On the sad and destructive role of the robber church councils of 1666-1667 - Adishhub

On the sad and destructive role of the robber church councils of 1666-1667

On the sad and destructive role of the robber church councils of 1666-1667

For many people interested in the search for truth, the catastrophic consequences that have affected all aspects of not only church life, but also disastrously changed the whole of Russian life and influenced the fate of Russia, become obvious.

The results of the antichrist councils led to the fact that the Church ceased to be what it was called by Christ – to become and be the people of God, the New Israel, and turned into the Nikonian Leviathan – a magical, state office providing magical services to the population. In what an ugly, unhealthy mystical education the Nikonian church has become, we can see in our new time.

But how these so-called church reforms “reforms” influenced the course of Russian history has not yet been sufficiently studied. Basically, ideas about the further course of Russian history are in the area of ​​enthusiastic, mythical perception – about the transformation of “the great Peter”, about the lack of alternative to modernization, about the inevitability of serfdom and the ruthless use of their people for some incomprehensible imperial purposes. That is, all reformist “outrages” are built up as an annoying but necessary degree of equally necessary “modernization”. There is no need to talk about Peter’s reforms here, quite a lot has been written about this, but this is a completely different topic, affecting the ideology of our Internet resource only indirectly.

We are interested in looking at the further development of events from the point of view of a Christian. Look at the inner life of the antichrist usurpers who seized power, which determined all external actions. From this point of view, the picture is simply terrifying.

After the councils of 1666, a little over thirty years later, in 1700, in Russia, according to the personal action of Tsar Peter, the church reform continued. The external consequences of this reform are known – the “Holy Synod” and the Synodal “Greek-Russian Church” were established. Church reform carried the abolition of the institution of the patriarchate. There is no patriarch independent of the state. The Holy Synod appears. Priests now become in the same rank as officials – they receive salaries from the state.

The synod was established in 1721 and Metropolitan Feofan Prokopovich draws up a spiritual regulation “On the duties of the church in relation to the state.” In 1724 a decree on monasticism was issued. Now the monks were instructed not only to “take monasticism”, but also to “fulfill the title.” Think about it, reader, a monk must “fulfill the title.”

But few people associate this external, visible reform with its internal side. But it is precisely the internal movements that have become the defining prototypes of the “synodal reform” that are of real interest. Few people know that the Synodal Church, as well as the modern ROC Ltd (registered in 1943), originated not only from the Antichrist Cathedral of 1666, but also from the one established by Tsar Peter – … the “all-joking”, extravagant and all-drunken cathedral of Prince Ioanikita, Patriarch of Presburg, Yauz and all Kokuy.

Dear readers, for the most part, have heard from the history course about this “cathedral”. And the majority took from these “courses” the idea that “all-joking blasphemy” was something like harmless self-indulgence, maturing “genius”. Well, the young man was fooling around, well, he blasphemed a little, with whom one does not happen in his youth. But in fact, upon closer examination, everything turns out to be completely different. With his church and social reforms, Peter I was able to regenerate Russia not only externally, but also internally. He changed the very consciousness of the Russian people, and this change comes from the same “all-joking” cathedral. Peter the Great was the personal creator and inspirer of the “All-Silent Council”. The question remains beyond the scope of historical understanding why a person brought up in a traditional Christian spirit could suddenly become an open overthrow of Christianity. He began his studies quite traditionally in the Book of Hours, Psalms, the Gospel and the Apostle, studied all church services and singing. On this score, there are no documents at all, and this area of ​​historical research, in our time, is left to speculation and conjecture. Most likely, the pernicious influence on little Peter was exerted by his first teacher Nikita Moiseevich Zotov, the clerk of the embassy order and later an active participant in the blasphemous “all-joking”.

