The rite of anointing to the kingdom. David

When the Creator showed Adam all the coming generations, he saw that David's soul was not allowed to live at all. Unknown details of the birth of the future king.

In the reign of David, the Jewish state approached in size the boundaries indicated in the Pentateuch: “from the Suf Sea (i.e. the Red Sea) to the Philistine Sea (Mediterranean) and from the desert (Negev) to the river (Euphrates)” ( Shemot 23:31, Rashi; cm. I Melachim 5:1).

Son of David wise king Shlomo built the Temple in Jerusalem - the House of the Creator. The Tanakh tells that “from all the peoples came to hearken to the wisdom of Solomon, from all earthly kings who have heard of his wisdom" ( I Melachim 5:14). The time of peace and abundance has come: “silver in Jerusalem has become equivalent to ordinary stones” ( there 10:27). The sons of Israel, "as numerous as the sand of the sea, ate and drank and were merry" ( there 4:20). They "dwelt in safety, each under his own vine and under his own fig tree" ( there 5:5).

It seemed like an era Geula - final redemption, and the people of Israel have already become a "light for the nations"...

David ben Yishai (דוד המלך; 2854-2924 / 906-836 BC /) is the greatest of the kings of Israel, the creator of spiritual chants glorifying the Creator of the world.

On the line of his father, he descended from the chief judge Ivtzan-Boaz (see), who was a direct descendant of the leader of the tribe of Judah - Nakhshon, the son of Aminadab. And the great-grandmother of David was the wife of Ivtzan-Boaz, the Moabite Ruth ( Ruth 4:20-21, Targum; I Divrey Ayamim 2:10-11).

His mother Nicevet bat Adael ( bawa batra 91a) descended from Bezalel (see), the creator of the Tent of Revelation, and, therefore, her family went back to the prophetess Miriam, sister of Moses (see) ( Tanhuma, Wayak'el 4; Shemot of a slave 40:4, 48:4; Seder adorot).

A number of mysterious circumstances were connected with the birth of David. His father Yishai, because of his great trembling before Gd, began to doubt: perhaps his grandfather Boaz, who married the Moabite Ruth, mistakenly interpreted the law of the Torah, which forbids the Moabites from joining the community of Israel (Boaz interpreted: it is forbidden for the Moabites, but not for the Moabites) . “And then it turns out,” Yishai reasoned, “that that relationship was forbidden, and all the descendants of Ruth, including myself, are Moabites, and they are forbidden to marry Jews.” And although by that time Yishai had six sons and two daughters, he separated from his wife, and his children knew about it. But a few years later, he was saddened that he did not fulfill the commandment "Be fruitful and multiply." He called a Knaan slave who lived in his house to him and said to her: “I will free you on the condition: if I am a Jew, and I can marry Jewish women, then since the freed slave becomes Jewish, I will take you as a wife according to the law. Moshe and Israel. But if I am a Moabite, then this liberation is invalid, you remain a slave, and then the connection with you is also allowed for the Moabite.” But the slave saw how the righteous wife of Yishai was suffering, and said to her: "Let's do like Rachel and her sister Leah." Yishai's wife came to him instead of a slave, but he did not find a substitute. Three months later, the sons noticed that their mother was pregnant and told Yishai: "Our mother suffered from fornication." The son born of this pregnancy was David. In his mature years, he wrote in one of his psalms: "I have become hated for my brothers" ( Teilim 69:9) - for they thought that he mamzer, the result of the fornication of a married woman ( Sefer aTodaa, 3:110-111; Otzar Ishey aTanakh, David).

Was born in 2854/ 906 BC / in the city of Beit Lehem ( Seder adorot). He was born as if "circumcised", i.e. without foreskin, like the First Man - Adam (see), as well as such righteous people as the forefather Jacob (see) and the prophets Moshe and Shmuel (see) ( Shoher tov 9).

When, on the day of Adam's creation, the Creator showed him all the coming generations, he saw that the beautiful soul of David was not allowed to live at all: this baby was supposed to die at the third hour from birth. Adam was confused and gave David seventy years of his life - he wrote a deed of gift, and the Creator put a seal on it. Therefore, the First Man lived only 930 years out of the thousand allotted to him, and 70 passed to David ( Zohar 1, 91b; Yalkut Shimoni, Bereshit 41).

