On October 16 (October 3 on the Julian Calendar) we commemorate Saint Agathangel, Metropolitan of Yaroslavl, confessor under the Communist yoke, who reposed in the Lord in 1928.
Metropolitan Agathangel (in the world Alexander Lavrentyevich Preobrazhensky) was born on September 27, 1854 in the village of Mochily, Venevsky district, Tula province, into a priest's family. Raised by his parents in obedience to the Christian faith and strict observance of church rites, he highly valued serving the Holy Church in the priesthood. As a child, he loved to spend long periods of time in the cemetery, walking among the graves and crosses - eloquent evidence that all is dust, all is ashes, all is shadow. Here, with tears in his eyes, Alexander asked the Lord to allow him to become a servant of the altar in due time and offer a propitiatory bloodless sacrifice for those who have finished their earthly life. This desire was so great that when, after graduating from college, the opportunity presented itself to enter a privileged capital educational institution, he decisively rejected it. His relatives advised him not to pass up the opportunity to receive a serious secular education, which would open up wide opportunities for him in life. Seeing the ineffectiveness of their advice, his family tried to force him to agree with them and abandon his thoughts of receiving a theological education, but all was in vain. Feeling an irresistible attraction to church service, Alexander, with his characteristic determination and persistence, insisted on continuing his education at the Tula Theological Seminary, which he entered in 1871.
In those years, seminary education in Russia was in a deplorable state, and materialistic and unspiritual sciences were freely penetrating the walls of theological educational institutions. Under the guise of new scientific discoveries, social and natural science myths began to be openly asserted in the field of scientific knowledge. The ideal of serving in the spiritual field among educated society was almost lost, and society entered a state of spiritual ossification. Professions that arranged earthly life - engineer, doctor, etc. - became fashionable and morally praiseworthy. The passion for natural sciences among educated youth did not leave Alexander aside and, in the end, captivated his mind and heart. His ardent desire to serve the Church of Christ in the holy orders cooled during his studies, and by the end of his studies he decided to leave the seminary and enter a secular educational institution to become a doctor.
He began preparing for admission. And suddenly he fell seriously ill. The illness lasted for about a year, and not only did he not have the strength to prepare for the entrance exams, but he had to postpone his studies altogether. Having recovered from the illness, Alexander did not abandon his intention to become a doctor, but another test was not long in coming - his father, a priest, died, he had to take care of the orphaned family, and Alexander agreed to become a rural pastor in his father's parish. However, God's Providence prepared a different path for him. As the best student at the seminary, he received a referral to the Moscow Theological Academy to continue his theological education. Here, in the monastery of St. Sergius, his first youthful desire to become a priest returned to him. But whether as a priest or a hieromonk - Alexander did not know. And often, reverently bowing before the relics of St. Sergius, he prayed and asked: should I remain forever within the walls of the monastery? And an inner mysterious voice answered him: "It is good to be here, stay, stay here." But, alas, he did not listen to this inner voice. The tempting offers of the world seduced him, and he refused to enter the monastic path.
Having graduated brilliantly from the Theological Academy in 1881 with a degree in theology, he was appointed to the position of teacher of Latin at the Ranenburg Theological School. On December 7, 1882, Alexander Lavrentyevich was transferred to the position of superintendent of the Skopin Theological School. Having chosen a family way of life, he got married, but here a new grief befell him. After eleven months of happy life, he lost both his wife and son at once. And only then, grief-stricken, consumed by a feeling of bitter orphanhood and homelessness, feeling as if he were superfluous in this world, thrown out of life, he realized that the path in life he had chosen was not his path; and he asked himself: is it really necessary to try harder to catch fleeting shadows, to chase after the phantoms of deceptive pleasures? And then the blessed light of Christ, forgotten in the vanity of life, obscured by the images of this world, but never extinguished, flashed and illuminated his thoughts, his feelings, his suffering - and everything was illuminated: both his soul and his life. And bowing before the inscrutable will of God, Alexander this time firmly decided to leave the world, take up his cross and accept monasticism.
On March 7, 1885, he took monastic vows with the name Agathangel, and on March 10, he was ordained a hieromonk; the following year, he was appointed inspector of the Tomsk Theological Seminary and elevated to the rank of hegumen, and in 1888, rector of the Irkutsk Theological Seminary and elevated to the rank of archimandrite. Upon his arrival at the Irkutsk Seminary, Fr. Agathangel set about creating a good order appropriate to a theological school. With his selflessness and love for his work, he earned the trust and goodwill of both his colleagues and students.
On September 9, 1889, in the Irkutsk Church of the Cross, Archimandrite Agathangel was named Bishop of Kirensk, Vicar of the Irkutsk Diocese; the next day, in the Irkutsk Ascension Monastery, in front of a huge crowd of people, he was consecrated as a bishop. In 1893, Bishop Agathangel was transferred to an independent see in Tobolsk. Here he had to work not only as a diocesan bishop, but also as a missionary. Every year he undertook long and distant journeys to the most remote corners of the diocese, not imagining then that thirty years later he would have to walk through these places again, but this time as a prisoner.