“The most extravagant, all-joking and all-drunken council”, as a mocking parody of the Christian Church, existed for at least thirty years. The structure of the cathedral blasphemously copied the entire church hierarchy. The cathedral included “deacons”, “archdeacons”, “priests”, “sacristan”, “bishops”, including “metropolitans”, as well as “deacones”, “arch-abbess” and “prince-abbess”, etc. The cathedral had its own prayers, most of which were lost and survived through the private correspondence of the “Sobornyans”

The participants of the “cathedral” were sewn special robes, which also represented a parody of the vestments of Christian clergy: for example, instead of the bishop’s panagia, they wore a flask of wine, and on the miter of the “prince-pope” was depicted Bacchus (Roman image of the ancient Greek god of winemaking Dionysus) … The composition of the permanent participants in the “council” of unrestrained revelry ranged from 80 to 200 people, the “indefatigable abode” of jesters and fools.

The residence of the notorious cathedral was located in Presburg, located on an island in the middle of the Yauza, near the village of Preobrazhenskoe. Pressburg “amusing fortification” was an earthen fortification erected by Peter for military games in 1691.

At the head of the “cathedral” was the “prince-pope”, he was also called the “patriarch” and “prince-Caesar.” Peter himself was formally listed as “Protodeacon Peter Mikhailov.” The first “Prince-Caesar” was Prince Fyodor Yuryevich Romodanovsky. Peter also called him “the king” and “the most luminous royal majesty”, called himself the “slave and the last slave” of the prince, at the end of his letters simply Pieter or “Petrushka Alekseev” signed to him, and in the “extravagant” ceremonies he kissed his hand. After the death of this noble “Caesar” in September 1717, the title of “Caesar” was inherited by his son, the same “aristocratic” scum Ivan Fedorovich Romadanovsky. “Prince” and “Caesar”, two actors of the cathedral, were personally appointed by “Petrushka”, while the “patriarchs” were elected by all by the “council”.

The first “patriarch of Moscow, Kokuisky and all Yauza” was the viceroy Matvey Filimonovich Naryshkin, the tsar’s great-uncle. Pretty soon he was replaced by Nikita Moiseevich Zotov, who once taught little Peter to read the church, and then became the head of his nearby field office.

After the death of Nikita Zotov, the “patriarchal” throne in December 1717 was taken by Peter Ivanovich Buturlin, who for 11 years was appointed to the role of “the most joking and all-drunk metropolitan of St. Petersburg, Izhora, Kronshlotsk, Ingermanland”. Not only Zotov’s amusing post passed to Buturlin, but also his widow, with whom the new “prince-dad”, also widowed, got married at the insistence of the sovereign in 1721.

Everything that we have described has to do with the outward manifestation of the “cathedral” that spilled out onto Moscow streets and stunned God-fearing Muscovites. But the inner life of the “extravagant cathedral” was carefully hidden from prying eyes. Only at the present time are the personal correspondence and papers of the participants in this ugly and terrifying action being extracted from the archives. The Cathedral is a mockery of Christian life and Christian ideas. All the leaders of the “cathedral” communicated in special sacred languages, which were contrasted with the sacred Christian language of communion with God.

One language came from the thieves’ so-called “ofen” jargon (modern “fenya”). Drunkenness, among the participants in the orgies, was called “Ivashka Khmelnitsky”, and debauchery – “Eremka”.

Another language of the “Sobornyans” ruling Russia, was, alas, the language in which both old and young people now communicate in Russia – this is Russian mat. It is necessary to clarify here – Russian swearing is not just rude curses. Swearing is a sacred, religious language of the pagan Slavs associated with dualistic ideas of life. According to these views, “heaven” as a masculine, active principle, “fertilizes” the feminine, passive principle, that is, “earth”. Hence, the Slavic pagans have a “mother-damp earth”, a generative and destructive beginning of all things, and “heaven” initiates – this is eternal birth. Verbal (verbal) and symbolic (pictorial) presentation of these processes was expressed in the description or image of male and female genital organs, as well as all processes associated with the action of fertility, fertilization [1].

Mat is one of the few remnants of paganism that has staunchly survived from pre-Christian times. If many pagan, religious ideas have irrevocably disappeared with the Christianization of Russia, then swearing turned out to be a surprisingly stable phenomenon. Proceeding from its pagan, ritual and “rotten” meaning, mat was strictly forbidden by the Christian church.