1. Years of shepherding and anointing to the kingdom

As a child, David often shared his dreams with his father, which were like predictions: “In the future, I will defeat the Philistines and conquer their cities. In the future, I will kill their hero Golyat. In the future, I will build a Temple for the Creator.” The father, with contempt for the fantasies of a teenager, sent him to pasture sheep on distant pastures ( Midrash HaGadol, Devarim 1:17; Otzar Ishey aTanakh, David).

For many years, David was a shepherd, as once the forefathers of the Jewish people, as well as the prophet Moses. In a nomadic life in the bosom of nature, David acquired exceptional dexterity and strength: protecting his sheep, the young shepherd overcame lions and bears in a fight ( Midrash Shmuel 2:20:5; Otzar Ishey aTanakh, David).

Wandering with his herds, the young man admired the surrounding nature, discerning the invisible fingers of the Creator behind its perfection of nature. Even at night, when everyone was asleep in their beds, he usually stayed in the field, looking at the moon and stars. There he began to compose his first psalms in praise of the Creator - and he sang them to the sounds of kinara(ancient lute) ( Zohar Hadash, Shir Ashirim 67g). “Behold, I look at the heavens created by Your fingers, the moon and stars created by You,” David sang. — What is a man that You remember about him?... And You only slightly belittled him before the angels, crowned him with glory and magnificence. Gave him power over the creations of Your hands, laid everything at his feet - countless thousands of cattle and field animals, heavenly birds and fish following the sea routes. G-d, our Sovereign, how majestic is Your Name throughout the whole Earth! Teilim 8:4—10).

AT 2883/ 877 BC / in the fate of the twenty-nine-year-old shepherd there was an unexpected radical change. One day he was hastily called home from a distant pasture. At home, the prophet Shmuel was waiting for him, who, without giving any explanation, took his horn with oil and anointed him to the kingdom instead of King Shaul - for such was the will of G-d ( I Shmuel 16:11—13;Seder Olam Rabbah 13; Seder adorot).

When, following the command of the Creator, Shmuel came to the house of David's father, Yishai, to anoint one of his sons as king, Yishai introduced him to the seven older brothers, but Shmuel said: “Gd chose not these. Don't you have more youths?" And only then did Yishai send to the pasture for David ( there 16:1—11; Seder adorot). Yishai did not call David right away only because he still considered him mamzer and wanted to hide it from the prophet ( Otzar Ishey aTanakh, David). When the prophet Shmuel saw that the young man who came from the pasture was red-haired and red-faced, he became worried and thought: “By his nature, he is prone to bloodshed and will begin to kill people, like the villain Esau!” But the Almighty told him: “Esau killed for his own whim, but this one will kill according to the decision of the council of wise men” - i.e. in wars against the enemies of Israel ( Bereshit slave 63:8; Malbim, I Shmuel 16:12).

Later, David allegorically wrote about his election in one of the psalms: “The stone that the builders rejected became the cornerstone” ( Teilim 118:22) - after all, he himself was like a stone, which they neglected and did not want to put into the wall of the house at all ( Metsudat David).

AT midrash figuratively interpreted for what qualities the Creator chose the shepherd David to the kingdom: “Gd tested him on the sheep and made sure that he was a good shepherd. David protected the lambs from the adult sheep. He brought the lambs to the meadow first to nibble the tender grass, then he brought the old sheep to eat the grass left after the young, and then he brought out the strong young cattle to eat the tougher grass. “He who shepherds the flocks, taking into account the characteristics of each sheep,” the Creator said, “let him shepherd My people” ( Shemot of a slave 2:2).

But for the time being, this anointing was kept secret from King Shaul, since the prophet Shmuel feared the royal wrath ( Tanhuma, Emor 2).

Share this page with your friends and family:

In contact with

.." Saint Deacon Philip Eliseevich Gorbenko of Lugansk (1858-1956) there was a prophecy, both about the collapse of the Union and the colonization of Ukraine. He tore the handkerchief into 3 parts with the words: “Girls, Soviet Union will not". Everyone was surprised: “It can’t be like that, how is it ?!” And he says: “Yes, like this: part 1 - the Baltic states, part 2 - Russia, at first it will be difficult for her, and then it’s good, part 3 - Ukraine. My poor Ukraine, foreigners will enslave her and take over all the factories.” This has obviously also come true!