In 1897 he was appointed Bishop of Riga and Mitava; in 1904 he was elevated to the rank of Archbishop; in 1910 he was appointed Archbishop of Vilnius and Lithuania. Two years later, for his zealous service to the Church of Christ, Bishop Agathangel was awarded a diamond cross to be worn on his klobuk. The decree on the award described him as a saint distinguished by his concern for the development of religious and educational societies, and his unfailing benevolence towards the clergy and laity, combined with firmness. During this period of his service, the Archbishop gained fame as a bishop with broad liberal views. After the revolution of 1905, when many of its participants in Latvia were sentenced to death, he made an energetic petition to have the death sentences overturned. The civil authorities granted the bishop's petition, and thus many were saved from violent death.
In 1913, Archbishop Agathangel was appointed to Yaroslavl, and in April 1917, he was elevated to the rank of Metropolitan of Yaroslavl and Rostov. In the Synod formed under Patriarch Tikhon, the Metropolitan was elected as a permanent member.
After the October Revolution, which eventually spread widely across the entire expanse of Russia with persecutions and unrest, came trials and sorrows from the priests subordinate to the Lord. After the godless revolution, fornicators, drunkards and extortionists, wolves in sheep's clothing, left the Church to form their own renovationist and living church church. When they left, they caused the Church many annoyances.
In 1919, the priest of the village of Nikolsko-Troitskoye in the Tutayev district, Nemirov, became a widower and two years later entered into a civil marriage, for which, in accordance with church canons, he was suspended from serving by Metropolitan Agathangel. Nemirov ignored the ban, gathered the parishioners and convinced them that the Holy Scriptures did not say anywhere that a widowed priest could not marry, and the parishioners decided that Nemirov should begin to fulfill his duties as a priest. The Metropolitan sent a dean to explain to the parishioners how important and obligatory the church canons were. However, Nemirov's associates ignored the Metropolitan's ban. At the end of January, Bishop Veniamin (Voskresensky) arrived in Tutayev, to whom the Metropolitan entrusted Nemirov's case. In his instructions to him, Metropolitan Agathangel wrote:
You... need to go there to give the parishioners an admonition, a warning, a warning and threats. In conclusion, say that... the former priest Nemirov will be excommunicated from the Church, and along with him, those who will pray with him and even have any communication with him.
Be extremely careful with Nemirov. He may be so impudent that he dares to meet you in vestments and with a cross or commit some other blasphemous act. From the first word, you reject all this and remove him, ordering him to undress and leave the church, do not even give him the archpastoral blessing.
I realize that this mission is difficult for you, but I firmly hope that the Lord will help you to accomplish it without heavy sighs and will bless you with success.
It would be best for you to come to Nikolsko-Troitskoye on a holiday, having warned the parishioners of the day and hour of your arrival. By the way, if you arrive at the church at a time when Nemirov is conducting a service or a service, first of all stop this blasphemy
On January 22, Bishop Veniamin convened a general meeting of parishioners, which decided to dismiss Nemirov. But Nemirov's supporters convened their own meeting, which decided that the meeting of January 22 was illegal, and decided to meet on March 5. At the meeting on March 5, Bishop Veniamin again read to the people the decree on Nemirov's defrocking, as well as his excommunication from the Church for failure to comply with the orders of the Metropolitan. But no matter how hard the bishop tried to convince the parishioners to agree with the opinion of the Metropolitan and stop supporting the violator of church canons who had placed himself outside the Church, he was unable to convince the noisy meeting. "If you like Nemirov so much," said the bishop, "intercede for him with Metropolitan Agathangel, and if he refuses, with Patriarch Tikhon."
Nemirov's supporters did not appeal to the Patriarch, but turned to Lenin, demanding that the authorities bring Metropolitan Agathangel to trial for violating the decree on civil marriage, and also "through legal bodies subject to Soviet authority, clarify... the question of the right of widowed clergy to freely enter into civil marriage, and whether the church authorities have the right to use... violence... for entering into civil marriage." The statement was forwarded to the 5th Department of the People's Commissariat of Justice, and then to the secret department of the GPU Samsonov with Krasikov's resolution: "Immediately give instructions to the Provincial Department that, upon establishing this fact, they should collect additional material on the bishop, arrest him and bring him to trial."
On May 13, the Yaroslavl GPU gave the order to search the metropolitan's chambers in the Spassky Monastery for church valuables, in order (if any were found) to accuse the metropolitan of hiding them. The GPU officers rummaged through all the chests, but found nothing except household belongings and bishop's vestments. On May 16, the head of the first secret department of the Yaroslavl GPU ordered that a case be opened against the metropolitan and that measures be taken to find out what the views and convictions of the Yaroslavl bishop were.
But it was not the requests of the excommunicated priest to the authorities, nor the orders of the People's Commissar of Justice, nor even the orders of the local GPU that served as the reason for the persecution of Metropolitan Agafangel. A new persecution of the Orthodox Church began. Trials were opened in Ivanovo-Voznesensk and Moscow on the case of the confiscation of church valuables.