That is why Russian swearing was adopted as a sacred language at the “all-joking council”, which determined the further course of Russian spiritual and social history. Mat was widely used in direct communication, and was also the official language of “council” meetings.

All the faces of the “cathedral”, consisting of drunks and ugly people, wore nicknames at the suggestion of Peter, which, according to V.O. Klyuchevsky “will never be able to appear in print.” We apologize to our readers, but without this “demonic verbal sacredness” the picture of the “cathedral” can only be defined as “rowdy, drunkenness, which is impossible to describe,” in the words of Prince Kurakin.

“Cathedral” was not just a vile drinking drink of presumptuous high-born scoundrels, it was the founder of a new “holiness”, in an anti-Christian manner. At the head of the cathedral were “archpriests” (“bishops”, “bishops”, “cardinals”), numbering 12 people. It is clear that the “conciliar act” parodied the 12 apostles of Christ and the Last Supper.

Peter I himself had the nickname Pakhom-pihaikhuy. Nikita Zotov was referred to as “the most sentimental and most holy patriarch of the Kir-ebi Nikita of Presburg, Zayauz, from the great Mytischi to the wizards.” Buturlin had a thieves nickname Korchaga, and since 1718 he was also “Prince-Pope of Ibass”. In addition, both when he was “Metropolitan” and when he became “Pope”, he applied to himself such nicknames as Petrokhuy and Petropizd.

This is how the list of 1706 characterizes the composition of the “all-joking cathedral”. In the first place is “Archpriest-Pope. With him ministers: protokopaykhuy – Mikhailov, confessor Irinarhuy, archdeacon Idinakhuy Stroyev, protodeacon Pakhom Pihaykhuy Peter himself, deacon Joel Popiraikhuy Buturlin.

Keys: Fix Opraxin, Brihuy Khilkov, Ioniykhuy Subota, sacristan Izymaykhuy Musin-Pushkin, director Neomankhuy Repnin, priest Feofankhuy Shusherin.

Deacons: Sit down Golovin, Catch Voeykov, Roikhuy Ronov, Duinakhuy Shemyakin.

Subdeacons: Filaret Yaritzanakhuy Prozorovskaya.

Workers: Take out the bear.

Dean: Anaspihuy Yushkov.

Grozny: Somnikhuy Turgenev, merlin Izymaykhuy Koltovskaya.

Lamp-lamps: Huy Polibin, Ivanakhuy Gubin, Rozmanikhuy Vasilyev, Vozmikhuy Timashev, Commissar Suikhuy Klyucharev, Imaykhuy Likharev, Novgorod clerk Pasikhuy Kozyrev, Siberian commandant Grigory Kaletin, Rozlomikhuy Trakhaniotov.

Clerks: Ivan Losev, Osip Metlin “and so on.

Isn’t it funny ?! For the average, modern person, brought up on anti-Christ morality, these nicknames and names will cause delight and mocking laughter. And more modern “advanced chelas” with higher education and scientific degrees will seriously discuss the culture of “laughter and parody” in Ancient Russia.

As attendants at the “cathedral” there were persons called “Sufrans” [2] – who walked with censers, but censed not incense, but sulfur. For uninformed readers, let me clarify that the smell of sulfur, the Devil leaves behind. Hence, tobacco incense is a demonic “incense” to Satan. Sami “censer” were executed in the form of a washstand or toilet pot.

The special members of the “council” were women. The hierarchy among them was as follows: “princess-abbess”, until 1717 she was unchanged Daria Gavrilovna Rzhevskaya, and then Anastasia Petrovna Golitsyna. All women were representatives of the most ancient aristocratic families.

Then came the “arch-mothers”, the Rzhevskaya moved to their category, leaving the previous position, then the “abbess”, “deacones” and “nuns” – “nuns” followed. In addition, the wives of the “servants of Bacchus” were involved in the conciliar activities. The church curse “anathema”, “anathematize” was replaced by the word – “ebimat”.

