home Gasification

Stone of Faith Stefan Jaworski. Read online "The Stone of Faith of the Orthodox-Catholic Eastern Church." After the creation of the Synod

Stone of Faith.
Stone of faith: the Orthodox Church of the holy sons for affirmation and spiritual creation. Those who stumble are the stumbling stone of temptation. On revolt and correction

Genre	Theology
Author	Stefan Yaworski
Original language	Church Slavonic
Date of writing	1718

Stone of Faith(full title: " Stone of faith: the Orthodox Church saints son for affirmation and spiritual creation. Those who stumble over the stumbling stone are tempted to rise up and correct themselves.") is a polemical work by Metropolitan Stefan Yavorsky, directed against Protestant preaching in Russia.

The book is primarily intended for Orthodox Christians leaning towards Protestantism. Metropolitan Stephen examines the dogmas that were disputed by Protestants at that time.

History of creation

The reason for writing the book, as stated in its preface, was the case against the heresy teacher Dimitri Evdokimov in 1713. Demetrius was born and raised in Orthodoxy, but in adulthood he adopted Protestant views from a Calvinist; he abandoned the worship of icons, the Cross and holy relics; Evdokimov spread his teachings and gathered around him people who shared his non-Orthodox views. One of Evdokimov’s followers, the barber Thomas Ivanov, reached such insolence that he publicly blasphemed St. Alexis the Metropolitan in the Chudovo Monastery and cut his icon with a knife. . In 1713, a council was convened at which the apostates were tried and anathematized. Foma Ivanov repented for his act, but he was still tried in a civil court and sentenced to death. The remaining followers, since they did not change their views, were left under church ban. Soon Evdokimov became a widower and decided to remarry; he repented and was accepted back into church communion, where he entered into marriage with his new wife.

Metropolitan Stephen worked on compiling his famous “Stone of Faith,” which, in his opinion, was supposed to serve as the main weapon of Orthodox polemics against Protestantism. It was only in 1717 that Stephen himself, after many corrections, decided to begin printing the “Stone of Faith.” In his letter to Archbishop Anthony of Chernigov (Stakhovsky), Metropolitan Stefan asked the latter, “if anywhere [in the book] cruel annoyance with opponents is found, it must be removed or softened.”

As Anton Kartashev wrote, “Of course, Stefan was told in time that such an essay, harmful to the state, which needed to attract foreigners, would not be published.” On November 27, 1722, Metropolitan Stefan died without ever seeing his work published.

book chapters:

about holy icons
about the Sign of the Holy Cross
about Holy Relics
about the Most Holy Eucharist
about the calling of saints
about the entry of holy souls leaving the body into the heavenly abodes and the participation of heavenly glory before the second coming of Christ
about doing good to the deceased, that is, about prayers, alms, fasting and especially bloodless sacrifices made for the dead
about legends
about the Most Holy Liturgy
about Holy Fasts
about good deeds that contribute to eternal salvation
on the punishment of heretics

Stephen defends icons on the grounds that they are holy not materially, but figuratively. Unlike idols, icons are not the body of God. They serve to remind us of biblical events. However, Stephen admits that only Calvinists are extreme iconoclasts. Lutherans “accept some icons” (the Crucifixion, the Last Supper), but do not worship them. At the same time, Stephen notes that not every image of God is worthy of worship. So at the Sixth Ecumenical Council it was forbidden to depict Christ in the form of a lamb. At the same time, Stephen believes that the worship of the Jews of the Brazen Serpent (from Moses to Hezekiah) was pious.

Stephen rejects Protestant ecclesiology, arguing that the church could not turn into the Whore of Babylon, despite the fact that Ancient Israel departed from God many times. Stephen uses the word “latria” to describe the service, and he calls the characteristic practice of remembering the dead “hagiomnisia.”

In challenging Protestant opinions, Stephen draws heavily from the Catholic system, although he rejects some Catholic dogmas (for example, purgatory). The Catholic element was included in articles on justification, on good works (“salvation requires good works as well as good faith”), on supererogatory merits, on the Eucharist as a sacrifice, on the punishment of heretics. Archpriest John Morev analyzed the book “The Stone of Faith” and drew attention to the fact that Stefan simply translated, rewrote, or retold entire huge chunks of texts from Latin Western authors: Bellarmina and Becan. Among such borrowings from the above-mentioned authors was the text of the apologetics of the Inquisition.