On May 9, the authorities announced to Patriarch Tikhon that he was being brought to trial as a defendant in a case of resisting the confiscation of church valuables.
On May 12, 1922, the Patriarch sent a letter to the Chairman of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee: "In view of the extreme difficulty in church administration that has arisen from my being brought to civil court, I consider it useful for the good of the Church to temporarily, until the convocation of the Council, place at the head of the Church Administration either Metropolitan Agathangel (Preobrazhensky) of Yaroslavl or Veniamin (Kazansky) of Petrograd."
After this, the Renovationists tried to legitimize their church administration, seeking recognition by Metropolitans Agathangel and Veniamin. From that time on, the future fate of the metropolitans depended on their attitude toward the Renovationists. And so, having barely managed to take from Patriarch Tikhon a document on the transfer of power to Metropolitan Agathangel, the head of the Living Church, Vladimir Krasnitsky, hurried to Yaroslavl to see the metropolitan. He found Bishop Agathangel in the Tolga Monastery. Krasnitsky presented a document from May 3 (16) on the transfer of church administration to Metropolitan Agathangel.
After the Metropolitan read the document, Krasnitsky began to outline the purpose of his visit. He briefly explained that the Church's governance was going down the wrong path, that it was the path of counterrevolution. And it had to be changed. Some things were already being done in this direction. For example, an appeal by a group of clergymen had been published in central newspapers.
"The Church must remain outside of parties and outside of politics," the Metropolitan objected.
"I completely agree with you," Krasnitsky picked up. "Could you please express this point of view in writing?"
This rude zeal of Krasnitsky unpleasantly struck the bishop and he hastened to reject the offer.
It is unlikely that Krasnitsky believed that he would be able to convince the metropolitan to support the GPU; he hoped much more that the GPU would arrest the metropolitan for resisting the Renovationists. Couldn't the GPU, which had almost unlimited power, organize the GPU's accession to the governance of the Orthodox Church? And Krasnitsky decided not to bother himself with negotiations with the diplomatically reserved and firmly unyielding metropolitan. But having obligations to the GPU to clarify the metropolitan's position, he asked whether the metropolitan would sign the appeal of the "initiative group of the clergy," published in the newspapers. The metropolitan refused.
"And may I ask why?" asked Krasnitsky.
"I know little about it and it has not been discussed in wide church circles," the bishop replied.
At this point the conversation ended. That same day Krasnitsky left for Moscow, where he informed the GPU leadership about the conversation that had taken place. The consequences were immediate. The next day, the head of the secret operational department of the GPU Menzhinsky and the head of the secret department of the GPU Samsonov sent an encrypted telegram to Yaroslavl: "Under the responsibility of the head of the GPU, and observing the strictest secrecy, we propose to carry out the following: 1) inspect the property of Metropolitan Agathangel, carefully hinting that it may be requisitioned; 2) immediately conduct the most thorough search of Agathangel in his office and those of his closest assistants, confiscating all suspicious documents; 3) take a written undertaking from Agathangel not to leave due to his unreliability; 4) arrest all his confidants, in particular, those who took part in Agathangel's conversation with the Moscow priest Krasnitsky; 5) send all incriminating material on Agathangel. This is to be strictly followed and kept in the strictest confidence."
The telegram was received on May 20, and on the same day a search warrant was issued, and the metropolitan himself was invited to the Yaroslavl GPU for questioning. The investigator was interested in what the metropolitan had spoken about with Krasnitsky and what his attitude was to the Renovationists. The bishop told how it happened.
The next day, a search was conducted in the cells of the Tolga Monastery. Seventeen letters of the bishop's private correspondence were confiscated. Having examined the property and household of the metropolitan, it was seen that his furniture was rather meager, and there was no household property at all, so there was essentially nothing to take away.
On June 14, 1922, Metropolitan Agathangel was summoned to the GPU for interrogation. The first question: the Metropolitan's attitude toward the Soviet government.
What particularly distinguished the Metropolitan and what was developed by the experience of his entire long life was the indispensable sobriety of judgment and balance. He knew that he would not commit an act carried away by passion or random emotions. He had had enough experience in his youth; he had long been accustomed to subordinating his thoughts and actions to the will of God. The Metropolitan answered the investigator in a measured and balanced manner:
I have absolutely nothing against the current government, I have carried out and will carry out all its orders. I sympathize with the nationalization of large-scale industry and large landownership, but I recognize the desirability of compensating for this alienation, I recognize the necessity of granting the right to small property, the same with regard to churches and monasteries. I have nothing against the prohibition of teaching the Law of God in schools, but I do not agree with the prohibition of teaching it to persons under 18 years of age, because it contradicts the decree of separation of Church and state. I do not protest against the confiscation of church valuables of secondary importance, if it does not significantly violate the interests of religion, such as, for example, the confiscation of vessels in which the sacrament was performed, and the removal of vestments from especially revered icons.
They asked about church authority. The Bishop answered:
"The power has been transferred to me by the Patriarch. I consider the orders of the Supreme Church Administration [of the Renovationists] to be illegal."