The “Sobornyans” had a whole composition of professional clowns and mockers, as the “hokhmachi” would now say – “formidable stutterers 12 people, daddy’s bald men, 24 people in the spring (the latter imitated the voices of birds)” musicians who played tambourines and other buffoon instruments. The whole action of the “cathedral” parodied the church service.

As we have already noted above, the clown patriarch was elected by the whole council. There was even a special procedure for election – “the rank of the prince-pope of the decree [and] the bishop.” Historical sources describe this process as follows.

On the afternoon of December 28, 1717, the “funniest cathedral” gathered in Pressburg in the “old courtyard” of Nikita Zotov in a wooden house. When the “arch-priest” sat down, they together sang “a song to Bakhusov.” Then the “prince-Caesar” Ivan Romodanovsky ascended “to a high place” and delivered a speech “exhorting [those present] to diligently ask Bacchus” to help them elect a new “patriarch”.

After that, everyone went on a festive process to the stone house of Zotov, located in another yard. The order of the procession was as follows: “spring,” the singers, the “wall fraternity”. Then the “deacons”, “priests”, “noble monks” marched (all these ranks marched in columns of three). Then “archimandrites”, “sufrans” (these ranks were already in columns of two people). The procession was completed by the “monks of the great monastery” who carried a picture or statue of Bacchus, followed by the “bald ones” who carried a huge ladle, and, finally, one after another, one by one, the “arch-priest”.

Bacchus, carried by the “monks”, reminded Christians of the image that was preceded to the patriarch at the exit. The speech of the prince-Caesar was reminiscent of the speech that the Moscow tsars usually uttered at the election of the Patriarchs.

In the new place, the “sobornyans” dispersed to different rooms: in one room (“conclavia”) the “bishops” settled, in the other – other “sobornyans”, in the third – “the prince-papa’s house”. All these rooms were specially prepared: the windows were half-filled with felt from the bottom, and each guest was waiting for a “lair” – a separate place, upholstered with “aksamits” (velvet), above which hung a flask or other vessel with intoxicated drink. The bulk of the servants and actors were accommodated in the “hall”.

The “prince-caesar” personally escorted the “bishops” to the premises allotted for them and, bowing to them, asked “for the diligent labors of the Bakhusovs” and for the nomination of three applicants from among them for the title of “imitator of Bacchus.” Then he locked the door to the “Conclavia”, sealed it and went to his home.

A binge began, during which its participants asked “Father Bacchus to reveal the chosen imitator for himself.” By morning, the “archpriest” managed to identify the most worthy. The main requirement of the charter of the All-Sightful Council was: “to be drunk all the days and never go to bed sober.” Here we again digress from the main topic and ask: Reader, does this remind you of anything in our modern life?

On the morning of December 29, the “prince-abbess” Rzhevskaya arrived at the place of the drinking party, accompanied by the “archmigumenia” and “deaconess”. The women went into the “chamber” assigned to them and began to prepare for the amusing ceremony. Romodanovsky also arrived. Having opened the “conclave”, he went to a large room where his throne stood and places were prepared for all the “sobornyans”. When the “prince-Caesar” sat on the throne, other participants in the meeting were drawn into this room “by rank”, in accordance with the cathedral categories and seniority.

All of them, entering, bowed to “Caesar” and sat down in places specially designated for each category of “sobornyans”. When the relocation ended, the names of the candidates were announced, after which the “venerable” was sent to the “nuns” with the order of the “prince-Caesar” and the entire “council” to bring “muda for selection.” These were the so-called “points” (from the English “ball” – a ball, ball), which were obtained from the scrotum of male large animals. “Points” were of two types: black-trimmed “black” and “natural” “white”.

Following the return of the “priest” into the meeting hall “with music” entered the “prince-abbess” and, bowing to “Caesar”, sat down opposite him. The “deacones” who followed behind put a box with “points” on the table in front of her. After that, the candidates for “dads” went to the test – “in a special chamber,” they took off their pants, sat down on chairs with holes in the seats, and through the holes they checked the candidates for being male. It was a parody of a rite that was performed at the election of the head of the Catholic Church. The operation “with a firm touch” was carried out by special authorized people – “archdeacon”, “key-keeper” and “protodeacon”.