And now about the future regarding us is connected with the unusual appearance of the Mother of God to the elder. In June (13,14 and 15 - as commanded by Father Philip) the apparition is celebrated Mother of God in the city of Lugansk, which appeared to him three times in succession one after another, marking the cross over the city with her procession. Moreover, She appeared every time at different ages (40, 60 and 18 years old). In this regard, the Luhansk icon appeared, which is now hidden. When this icon will be shown to the world is unknown. Something special must happen, but what exactly, no one knows yet. Everyone continues to wait for Philip to give some kind of sign. But what matters to us is the prophecy that is connected with this miraculous phenomenon - the appearance of the King, the anointed of God.
The Mother of God predicted: “I will say about this city that by the end of the world it will be called Tsargrad-Svyatograd Lugansk, it is determined to be the city of My glory, the heavenly Tsargrad. And many people will come here from all corners of the Earth without knowing why. My help and blessing will then be with them on the Day of Judgment.” That is, Luhansk is the city of the Tsar, not the capital, but, perhaps, in this city there will be the appearance of the Tsar!

I will remember another contemporary of ours, the now living Schema-Archbishop Alipy (Pogrebnyak), Bishop of Krasno-Limansky (part of the Donetsk region, which is now under the control of Ukraine). Vladyka is known for the fact that in 1992 he was one of two bishops of Ukraine who did not sign an agreement on the autonomy of the UOC-MP. Then he fell into disgrace and was at rest for almost 20 years. During the bloody hostilities of the confrontation between Ukraine and Novorossiya, he was placed on the cathedra as an acting bishop in the city of Krasny Liman, where he had previously created a powerful monastic community. Coincidence? Is this a coincidence? A gigantic temple was built, obviously redundant for a small town, where there are already several temples, and there were already 2 temples on the territory of the monastery. To my question (this was approximately in 2008, the temple was just being built and Vladyka was still at rest), why larger temple, he answered firmly, openly and without doubt: "So that all the guests would fit when the King comes here to anoint him."

Even in the days of Vladyka's youth, when he was a novice at the Holy Trinity Lavra, he had a miraculous meeting with a holy fool who gave him prophecies related to his life: the Union would fall apart, he would be at the origins of the revival of the Dormition Svyatogorsk Lavra. Two prophecies have already come true, the third is left! For his strong standing in faith, God will give him a great gift - to anoint the King for the Kingdom!

The time is near, as you know, in the summer of this year in the city of Krasny Liman there was an appearance of two angels. The video was filmed by Ukrainian ATO soldiers and is freely available on the Internet. Is that by accident? What is this foreshadowing?"

In the Bible, anointing with oil acts as a symbol of the communication of higher gifts to a person and was used during the elevation to the highest responsible ministry - the high priest, prophet and king.

The first biblical example of such an anointing is the story of Aaron's elevation to the rank of high priest (Ex.). Repeatedly in the Old Testament there are indications of the anointing of kings (for example, Saul and David by the prophet Samuel), so that later the very expression "anointing to the kingdom" became common when the king ascended the throne. The prophets, as the highest servants of truth, were also anointed for their ministry (for example, Elijah anointed his successor Elisha - 1 Kings).

Anointing to kingship in the Middle Ages

Drevnosti RG v1 ill043.jpg

August crab

Nicholas II's coronation uniform (1896, Kremlin museum) by shakko 02.jpg

Uniform of Nicholas II for the coronation - with a folding valve for anointing.

see also

Write a review on the article "Kingship Anointing"

Links

• Ulyanov O. G.// Russia and Byzantium: The place of the countries of the Byzantine circle in the relationship between East and West. Abstracts of the XVIII All-Russian scientific session of the Byzantine scholars. - M .: IVI RAN, 2008. - S. 133-140. - ISBN 5-94067-244-2.
• Crowning the kingdom / Ulyanov O. G. // Moscow: Encyclopedia / Chapter. ed. S. O. Schmidt; Compiled by: M. I. Andreev, V. M. Karev. - M. : Great Russian Encyclopedia, 1997. - 976 p. - 100,000 copies. - ISBN 5-85270-277-3.