"Who do you correspond with privately?" asked the investigator.
"With my brother..." the metropolitan answered.
The investigator was interested in whether the Metropolitan had told anyone about the persecution of the Church. This persecution was obvious; back in 1918, priests in the Yaroslavl diocese were shot on the sole suspicion of sympathizing with the participants of the anti-Bolshevik uprising.
"I have never said that the Soviet government is persecuting the Church," the Metropolitan replied, "but I do not deny that in the first period after the revolution there were cases that gave reason to think so, but I attribute this not to the government, but to the local executors of Soviet orders.
"What is your attitude towards the progressive clergy, calling for support of the Soviet government in all its endeavors, as the government of the working people?" asked the investigator.
"I am ready to listen to their views," the Metropolitan replied, "and from what I know about their desires, I agree with them in many ways."
The next day, Metropolitan Agathangel was informed that his answers were sufficient evidence of his anti-Soviet activities, and therefore, in order to avoid hiding from the investigation and trial, he must sign a written undertaking not to leave his place of residence.
Patriarch Tikhon was under house arrest, on June 1 the Petrograd authorities arrested Metropolitan Veniamin, and on June 10 a trial began against him and part of the Petrograd clergy. Now Metropolitan Agathangel was also under threat of arrest, which meant that the Russian Orthodox Church could lose its legal governance. It was impossible to remain silent, it was necessary to deliver his primatial word. The Metropolitan believed that, having become the deputy of His Holiness the Patriarch, he was obliged to express his view on the events taking place and propose a way out of the situation.
On June 5 (18), 1922, he wrote a message to the archpastors and all children of the Russian Orthodox Church:
In the name of holy obedience and in accordance with the duty of my bishop's oath, I proposed to immediately take up the service of the Church entrusted to me and to hurry to Moscow. But contrary to my will, due to circumstances beyond my control, I have been deprived to this day of the opportunity to go to the place of service. Meanwhile, as I officially know, other people have appeared in Moscow and have taken the helm of government of the Russian Church. From whom and what authority they received for this, I do not know at all. And therefore I consider the authority they have assumed and their actions to be unlawful.
Beloved in the Lord, most holy archpastors! Having been deprived for a time of supreme leadership, you now govern your dioceses independently, in accordance with Scripture, sacred canons and ordinary church law, according to your conscience and the bishop's oath, and until the restoration of supreme church authority, finally decide matters for which you previously sought permission from the Holy Synod, and in doubtful cases, turn to our humility.
Metropolitan Agathangel dictated the text of the message to Bishop Veniamin (Voskresensky) and then gave it to his cell attendant Vasily Morov, who rewrote the message in four copies; they were signed by the metropolitan and given to the head of the chancery, Archpriest Sergiy Lileyev, for duplication and distribution. The metropolitan sent two copies to Moscow for Archbishop Thaddeus (Uspensky) of Astrakhan and Protopresbyter Nikolai Lyubimov.
The message caused concern among the authorities: the metropolitan who had assumed power stood firm in his determination to observe church canons and not to recognize the "Supreme Church Authority." On June 28, the head of the Yaroslavl GPU ordered a search of the bishop's home in the Tolga Monastery, and the bishop himself was placed under house arrest in the Spassky Monastery.
The GPU investigators wanted to know for what purpose the Metropolitan wrote his appeal. During interrogation he answered: "In order to calm the minds of believers... I wrote an appeal in which I called on the clergy and believers not to recognize the Supreme Church Administration that had been formed from unknown persons who had no canonical justification. I did this because I wanted to calm the believers and clergy in anticipation of the Council."
In search of material to accuse the metropolitan of anti-state activity, the GPU investigators called on Andrei Nemirov, who was banned from priesthood, to assist them. On July 7, he and eight of his associates appealed to the Yaroslavl GPU with a request to bring Metropolitan Agathangel and Bishop Veniamin to trial for defrocking Andrei Nemirov and declaring his like-minded parishioners sectarians. They wrote about Bishop Veniamin that "he is not a bishop, but an executioner," since he is the executor of the will of the metropolitan; that "in his speeches, he clearly and indirectly made it clear to everyone that the Soviet government is a godless government."
The days of confinement dragged on - at home for now. No one was allowed to see the Metropolitan except for his cell attendant, who had no right to enter the Bishop's office without being accompanied by a guard. The restrictions sometimes became unjustifiably harsh. Having a need to confess and take communion, the Bishop wrote a petition to the GPU asking for permission to attend Vespers and Liturgy at the Spassky Monastery on one of the days of the week, but he received a categorical refusal.
It was a turbulent time. Atheism was again plotting the physical destruction of the Church. In Ivanovo-Voznesensk, the priests Pavel Svetozarov, Ioann Rozhdestvensky, and the choirmaster Pyotr Yazykov were shot. In Moscow, four priests and a layman were shot. In Petrograd, Metropolitan Veniamin, Archimandrite Sergius, and two laymen were sentenced to death.
