The Russian Church under
the Mongols (1237-1448).
The suzerainty of the Mongol Tartars over Russia lasted from 1237 until 1480. But after
the
great battle of Kulikovo (1380), when the
Russians dared at last to face their oppressors in an
open fight and actually defeated them, Mongol overlordship was considerably weakened; by
1450 it had become largely nominal. More
than anything else, it was the Church which kept alive
Russian national consciousness in the
thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, as the Church was later
to preserve a sense of unity among the
Greeks under Turkish rule. The Russia which emerged
from the Mongol period was a Russia greatly
changed in outward appearance. Kiev never recov-
ered from the sack of 1237, and its place
was taken in the fourteenth century by the Principality
of Moscow. It was the Grand Dukes of
Moscow who inspired the resistance to the Mongols and
who led Russia at Kulikovo. The rise of
Moscow was closely bound up with the Church. When
the town was still small and comparatively
unimportant, Peter, Metropolitan of Russia from 1308
to 1326, decided to settle there; and
henceforward it remained the city of the chief hierarch of
Russia.
Three figures in the history of the Russian Church during the Mongol
period call for
particular mention, all of them saints:
Alexander Nevsky, Stephen of Perm, and Sergius of Ra-
donezh.
Alexander Nevsky (died 1263), one of the great warrior saints of Russia,
has been compared
with his western contemporary, Saint
Louis, King of France. He was Prince of Novgorod, the
one major principality in Russia to escape
unharmed in 1237. But soon after the coming of the
Tartars, Alexander found himself
threatened by other enemies from the west: Swedes, Germans,
and Lithuanians. It was impossible to
fight on two fronts at once. Alexander decided to submit to
Tartar
overlordship and to pay tribute; but against his western opponents he
put up a vigorous
resistance, inflicting two decisive
defeats upon them . over the Swedes in 1240 and over the
Teutonic Knights in 1242. His reason for
treating with the Tartars rather than the west was pri-
marily religious: the Tartars took tribute
but refrained from interfering in the life of the Church,
whereas the Teutonic Knights had as their
avowed aim the reduction of the Russian .schismat-
ics. to the jurisdiction of the Pope. This
was the very period when a Latin Patriarch reigned in
Constantinople, and the German Crusaders
in the north aimed to break Orthodox Novgorod, just
as their fellow Crusaders in the south had
broken Orthodox Constantinople in 1204. But Alexan-
der, despite the Mongol menace, refused
any religious compromise. .Our doctrines are those
preached by the Apostles,. he is reported
to have replied to messengers from the Pope. ..The
tradition of the Holy Fathers of the Seven
Councils we scrupulously keep. As for your words, we
do not listen to them and we do not want
your doctrine. (From the thirteenth-century life of Alexander
43
Nevsky; quoted in Fedotov, The Russian Religious Mind, p. 383). Two centuries later the Greeks after the
Council of Florence made the same choice:
political submission to the infidel rather than what
they felt would be spiritual capitulation
to the Church of Rome.
Stephen of Perm brings us to another aspect of Church life under the
Mongols: missionary
work. From its early days the Russian
Church was a missionary Church, and the Russians were
quick to send evangelists among their pagan
conquerors. In 1261 a
certain Mitrophan went as
missionary bishop to Sarai, the Tartar
capital on the Volga. Others preached,
not among the
Mongols, but among the primitive pagan
tribes in the north-east and far north of the Russian con-
tinent. True to the example of Cyril and
Methodius, these missionaries translated the Bible and
Church services into the languages and
dialects of the people to whom they ministered.
Saint Stephen, Bishop of Perm (1340?-1396), worked among the Zyrian
tribes. He spent
thirteen years of preparation in a
monastery, studying not only the native dialects but also Greek,
to be the better fitted for the work of
translation. While Cyril and Methodius had employed an
adapted Greek alphabet in their Slavonic
translations, Stephen made use of the native runes. He
was an icon painter, and sought to show
forth God as the God not of truth only, but of beauty.
Like many other of the early Russian
missionaries, he did not follow in the wake of military and
political conquest, but was ahead of it.
Sergius of Radonezh (1314?-1392), the greatest national saint of Russia,
is closely con-
nected with the recovery of the land in
the fourteenth century. The outward pattern of his life re-
calls that of Saint Antony of Egypt. In early manhood Sergius withdrew into the
forests (the
northern equivalent of the Egyptian
desert) and here he founded a hermitage dedicated to the
Holy Trinity. After several years of
solitude, his place of retreat became known, disciples gath-
ered round him, and he grew into a
spiritual guide, an .elder. or starets. Finally (and
here the
parallel with Antony ends) he turned his
group of disciples into a regular monastery, which be-
came within his own lifetime the greatest
religious house in the land. What the Monastery of the
Caves was to Kievan Russia, the Monastery
of the Holy Trinity was to Muscovy.
