]) was made from olive wood, which Pilate commanded to be placed above the head of Christ the Savior, as the divine Evangelists proclaim [John, ch. 19]. This three-composite cross of Christ is of this form [an eight-pointed cross is depicted].

But after the voluntary crucifixion of Christ, whether from three woods, or from one, or from gold or silver, or copper and other metals, the holy Church makes the cross of Christ with the depiction of His flesh, and it is equally accepted and honored; or if only a single cross is depicted without the flesh of Christ, as on antiminses, on prosphora, on all-night breads, on artos, on the panagiarny bread, and on other various church objects, the image of that same cross of Christ is confessed; and thus it is also placed on the very domes of sacred temples. Not only this, but even the abbreviated form made in the image of that same cross of Christ is accepted: as, for example, the planted cross which is placed under the throne, having this appearance: [depicted are a seven-pointed cross: the titulus placed atop the vertical beam; a six-pointed cross without titulus; and a four-pointed cross].

Likewise, the four-pointed cross is not a shadow of the old shadowy covenant and is not abolished by the new-grace law of Christ. Moreover, it is not the image of the God-opposing Antichrist, nor an idol, nor the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place, as it is blasphemed in the aforementioned notebooks; but it is the image of the cross of Christ, accepted by the orthodox-catholic Church from apostolic days until now, and formed “by shadow and depiction” [Lenten Triod, on Monday of the 4th week of Lent: 2nd canon of the second creator, last sticheron]. By shadow: when the sign of the cross is depicted by the overshadowing of the hand, with candles, with blowing, and by fencing oneself with the hand. By depiction: when the cross is drawn with oil, myrrh, wax, and any material formation. And thus it is accepted in the church mysteries and seals them: as in the anointing with oil, in the anointing with myrrh, in the cutting of hair, in the priest’s blowing over the water, and in overshadowing with the hand and candles, and in our fencing when we sign our faces. Likewise, it is placed on the sacred vestments of deacons, priests, and hierarchs, which, when one of the sacred order vests, he first overshadows the garment—not consecrating the cross, but blessing the garment—and then kisses the cross and vests [Ustav Bol., fol. 10].

And that the cross is not consecrated by the overshadowing of the hand, but its depiction consecrates, is witnessed by the holy Patriarch Kallistrat, saying: “wherever the cross is depicted, it blesses, and sanctifies, and enlightens, and gives all salvation” [Didactic Gospel on the Exaltation of the Honorable Cross, fol. 402].

Such a depiction of the cross is also placed on the sacred veils with which are covered the divine Lamb on the diskos and the life-giving blood in the chalice. Therefore, wherever with the pledge of remembrance of Christ’s suffering for us it is depicted or drawn, it is and is called the image of the cross of Christ, as the holy and God-bearing fathers teach concerning this, whom the Church following confesses that by the shadow and depiction of the cross all opposing powers are crushed, as is evident in the prayer at the baptism of a person over the water, which the priest, overshadowing crosswise with candles, with blowing and with the hand, says: “let all opposing powers be crushed under the sign of the depiction of Your cross” and so forth [P Trebnik Bol., fol. 102].

Not only is the sign of the cross depicted with the pledge of remembrance of Christ’s suffering not rejected, but it is accepted and honored with reverence; but wherever by chance the simple form of the cross is drawn or composed: +: even such, though not honored in a saintly manner, is nevertheless not defiled or dishonored, as proclaims the 73rd rule of the Sixth Ecumenical Council: “The cross drawn on the ground shall be erased. That is: if the image of the cross is drawn or composed on the ground by someone, let it be trampled or scattered, lest it be trodden by unknowing people or animals and our victorious weapon be mocked” [Kormchaia, fol. 200]. But also in the rules of Iliya, Archbishop of Novgorod, it is enjoined: “and if it is not possible to sleep: it is blessed, as it is not to walk over them and not to trample them with feet. For the holy Church calls the Latins cross-tramplers, and moreover curses them, saying: ‘I curse the Latin hypocrisy concerning the depiction of the honorable cross, which the Latins do: entering the church and drawing the cross on the ground with two fingers, and having kissed it, they rise and again trample it with their feet, and thus appear as cross-tramplers'” [Ancient handwritten manuscript, written in the year 7078]. In accordance with this, the wise kyr Zinovii the Monk also writes, saying: “Henceforth we command to curse those who make the image of the cross on the ground” [Book of Zinovii the Monk, ch. 56].

Under this church curse inevitably fall the cross-mockers among the priestless, who with dreadful blasphemies defile the four-pointed cross, calling it the abomination of desolation and naming it the seal of the Antichrist (oh, the audacity!).