After the “survey”, voting began. Those present “by rank” and one by one approached the table, which stood in front of the “prince-abbess”, and, “kissing it in the Persia” (on naked breasts), received from her two “points” (white and black), after which returned to their places. When the distribution was over, Romodanovsky examined the “covered cup” (chest), made in the form of the Gospel (God forgive me) and intended to collect “points”, made sure that it was empty, and sealed it with his seal.

Further, on his order, one of the “keys”, named the name of the first candidate, and the closest assistant of the “prince-abbess” – the “first deaconess”, in a completely naked form, began to walk through the rows with a chest, where the candidate’s supporters lowered white balls, and his opponents are black. The expression of the will of the “archpriest” was doubly secret: they sat in epanches (capes symbolizing the robes of the Catholic high priests) and hid their hands with “points” under them, so others could not see how each of them voted.

At the end of the collection of “points” the chest was placed in front of the “prince-Caesar” on the table. He opened it in front of everyone and poured out the contents, after which the “boyars” entered the business: one sorted the “natural” and trimmed “points”, the other wrote down the number of those and others. Voting for the second and third candidates proceeded in exactly the same way, starting with the examination and sealing of the prefabricated bowl by “Caesar”.

The winner was to be the one who collected the most bright balls. For Buturlin, who won the election, went to the “dean” and “archdeacon”. When he was placed in the middle of the “cathedral” in front of the “prince-tsar”, Romodanovsky congratulated him, and the senior “arch-priest” made a speech in honor of the winner. Buturlin was put on “father’s mantle and hat”, the “bald ones” raised him above their heads, carried him to the “papal throne”, placed next to the “Caesar’s” one, and put him on it. At this time, all those present sang “Prince Caesar” and the newly elected “many years.”

This was followed by the ceremony of “reading”: everyone, except for “Caesar”, approached the seated Buturlin, kissed his right hand, with which he held the “Great Eagle” (a huge bucket with the image of the Russian coat of arms), and drank from the “eagle” as a sign that that they swear allegiance to the “pope” and Bacchus, and at the same time kissed the former “prince abbess” (Daria Gavrilovna Rzhevskaya) and the new one (Anastasia Petrovna Golitsina) in “her bosom beneath her”.

At the end of these honors, the symbolic end of the elections took place: by order of “Caesar” in front of him, as well as “Pope”, “Archpriest” and “other noble” were set tables with the same treat – these were the same “points”, but already ” with their long and their nests ”(with the organs from which the accessories for voting were obtained).

It all ended with the fact that the new “prince-dad” was put in a ladle brought by the “bald ones”, they also carried the “pontiff”, accompanied by the entire “cathedral” to his house, where he was stripped, and lowered naked into a giant vat full of beer and wine. There, the happy Pyotr Ivanovich Buturlin was swimming in a ladle. Guests, men and women, belonging to the highest boyar families, naked, drank wine from this vat. Then something unimaginable happened – the naked goose of Prince A. Tolstoy broke eggs in a tub, then they hammered a candle into his anus and all this was accompanied by the singing of irmos, and the singing of obscene songs to church motives. Then this proud and free aristocrat gave his soul to God.

In connection with these outrages, it is necessary to mention the wedding of P.I. Buturlin, which took place according to all the canons of the “all-joking cathedral”. Above the head of the newlyweds, where the Christian icon usually was, hung a “silver Bacchus” sitting on a barrel of vodka. The room for the “young” was arranged in a pyramid, illuminated from the inside, with holes in the walls, so that all those present could watch the action.

 It was in this way that “glorious deeds” began and a new, enlightened Russia appeared.

