October 30 2012 on the eve of the Day of National Unity and the Feast of the Kazan Icon of the Mother of God in Yekaterinburg took place the Forum of the Public of the Middle Urals "Unity - weapon our victory. " The event was organized by the Ekaterinburg Diocese, the Administration of the Governor of the Sverdlovsk Region and the public organization “The Family of Dimitry Solunsky”.
The forum was dedicated to several significant dates of the national stories - the celebration of the 1150 anniversary of the Russian statehood, the 400 anniversary of the end of the Troubles in the Russian state and the 200 anniversary of victory in the 1812 war of the year. It was held with the participation of the Metropolitan of Yekaterinburg and Verkhoturye Kirill, the governor of the Sverdlovsk region E.V. Kuyvashev and over two thousand guests.
- I want to speak exclusively as a child of the Russian Orthodox Church, which is the last 23 years of my life. The twentieth century is the century of historical demolition of Orthodox Russia. In the first decade of the twentieth century. the renunciation of the ruling elite from the Russian spirituality, traditions has reached such proportions that we can safely talk about its renunciation of historical statehood. And this is in a situation where, in the reign of Emperor Nicholas II, Russia reached an unprecedented material heyday. By 1914, the population of the Russian Empire increased from 125 million (according to the census 1897) to 178 million, that is, the increase was 53 million.
Russia was becoming a rich, well-fed and prosperous state. But, paradoxically, it was this material growth that became one of the main reasons for the revolutionization of society. Many did not stand the test of wealth or wealth, they wanted to reject strict moral rules, to go on the path that Europe has already moved. The Orthodox monarchy, with its spiritual and moral code, imposes on all people, above all, moral obligations, the first of which was to serve the Motherland selflessly, in the beginning of the 20th century. already interfered. The identity of Sovereign Nicholas II caused misunderstanding and irritation.
God bestowed on Russia a king who was amazing in his spiritual and human qualities: Emperor Nicholas II combined unshakable devotion to Christ and Russia. The rejection by the Russian society of just such a Tsar created the conditions for the spread of various fabrications about him. All this is quite explicable: the Tsar, in modern terms, remained in the Orthodox field, and his opponents from the political and intellectual elite left this field a long time ago. However, the writings of modern interpreters of the actions of Nicholas II cannot even come close to their true understanding for the same reason: they are still in a completely different spiritual field.
For the overwhelming majority of Russian educated society, Nicholas II was a tyrant, a reactionary and a conservative, stubbornly clinging to power. Whatever Nikolai II did, whatever decision he made, everything was condemned by this society. Radicals of all kinds and shades, artists and poets, statesmen and industrialists, publishers and publicists imposed on Russia their own development recipe. Condemnation and denial gradually became the meaning and essence of her life.
The fall of the people in 1917 was the inevitable cause of all the misfortunes and misfortunes that Russia experienced in the twentieth century and from which it has not fully recovered so far. The poet A. Belyi, looking at 1917 in February at the joyful revolutionary crowds, in some sudden foresight wrote: "He will bend a quarter of your iron, mora and sword." So it exactly happened. In February, the state and spiritual pillars of the Russian people collapsed on 1917, there was a serious breakdown in its traditional national code, a rejection of the national idea with which Russia and Russia lived for a thousand years. February 1917 led our people to October, to Bolshevism - a special phenomenon in world history. Not a single regime, either before or after, raised to such a degree theomachism and hatred of the national principle to the rank of the main task of its policy. The “moral” credo of Bolshevism is formulated in Lenin’s words: “Moral is what meets the interests of the proletariat.” In fact, behind the verbal "concern" about the interests of the proletariat was hidden aggressive and consistent theomachism. Dostoevsky described the essence of these people - demons with a short but very precise word. It was devilry that was the breeding ground of the notorious Bolshevik "morality", which allowed killing hundreds of thousands of people, including representatives of the same proletariat, only because of their "unsuitability" for the world revolution. The same “morality” completely allowed for the total extermination of people on the basis of belonging to a “parasitic” class and class. This “morality” made it possible to destroy temples, burn icons, sneer at honest relics, and kill priests.
The Orthodox monarchical consciousness of the Russian people was seriously undermined in the decades before the revolution. The Bolsheviks began to fill the emerging vacuum on the move with the created false religion. Instead of God - the leader, instead of the Kingdom of Heaven - a happy future, communism, which everyone must selflessly build. In general, the devilish substitution.