But we, as those redeemed by the honorable and God-flowing blood poured out on the cross for the salvation of the whole world, think in unison with the holy theologians concerning the honorable cross of Christ, keeping and preserving the eternal boundaries set by the fathers inviolably, sacredly, and unbroken. And the crucifixion of our Lord Jesus Christ we depict on the three-composite cross unchangingly; but elsewhere, wherever any form of the cross is placed by the Church, we preserve it unalterably, and accept and honor it as the image of the cross of Christ, crying out with the Apostle: But God forbid that I should boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ [Gal., ch. 6]. “Therefore we too hold fast to the cross of the Lord, the boast of all: for this tree is our salvation, the weapon of peace, the unconquerable victory” [Ikos to the Cross]. But wherever by chance the form of the cross (+) is drawn or composed, even that we do not dishonor or blaspheme, for the sake of the original cross of Christ; but, according to the injunction of the holy fathers, we strive to preserve it from every mockery, as far as strength allows. All cross-blasphemy and cross-mockery we refute, cast aside, and annul.

To these we also forbid and prohibit making the cross (+) in improper places, where not honor but mockery may come to its depiction [Matfey Rule-compiler, comp. 200, ch. 3]: as on the ground, on soles, on carpets, on playful objects, and wherever by the smoke of incense or some stench it is dishonored, and other similar things. But if anywhere such is found, we command it to be covered, or erased, or scattered, according to the power of the 73rd rule of the Sixth Ecumenical Council of the holy and God-bearing fathers.

Fifth The priestless ones, who do not confess the offering of the bloodless sacrifice upon the face of the universe, bring audacious mockery upon the Eucharist now performed in the Greek and Russian Churches. But to such audacious ones the eastern teachers stop their mouths: the most sacred Ioann of Kitros, the Venerable Matfey the Rule-compiler, and the all-honorable Sevast of Armenopol, who writing concerning the Roman unleavened breads do not command to partake of them, but bless them and do not count them as ordinary, for the sake of the Lord’s invocation and the sacred chants of Saint Iakov the Brother of God performed over them [most sacred Ioann of Kitros (Kormchaia ancient handwritten, ch. 4 [57?]); Matfey the Rule-compiler, comp. 800, ch. 12; Sevast of Armenopol, book 5, answer 3 of Archbishop Dimitriy Khomatin]. But if concerning the unleavened breads of the Roman Church there is such a conclusion by the interpreters of the sacred rules, and it is not condemned by the holy Church: then the priestless reasoning about the Eucharist of the Greek and Russian Churches is harmful. The mockery brought by them upon the mysteries performed according to ancient church tradition in our orthodox-catholic Church is exceedingly blasphemous and destructive.

For these reasons, we enjoin Orthodox Christians not to listen to the harmful teaching of the priestless, and all their compositions, the above-named and others, directed toward the destruction of the church mysteries and the mockery of holiness, inconsistent with Holy Scripture and church teaching, we command to be given to burning by fire, as tares sown by the enemy for the deception of the souls of the Christian race, as the sacred rules proclaim and the Venerable Maxim the Greek advises [Rules of the holy apostles 60; of the Sixth Ecum. Council 63; of the Seventh Ecum. Council 9; Maxim the Greek, word 3 (10?)].

Sixth To this we enjoin and beseech, together with the supreme Apostle Paul, to make prayers, supplications, petitions, thanksgivings for all men [1 Tim., ch. 2]; especially for the health, and salvation, and tsar’s victory of him who is set by the most high and all-ruling right hand of God, and crowned with glory and honor, our most autocratic, God-preserved Great Sovereign, Tsar and Grand Prince Alexander Nikolaevich, and all His Most August House, and all his palace and armies [Sobornik Bol., fol. 360 verso], for whom also at the holy proskomedia of the divine liturgy, among the great seven, the fifth prosphora is offered, and will be offered, as for him, so for his future successors to the throne and scepter, from generation to generation and forever, that the Lord God may preserve him healthy, peaceful, and long-lived, may grant him victory over enemies, may surround his dominion with peace, and may subdue under his feet every enemy and adversary, and may place in his heart good and useful things concerning the holy Church, that we too may live a quiet and peaceful life in all piety and honesty under their tranquility [Stoglav, ch. 9; Sluzhebnik of Patriarch Job; Sluzhebnik of Patriarch Filaret; Sluzhebnik of Patriarch Ioasaf; Sluzhebnik of Patriarch Joseph; Potrebnik Bol., fol. 709; Nomokanon rule 210; Apostolic Discourses, fol. 2421].

Seventh Again for the second time we enjoin and beseech to flee crooked teachings, and not to accept at all falsely composed writings inconsistent with the narration and interpretation of the holy fathers, but to cast them aside, and to think in unison with the holy Church, with one voice and one mind, as the holy fathers handed down and taught.