The fate of the book

The first edition of the book, printed in 1200 copies, sold out in one year. The book was republished in 1729 in Moscow, and in 1730 in Kyiv.

The book caused strong displeasure among court circles oriented towards German Protestants. The publication of the book offended many, including Feofan Prokopovich, whom many accused of sympathizing with Protestantism and even of heresy. German Protestants perceived the publication of the book “The Stone of Faith” as a challenge that required an immediate response. Information about the book already appeared in the Leipzig Scientific Acts in May 1729, and then in the same year a polemical treatise by the Jena theologian Johann Franz Buddei, “Apologetic Letter in Defense of the Lutheran Church,” was published. What most offended opponents of the book was that it repeated Catholic views on the Inquisition and justified the death penalty for heretics.

At this time, a malicious pamphlet was anonymously published in Russia, which later became known as “Hammer on the Stone of Faith,” the author of which deliberately created an offensive cartoon libel with elements of a political denunciation against his opponent. Metropolitan Stefan Yavorsky is presented as a secret Catholic agent acting in the interests of the pope, consciously opposing the church policies of Peter I and harboring ambitious plans for the restoration of the patriarchate. The locum tenens is accused of all sorts of sins: disobedience to the tsar and sabotage of his orders, passion for acquisitions and luxury, simony, sympathy for the political conspiracies of Mazepa and Tsarevich Alexei against the tsar. Actions that are moral and not subject to condemnation are presented as a manifestation of Jesuit cunning. The author treats the Russian people, the Orthodox clergy and monasticism with open contempt. In general, the work is not distinguished by its theological depth; attacks on Metropolitan Stephen take up more space than criticism of his theological views. At the end of his essay, the author of “The Hammer...” expresses confidence that the reigning Empress Anna Ioannovna, “like Peter in everything, the true heir of Peter,” will not tolerate the triumph of the opponents of Tsar Peter I, and the book “The Stone of Faith” will be banned. The hopes of the author of “Hammer...” were justified. By the highest decree of August 19, 1732, the book “The Stone of Faith” was banned.

The question of authorship still remains unambiguously unresolved. The author of the lampoon is a person, of course, informed about many circumstances of the personal life of Metropolitan Stephen, including in Kyiv, his relationship with the higher clergy and priesthood of the Ryazan diocese. He is also well aware of the relationship between the Locum Tenens and the Emperor, and understands the circumstances of palace intrigues during a change of power. There is almost no doubt that this is not a foreigner, and not a simple pastor who lived in Russia, but a person included in the highest circles of government of the Church or state. Modern researchers agree that its publication was beneficial specifically to Theophanes; Moreover, it contains a flattering review of him. Modern researcher Anton Grigoriev calls the most likely candidate for the authorship of Antiochus Cantemir.

In 1730, Archbishop Varlaam (Vonatovich) of Kiev was defrocked and imprisoned in the Cyril Monastery for not serving a prayer service on time for the Empress’s accession to the throne; but most of all he was guilty of poorly restraining his clergy from talking about Theophan’s heresy and allowing a new edition of the “Stone of Faith” to be published in Kiev.

In 1735, Theophylact was also arrested, who was responsible for the important guilt of publishing the “Stone of Faith” and who, in addition, due to his sincere frankness and trust in those around him, more than once allowed himself unnecessary speeches about the patriarchate, and about Theophan, and about the Germans, and that Empress Anna sat on the throne, overtaking the crown princess.

During the reign of Elizabeth Petrovna, the book was published again in 1749. Then it was published several times in the 19th century: in 1836 and 1843.

Notes

// Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron: in 86 volumes (82 volumes and 4 additional). - St. Petersburg. , 1890-1907.

Stefan Jaworski, metropolitan (1658-11/27/1722), church and statesman, the largest representative of the Western Russian philosophical school, spiritual writer. He was born in the borough of Yavor near Lvov into an Orthodox family, receiving the name Simeon at baptism. Subsequently, the parents, fleeing the Uniate encroachments of the Polish crown, moved to Nizhyn. He was formed as a philosopher at the Kiev-Mohyla Academy, where he studied directly with Varlaam Yasinsky, and at the Jesuit schools of Lemberg (Lviv), Poznan. At the Kyiv Academy he reached the rank of prefect, then was promoted to abbot of the Kiev-Nicholas Monastery. The speech delivered by Stefan at the funeral of Field Marshal Shein made an impression on Peter, at whose insistence he was ordained Metropolitan of Ryazan and Murom in 1700. From 1702 he held the posts of administrator, guardian, vicar and exarch of the Moscow Patriarchal Throne; upon the establishment of the Holy Synod (1721) he was appointed president of the latter.