The part of the population, in which the Orthodox world view and traditions were still strong, did not accept it. It was subject to physical destruction in 20-e – 30-e, and in 50-e – 80-e. - political persecution. The other part of the people, especially the one that entered the Soviet period in the history of our country in its youthful years, and especially born after the revolution, gradually adopted this heresy as its ideology, its religion. With this false religion, most of the people lived, committed labor and military feats, mistakes and misdeeds. She became for her an explanation of the meaning of life in those years. It is because of this that many people today cannot separate the chaff from the seeds, the popular delusion from the conscious crimes of the system, or abandon the false religious heritage of communobolshevism. The introduction of the new false religion went on in 20-30-s in Russia at an accelerated pace: temples were demolished and closed (not only Orthodox, but also mosques, datsans, synagogues), the clergymen were massively repressed, most of whom were shot. Everywhere stone idols were placed - idols. The ancient Russian cities were massively renamed in honor of the Bolshevik leaders (the "saints" of the new "religion"). Thus, on the map of the RSFSR, instead of Gatchina, Trotsk appeared, instead of Elizavetgrad — Zinovievsk, instead of Petrograd — Leningrad. Against this background, the appearance in 1925 instead of the old Tsaritsyn Stalingrad was already a normal, ordinary event.
Joseph Stalin has long become a myth that causes either horror or delight. "Stalin's camps", "Stalin's purges" - these, excuse me, historical "brands" have long been part of our consciousness. But few people think that these repressions and camps are Stalinist to the same extent that they are repressions and camps of Lenin, Trotsky, Sverdlov, Dzerzhinsky, Bukharin, Khrushchev, the entire Bolshevik elite, which created the system that gave rise to these terrible ugly phenomena. .
Meanwhile, an understanding of the true role of Stalin, as in general of historical processes and events, is possible only within the framework of the Orthodox worldview. Stalin was an active activist of the Bolshevik regime. He is directly responsible for the policy and for the lawlessness that was widespread in the USSR in the 20 – 50-ies. Twentieth century. Stalinism, that is, the regime that developed at the beginning of the Great Patriotic War, on some issues sometimes declared other ideological dogmas than Lenin's Bolshevism. However, individual ideological and political differences between the Leninist and Stalinist regimes cannot abolish their apparent common ideological basis.
It is absolutely unreasonable to look for a fundamental difference between the approaches of Lenin, Trotsky and Stalin. For all of them, people were consumables, and Russia was a springboard for a social and political experiment. However, if Trotsky and Lenin aimed at holding it on a “global scale” and dissolving Russia in a world socialist state (which is not a variant of world government?), Stalin, faced with insurmountable problems in the implementation of these plans, focused on turning the country into a Soviet empire . To a certain extent, some of Stalin's actions coincided with the interests of the revival of historical Russia. But it was exactly the same. Shortly after the seizure of power, he realized that the building of his empire, the core of which the Russians remain, is impossible without the use of elements of the Russian statehood. The latter circumstance often misleads non-church or non-church people, who perceive such pragmatic approaches almost as evidence of Stalin's desire to restore historical Russia. It's a delusion. After all, we are again talking about the classic diabolical substitution.
The danger of the mythological Stalin, the “red king”, is that only his image can be used by the enemies of Russia with some hope of success in the struggle with the idea of Holy Russia. Neither Lenin nor Trotsky, nor even the gods of modern liberalism, are able to carry the people along with them: they are frankly disgusting and ugly. Stalin is mythical, as the supreme god of the Bolshevik false religion, a merciless, but “just” god, may be attractive to people who are spiritually underdeveloped or who are just looking for the path to Truth. But with Stalin the myth, inevitably Stalin will return concrete: with terror, civil strife, voluntarism, the pursuit of faith. This is easily explained - there will be no God with him, which means there will be no peace in hearts and souls, there will be no love and humility of pride.
