There were periods in the history of Russia when it was the Church that led the people out of the crisis. Let us remember St. Sergius of Radonezh, let us remember the Hieromartyr Patriarch Hermogenes and the role of the Church in the liberation of Moscow from the Poles during the Time of Troubles. However, not all state-national crises in the history of Russia were overcome with the primary participation of the Church. For example, the victory in the Patriotic War of 1812 was brought by the heroism of Russian soldiers and officers, and not by the sermons of hermits who visited the army in the field; the terrorists of 1905 were pacified by Stolypin and his "ties", and not by the proclamations of the Synod. I think that Russia, if it is destined to get out of it, will be led out of the current crisis by people in uniform, and not by people in cassocks.

However, I am not at all sure that Russia will be able to get out of the current crisis. You know, I would like to preach today against riots, uprisings and pogroms, but, unfortunately, there are none. What I have listed is all outbursts of terrible, of course, destructive energy, but it is at least energy. When these outbursts are absent at all, it means one of two things: either the people have reached such a degree of perfection and holiness that they know how to live according to the Gospel and really forgive their enemies, or this is the apathy of a corpse that does not care what is done to it. And sad as it is to me, it seems that the second is true. Apparently, the Bolsheviks did break Russia, broke its back, and today it looks like a dog with a broken spine, which still whines, sometimes even barks, scratches with its paws, but it can neither guard its kennel (not to mention the house), nor bite a thief - it can no longer do anything. While a person is still alive, he has at least a knee-jerk reflex: if you hit the cup, pull your leg and hit the offender in the face with a shoe. But when they beat under the cup, and the leg no longer moves, it means that it is either a corpse or a paralytic. Over the past ten years, we have already been hit at all possible sore spots, especially by our television people and propagandists of the "new world order". All national, historical, religious shrines were desecrated, at least verbally, in a stream of mockery and caricatures. There is no reaction. The people drank through the collapse of the USSR, now they are calmly waiting for the collapse of Russia. Therefore, it seems to me that our people are "more dead than alive."

Folklore died out in our country. No songs, no poems lamenting the pain over the knee of the reformed Motherland... Not even jokes or ditties about "democratizers". And how do the inhabitants of Russia feel about Russian refugees from Kazakhstan and Central Asia, the Baltic States and the Caucasus? Help and sympathy or indifference and contempt meet them in Russia? And was Orthodox Russia truly able to celebrate the 2000th anniversary of the Nativity of Christ in a truly popular and sincere way? It seems that we can no longer rejoice or cry.

And I will say one more bitter thing. In the press, I came across information that alcohol consumption in Bashkiria has sharply decreased in recent years. This trend is a disgrace for our people, "baptized, but not catechumenized." After all, what does it mean? According to the laws of Islam, drinking alcohol is a sin. And now we see that the Bashkirs have taken seriously the return to the norms of life of their fathers. And in Russia, no matter how many churches we open, the consumption of vodka is growing. And I am afraid that this means that all our pathos of the "second baptism" will go into the bells, into the whistle, and not into the real revival of life.

Rep.: But Moscow is really the Third Rome. By the power of its statehood, it defended universal Orthodoxy after the fall of Byzantium, and the rest of the Orthodox peoples hoped for it. Remember in Lewis's "The Vile Power": when Merlin wakes up and sees how difficult the situation is, he says: "Let us appeal to the Christian kings!" – "Well, then let's appeal to the Byzantine emperor!" – "There is no emperor either." And Merlin says: "In terrible times I woke up"... 863

А.К.: You know, maybe that's why they don't exist, because too many hopes were pinned on them. Yes, the empire is a fence for Orthodoxy. But if you put too much effort into maintaining the fence, in its decoration and strengthening, then you may not notice that within the fence itself, the ground has ceased to bear fruit. It has been trampled underfoot, turned into an army parade ground, and therefore has become infertile. And today I am rather frightened by calls to restore the Orthodox monarchy. Too often, the tone and motivation of these appeals are such that one has to recall the words of Nietzsche: "These people pretend that they believe in God, but in fact they believe only in the police."

I am not going to answer for the whole Church: I have no right to do so. But I will say on my own behalf: I personally (I emphasize again – I am talking only about myself; let others talk about the spiritual needs of other people) do not need an Orthodox monarchy. We are told that monarchy is needed in order to protect the Church from heresies... Here, for example, is a quote: "Thus, autocracy is absolutely necessary precisely in order to give the Church normal conditions of existence, to protect it from a multitude of enemies."864