The more time passed, the more the faithful of Yaroslavl became concerned about the fate of the imprisoned metropolitan. Many of those who loved the bishop approached the guards and begged them to let them see the metropolitan, and then, seeing their inflexibility, they shamed them: "You are not worthy of standing at the door of the bishop-metropolitan, let alone keeping him under guard." When the metropolitan went out for a walk in the small inner garden, people gathered on the second floor of the church to at least see their archpastor from afar. Many tried to get into the garden during these walks, but they were driven away. They asked to be allowed to at least take a blessing, but the guards were adamant, and if they tried to insist, they threatened to take them to the GPU. The threat was not empty, and the people gradually dispersed. On the Transfiguration, after the festive service, a crowd of about three hundred people gathered in front of the metropolitan's cell. The women asked to be allowed to see the bishop for a blessing. The officer of the secret department of the GPU, the head of the guard, Sharov, refused. The crowd demanded that the metropolitan be called at least to the window to make sure he was alive. Sharov replied:
"If you want to see the Metropolitan and receive his blessing, then go to the city department of the GPU for permission; if he gives permission, I will release him to you."
Several people went to the GPU, but they were categorically refused. The believers again began to ask that the Metropolitan be called to the window, but Sharov refused, and the people, seeing the inflexibility of the guards, began to disperse, but some still remained, as if unable to leave their home prison on this great holiday without receiving a blessing from the Metropolitan, without seeing him, without giving him a visible sign by their presence that the faithful of Yaroslavl were grieving for his fate and many were fussing about his release. One woman cried out: "If you don't take it from them by force, they will never let you go!"
The guards tried to grab her, but did not dare to go far from the doors, fearing that the crowd would then burst into the metropolitan's chambers. The people waited for about an hour, and then everyone dispersed.
Three days later, the bishop was transferred from the Spassky Monastery to a solitary confinement cell in the Yaroslavl prison. The elderly metropolitan's health immediately deteriorated so much that the GPU officers were forced to call doctors from the hospital. The doctors diagnosed general sclerosis and sclerosis of the heart vessels, and recommended complete rest and a home environment with constant medical supervision. The conditions of detention were somewhat improved: the metropolitan was transferred from the prison solitary confinement cell to a room near the GPU guardhouse and daily food parcels were allowed.
On September 5, 1922, the assistant to the authorized representative of the Secret Department of the Yaroslavl State Political Directorate Kulikov drew up an indictment in the case of the metropolitan. He was accused of writing an appeal:
in which [Metropolitan Agathangel] declares himself the successor of Patriarch Tikhon, the head of the Russian Church and at the same time declares the Supreme Church Administration to be an illegal and arbitrary authority with all the ensuing consequences... that... he showed violence against civil freedom of conscience... towards the citizens of the Nikolo-Troitskaya volost... that they... would be excommunicated from the Church... and declared sectarians... and when voting he ordered not to vote for Nemirov... Taking into account all of the above, that is, the presence... of active and passive resistance to the Soviet government and the fact that when the case is transferred to court, the said crimes can be interpreted in a different sense, and due to his advanced age, judicial punishment cannot be applied, and taking into account... that Agathangel enjoys enormous popularity... his further detention is inappropriate, while leaving him free... threatens to become a pretext for a new revival of the old reactionary church and the suppression of the renovationist movement in it. I believe it would be appropriate... to apply administrative punishment to him and send him to one of the remote monasteries, where he could spend his old age peacefully and without harm to the Soviet government.
The saint was transferred to the internal prison of the GPU in Moscow. Having learned of this, the believers of Yaroslavl addressed the chairman of the GPU with a petition:
We most earnestly ask you to show us great mercy to release from custody as soon as possible our elder, Metropolitan Vladyka Agathangel, who is languishing in prison, about whom we testify in all honesty that he suffered completely in vain, being only a victim of the disgusting malice of a certain part of the clergy.
There is no guilt on the part of our elder-lord before the Soviet power: on the contrary, he has always, both now and previously, been an example of the most loyal and honest citizen, and taught us the same... And now this elder-metropolitan, who had such an enviable and good reputation in Latvia, languishes, the unfortunate one, in the confinement of the State Political Administration, languishes only because of the intrigues of... the embittered part of our clergy. May this soon be put to an end! May the innocent seventy-year-old sufferer be quickly freed.
This is what we ask, this is what we most earnestly pray to you for.
The petition was ignored. Meanwhile, the autumn cold was approaching, and it was becoming painful for the old man, who was in prison and dressed in summer clothes. On October 30, the Metropolitan asked the GPU investigator to allow him to "write to Yaroslavl about sending a fur cassock, a warm klobuk, and felt boots with galoshes." The request was ignored. A month later, the Bishop again approached the GPU investigator with a request "to allow him to write to Yaroslavl about sending winter clothing." But this time, too, the request was left unanswered. On November 25, a meeting of the NKVD commission on administrative exiles was held. Tuchkov proposed exiling Metropolitan Agathangel to the Narym region for a period of three years.