Traditions of Kyiv and Polish schools 2nd half. XVII century determined the nature of Stefan’s main philosophical work, “The Philosophical Contest,” read at the Kiev-Mohyla Academy in 1693-94. In this work, Stephen summarized the main ideas of the Second Scholasticism. Firstly, this is the recognition of matter and form as equivalent principles of natural things, in contrast to Thomism, which absolutized the meaning of form. Form, understood as the idea and possibility of an object, is considered by Stefan as existing in matter itself and dependent on it. The “common subject” of all changes, present in every object and determining the “mutual transition of sublunar bodies,” is the first matter created by God. Secondly, this is the idea that the existence of a thing is irreducible to either form or matter. Hence, act and potency are considered not as 2 separate realities, but as 2 aspects of a specific thing. Thirdly, for Stephen the difference between essence and existence does not take place in reality, but only in concepts. Fourthly, Stefan, as a moderate nominalist, affirms the primacy of the individual over the universal, believing that “the universal is nothing or secondary.” Hence the conclusion that the subject of knowledge is the concrete existence of things. One of the methodological foundations of Stephen's philosophical views was the theory of “two truths” (religious and philosophical knowledge). Stephen's philosophical views could not but be affected by his adherence to the Western Russian theological tradition. Representatives of this tradition in Russia were called “motley”; they were considered no longer Orthodox, but not yet Catholics. The philosophical principles of this theological school are expressed in the essay “The Stone of Faith” (first published in full in 1728). These include, firstly, a significant expansion of the subject of theology compared to the Byzantine tradition. Stephen did not limit this subject to God in Himself, but included in it all the manifestations of the Divine in the world, as a result of which the subject of philosophy was significantly narrowed. Secondly, Stephen believed that there should be no intermediate disciplines between philosophy and theology. In the 18th century This understanding of the relationship between philosophy, metaphysics and theology formed the basis of school curricula. Stefan Jaworski's social views were not innovative. He recognized the king's rights to supreme power in the state, which, in his opinion, should provide the common good to all subjects. Stephen connected his hopes for deliverance from the imperfections of earthly existence with the acquisition of the Kingdom of God. If Feofan Prokopovich subjected to ideological destruction the parallelism of secular and spiritual power, which in modern times. XVIII century eked out at least a theoretical existence in the minds of the princes of the Church and the Orthodox population, then Stefan did everything possible to ensure that this parallelism was preserved in the consciousness of Russian society. Considering Stefan’s activities in the field of Russian culture as a whole, he should be credited with preparing educated cadres of ministers of the Orthodox Church.

The figure of the Russian Orthodox Church, Stefan Yavorsky, was the Metropolitan of Ryazan and the locum tenens of the patriarchal throne. He rose to prominence thanks to Peter I, but had a number of disagreements with the tsar, which eventually developed into a conflict. Shortly before the death of the locum tenens, a Synod was created, with the help of which the state completely subjugated the Church.

early years

The future religious leader Stefan Jaworski was born in 1658 in the town of Jawor, in Galicia. His parents were poor nobles. According to the terms of the Andrusovo Peace Treaty of 1667, their region finally passed to Poland. The Orthodox Yavorsky family decided to leave Yavor and move to what had become part of the Moscow state. Their new homeland turned out to be the village of Krasilovka not far from the city of Nizhyn. Here Stefan Yavorsky (in the world his name was Semyon Ivanovich) continued his education.

In his youth, he independently moved to Kyiv, where he entered the Kiev-Mohyla College. It was one of the main educational institutions in Southern Russia. Here Stefan studied until 1684. He attracted the attention of the future Varlaam Yasinsky. The young man was distinguished not only by his curiosity, but also by his outstanding natural abilities - a keen memory and attentiveness. Varlaam helped him go to study abroad.

Study in Poland

In 1684, Stefan Jaworski went to He studied with the Jesuits of Lvov and Lublin, and became acquainted with theology in Poznan and Vilna. Catholics accepted him only after the young student converted to Uniatism. Later, this act was criticized by his opponents and ill-wishers in the Russian Orthodox Church. Meanwhile, many scientists who wanted access to Western universities and libraries became Uniates. Among them were, for example, the Orthodox Epiphanius of Slavonetsky and Innocent Gisel.