Sergius displayed the same deliberate self-humiliation as Theodosius,
living (despite his
noble birth) as a peasant, dressing in the
poorest of clothing. .His garb was of coarse peasant felt,
old and worn, unwashed, saturated with
sweat, and heavily patched. (Saint Epiphanius, .The Life of
Saint Sergius,. in Fedotov, A Treasury of Russian Spirituality, pp. 69-70). At the height of his fame, when
Abbot of a great community, he still
worked in the kitchen garden. Often when he was pointed
out to visitors, they could not believe
that it was really the celebrated Sergius. .I came to see a
prophet,. exclaimed one man in disgust,
.and you show me a beggar. (Epiphanius, in
Fedotov, op.
cit., p. 70). Like Theodosius, Sergius played an active
part in politics. A close friend of the Grand
Dukes of Moscow, he encouraged the city in
its expansion, and it is significant that before the
Battle of Kulikovo the leader of the
Russian forces, Prince Dmitry Donskoy, went specially to
Sergius to secure his blessing.
But while there exist many parallels in the lives of Theodosius and
Sergius, two important
points of difference must be noted. First,
whereas the Monastery of the Caves, like most monas-
teries
in Kievan Russia,
lay on the
outskirts of a
city, the Monastery of
the Holy Trinity
was
founded in the wilderness at a distance
from the civilized world. Sergius was in his way an ex-
plorer and a colonist, pushing forward the
boundaries of civilization and reducing the forest to
cultivation. Nor is he the only example of
a colonist monk at this time. Others went like him into
the forests to become hermits, but in
their case as in his, what started as a hermitage soon grew
into a regular monastery, with a civilian
town outside the walls. Then the whole process would
start all over again: a fresh generation
of monks in search of the solitary life would make their
44
way into the yet more distant forest,
disciples would follow, new communities would form, fresh
land would be cleared for agriculture.
This steady advance of colonist monks is one of the most
striking features of fourteenth- and fifteenth-century
Russia. From Radonezh and other centers a
vast network of religious houses spread
swiftly across the whole of north Russia
as far as the
White Sea and the Arctic Circle. Fifty
communities were founded by disciples of Sergius in his
own lifetime, forty more by his followers
in the next generation. These explorer monks were not
only colonists but missionaries, for as
they penetrated farther north, they preached Christianity to
the wild pagan tribes in the forests
around them.
In
the second place, while there is in the
religious experience of Theodosius nothing that
can
be termed specifically mystical, in
Sergius a new
dimension of the
spiritual life becomes
evident. Sergius was a contemporary of
Gregory Palamas, and it is not impossible that he knew
something of the Hesychast movement in
Byzantium. At any rate some of the visions granted to
Sergius in prayer, which his biographer
Epiphanius recorded, can only be interpreted in a mysti-
cal sense.
Sergius has been called a .Builder of Russia,. and such he was in three
senses: politically,
for he encouraged the rise of Moscow and
the resistance against the Tartars; geographically, for
it was he more than any other who inspired
the great advance of monks into the forests;
and
spiritually, for through his experience of
mystical prayer he deepened the inner life of the Rus-
sian Church. Better, perhaps, than any
other Russian saint, he succeeded in balancing the social
and mystical aspects of monasticism. Under
his influence and that of his followers, the two cen-
turies from 1350 to 1550 proved a golden
age in Russian spirituality.
These two centuries were also a golden age in Russian religious art.
During these years
Russian painters carried to perfection the
iconographic traditions which they had taken over from
Byzantium. Icon painting flourished above all among
the spiritual children of Saint Sergius. It is
no coincidence that the finest of all
Orthodox icons from the artistic point of view . the Holy
Trinity, by Saint Andrew Rublev
(1370?-1430?) . should have been painted in honor of Saint
Sergius and placed in his monastery at
Radonezh.
Sixty-one years after the death of Sergius, the Byzantine Empire fell to the Turks. The new
Russia which took shape after Kulikovo, and
which the Saint himself had done so much to build,
was now
called to take Byzantium.s place as protector of the Orthodox
world. It proved both
worthy and unworthy of this vocation.
|