On November 28, the Metropolitan was given his sentence and on the same day he was transferred to Taganskaya Prison to be transported to the place of exile. The Bishop appealed to the GPU with a request that, in view of his ill health and advanced age, he be given warm clothes and allowed to travel to the place of exile alone with a guard, whom he was prepared to support at his own expense. "Failure to do so," he wrote, "is dangerous to my life, and I am forced to resolutely ask for the satisfaction of the stated request."
But it was the death of the Metropolitan that those who sent him to the Narym exile wanted. Tuchkov ordered that the solitary order be refused, that the Metropolitan be sent in a general convoy, and that warm clothes be given.
The bishop was supposed to be sent with a convoy at the end of December, but his health deteriorated so much that he was left in prison for another week. Despite his infirmities and advanced age, when prison conditions were especially difficult to bear, the metropolitan never lost heart. His most reliable support was the Word of God, in which he studied day and night. In difficult life circumstances, he did not consult with human reason, but with the Holy Scripture. And in prison it was a great support for him. He did not part with the Bible for days on end. The prisoners who were in the same cell with him were of a secular orientation, they treated everything religious with mockery, but they were also struck and surprised, and even worshiped, by the prayerful attitude of the elder and his love for God.
Neither the intercession of doctors nor the requests of the Orthodox helped - Metropolitan Agathangel was sent in a general convoy with criminals, traveled through all the transit prisons to Tomsk and from Tomsk several hundred kilometers along a dirt road. The bishop was ill, experienced many hardships, grieved a lot, but humbled himself and meekly endured all the hardships. By order of the GPU, he was settled in a remote village; he was forbidden to serve. Here, a meeting with exiled monks and priests from Yaroslavl became a great consolation for him. In exile, he received news of the death of Patriarch Tikhon and the assumption of the post of Patriarchal Locum Tenens by Metropolitan Peter (Polyansky).
At the end of his exile, in August 1925, the bishop was informed that the authorities would not hinder his return to Yaroslavl.
At that time, the secret department of the GPU was making further plans for a schism in the Russian Orthodox Church. A group of bishops was organized, headed by Archbishop Gregory (Yatskovsky), which was preparing to seize church power after the arrest of Metropolitan Peter. Pursuing the goal of a schism and destruction of the Church, the GPU assigned a place in this plan to Metropolitan Agathangel. It was supposed to offer him as the second candidate to assume the post of Patriarchal Locum Tenens in accordance with the last will of Patriarch Tikhon at the right moment, in order to supposedly save the Orthodox Church from anarchy and church ruin, but in fact to give rise to yet another schism. For the sake of implementing the GPU plan, the Metropolitan was detained for more than six months in the Perm prison. Tuchkov asked the bishop to use his authority to save the situation in the Church. He said that Locum Tenens Peter had been arrested, but while in prison he had blessed the bishops' collegium for the administration of the Church that had been formed on the initiative of Archbishop Gregory. But the deputy of the Patriarchal Locum Tenens, Sergius, Metropolitan of Nizhny Novgorod, declared the collegium illegal and banned Archbishop Gregory from serving. Now there was a war between Metropolitan Sergius and Archbishop Gregory for church authority, and this was causing real disruption in church life. Confusion was growing among the believers. Meanwhile, the Soviet government was ready to change its attitude toward the Orthodox Church and legalize church administration. But at the moment this was impossible, because the authorities did not know with whom to negotiate and who was in charge of the administration of the Church. Personally, he, Tuchkov, did not see a way out of the current situation unless Metropolitan Agathangelus assumed the duties of the Patriarchal Locum Tenens; the Metropolitan is the oldest bishop of the Orthodox Church, he was appointed deputy of the Patriarch back in 1922, after all, he had enormous authority among the bishops as one of the most reasonable and moderate figures. Tuchkov promised that if the Metropolitan took on the duties of the Locum Tenens and entered into negotiations with the government on the legalization of church administration, then there would be no objections from the GPU. Tuchkov called on the Metropolitan to sacrifice - for the sake of the well-being of the Church.
The church situation described by Tuchkov caused such great concern in the metropolitan that there was no room for guesses about the investigator's treachery and cunning. The main thoughts and feelings that prompted the elder to decide to accept the post of Locum Tenens were the thirst for sacrificial service to the Orthodox Church, the establishment of church peace, the end of strife, and the protection of the Church from the renovationists who were trying to plunder the church flock. The situation was so serious and seemed to require such urgent intervention that the metropolitan did not insist on a preliminary personal meeting with the Patriarchal Locum Tenens, Metropolitan Peter, and his deputy, Metropolitan Sergius, before the GPU.
On April 18, 1926, Metropolitan Agathangel composed an appeal in Perm, in which he declared that he was assuming the rights of the Patriarchal Locum Tenens. Without leaving Perm, he began sending it to the diocesan bishops. Three copies were sent to Kharkov, where eight bishops lived at the time. Having familiarized themselves with the appeal of Metropolitan Agathangel and discussed the situation that had arisen, the bishops came to a firm decision to recognize only Metropolitan Peter as the Patriarchal Locum Tenens; to recognize the action of Metropolitan Agathangel as a schism destructive to the Church. And with this they sent a reply letter to Metropolitan Agathangel. They admonished him to renounce his schismatic activities and not to bring confusion into the Church. In addition, they explained their attitude towards the Patriarchate and towards collegial church governance, recognizing the latter as absolutely non-canonical.