A true monarchy is eternal, for it does not confine itself to a specific person, to tyranny, but to recognize only God over himself and serves Him and his people. However, such a monarchy requires a much higher level of spiritual development from the people than a republic or dictatorship. Our eminent thinker I. A. Ilyin wrote: “This is a great illusion that it is“ easiest ”to enthrone the legitimate Sovereign on the throne. For a legitimate Sovereign must be earned with heart, will and deeds. The monarchy is not the easiest and most generally accessible form of statehood, but the most difficult, for it is the most deeply sincere soul spiritually demanding monarchical sense of justice from the people. ”
For a spiritually weakened people, the image of the “red king” - “effective manager” is closer and clearer than the image of God the Anointed One. Stalin is the direct opposite of Emperor Nicholas II, in the spiritual sense they are incompatible, as it is impossible to combine the devil with the Divine. It is amazing that people who call themselves Orthodox do not understand this.
Stalin is a natural and direct consequence of the apostasy of Russian society from God and historical Russia, which took place in 1917. We dare to assert that Stalin was sent to Russia as a punishment for this apostasy. However, this should be clear to any thinking person. The people, who did not want to have God's anointed one above them, received a cruel ruler, in which the whole terrible post-revolutionary era was reflected. Stalin was brought to the surface by the dark force of Russian society, which was born as a result of the betrayal of faith, the oblivion of the ideals and traditions of the ancestors.
When the question was decided who would lead Soviet Russia after Lenin, the “miracle-workers” from backstage, who settled in America, could not stand aside. They were more comfortable with the business and pragmatic Stalin than the talkative and conflicted Trotsky. Indeed, in Washington and New York, it was considered advantageous to strengthen the USSR as a counterbalance to the ambitions of London in Europe and the prospects for the revival of a strong Germany. In 1928, one of the representatives of the mentioned backstage, hiding behind a pseudonym, sent a telegram from New York to Trotsky to Alma-Ata, in which he demanded that the latter "immediately abandon the struggle and" surrender power "to him. Without their support for Stalin, it was difficult to expel the “eternally inflamed” Lev Davidovich from the country. It is noteworthy that after Trotsky, Stalin continued his Trotskyist economic policy for a long time. The main slogans of Trotsky, “Let's strike a fist!” And “Give us the industrialization of the country!” Will be implemented by the Stalinist leadership. Some decisions of Trotsky, with which Stalin had previously categorically disagreed, for example, the construction of the Dnieper power plant, were immediately implemented, because American capital was interested in them, having taken an active part in this “building of communism”. What are the reasons for such American "philanthropy"? In 1929, US President G. Hoover met with prominent US entrepreneurs from the Russell Center. They said to Hoover: “There is a crisis, trying to avoid the difficult situation in which the United States may find itself can only be done by changing the balance of forces in the world. For this, Russia must be helped to finally get rid of the consequences of the civil war, and help Germany to get rid of the grip of the Versailles Treaty. ” Hoover objected: “But money is needed for this, several billion. And why do we need it, what will happen next? ” "And then it is necessary to push Russia and Germany with their foreheads so that, after recovering from the crisis, the USA will be only one on one with the remaining of these opponents."
Let's look at the era of Emperor Nicholas II and General Secretary Stalin (the name of which for the leader of the state is the secretary!). They were faced with very similar tasks: the industrialization of the country, the reform of agriculture, the struggle against the internal opposition, the opposition of Germany and its allies. The approaches to solving these problems, their methods of the emperor and the secretary were fundamentally different.
In the face of the impending world war, Stalin had very little time to create a more or less strong economy that was destroyed in the civil war and in the 20s, years of 12 – 15. Within the framework of the Bolshevik system, it could only be a matter of militarized, rigid total mobilization, not limited by any moral principles.
Today one can often hear that the victims of Stalinism were justified, since terror and repression helped save the state. But we, believers, and everyone who has a sense of conscience and mercy, should understand perfectly well that the state that can survive, devours its children is worthless. The state is for the people, for the people, and not vice versa.
This principle was guided by Emperor Nicholas II. He also took Russia on the eve of the greatest tests. Already at the end of the nineteenth century. World War was viewed as a quick inevitability. Like Stalin, the Sovereign had little time.
- The results of the transformations carried out under the leadership of Nicholas II in the shortest possible time were amazing. The prewar five years is the time of the highest, last take-off of pre-revolutionary Russia. Almost one and a half times in 1909 – 1913. increased industrial production. On the eve of World War I, there were 255 metallurgical plants, 568 coal industry enterprises, 170 oil producing and 54 oil refineries, 1800 large and small metalworking enterprises. In 1913, in terms of production, Russia was almost equal to England, significantly surpassed France, doubled over Austria-Hungary, and reached 80% of German production.