The rite of “placing in riches-pope” was performed in Moscow in the first week after Epiphany. Buturlin was approved in office on January 10, 1718. Here’s how it happened: “When everyone gathered in the prince-papa’s house, then in the prince-papa’s house the priests and other worthy people sat down in their places. Then, sent by the newly elected from the whole cathedral, the old clerk, and the cardinal, the protodeacon, and from his secluded bed, led him respectfully into the assembled bed. Before him were two flasks filled with drunken wine – one gilded flask, the other silvered – and two dishes: one with cucumbers, the other with cabbage. They put him in front of his Caesar majesty on a hefty, layered axamite Lukhov carpet. The bishops on a high throne sat in degrees from the right and left sides.

Then the newly elected one bowed to his Caesar’s majesty and the priests sitting three times, and the aforementioned gifts, one by one, presented the supplier to the supplier, saying a brief compliment about his position, and then sat on the chair directly supplying.

Then the supplier asked him: “Why, brother, didst thou come, and ask what is wrong with our immobility?” Then the delivered one answered: “He should be an extreme priest and the first son of our father Bacchus.” The supplying verb: “Let Bacchus’s drunkenness be with you!”

The same supplier also asked: “What does the law of the Bacchus contain and in it do you work?” The supplied one answered: “Hey, imitative eagle and most drunken father! Standing in the morning, still dark and barely visible to the light, and sometimes about midnight, draining two or three cups, I drink and, continuing the time, not [in] this, but in the same way I convey, when the time for dinner comes, I drink on a large cup, like a changing brush, I convey any non-empty, but each row with different drinks – even more wine, like the best and the most dear Bakhusov – I fill my belly, like a barrel, with goodness, so that sometimes with poison, carried past my mouth from the jerking of my hand the darkness that lies ahead in my hair. And I always do this and teach me the promises I have been given, otherwise I reject the philosophical and as if I create foreigners, and I curse [curse] all drunkards, but like the priest I promise to create until the end of my life with the help of our father Bacchus; we live in it, and sometimes we do not move from our place, and whether we eat or not, we do not know, I wish you, my father, and all our cathedral to receive. Amen”.

The supplying verb: “Let Bacchus’ drunkenness be with you, darkening, and tingling, and rolling, and maddening thee throughout all the days of your life!” Then the delivered man, kmiknuv on his knees, and lay down, and bowed with Persians and hands and head on the presented delux [delva – barrel, tub], and then the priests sang a song to Bakhusov. Then the shipper, getting up, came to the high ambon to the shipper, where the arch-priest dressed him in all his clothes, except for the hat.

Then the first priest anointed him with strong wine on his head and near his eyes the image of a circle, verbing taco: “Let your mind spin, and such different types of circles appear to your fringes from this all the days of your belly” – so are both hands and four fingers, they also accept a glass, in the image of bowls [bowls – diverging rays], verbing taco: “Let your hand tremble throughout all the days of your life!”

Then the archpriest laid hands, and the first read the speech as follows: “I ordain, old drunk, this drunken man in the name of all drunkards, in the name of all drugs, in the name of all grains [a grain mill is a gambler in dice, in grains], in the name of all fools , in the name of all jesters, in the name of all madmen, in the name of all lotras [lotr is a robber, a bum, a reveler, it is necessary to remember here that the first sacred language of the “cathedral” was the language of robbers, modern “fenya”], in the name of all vodkas, in the name of all wines, in the name of all beers, in the name of all honeys, in the name of all carazins [carazin – raspberry vodka], in the name of all rips [rip – must, kvass], in the name of all brags, in the name of all barrels, in the name of all buckets, in the name of all mugs, in the name of all glasses, in the name of all cards, in the name of all bones, in the name of all spillikins, in the name of all tobaccos, in the name of all taverns – like the home of our father Bacchus. Amen”. Then they put a hat on the head and sang: “Axios!” [in Greek: “Worthy!”]. This whole process was a mockery of the Christian divine service of the first half of the 17th century, when the bishop exclaimed before the ordination of a priest, “worthy”, and then, instead of confessing faith, the “sobornyami” said how the “prince-pope” “contains the law of Bacchus,” that is, he drinks

Then this new initiate sat down on his throne – on a great covered barrel, and ate wine from the “Great Eagle,” and served it to everyone. The singers at that time sang “Many Years” to Caesar and the newly appointed. And having finished this, they were all dismissed to their homes. The prince-dad, revealing himself from his clothes, went to his quarters and stayed in that house. ” These “ceremonies” are a parody of the rites of the election and appointment of bishops of the Orthodox Church.