Metropolitan Agathangel also sent a copy of the appeal to Metropolitan Sergius, and it was delivered with extraordinary speed, literally in two days. Having familiarized himself with it, Metropolitan Sergius began to seek permission from the GPU to exchange letters with Metropolitan Peter regarding what had happened. Tuchkov happily agreed to this, intending to subsequently use the correspondence to deepen and expand the discord between the ruling bishops. On April 22, an exchange of letters took place in prison between the Patriarchal Locum Tenens and his deputy. Metropolitan Sergius informed the Locum Tenens that Metropolitan Agathangel, returning from exile, intended to assume the duties of the Patriarchal Locum Tenens. Knowing the straightforward and open character of Bishop Peter, his rejection of any deceit and treachery, no matter who it came from, the Metropolitan asked the Locum Tenens to hold off on transferring the rights. It was clear to him that this was just a new idea of the GPU. The Locum Tenens avoided expressing any categorical position, but did not relieve Metropolitan Sergius of his deputy duties.
On April 26, Metropolitan Agathangel wrote to Metropolitan Sergius: "Having now the opportunity to fulfill the duties of Locum Tenens of the Patriarchal Throne, entrusted to me by His Holiness the Patriarch, now reposed in God, I have assumed the governance of the Russian Church... I most humbly ask that you notify the diocese entrusted to you of this, and, in need of special mercy and help from God, I earnestly ask you, Vladyka, and all the faithful children of our Orthodox Church to pray for me to the Rewarder of all and the Providence of God, proclaiming our name during divine services, in accordance with the existing church rules on this matter."
Already aware of Metropolitan Agathangel's appeal and the position of Metropolitan Peter, who had reserved for him the rights of deputy in a letter dated April 22, Metropolitan Sergius sent a letter to Bishop Agathangel in Perm on April 28 setting out his position. The letter did not find the metropolitan in the city. Two days later, Metropolitan Sergius sent a second letter to the bishop, refusing to recognize Metropolitan Agathangel's rights to the locum tenens as indisputable. Firstly, because Metropolitan Peter had not renounced them, who "considers it obligatory for himself to remain Locum Tenens, even if he was not at liberty," and, secondly, because Patriarch Tikhon's decree did not stipulate that the one who accepted power accepted it:
...only temporarily, until the return of the oldest candidates. He accepted power legally, therefore, he can be deprived of it only on legal grounds, i.e. either in case of voluntary refusal, or by the court of the bishops.
As you see, the question of your assumption of the office of Locum Tenens is far from being decided beyond doubt. And I, with all my desire to be freed from the burden placed upon me, cannot immediately transfer power to you. Therefore, I ask you to delay your assumption of power a little. I am afraid that under the present circumstances it will lead to great confusion among the Orthodox, who are already suffering from the incessant strife between the bishops.
On May 1, Metropolitan Agathangel arrived in Yaroslavl. The city's clergy had been informed of the bishop's arrival in advance, and he was met at the station by priests Smirnov, Nevsky, Pongilsky, Lileyev, and Dorevatovsky. The Metropolitan informed the clergy that he was the Locum Tenens of the Patriarchal Throne, and handed them each a copy of his address to the archpastors and pastors, ordering that it be distributed in the city's churches.
During this last period of his life in Yaroslavl, the bishop had to endure many sorrows. Some priests had gone over to the Renovationists, some of them had now returned, and some remained in their previous error. The Metropolitan returned to Yaroslavl as a confessor of Holy Orthodoxy, having suffered imprisonment for resisting the attempts of the Renovationists to seize church power and destroy the Russian Church. He now accepted the post of Locum Tenens solely in order to prevent anarchy in the Church.
Many Yaroslavl priests did not understand the saint's intentions at all. Nor did the vicar bishops understand him. A few days after the Metropolitan's arrival in Yaroslavl, Archbishop Joseph (Petrovykh) of Rostov visited him. The Archbishop reproached him for usurping power and persistently urged the bishop to refuse the post of Locum Tenens and not to quarrel with Metropolitans Peter and Sergius. At the same time, Archbishop Seraphim (Samoilovich) of Uglich arrived in Yaroslavl. He ardently urged the metropolitan to give up his locum tenens. They say that when he met Metropolitan Agathangel, the archbishop knelt down and said:
"I cannot serve with you, you have illegally seized church power."
"I am not asking you to do this," Metropolitan Agathangel answered calmly. Archbishops Joseph and Seraphim viewed Metropolitan Sergius's appointment as completely legitimate, and besides, Metropolitan Sergius's authority at that time was very high in their eyes, and therefore they clearly assessed Metropolitan Agathangel's step as an ambitious attempt to seize church power, taking advantage of the fact that Metropolitan Peter was in prison. It would have been difficult to inflict a greater insult on the Metropolitan, or to inflict a greater humiliation.