Evolution Wars Monarchy Political system estate organization Rat Economy

A passage characterizing the Anointing to the kingdom

But even if we assume that Alexander I was mistaken fifty years ago in his view of what is the good of the peoples, we must involuntarily assume that the historian who judges Alexander will, in the same way, after some time have passed, turn out to be unjust in his view of the fact that which is the good of mankind. This assumption is all the more natural and necessary because, following the development of history, we see that every year, with every new writer, the view of what is the good of mankind changes; so that what seemed good ten years later seems to be evil; and vice versa. Moreover, at the same time we find in history completely opposite views on what was evil and what was good: some of the constitution and the Holy Alliance given to Poland are credited, others reproach Alexander.
It is impossible to say about the activity of Alexander and Napoleon that it was useful or harmful, because we cannot say for what it is useful and for what it is harmful. If someone does not like this activity, then he does not like it only because it does not coincide with his limited understanding of what is good. Whether the preservation of my father's house in Moscow in the 12th year, or the glory of the Russian troops, or the prosperity of St. Petersburg and other universities, or the freedom of Poland, or the power of Russia, or the balance of Europe, or a certain kind of European enlightenment - progress, I must admit that the activity of every historical person had, in addition to these goals, other goals that were more general and inaccessible to me.
But let us suppose that so-called science has the possibility of reconciling all contradictions and has an invariable measure of good and bad for historical persons and events.
Let us assume that Alexander could have done everything differently. Let us assume that he could, at the behest of those who accuse him, those who profess the knowledge of the ultimate goal of the movement of mankind, dispose of according to the program of nationality, freedom, equality and progress (there seems to be no other) that the present accusers would give him. Let us assume that this program would have been possible and drawn up, and that Alexander would have acted according to it. What would have happened then to the activities of all those people who opposed the then direction of the government - to the activities that, according to historians, are good and useful? This activity would not exist; there would be no life; there would be nothing.
If we assume that human life can be controlled by reason, then the possibility of life will be destroyed.

If one assumes, as historians do, that great men lead mankind to certain goals, which are either the greatness of Russia or France, or the equilibrium of Europe, or the spreading of the ideas of the revolution, or general progress, or whatever it is, it is impossible to explain the phenomena of history without the concepts of chance and genius.
If the goal of the European wars of the beginning of this century was the greatness of Russia, then this goal could be achieved without all the previous wars and without invasion. If the goal is the greatness of France, then this goal could be achieved without a revolution, and without an empire. If the goal is to spread ideas, then printing would do it much better than soldiers. If the goal is the progress of civilization, then it is quite easy to assume that, in addition to the destruction of people and their wealth, there are other more expedient ways for the spread of civilization.
Why did it happen this way and not otherwise?
Because that's how it happened. “Chance made the situation; genius took advantage of it,” says history.
But what is a case? What is a genius?
The words chance and genius do not designate anything really existing and therefore cannot be defined. These words only denote a certain degree of understanding of phenomena. I don't know why such a phenomenon occurs; I think I can't know; therefore I do not want to know and I say: chance. I see a force producing an action disproportionate to universal human properties; I don’t understand why this is happening, and I say: genius.
For a herd of rams, that ram, which every evening is driven off by a shepherd into a special stall to feed and becomes twice as thick as the others, must seem like a genius. And the fact that every evening this very ram ends up not in a common sheepfold, but in a special stall for oats, and that this very same ram, drenched in fat, is killed for meat, must seem like an amazing combination of genius with a whole series of extraordinary accidents. .

The Spirit of the Most High teaches every person who arrives in this mortal world. It is the Almighty who points out to every Orthodox believer how to properly increase righteousness and preserve it. The Lord says that people need someone to constantly receive them. However, it is the Lord God who believes that anointing teaches every Orthodox believer. Every Christian knows that such a word as the anointed one is often found in the Bible and legends. Of the many historical information and of course, from the Bible, to this day, mankind knows various peoples in which at one time or another there were divine anointed ones, who in turn were not only mentors, but also kings, leaders, and even leaders. However, still at present, many Orthodox believers are asking the question: “Who is the anointed of the Almighty?” So deep philosophical question arises in the thoughts of almost every believer who respects the Almighty and, with a certain frequency, offers prayers or prayers to him.

Who is the anointed of the Lord?

The anointed of the Almighty is in some way the chosen one , which not only governs the Orthodox country and its believers, but also acts according to divine foreknowledge. From various sources, it is known that it was he who was chosen by the Almighty to serve himself and sends him his own grace and gifts so that he can freely rule the state with the help of church rites or other Orthodox deeds. In church canons, it is believed that the Divine anointed one receives a certain task from the Almighty, as a result of which he not only rules the country, but also helps every Orthodox believer save his own soul in a short time from disastrous death. It is he who is the chosen one, who helps humanity to become much closer to the heavenly kingdom, but people should come to him only through sacrificial service and fidelity. Only in this case, the Lord's anointed one can fulfill the task that was set before him.