Here, however, the question arises: how did the apostles walk through the Roman Empire without being accompanied by gendarmes? And today I can protect myself from heresies: in order to keep my mind within the framework of Orthodoxy, I do not need an Orthodox mayor. Or will the monarchy give me not a guardian soul, but bodykeepers who will protect my physical life from the attacks of sectarians? But isn't it strange to risk the lives of other people to save your own? However, the word "salvation" here is ambiguous: it is precisely in the event that the enemies of Orthodoxy kill the body of an Orthodox preacher, his soul will be saved. So what do bodyguards protect against? From the path to the Kingdom of God? Is it not better to rely on God's Providence? Moreover, a priest or missionary who walks with armed guards is unlikely to arouse sympathy for the faith that he preaches. It is still strange to see monasteries under the protection of dozens of Cossacks and policemen (guarding not icons in churches, but fraternal buildings), because monks are by definition! – the "living" dead. These monastic bodyguards especially multiplied after the murder in the Optina Hermitage. We had forgotten the axioms of church life to such an extent that letters and telegrams of condolences were sent to Optina from Orthodox congregations and pastors! But was such a thing conceivable in the ancient Church? Is it possible that in Carthage they learn that several priests have been executed in Rome, and send a messenger there to express sincere condolences? Is this not a feast for the Church – the appearance of new martyrs, new saints?

The Savior said: "I send you out as sheep among wolves..." (Matt. 10:16). Didn't the "sheep" then take too much from the "wolves"? Should sheep dream of a false wolf's jaw? As one philosopher put it, "The Church itself provoked its own crushing defeat in the battle for culture. Too often, instead of fulfilling the commandment of love, she insisted on tightening the law; instead of knocking softly on doors, she broke them down; Instead of just being here, open to those in need and willing to serve them, she loudly demanded to be served; instead of accepting insults in humiliation, she proudly rebuffed."865

They also say that the Orthodox monarchy is needed in order to attract people to the church. However, people come to those lectures that are really interesting without any urging from the state. And on the contrary, I often see that the church of an untalented preacher is empty. But, unable to honestly admit to himself his own lack of talent, this unfortunate preacher begins to look for reasons somewhere outside, and accordingly he sees purely external measures to improve the situation. He will come to school, and the children will not listen to him. And instead of thinking: "Maybe I am too poor and boring, it is my fault that the children do not listen to me," he begins to dream: "If only there were an Orthodox tsar, he would organize a school in which the children would be obliged to listen to me."

Or maybe you need to look in the other direction with hope? It is better to leave the plans for the restoration of the Orthodox monarchy to God (for it cannot be anything other than a miracle), and not to act in His place, and not to calculate the terms in His place. And we ourselves begin to do what really depends on us – for example, to force ourselves to receive a serious theological education. Today, even among priests, no more than one in ten has at least a seminary education. And let us recall the words of St. Philaret of Moscow: "In Christianity, no one is allowed to be completely unlearned and remain ignorant. Did not the Lord Himself call Himself His Teacher and His followers disciples? Are these idle names that mean nothing? And why did the Lord send the apostles into the world? First of all, teach all nations: "Go and teach all nations..." (cf. Matt. 28:19). If you do not want to teach and enlighten yourself in Christianity, then you are not a disciple and follower of Christ – the apostles were not sent for you – you are not what all Christians have been from the very beginning of Christianity; I don't know what you are and what will happen to you." 866

It seems to me that instead of looking for prophecies and signs of the coming drastic changes, you should move to the ethics of small deeds and just do what is your Christian duty. Let us remember the Gospel commandment: "Do not be anxious about tomorrow." We need to try to put things in order in our souls, and not reach for a vodka glass with another fortune-telling: "What will happen to the Motherland and to us?" … The best step towards the revival of Russia is simply a boycott of wine and vodka stores.

For Orthodox people, the first step towards the defense of Russia is not in a hasty rush to a "protest" rally. If you study Orthodox theology yourself, then you will not need not only an Orthodox policeman, you will not need Deacon Andrei Kuraev either. Then you yourself will be able to distinguish between Orthodoxy and a surrogate, and you will be able to adequately respond to sectarians and protect your loved ones from sects.

But such an episode is painfully characteristic of our current state of mind. It was in one of the northern Siberian cities. A woman who sells books in a local church complained about the sectarians: "Protestants often come to our church and, of course, they attack our icons. It happens that I am alone in church – so they pester me with their attacks. I defend our icons as best I can, but for some reason they do not believe me. And I tell them that we bow to icons because the Savior commanded us to do so. After all, Christ Himself created the first icon when He presented the cloth with His face to Tsar Augarus. And they tell me that there is nothing in the Bible about this. Are they right? Look: this is undoubtedly one of the most conscious and literate parishioners, since she is assigned to books. She hears these questions repeatedly. And she understands that the fate of many people depends on her answers. And the books she needed were at hand. But it did not occur to her to look for the right book herself, open it and learn from there a few truly biblical arguments in defense of the veneration of icons and Orthodoxy. Even for the sake of many people who turn to her, she did not deign to work.