Unprecedented flourishing experienced Russian agriculture. In 1913 in Russia, the yield of the main grains was on 1 / 3 higher than that of Argentina, Canada and the United States combined. The burden of direct taxes in Russia was almost 4 times less than in France, more than 4 times less than in Germany, and 8,5 times less than in England. The burden of indirect taxes was on average twice as low as in Austria, France, Germany and England. In the reign of Nicholas II, the Trans-Siberian, Chinese Eastern and South Manchurian railways were built. Industrial expansion was accompanied by technical progress - domestic engines, motor ships, submarines, locomotives, cars, airplanes were created. In terms of economic growth, Russia overtook all European countries and was on par with the United States. During the First World War, the chemical industry was created in just one year. By decree of the Sovereign, on the eve of the war, work began on the founding of a city with a non-freezing port beyond the Arctic Circle. In 1916, he gets the name Romanov-on-Murman. Here, in Murmansk, during the Great Patriotic War, Allied convoys will arrive, delivering weapons, equipment and food. The pace of economic and cultural development of the country was so impressive that a prominent French economic expert E. Terry was forced to admit in 1913: “By the middle of this century, Russia will dominate Europe, both politically and economically and financially”.
Note that for the transformation of the economy, Emperor Nicholas II took almost as much time as Stalin did - 13 – 14 years. It should be borne in mind that for three years (1905 – 1907) a bloody turmoil raged in Russia, seriously hindering the implementation of plans for the industrialization and modernization of the country. All the transformations carried out under the leadership of the Sovereign, did not require any tremendous human sacrifices or the inhuman efforts of the people, which is fundamentally different from the reality of the Bolshevik five-year plans. The only major pre-revolutionary "construction", which had to attract prisoners, the number in excess of 500 people, was laying the Amur railway (5000 people). But Stalin's industrialization without the camps of the Gulag would be doomed to failure. Thus, 126 thousand prisoners were used on the construction of the White Sea Channel (about 50 thousand died from overwork and starvation). Especially for the construction of the Moscow-Volga Canal. JV Stalin created Dmitrovlag in 1937, through which passed (and many did not pass) hundreds of thousands of people. The prisoners of Bamlag built the railway in incredibly difficult geographical and climatic conditions, undeveloped territories of the Far East. Under such conditions, construction work could be carried out no more than 100 days per year, but the prisoners worked all year round and in any weather for 16 – 18 hours per day.
Some transformations in imperial Russia and the Soviet Union, although they affected the same sphere, cannot be compared at all. For example, it is just a shame to try to put together the agrarian reform of 1906 and the so-called “collectivization”, which cost millions of lives.
They claim that all these horrors were needed to prepare the USSR for war. But Emperor Nicholas II, who carried out his global reforms without the monstrous sacrifices of the Stalin period, organized the defense of his country much better. We are often told that the First World War was extremely unfortunate for Russia and the “weak” Tsar was responsible for this. At the same time it is emphasized that Stalin was a great commander, at the head of which the Soviet Union won the Great Patriotic War. But in World War I under the monarchy, that is, until February 1917, Russia ceded only the territory of the Kingdom of Poland and a small part of today's Lithuania. The enemy not only was not allowed on the Russian land itself, but was repeatedly beaten. In 1916, the Russian army carried out the largest offensive of the First World War, inflicting heavy defeat on the German-Austrian forces in Galicia, part of the territory of which was occupied by the Russians. On the Caucasian front, our troops under the command of General N. N. Yudenich utterly routed the Turks and advanced a few hundred kilometers into the Ottoman Empire.
Let us recall the events of summer - autumn 1941: despite the courageous resistance of individual units, the Red Army is almost defeated, soldiers and commanders in thousands, whole units surrender - this is about 3 million people, German troops in November 1941 turn out to be under Moscow. For incomplete 5 months, the enemy captured most of the European territory of our country. The most densely populated and industrially developed territories of the USSR were given to 2 – 3, to be torn apart by the Nazi beast. This is where a huge number of victims came from: millions of women, old people, children died, which was impossible in the First World War.
It may be objected that the wars, they say, were different, in 1941, the enemy was significantly stronger and more numerous. Let's look at the facts. In 1914, Russia was opposed by the German, Austro-Hungarian, Ottoman (Turkish) empires, Bulgaria. Allies of Russia were France and England. She had to fight on five fronts: German, Austro-Hungarian, Turkish, Persian and Romanian. In general, about 4 million people fought against Russia.