Grace of the sovereign

The divine anointed is a kind of king who has his own grace with the help of which he comprehends goals, and it is he who is able to make some kind of decision in order to help a person in modern world deal with life's most pressing issues. Some clergy claim that it is he who can look into the distant future of a particular country. In some situations, especially at the present time, everyday questions Orthodox people do not coincide with the Orthodox requirements of this or that power. Since the main goal of the divine anointed is the salvation of human souls, both in the past and in the present, and so it will be in the future. There are cases in history when many needs of people in the present do not coincide with the same needs in the future, that is, they are opposite. In such a situation, the monarch comes to the rescue, who is presented in the form of God's anointed one, it is he who takes responsibility for solving many global problems, which it is he, the Divine King, who can solve in the best way for the people, that is, for the benefit of every person on Earth. This is precisely the grace of the ruler, and the offering of the Most High is directed to the divine anointed one.

Proof of this truth

Therefore, the Almighty is a virtue who daily takes care of the well-being of the Orthodox people. Also, the Almighty knows everything about everyone, and predicts which of the Orthodox believers can in one way or another cope with the management of a certain power. It is he who chooses the person who will be able to govern the state in the most appropriate way, and also his children will be able to perform the same duties in various life situations. Thus, we can conclude that it is the Almighty who from time immemorial approves the dynasty of kings and provides them with his own help, guardianship and directs them in the most difficult times to make the most correct and optimal decision. Therefore, it is the Lord God who knows exactly which Orthodox believer will turn out to be his anointed, and will serve him for many years, showing the world the most optimal result, which can subsequently improve not only the quality of life of certain people, but also of all mankind or a single people. God's anointed will create optimal conditions for saving human souls Orthodox believers. In turn, the Orthodox Church and its canons teach believers that the Almighty is a virtue, omnipotent and omniscient, that is, omniscient. That is why he is given the right to choose the anointed one who will rule not only the people, but the whole state.

Anointing in the Bible

The Bible speaks of the anointing of a person at the moment when he comes to the throne, thus, a ceremony is performed during which the future ruler steps on his own throne, and his subjects are anointed with olive oil along with aromatic oils made up of many different herbs. Thus, anointing is carried out with the aim of offering the future ruler various gifts from the Almighty so that he can properly manage the state and have the support of the Almighty daily. Many people who have read the Bible at least once know that the first example of a king anointing is the story in the Bible about Aaron. As is known, from biblical tales, he was later elevated to the former rank of high priest. Many times in biblical stories there are various legends and indications about the anointing of certain monarchs, during the accession of kings to the throne, this ceremony is always performed so that the future Monarch can receive heavenly blessings and the ongoing support of the Almighty. Thus, the Orthodox people can be sure that the Almighty will not leave the monarch in difficult times and will help him so that he can make the best decision for his own people.

Anointing in Orthodoxy

Every Orthodox Christian believer knows that the rite of anointing is carried out directly by the patriarch or by senior bishops. From historical data, every Orthodox believer knows that during such a ceremony with the participation of Russian tsars, that is, monks, a vessel was used, which, according to legend, previously belonged to Emperor Octavian Augustus and was lost some time later, around 1917. The clergy of the temple and the church claim that the rite of anointing to the kingdom in the Orthodox Christian faith is not considered one of the seven sacraments of church laws, that is, konons.

Characteristics of the anointing

The anointing represents a kind of heavenly blessing. It is important to know that it is given to a person not in order to achieve their own specific benefits, but in order for a person to serve the Almighty with faith and truth. Many temple ministers argue that the anointing gives a person some kind of power that can change not only the person himself, but also life situation in better side while bringing or multiplying spiritual fruits. It is also important to know that the reward for anointing is not the action itself, but only the achievement of certain results, that is, the receipt of fruits. From biblical legends people know that the divine anointed one must serve the Almighty with faith and truth, in order to achieve a 100% result, that is, to achieve incredible goals.

Monarch and church

It is important to note that the Almighty says that the servants of the temple, the church, as well as patriarchs or bishops, in no case can be monarchs or rulers of this or that state. Since if a person who bears a certain rank proclaims himself a king and performs the ceremony of anointing, therefore, he defiles the purity of faith and thereby delivers people from faith in the Almighty and salvation own soul. That is why the Almighty believes that a person who is a rank higher than the Patriarch should rule the state, as a result of which Orthodox Christian laws endow him with certain power. It is church canons that allow the anointed of the Most High to appoint or remove a bishop or patriarch from his position. It is also necessary to know that the anointed bears some responsibility only before the Almighty, therefore, in a human court, he will in any case be not guilty.