The actions of the “all-joking council” are still awaiting their researchers. It takes a lot of effort to fully study and understand all the symbolism of the “cathedral”. One thing is clear – that the “action of the cathedral” did not refer to just a drunken and ugly stupor and was not a simple broom orgy.

All the “meetings” of the cathedral took place during the holy holidays for Christians. In the first, strict, week of Great Lent, Peter’s “most drunken council”, in a mockery of Christians, organized a clown “penitential” procession. “His whole joke” went out surrounded by his accomplices in twisted sheepskin coats on donkeys, oxen or in a sleigh pulled by pigs, goats and bears.

On Palm Sunday, “in the amusing courtyard” after dinner, a procession “set off”: “the comic patriarch,” the “prince-dad”, was taken on a camel “to the embankment garden to the Fryazhsky cellar”, where they drank endlessly. Instead of the previous “donkey march” on Palm Sunday, the “prince-daddy” and members of the “funniest cathedral” rode around the city on donkeys, oxen, in sleighs pulled by pigs, bears or goats.

Here we should also mention one more festival that has similar parallels with the “all-joking cathedral” – the “consecration” of the Lefortovo Palace in honor of Bacchus on January 21, 1699, which was a mockery of genuine Christian consecration. Instead of sprinkling the building with holy water and incense, the participants in this “ceremony” carried cups of wine, honey, beer and vodka, fumigated the rooms with tobacco, and instead of a cross, the “prince-pope” had two crossed pipes.

This is how Korb, the secretary of the Austrian Emperor Leopold’s embassy, ​​describes this ceremony in his “Diary”: “February 21. – The person playing the role of the Patriarch, with the whole troupe of her buffoonery clergy, celebrated the solemn dedication to the god Bacchus of the palace built by the king and commonly called Lefort’s palace. The procession appointed to mark this rite set out from the house of Colonel Lima. A very decent vestment elevated the Patriarch to the rank of High Priest: his miter was adorned by Bacchus, who aroused love desires with his nakedness. Cupid and Venus decorated the staff to show what kind of flock this shepherd was.

He was followed by a crowd of other persons depicting bacchanalia: some carried large mugs filled with wine, others – vessels with honey, others – flasks of beer, with vodka, the last gift in honor of the Son of the Earth. And as, due to winter time, they could not wrap their heads with laurels, they carried sacrificial vessels filled with tobacco dried in the air, and, lighting it, walked through all the nooks and crannies of the palace, releasing from their smoking mouth the most pleasant fragrances for Bacchus and the most decent incense”. It should be recalled that the case was in Moscow, in 1699, during the terrible search and execution of the archers, when Peter, according to A.S. Pushkin, was “knee-deep in blood.” For the regimental ancient Orthodox priests of the rebellious archers, a special gallows in the form of a Cross was erected. The priests (still of the old, pre-Nikon ordination) were hanged by a court jester, dressed up as an Orthodox hierarch.

Peter loved all kinds of deformities. When the dwarf Peter the Great, the “Deliberate Monster,” died, the most horrible freaks that could be collected followed his coffin. The funeral of the dwarf Peter, like everything he did, turned into blasphemy and mockery. Mocked the living, mocked the ashes of Miloslavsky, mocked the corpse of his “Deliberate Monster”. A huge grenadier, in a children’s vest, was led by two dwarfs on the helpers. Six tame bears were carried in a cart, swaddled like a baby, a tiny dwarf. At the end of the processions, Peter walked and beat a drum. Neither life nor death, nothing was sacred for the crowned Antichrist Peter, who himself was nothing more than a “deliberate monster.” There are Peter’s resolutions on investigative matters: “Death cannot be executed. Transfer to doctors for experiments. “

During the executions of the archers and the executions in the case of the alleged conspiracy of Tsarevich Alexei, Peter always arranged the blasphemous games of the All-Sense Council. As soon as the savage executions of the imaginary accomplices of Tsarevich Alexei were over, in the Preobrazhensky village, the celebration described above was arranged on the occasion of the vesting of the new Pope of the All-Sightful Council, Peter Buturlin, in vestments and miter in the image of the patriarchs.