In 1941, the USSR was attacked by Germany, Romania, Hungary, Finland, Italy. Allies of our country were England and the USA. The total number of enemy forces in 1941 was the same 4 million people. Yes, the Western Front at the beginning of the First World War was delaying a large part of the German forces, but already in 1915 it was completely calm, which lasted until the spring of 1916. Taking advantage of this, the German command transferred the most efficient divisions against Russia. In addition, the Russian army had to directly assist the allies - the Russian expeditionary force was sent to France, two Russian brigades to Greece on the Thessaloniki front.
It should be noted that during the Great Patriotic War, Turkey did not fight against us, and the allies in 1941 – 1945. rendered the USSR substantial military-technical, material and financial assistance.
Yes, in the Great Patriotic War, compared with the First World War, there was a qualitative development of military equipment, new types of troops appeared (armored, for example). In 1941 – 1945 the war has become much more maneuverable. But, on the other hand, chemical weapons were not used in the Great Patriotic War, in contrast to the 1914 – 1917 war. In general, both wars are quite comparable. The losses of the Russian army in the First World War until February 1917 were about 1 million people, the number of casualties among the civilian population of Russia is extremely small. These figures cannot be compared with the monstrous losses of our people in the Great Patriotic War. The Soviet leadership, headed by Supreme Commander Stalin, is fully responsible for them. And do not say that, on the other hand, we, under his command, eventually won, putting almost 30 million lives on the altar of this victory. They won in many respects not because of him, but in spite of. They won thanks to the boundless courage and sacrifice of the Russian and other peoples of the USSR, thanks to the talent and determination of our generals, most of them noncommissioned officers and warrant officers of the old Russian army. For the price, Stalin did not stand, and Nicholas II showed that in the most difficult situation it may be incomparably smaller.
The Great Patriotic War is the highest feat of our people. However, it is time to look at the Patriotic War and from a different, spiritual, religious point of view. This is necessary to understand the true causes of the terrible tragedy that our Motherland has experienced, and to choose the path that it has to face in the future. Every believer cannot fail to see the Providence of God in the last war. The Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia Kirill said very precisely and deeply about this: “The Church has the right to spiritually see the historical ways of the people; a believer has the right and opportunity to see the hand of God in his life, in the history of his Fatherland, and to understand what God's punishment is. Some people wonder: “Why was the last war so terrible and bloody? Why so many people died? Where does incomparable human suffering come from? ” But if we look at this military catastrophe with our gaze that our pious ancestors looked at the past and the present, can we really refrain from completely clear evidence that this was a punishment for sin, for the terrible sin of apostasy of the whole people, for the denial of holy things, for blasphemy and mockery at the Church, at the shrines, at the faith. "
The Soviet country is so far removed from its predecessor, the Russian Empire, and even earlier Russia, that only the strongest shock could stop this process, during which people would give their lives or risk it not for socialism-communism, but for the Fatherland, . Above this, says the Lord, there is nothing.
It took all the millions of people to realize that a German came to Russia not as a liberator from the communist oppression, but as a ruthless destroyer, so that the war would become sacred. Such a war could have been won only by the people, who had Holy Russia with their deep-seated foundations, and not the godless Soviets. In 1942, Mr. Stalin, speaking of Soviet people, said to the American Ambassador A. Harriman: “Do you think they are fighting for us? No, they are fighting for their mother Russia. ”
In May 1945, a significant part of our people reached the former, pre-revolutionary level of understanding the meaning of great events, sacral, Divine meaning. Another effort would begin a religious rebirth. But this effort should have been supported from above, by the leadership, the leader, which turned out to be impossible in principle. After the victory over Napoleon, Alexander I did not explain it either by the patriotic uplift of the people or by his own merits, but carried it completely to God, saying: “The Lord walked ahead of us. He defeated the enemies, not us! ” Get into the amazing words of the High Manifesto of 25 in October 1812: “So let us know in this great work of this Providence of God. Let us turn before His Holy See, and, seeing His hand clearly, punishing pride and evil, instead of vanity and blasphemy of our victories, we learn from this great and terrible example to be meek and humble laws and will performers who do not resemble those who have fallen away from their faith the temples of God, our enemies, whose bodies are packed in great quantities to feed the dogs and the crows ”! How deep and true! After all, all this can and must be said was in the victorious forty-fifth. Most of the Russian people were ready to hear it. But that did not happen. There was an unrestrained praise for the generalissimo, the generals, the victorious Soviet people, the “guiding and organizing role of the Communist Party”. And again, a comparison with comprehension of the victory over Napoleon Alexander I suggests itself, who ordered to mint at the commemorative medal: “Not to us, not to us, but to Your name”. These great words are also stamped on the Russian monument in Sofia, erected in honor of the liberation of Bulgaria in 1878 from Turkish oppression, during which 200 of thousands of our soldiers and officers died: "Not to us, not to us, but to Your name." So the Russian people considered it necessary to perpetuate the memory of the terrible events and great victories. In 1945, everything was different. Suddenly, historical Russia, which came close to our people during the war, began to drift away from Holy Russia. But everything could not go back to normal, to the reinforced concrete Soviet dogmas — the Russian life, which over the past three decades and has eroded the foundations of Bolshevism and Stalinism, has become warmer in the thick of the masses.