Russian Orthodox Tsar

After the ceremony, it is the Holy Spirit that presents the Monarch with gifts from the Almighty. Consequently, the Russian Monarch, thus, becomes the so-called husband of his own people, and in turn the people, that is, Orthodox believers, become in some way his wives. It was on the basis of such information that earlier the coronation was called nothing more than the crowning of the kingdom. Consequently, a semblance of marital relations arose between the monarch and subjects, in which, according to church canons, had to proceed strictly according to church commandments. That is why it was believed that all the deeds of the king, that is, the anointed of God, are correct, and the people, that is, the spouse, are always sinful.

People and the Lord

Therefore, we can safely say that the Almighty does not deny the existence of another source of power besides his own. Since there is a power chosen by the people, its free choice and decision. That is why the Almighty, in no case should resist if people do not believe in him and choose their own life path and future ruler without the help of the Lord. Based on such data, the expression went that not every power comes from the Almighty. Therefore, every person on earth needs to know that the Almighty chooses a single divine anointed one who fulfills all his laws and serves directly to himself. And in the event that the power is elected only by the people and their free choice, then the Holy Spirit does not touch the divine anointed one, therefore, does not transfer the gifts of the Almighty to him, thus, this sovereign finds himself without the support of the Almighty and only with the support of his own people. At the same time, God does not direct him to implement the most optimal solutions in difficult life situations.

Based on the foregoing, we can conclude that the Divine anointed is the King who is chosen by the Almighty. And it is he who takes care not only of the state, the throne, but also of the Christian people. Thus, he becomes the head of not only a certain power, but also the father of the whole people, their protector, virtue and boss.

Ask us for a positive definition
our Orthodoxy ... and you will see that even our specialists
in the field of theological science will disagree
on the most fundamental questions of the teachings of our Church.

V.Z. Zavitnevich, Professor of the Kyiv Theological Academy
(Zavitnevich V.Z. On the restoration of catholicity in the Russian Church //
Church Bulletin. SPb., 1905. No. 14. S. 422).

As you know, unlike the “usual” sacrament of chrismation performed over Orthodox Christians for the only time in their lives immediately after the sacrament of baptism, when the Vasileus were crowned king, they were anointed again, in a special way.

Is the chrismation of emperors a church sacrament? To this question at the turn of the XIX-XX centuries. representatives of the church hierarchy expressed literally diametrically opposed judgments. There were both unambiguously positive and sharply negative opinions. There were also evasive answers.

So, on the day of the coronation of Emperor Nicholas II, May 14, 1896, Metropolitan of Moscow and Kolomna Sergius (Lyapidevsky) greeted the sovereign on the porch of the Assumption Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin with a speech in which it was unequivocally stated that the chrismation of the emperor was a sacrament. Vladyka said: “Pious Sovereign! Your present procession, combined with extraordinary splendor, has a goal of unusual importance. You enter this ancient sanctuary in order to place the Royal crown on Yourself here and receive the Holy Anointing. Your Ancestral Crown belongs to You alone, as the Sovereign King; but Chrismation is granted to all Orthodox Christians, and it is not repeated. If, however, it is before You to perceive new impressions of this sacrament (sic! - M.B.), then the reason for this is that, just as there is no higher, so there is no more difficult on earth the Royal power, there is no burden heavier than the Royal service. Therefore, in order to bear it, the Holy Church from ancient times recognized the need for an extraordinary, mysterious, grace-filled means. It is written about the holy king David: the tribes and the elders of Israel came to the king in Hebron and anointed David to the kingdom, and David prospered and exalted himself. The elders of the Russian land have been gathered for the triumph of Your Wedding and Anointing for the Kingdom. Through them, from all the tribes that are subject to You, wishes are sent to you for a long and prosperous reign; especially from the depths of Orthodox hearts, prayers fly to the Lord; may an abundance of gifts of grace be poured out on you now, and through the visible anointing may an invisible power from above be given to you, acting to exalt your royal virtues, illuminating your autocratic activity for the good and happiness of your faithful subjects.