Jaworski's studies in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth ended in 1689. He received a Western diploma. For several years in Poland, the theologian learned the art of rhetoric, poetry and philosophy. At this time, his worldview was finally formed, which determined all future actions and decisions. There is no doubt that it was the Jesuit Catholics who instilled in their student a persistent hostility towards Protestants, whom he would later oppose in Russia.

Return to Russia

Returning to Kyiv, Stefan Yavorsky renounced Catholicism. The local academy accepted him after the test. Varlaam Yasinsky advised Yavorsky to take monastic orders. Finally, he agreed and became a monk, taking the name Stephen. At first he was a novice at the Kiev Pechersk Lavra. When Varlaam was elected metropolitan, he helped his protégé become a teacher of oratory and rhetoric at the Academy. Yavorsky quickly received new positions. By 1691 he had already become a prefect, as well as a professor of philosophy and theology.

As a teacher, Stefan Jaworski, whose biography was connected with Poland, used Latin teaching methods. His “pupils” were future preachers and high-ranking government officials. But the main student was Feofan Prokopovich, the future main opponent of Stefan Yavorsky in the Russian Orthodox Church. Although the teacher was later accused of spreading Catholic teaching within the walls of the Kyiv Academy, these tirades turned out to be groundless. In the texts of the preacher's lectures, which have survived to this day, there are numerous descriptions of the mistakes of Western Christians.

Along with teaching and studying books, Stefan Yavorsky served in the church. It is known that he performed the wedding ceremony of his nephew. Before the war with the Swedes, the clergyman spoke positively about the hetman. In 1697, the theologian became abbot of the St. Nicholas Desert Monastery in the vicinity of Kyiv. This was an appointment that meant that Yavorsky would soon receive the rank of metropolitan. In the meantime, he helped Varlaam a lot and went to Moscow with his instructions.

Unexpected turn

In January 1700, Stefan Yavorsky, whose biography allows us to conclude that his life’s path was approaching a sharp turn, went to the capital. Metropolitan Varlaam asked him to meet with Patriarch Adrian and persuade him to create a new Pereyaslav See. The envoy fulfilled the order, but soon an unexpected event occurred that radically changed his life.

Boyar and military leader Alexei Shein died in the capital. He, together with the young Peter I, led the capture of Azov and even became the first Russian generalissimo in history. In Moscow it was decided that the funeral eulogy should be given by the recently arrived Stefan Yavorsky. This man's education and preaching abilities were demonstrated in the best possible way with a larger gathering of high-ranking officials. But most importantly, the Kyiv guest was noticed by the tsar, who was extremely impressed by his eloquence. Peter I recommended that Patriarch Adrian make the envoy Varlaam the head of some diocese not far from Moscow. Stefan Yavorsky was advised to stay in the capital for a while. Soon he was offered the new rank of Metropolitan of Ryazan and Murom. He brightened up the waiting time at the Donskoy Monastery.

Metropolitan and locum tenens

On April 7, 1700, Stefan Yavorsky became the new Metropolitan of Ryazan. The bishop immediately began to fulfill his duties and immersed himself in local church affairs. However, his solitary work in Ryazan was short-lived. Already on October 15, the elderly and sick Patriarch Adrian died. Alexey Kurbatov, a close associate of Peter I, advised him to wait to elect a successor. Instead, the king created a new position of locum tenens. The adviser proposed to install Archbishop Afanasy of Kholmogory in this place. Peter decided that it would not be he, but Stefan Yavorsky, who would become the locum tenens. The sermons of the Kyiv envoy in Moscow led him to the rank of Metropolitan of Ryazan. Now, in less than a year, he jumped to the last step and formally became the first person of the Russian Orthodox Church.

It was a meteoric rise, made possible by a combination of fortunate circumstances and the charisma of the 42-year-old theologian. His figure became a toy in the hands of the authorities. Peter wanted to get rid of the patriarchate as an institution harmful to the state. He planned to reorganize the church and bring it directly under the kings. The first implementation of this reform was the establishment of the position of locum tenens. Compared to the patriarch, a person with such a status had much less power. Its capabilities were limited and controlled by the central executive. Understanding the nature of Peter's reforms, one can guess that the appointment of a literally random and alien person to Moscow to the place of head of the church was deliberate and pre-planned.