Stalinism, which laid the foundations of the Soviet system, despite some material successes, was doomed to defeat in advance. He had no continuity with Russian history, with Russian life, with Russian spirituality. Therefore, we declare once again to those who shout about “Orthodox Stalinism”: this is the fruit of a sick imagination. An Orthodox person cannot be either a “Stalinist” or a “sovpatriot”. It is impossible to simultaneously venerate the holy martyrs and their tormentors, it is impossible to glorify both God and the devil. This is tantamount to a denial of Christ.
In this connection, the words of one of the prominent Western ideologists S. Huntington (1979) are noteworthy: “The conflict between liberal democracy and Marxism-Leninism was a conflict of ideologies, which, despite all the differences, at least outwardly set the same basic goals: freedom equality and prosperity. A Western Democrat could easily wage an intellectual argument with a Soviet Marxist. But it will be unthinkable with the Russian traditionalist. ” That is, with us, with the Orthodox.
That is why the influential circles of the West are most afraid of the revival of Orthodoxy in Russia. Our enemies are ready to support any, even the bloodiest, historical figure of the Soviet past, be it Lenin, Trotsky or Stalin. These symbols are essentially neither hostile nor dangerous for the West, as they are generated by them. But to the Emperor Nicholas II, the godless gods have an implacable hatred. Why such hatred for our last sovereign? Nicholas II - the personification, the embodiment of the idea of the Russian Orthodox civilization, the Russian national idea: "Testimony of Christ before death." In the Akathist to the Holy King of the Passion-bearer there are such words: "Rejoice, adornment of the Russian kings." They accurately reflect the spiritual component of Nicholas II as a historical phenomenon. In his person, God sent the Russian people the last opportunity to avoid a revolutionary fall. Similar warnings were issued throughout the 19th century: Rev. Seraphim, St. Ignatius (Brianchaninov), Optina Elders, Righteous John of Kronstadt. These saints warned: the people and society are coming to a dangerous point. “If there is no repentance of the Russian people,” said righteous John of Kronstadt, “the end of the world is near. God will take away from him the pious King and send cruel, self-appointed rulers who will flood the whole earth with blood and tears. ” They did not listen to the holy elder and lost the gracious King, having received bloody oppressors.
Often we say: "Russia, which we lost." But we have lost not only Russia itself, but also Russian Orthodox civilization, which has been an alternative to Western apostasy civilization for a thousand years. We have lost our national idea - to carry the light of Christ to the world, and now we are wandering in darkness, trying to invent a new national idea. It is not developed, it is born in the thick of the people when it sees the light of God. In the people it matures, from there it is picked up by scholarly men, it is made out of them into a strategic concept. And we, the Russian people, will not give birth to anything worthwhile until we return to the spiritual path that our civilization has been following for a thousand years. All the peoples and nationalities that inhabited our country, with their faith, culture, traditions, with absolutely equal opportunities with other subjects of the empire, were built into this civilization, or rather, organically incorporated.
For the sake of such a civilization, we, the Orthodox, should work, pray, suffer, endure, and conquer with our weapons — unity in Christ. It was, is and will be the weapon of Russian victory. “His truth will be his weapon;” says a psalm known to every Orthodox Christian. Or, as our great poet Tyutchev said,
Unity - announced the oracle of our day, -
It may be soldered with iron only and blood ... ".
But we will try to solder him with Love -
And there we will see that stronger!