Known on this issue and the position of the supreme governing body of the Russian Orthodox Church(ROC) - of the Most Holy Synod of the composition of the winter session of 1912/1913. It is recorded in his "Blessed Letter", presented to the Emperor Nicholas II on February 21, 1913 - during the celebrations on the occasion of the 300th anniversary of the reign of the Romanov Dynasty. It said: “The royal ministry of our God-crowned Tsars from the blessed House of Romanov was a great feat of love for our native people and for our mother Church for obedience to the one God. The grace of God, which descended on Their crowned heads in the sacrament of holy chrismation (sic! - M.B.), and unshakable faith and love for their native Church, animated Them and gave Them strength to bear Their heavy royal cross. These words were signed by members of the Holy Synod: Metropolitans of St. Petersburg and Ladoga Vladimir (Bogoyavlensky), Kyiv and Galicia Flavian (Gorodetsky), Moscow and Kolomna Macarius (Parvitsky-Nevsky), Archbishops of Finland and Vyborg Sergius (Stragorodsky), Volynsky and Zhytomyr Anthony (Khrapovitsky), Vladivostok and Kamchatsky Eusebius (Nikolsky), Grodno and Brest Mikhail (Ermakov), Bishops of Yekaterinoslav and Mariupol Agapit (Vishnevsky), Omsk and Pavlodar Vladimir (Putyata), Nikon (Rozhdestvensky) - former Vologda and Totemsky.

From a slightly different angle, royal chrismation was spoken of in the teaching books of the Russian Orthodox Church: for example, in the Handbook for Hierarchs and Church Servants, published in 1913. It read: Orthodox Christian after baptism (just as, for example, consecration to the bishop is not a repetition of the previous consecration to the priesthood), but only a special type or the highest degree of the sacrament of chrismation (sic! - M.B.), in which, in view of the special purpose of the Orthodox Sovereign in the world and the Church, he is given special supreme grace gifts of royal wisdom and strength. The royal chrismation performed in our Church takes place during the Liturgy, after the communion of the clergy, before the open royal doors". Almost verbatim, the same words are reproduced in the fundamental encyclopedic edition late XIX in.

Thus, in authoritative publications published at the turn of the 19th-20th centuries, the chrismation of emperors was considered as a special degree of the sacrament of chrismation. At the same time, it was pointed out that this degree is in some way similar to that to which, in the implementation of the “repeated” sacrament of the priesthood, a priest is elevated to the episcopal rank.

However, there is also a fundamentally different point of view. She was professed by one of the most famous in the 1910-1920s. Bishop Andrey of Ufa and Menzelinsky (Prince Ukhtomsky) by his active social and political position of the hierarchs. In his biographical work, The History of My Old Believers, written in September 1926 (Bishop Andrei officially converted to the Old Believers in August 1925), Vladyka said:

“Everyone knows that Russian tsars were anointed with chrism during their coronation. From the point of view of the canonical and dogmatic, this was anointing with chrism and in no case the sacrament of chrismation. And I personally considered it a sacrament only when I was a fifth-grade gymnasium student.(sic(!), i.e. ca. 1885 - M.B.), and when he began to understand the meaning of church instructions, he began to be critical of children's textbooks(our italics. - M.B.). And so, the sacrament of anointing is not only anointing with chrism, but is something incomparably greater. The sacrament of chrismation is the mysterious introduction of the newborn into St. Church, into a grace-filled church society, and through this introduction, the newly baptized receive the special gifts of the Holy Spirit. Previously, as is known, the sacrament of chrismation was performed differently: it consisted in the laying on of hands (see [Acts 8:4-17]). Understanding this laying on of hands as an act of introducing a newly baptized Christian into the community of the earthly church, it is easy to understand that the authority to perform this sacrament should belong exclusively to the heads of the earthly community, the apostles and bishops.

There is every reason to believe that Bishop Andrei was not the only graduate of both the gymnasium and the Moscow Theological Academy (he graduated in 1895 with a degree in theology) who adhered to such an original point of view, so to speak. (For the non-recognition of the royal chrismation for the sacrament of the Church is in fact identical with the non-recognition of the emperor's anointing). Indeed, for her confession one had to have great confidence in the correctness of one's views. And this, in our opinion, could be possible if there was a kind of “atmosphere of like-minded people” among students, teachers, and fellow pastors.

Defending his point of view that the chrismation of emperors “by no means” is a sacrament, Bishop Andrei of Ufa said: “I will give several examples of anointing with chrism, which at the same time cannot be considered the sacrament of chrismation. First of all: many priests, the most pious, after anointing the newly baptized children with the world, instead of wiping the brush on some rag, anoint their forehead or head with the remnants of the world. This is done by the reverent priests, while the irreverent ones simply throw the brush with the holy myrrh into a box, into constant dust. Well, can this behavior of pious priests be regarded as the sacrament of chrismation? Further, the history of the Russian Church knows such a case: during the stay in Moscow of Patriarch Macarius of Antioch, under Patriarch Nikon, this Patriarch Macarius performed the rite of consecration of the world on Maundy Thursday. During the consecration, both patriarchs, Macarius and Nikon, descended from the pulpit and approached the vessel with oil, while the rest of the bishops held their open Gospel above their heads. And after the consecration of this world, both patriarchs mutually anointed each other with this world, and then they began to anoint all those present, starting with the bishops. Here historical fact. What was it? Blasphemy on the part of the patriarchs? Secondary sacrament of chrismation? Was the first one not enough for them? No no. It was a kind of expression of spiritual joy on the part of the bishops and laity present at the chrismation. It was an anointing with chrism, which was completely not provided for by the canons, but it, of course, was not the sacrament of chrismation.