What is very important, the locum tenens of the Patriarchal Throne Feofan Prokopovich was also present at this blasphemous gathering. He was often present at other gatherings of the All-Sense Council. And in this obscene, blasphemous atmosphere Theophanes (already almost a saint among the Nikonians) discussed with Peter the projects of replacing the Patriarchate with the Synod and other church issues. The very term “Sinodalis” was launched by Feofan Prokopovich, and the Synod as an institution was his direct brainchild. Yes, we do not know who and where “kissed” whom!

Here it is worth interrupting our presentation and trying to encourage the interested reader to think about what happened. Nikonians constantly and shamelessly tell that they are the “legitimate” heirs of Russian Orthodoxy. They argue that it is the magic office of Moscow Patriarchate LLC that is the spokesman and keeper of true “Orthodoxy”, as they themselves understand it by virtue of their heretical depravity. In fact, historical facts destroy this crafty deception. Nikon and Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich began to build the “Antichrist Church”, and “the brilliant director of life” Peter “rearing Russia on its hind legs” finished this church “creation”, which exists in its ugly form in our time.

The Nikonian Church is a completely new, not even heretical, but antichrist offspring. And it appeared after an attempt to destroy the Christian Church in the middle of the 17th century. The sources that nourish Nikonianism are the reforms of Patriarch Nikon, state persecution of Christians and Peter’s “all-joking councils”, as well as all kinds of religious blasphemy.

Nikon and Peter created a new “church” for the Antichrist, and its initial approval took place at the “most joking councils” by the antichrist tsar Peter, together with the Nikonian hierarchs who did not hide their participation in these “councils”. Another part of the Nikonian bishops and priests helplessly watched the secular, Westernizing and anti-church actions of the state authorities headed by Peter. All that was enough for these keepers of “Orthodoxy” was to whine and complain weakly.

If we look at Nikonianism from the point of view of “all-joking councils”, then all the wonderful and unchangeable attributes of this spiritual antichrist become clear. It becomes clear further bad “ascetic” mysticism, thoughtless admiration for any villainous power and the spirit of unrestrained profit, as well as justification of any crafty deeds.

Unfortunately, in our time, few people know the truth about the origins of Nikonian “Orthodoxy”. And the Nikonians themselves try to cunningly keep silent about the “beginning of their glorious deeds.” Still would! The entire house of cards of Nikonian piety dissolves from the historical truth like smoke from the face of fire. But fortunately for the truth, documents describing all the original blasphemy are stored and await researchers in dusty archives. While they are silent, but what will happen if they speak? !!

What kind of “grace” and continuity of Orthodoxy can we generally talk about? The Nikonian Church is a demonic swamp, where the shaggy gallop and scream. The Old Believers should think about this, from what source did they accept and accept their “hierarchy”?

We have presented only a small part of the documents concerning the “extravagant cathedral.” But they truly amaze and depress. One can imagine what impression the “councils” made on Christians. Such an imitation of church worship in the eyes of the people was blasphemy and a desecration of the faith. Fierce attacks on the Church and mockery of the rituals of the Orthodox Church, reaching the point of open blasphemy, Peter kept until his death and never regretted it. Quite deservedly, the kingdom of Peter was called the era of the Antichrist. As one poet exclaimed in the 18th century about Peter: “Behold, your God, O Russia!” Unfortunately, this “god” is still hovering over Russia.

[1] Ontological representations similar to Slavic paganism were and remain inherent in traditional Chinese and Hindu culture, let us mention here – Yang and Yin, as well as images of Shiva Lingams in Hindu temples. All readers interested in this issue can be advised to get acquainted with the works of B.A. Uspensky.

[2] “Sufrans” are probably derived from the French word soufrer – to fumigate, to impregnate with sulfur.