Eighth And concerning the coming of the holy prophets Iliya and Enokh, to believe as the holy Church teaches, that before the end of this world they will be sent by God to expose the deception of the Antichrist, in their own true flesh, sensibly, visibly, and in their own form, and will be seen by fleshly mortal men, and will preach the good faith to the human race, and will work wonders and signs, and will suffer nothing from anyone until the end of their reproof, and then they will fulfill their martyrdom, and, having been killed by the Antichrist, will depart, and already not only as prophets but as martyrs will be crowned with victorious crowns by God the Giver of crowns [St. Ippolit; St. Ioann Zlatoust; Efrem word 105; St. Feofilakt; St. Simeon Metafrast, July 20; Ven. Ioann Damaskin; St. Andrey Kesariysky; Sinaksar on Meatfare Sunday; Prolog, July 20; Svyattsy Iosifskiya, July 20, and others].

Ninth Likewise concerning the Antichrist, it is fitting to think in unison with the holy Church. For though there are many antichrists, according to Saint Ioann the Theologian [1 John, ch. 2], yet particularly and specially the Antichrist is spoken of, who will come at the end of the age, sensibly, visibly, and in his own form [Ancient handwritten book of Ioann Damaskin, word on the Antichrist], whose coming is according to the working of Satan, by God’s permission [2 Thess., ch. 2]. He will be born of the Jewish tribe, of the tribe of Dan, the seventh son of Iakov the Old Testament patriarch, from an unclean woman, a supposed virgin, but utterly defiled in every way. “He will be born of fornication, as we said, and will be nourished in secret and suddenly rise up, and oppose and reign.” He will raise great persecution and torment against all who abide in the faith of Christ. He will reign for three years and a half, as Holy Scripture teaches and the God-bearing fathers relate [St. Ippolit, Mirror of the Soul, Sinaksar on Meatfare Sunday, Book On Faith ch. 30 fol. 270, Ioann Damaskin book 4 ch. 27, Church teachers. Daniel ch. 7, St. Ioann Zlatoust, Ven. Efrem Sirin, Kirill Ierusalimsky, and others]. Him our Lord Jesus Christ will slay with the breath of His mouth and abolish with the appearance of His coming [2 Thess., ch. 2]. For he will be seized together with his false prophet, and both will be cast alive into the lake of fire burning with brimstone, as Christ’s bosom friend and Evangelist Ioann says in his Revelation, and Saint Andrey Kesariysky explains [St. Andrey Kesariysky in the interpretation of the Apocalypse, ch. 19].

Tenth But concerning the day and hour of the end of the world and the second coming of the Lord God and our Savior Jesus Christ, no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, but He alone [Matt., ch. 24; Mark, ch. 13; and Acts, ch. 1]. Therefore, it is impossible for anyone born of earth to know this, and it is not fitting to speculate at all, according to the saying: seek not things too high for you, and search not things too strong for you [Sirach ch. 3], and so forth.

In conclusion of this epistle, we announce to all Orthodox Christians that, with God’s help, an Ustav, or brief exposition of the dogmas and traditions of the ancient-orthodox-catholic confession of the one holy, catholic, and apostolic Church, will be composed, which will be given for guidance and steering to all Orthodox, sacred and lay, that they may rightly and surely know concerning the dogmas of faith and the traditions, concerning the seven church mysteries and other necessary and theological matters.

Finally, again we enjoin and beseech those who kiss the ancient church traditions to keep all the commandments of God and the church traditions unchangingly, sacredly, and unbroken, and to distance themselves from all heresies and schisms and foreign customs, and to have among themselves agreement and unity of mind in all things, peace and love, which is the bond of perfection, and not to do to others what is not pleasing to themselves [Col., ch. 3; Acts, ch. 15; 1 Cor., ch. 4; Ps. 76].

But the God of peace and Father of mercies, the God of all consolation, who gathers the scattered and settles the like-minded in His house, may He gather the scattered sheep into the fold of His pasture and grant unanimity and unity of mind to all Orthodox Christians by His grace and love for mankind: that there may be one flock and one shepherd [John, ch. 10]. Amen.

This Encyclical Epistle was issued [written] in the reigning city of Moscow, in the year 1862 [7370], on the 24th day of the month of February.

The original was signed by: Antoniy, Archbishop of Vladimir. Onufriy, Bishop of Brayila. Pafnutiy, Bishop of Kazan. Varlaam, Bishop of Baltov. Hieropriest Petr, Guardian of Moscow. Hieropriest Fedor of Vokhna. Deacon Kirill of Archbishop Antoniy. Monk Olimpiy of the Belokrinitsa Monastery. Clerk Simeon Simeonov. [According to another list: Antoniy, Archbishop of Vladimir. Onufriy, Bishop of Brayila. Pafnutiy, Bishop of Kazan. Varlaam, Bishop of Baltov. Hieropriest Petr, Guardian of Moscow. Hieropriest Fedor of Vokhna. Hieromonk Evfrosin. Hieromonk Iliya. Hierodeacon Pakhomiy. Hierodeacon Ippolit. Hierodeacon Mitrofan. Monk Alimpiy].