As an objection to Bishop Andrei of Ufa on our behalf (M.B.), we point out that the chrismation of emperors was carried out not in the form of a simple (“everyday”) anointing, but as a certain rite (with the pronouncement of the corresponding liturgical petitions and special prayers), which is part of the coronation of sovereigns . Directly during the chrismation of the emperor “on the forehead, on the eyes, on the nostrils, on the lips, on the ears, on the forehead and on both sides on the hands” (and the empress only on the forehead), the anointing metropolitan proclaimed: “The seal of the gift of the Holy Spirit.”

Thus, Bishop Andrew does not take into account that the sacrament of chrismation is carried out according to a certain "formula", with the pronunciation of the sacred and mysterious words: "The seal of the gift of the Holy Spirit." Moreover, this “formula” is pronounced both at the first chrismation (at baptism) and at the second (at the crowning of emperors to the kingdom). As well as the sacrament of baptism is also performed according to a specific “formula” with the pronunciation of the words: “The servant of God is baptized, name, in the name of the Father, amen. And the Son, amen. And the Holy Spirit, amen." Indeed, just as the usual (“everyday”) immersion by a priest of a person is not the baptism of the second, so the “everyday” anointing with chrism is not the realization of the sacrament of chrismation. However, as a result of both the triple immersion and the anointing with chrism, performed certain people according to the established rites and with the pronunciation of the liturgical "formulas", the corresponding church sacraments are carried out by the action of the Holy Spirit.

It should also be noted that not in all pre-revolutionary textbooks (primarily dogmatic theology) said that the chrismation of emperors is sacrament. For example, this question was passed over in silence by the famous hierarch of the 19th century. - Archbishop of Chernigov and Nizhyn Filaret (Gumilevsky) (before his ordination to the episcopal rank, he was the rector of the Moscow Theological Academy for several years). In his textbook, passed to the publishing house by the Kyiv Spiritual Censorship Committee, in the paragraph “Who should be chrismated?” (as, indeed, in other places of the paragraph "On Confirmation" of the chapter "Means of Sanctification") Orthodox emperors were not mentioned. In fact, the readers were left to decide for themselves whether the royal chrismation was related to the sacraments of the Church or not.

Not a word was said about the chrismation of emperors in the Orthodox catechism, compiled in 1822 by Vladyka Filaret (Drozdov) and withstood from 1837 unchanged up to the present time, hundreds of reprints, including in foreign languages. (See his paragraph "On Confirmation". The Catechism was written by the Highest command and after its birth was approved by the Holy Synod).

From the above examples it follows that at the turn of the XIX-XX centuries. representatives of the hierarchy of the Russian Orthodox Church on the issue of whether the chrismation of emperors is a sacrament of the church, literally diametrically disagreed. Obviously, similar "disagreements" took place among the faculty of theological academies and seminaries, and among students of theological educational institutions, and among the flock, who listened to the sermons of their shepherds. The emergence of the considered discrepancies was due, in our opinion, essentially to a "vacuum" in such matters as the church doctrine of royal power and the rights of the emperor in the church.

According to the foregoing, it can be stated that during the period under consideration in the Russian Empire, there was, strictly speaking, no unity in faith among the Orthodox. An indication of this is different attitude church hierarchs to the chrismation of the emperor. And from this, respectively, their attitude towards the king himself depended. Indeed, if an additional sacrament is performed on him, which is not repeated over anyone else, then he is God's anointed. If the “secondary” chrismation is not a sacrament, but only some kind of pious custom, then the conclusion suggests itself that the king is not essentially a sacred figure.

The lack of "confessional unity" of church hierarchs was reflected in their attitude towards the tsar. It also passed to the Orthodox flock: to dignitaries, to the command staff of the army and navy, to the clergy, officials and to the general population as a whole. “Religious differences” within the Russian Church served as one of the important reasons that led to the “perjured” February Revolution and the overthrow of the monarchy: in which the highest clergy of the Russian Orthodox Church, as you know, took the most direct part.