It is unlikely that Stefan Yavorsky himself sought this honor. The Uniatism, which he went through in his youth, and other features of his views could cause a conflict with the capital’s public. The appointee did not want major troubles and understood that he was being placed in a “execution” position. In addition, the theologian missed his native Little Russia, where he had many friends and supporters. But, of course, he could not refuse the king, so he humbly accepted his offer.

Fight against heresies

Everyone was unhappy with the changes. Muscovites called Yavorsky a Cherkasy and an Oblivian. Patriarch Dosifei of Jerusalem wrote to the Russian Tsar that it was not worth promoting natives of Little Russia to the top. Peter did not pay the slightest attention to these warnings. However, Dositheus received a letter of apology, the author of which was Stefan Yavorsky himself. The opal was clear. The Patriarch did not consider the Kievite “completely Orthodox” because of his long-standing collaboration with Catholics and Jesuits. Dositheos' response to Stefan was not conciliatory. Only his successor Chrysanthos compromised with the locum tenens.

The first problem that Stefan Yavorsky had to face in his new capacity was the issue of the Old Believers. At this time, schismatics distributed leaflets throughout Moscow in which the capital of Russia was called Babylon, and Peter was called the Antichrist. The organizer of this action was the prominent book writer Grigory Talitsky. Metropolitan Stefan Yavorsky (the Ryazan see remained under his jurisdiction) tried to convince the culprit of the unrest. This dispute led to the fact that he even published his own book dedicated to the signs of the coming of the Antichrist. The work exposed the mistakes of schismatics and their manipulation of the opinions of believers.

Opponents of Stefan Jaworski

In addition to Old Believer and heretical cases, the locum tenens received the authority to identify candidates for appointments in empty dioceses. His lists were checked and agreed upon by the king himself. Only after his approval the chosen person received the rank of metropolitan. Peter created several more counterweights that significantly limited the locum tenens. Firstly, it was the Consecrated Cathedral - a meeting of bishops. Many of them were not Yavorsky’s proteges, and some were his direct opponents. Therefore, he had to defend his point of view every time in open confrontation with other church hierarchs. In fact, the locum tenens was only the first among equals, so his power could not be compared with the previous powers of the patriarchs.

Secondly, Peter I strengthened the influence of the Monastic Prikaz, at the head of which he placed his faithful boyar Ivan Musin-Pushkin. This person was positioned as an assistant and comrade of the locum tenens, but in some situations, when the king considered it necessary, he became the direct superior.

Thirdly, in 1711 the former one was finally dissolved, and in its place arose His decrees for the Church, which were equal to the royal ones. It was the Senate that received the privilege of determining whether the candidate proposed by the locum tenens is suitable for the place of bishop. Peter, who was increasingly drawn into foreign policy and the construction of St. Petersburg, delegated the powers of managing the church to the state machine and now intervened only as a last resort.

The case of Lutheran Tveritinov

In 1714, a scandal occurred that further widened the gulf, on opposite sides of which stood statesmen and Stefan Jaworski. Photographs did not exist then, but even without them, modern historians were able to restore the appearance of the German Settlement, which especially grew under Peter I. Foreign merchants, craftsmen and guests, mainly from Germany, lived in it. All of them were Lutherans or Protestants. This Western teaching began to spread among the Orthodox residents of Moscow.

The free-thinking doctor Tveritinov became a particularly active promoter of Lutheranism. Stefan Yavorsky, whose repentance to the church occurred many years ago, remembered the years spent next to Catholics and Jesuits. They instilled in the locum tenens a dislike for Protestants. The Metropolitan of Ryazan began persecuting Lutherans. Tveritinov fled to St. Petersburg, where he found patrons and defenders in the Senate among Yavorsky’s ill-wishers. A decree was issued according to which the locum tenens had to forgive alleged heretics. who usually compromised with the state, this time did not want to give in. He turned directly to the king for protection. Peter did not like the whole story of the persecution of Lutherans. The first serious conflict broke out between him and Yavorsky.

Meanwhile, the locum tenens decided to present his criticism of Protestantism and views on Orthodoxy in a separate essay. So, he soon wrote his most famous book, “The Stone of Faith.” Stefan Yavorsky in this work preached his usual sermon on the importance of preserving the former conservative foundations of the Orthodox Church. At the same time, he used rhetoric that was common among Catholics at that time. The book was filled with rejection of the reformation, which then triumphed in Germany. These ideas were propagated by the Protestants of the German Settlement.

Conflict with the king

The story of the Lutheran Tveritinov became an unpleasant wake-up call, signaling the attitude of the church and the state, which held opposing positions regarding Protestants. However, the conflict between them was much deeper and only expanded over time. It worsened when the essay “The Stone of Faith” was published. Stefan Jaworski tried to defend his conservative position with the help of this book. The authorities banned its publication.

Meanwhile, Peter moved the country's capital to St. Petersburg. Gradually all the officials moved there. The locum tenens and Metropolitan of Ryazan Stefan Yavorsky remained in Moscow. In 1718, the Tsar ordered him to go to St. Petersburg and start working in the new capital. This displeased Stefan. The king responded sharply to his objections and did not compromise. At the same time, he expressed the idea of the need to create a Spiritual College.

The project for its discovery was entrusted to the development of Feofan Prokopovich, a longtime student of Stefan Yavorsky. The locum tenens did not agree with his pro-Lutheran ideas. In the same 1718, Peter initiated the naming of Theophan as Bishop of Pskov. For the first time he received real powers. Stefan Yavorsky tried to oppose him. The repentance and fraud of the locum became the topic of conversation and rumors that spread throughout both capitals. Many influential officials who had made a career under Peter and were supporters of the course of subordinating the church to the state were opposed to him. Therefore, they tried to tarnish the reputation of Metropolitan of Ryazan using a variety of methods, including recalling his connections with Catholics during his studies in Poland.

Role in the trial of Tsarevich Alexei

Meanwhile, Peter had to resolve another conflict - this time a family one. His son and heir Alexei did not agree with his father's policies and eventually fled to Austria. He was returned to his homeland. In May 1718, Peter ordered Stefan Yavorsky to arrive in St. Petersburg to represent the church at the trial of the rebellious prince.

There were rumors that the locum tenens sympathized with Alexei and even kept in touch with him. However, there is no documentary evidence of this. On the other hand, it is known for sure that the prince did not like his father’s new church policy, and he had many supporters among the conservative Moscow clergy. At the trial, Metropolitan of Ryazan tried to defend these clergy. Many of them, along with the prince, were accused of treason and executed. Stefan Yavorsky was unable to influence Peter’s decision. The locum tenens himself performed the funeral service for Alexei, who died mysteriously in his prison cell on the eve of his execution.

After the creation of the Synod

For several years, the draft law on the creation of the Theological College was being worked on. As a result, it became known as the Holy Governing Synod. In January 1721, Peter signed a manifesto on the creation of this authority, necessary to control the church. The newly elected members of the Synod were hastily sworn in, and already in February the institution began permanent work. The patriarchate was officially abolished and left in the past.

Formally, Peter put Stefan Yavorsky at the head of the Synod. He was opposed to the new institution, considering him the undertaker of the church. He did not attend meetings of the Synod and refused to sign the papers issued by this body. In the service of the Russian state, Stefan Yavorsky saw himself in a completely different capacity. Peter kept him in a nominal position only in order to demonstrate the formal continuity of the institutions of the patriarchate, locum tenens and the Synod.

In the highest circles, denunciations continued to spread, in which Stefan Yavorsky made a reservation. Fraud during the construction of the Nezhinsky monastery and other unscrupulous machinations were attributed to the Metropolitan of Ryazan in evil tongues. He began to live in a state of constant stress, which significantly affected his well-being. Stefan Yavorsky died on December 8, 1722 in Moscow. He became the first and last long-term locum tenens of the Patriarchal Throne in Russian history. After his death, a two-century synodal period began, when the state made the church part of its bureaucratic machine.

The fate of the "Stone of Faith"

It is interesting that the book “The Stone of Faith” (the main literary work of the locum tenens) was published in 1728, when he and Peter were already in the grave. The work, which criticized Protestantism, was an extraordinary success. Its first edition quickly sold out. Later the book was reprinted several times. When during the reign of Anna Ioannovna there were many favorite Germans of the Lutheran faith in power, the “Stone of Faith” was again banned.

The work not only criticized Protestantism, but, more importantly, became the best systematic presentation of Orthodox doctrine at that time. Stefan Jaworski emphasized the places in which it differed from Lutheranism. The treatise was devoted to the attitude towards relics, icons, the sacrament of the Eucharist, sacred tradition, attitude towards heretics, etc. When the Orthodox party finally triumphed under Elizabeth Petrovna, “The Stone of Faith” became the main theological work of the Russian Church and remained so throughout the entire 18th century .

Stone of Faith.
Stone of faith: the Orthodox Church of the holy sons for affirmation and spiritual creation. Those who stumble are the stumbling stone of temptation. On revolt and correction

Genre	Theology
Author	Stefan Jaworski
Original language	Church Slavonic
Date of writing	1718

The book is primarily intended for Orthodox Christians leaning towards Protestantism. Metropolitan Stephen examines the dogmas that were disputed by Protestants at that time.

History of creation

The reason for writing the book, as stated in its preface, was the case against the heresy teacher Dimitri Evdokimov in 1713. Demetrius was born and raised in Orthodoxy, but in adulthood he adopted Protestant views from a Calvinist; he abandoned the worship of icons, the Cross and holy relics; Evdokimov spread his teachings and gathered around him people who shared his non-Orthodox views. One of Evdokimov’s followers, the barber Thomas Ivanov, reached such insolence that he publicly blasphemed St. Alexis the Metropolitan in the Chudov Monastery and cut his icon with a knife. . In 1713, a council was convened at which the apostates were tried and anathematized. Foma Ivanov repented for his act, but he was still tried in a civil court and sentenced to death. The remaining followers, since they did not change their views, were left under church ban. Soon Evdokimov became a widower and decided to remarry; he repented and was accepted back into church communion, where he entered into marriage with his new wife.

Metropolitan Stephen worked on compiling his famous “Stone of Faith,” which, in his opinion, was supposed to serve as the main weapon of Orthodox polemics against Protestantism. It was only in 1717 that Stephen himself, after many corrections, decided to begin printing the “Stone of Faith.” In his letter to Archbishop Anthony (Stakhovsky) of Chernigov, Metropolitan Stefan asked the latter, “if anywhere [in the book] cruel annoyance with opponents is found, it must be removed or softened.”

book chapters:

about holy icons
about the Sign of the Holy Cross
about Holy Relics
about the Most Holy Eucharist
about the calling of saints
about the entry of holy souls leaving the body into the heavenly abodes and the participation of heavenly glory before the second coming of Christ
about doing good to the deceased, that is, about prayers, alms, fasting and especially bloodless sacrifices made for the dead
about legends
about the Most Holy Liturgy
about Holy Fasts
about good deeds that contribute to eternal salvation
on the punishment of heretics

Stephen rejects Protestant ecclesiology, arguing that the church could not turn into the Whore of Babylon, despite the fact that ancient Israel departed from God many times. Stephen uses the word “latria” to describe the service, and he calls the characteristic practice of remembering the dead “hagiomnisia.”

In challenging Protestant opinions, Stephen draws heavily from the Catholic system, although he rejects some Catholic dogmas (for example, purgatory). The Catholic element was included in articles on justification, on good works (“salvation requires good works as well as good faith”), on supererogatory merits, on the Eucharist as a sacrifice, and on the punishment of heretics. Archpriest John Morev analyzed the book “The Stone of Faith” and drew attention to the fact that Stefan simply translated, rewrote, or retold entire huge chunks of texts from Latin Western authors: Bellarmina and Becan. Among such borrowings from the above-mentioned authors was the text of the apologetics of the Inquisition.

The fate of the book

The book caused strong displeasure among court circles oriented towards German Protestants. The publication of the book offended many, including Feofan Prokopovich, whom many accused of sympathizing with Protestantism and even of heresy. German Protestants perceived the publication of the book “The Stone of Faith” as a challenge that required an immediate response. Information about the book already appeared in the Leipzig Scientific Acts in May 1729, and then in the same year a polemical treatise by the Jena theologian Johann Franz Budday, “Apologetic Letter in Defense of the Lutheran Church,” was published. What most offended opponents of the book was that it repeated Catholic views on the Inquisition and justified the death penalty for heretics. The favorite of Peter the Great, Mikhail Shiryaev, wrote one of his poems in defense of the “Stone of Faith”.

During the reign of Elizabeth Petrovna, the book was published again in 1749. Then it was published several times in the 19th century: in 1836 and 1843.

Notes

// Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron: in 86 volumes (82 volumes and 4 additional). - St. Petersburg. , 1890-1907.