The third Yaroslavl vicar, Archbishop Varlaam (Ryashentsev), took the side of Metropolitan Agathangel, but silently, without interfering in the conflict. He did not feel confident enough in the area of church politics to make decisions on complex issues and insist on them, as Archbishops Joseph and Seraphim did. Some rectors of Yaroslavl churches stopped commemorating Metropolitan Agathangel during services, but most churches accepted the Metropolitan's appeal satisfactorily, and many were glad that the saint, who had the indisputable authority of an Orthodox archpastor, had returned to Yaroslavl, strengthening them against the Renovationists.
On May 13, Metropolitans Agathangel and Sergius met in Moscow. Despite Metropolitan Sergius's confidence that the whole story of declaring Vladyka Agathangel as Locum Tenens was a GPU intrigue, during their personal meeting he saw that the Vladyka himself insisted on transferring the locum tenens rights to himself, although during his two-week stay in Yaroslavl and Moscow he should have received full information about what was happening in the Church. Vladyka Agathangel insisted on the legality of his rights to church governance - as the senior hierarch and as the hierarch appointed as deputy to Patriarch Tikhon in 1922. In doing so, he referred to the resolution of the Local Council of 1918 on locum tenens, believing that the power of the Locum Tenens should pass to the oldest bishop, that is, to him. Arriving in Nizhny Novgorod, Metropolitan Sergius studied the resolution of the Local Council concerning the locum tenens and believed that the rights of Metropolitan Agathangelus were not indisputable and in this case, declaring him the Locum Tenens was an attempt to "overthrow his legitimate head (the first bishop) and seize his rights and authority."
Having not received a letter from Metropolitan Sergius about the transfer of church authority, Metropolitan Agathangel sent a telegram to Nizhny Novgorod on May 20: "You promised to send a draft letter to the bishops about the transfer of church authority to me; please expedite it."
On the same day, Metropolitan Sergius responded by telegram: "Having checked the certificate, I am convinced of the absence of your rights; details by letter. I earnestly ask: refrain from taking a decisive step."
The next day, Metropolitan Agathangel sent a reply telegram to Metropolitan Sergius: "...You, in the presence of witnesses, definitely expressed your consent to transfer to me the rights, affairs, and management, and promised to inform the hierarchs of this transfer... Now, to my surprise, you refuse the transfer and thereby prepare a new turmoil. I will be forced to take a decisive step, to publish through a special message the results of our agreement and your subsequent refusal. I disclaim all responsibility for the consequences."
Convinced of his rightness, Metropolitan Sergius wrote to Metropolitan Agathangel on May 23:
I have only checked the certificate to which you referred with complete confidence as confirming your right to head our Church even now, during the life of the lawful Locum Tenens (in which confidence your message was also published in Perm). Having checked, I am convinced that this certificate not only does not confirm your rights, but even limits them in comparison with how I presented them earlier. It turns out ... that you do not have the right to head our Church or to be Locum Tenens and, consequently, your appropriation of this position should be considered as an unauthorized seizure of the dignity and authority of the first bishop, i.e., a very serious crime against the canons, punishable, as is known, by deprivation of rank ... It is clear that an agreement concluded on the basis of such erroneous data can never be recognized as binding and is subject to immediate cancellation; neither you have the right (and, having become convinced, you will have no desire) to insist on its unconditional fulfillment and on the transfer of the Locum Tenens to you, nor do I have the right to yield to your demands... In view of all of the above, I resolutely refuse to fulfill our agreement and do not consider myself entitled to transfer the power of Locum Tenens to you. While I still recognize the legal bearer of power of the first bishop, Metropolitan Peter, and myself as his legal deputy... I earnestly and respectfully, but also insistently ask you... to immediately renounce your claims to the position of Locum Tenens, to cancel the message you issued in Perm... please now issue an archpastoral order to the churches of the Yaroslavl diocese on the commemoration of the Locum Tenens, Metropolitan Peter, and also renew such commemoration yourself at your first divine service.
If you are not pleased to submit to this order of mine, as the replacement Patriarchal Locum Tenens, then by this message of mine to you, until your case is considered by the council of bishops, I release you from the care of the Yaroslavl diocese...
The disagreement of the vicar bishops and part of the Yaroslavl clergy, the rigidity of the position taken by Metropolitan Sergius, the likelihood of a new church turmoil if the dispute between them about the locum tenens continued, the support of many bishops for Metropolitan Sergius - all this began to incline Bishop Agathangel to the decision to refuse the locum tenens. And on May 27, he sent a telegram to Metropolitan Sergius:
"Continue to govern the Church. I will refrain from any speeches. I will make an order to commemorate Metropolitan Peter, since I intend to renounce the locum tenens for the sake of church peace."
But Tuchkov in no way wanted the church unrest to end and now he was vigorously convincing the Locum Tenens, Metropolitan Peter, who was in solitary confinement, that in the unrest shaking the Church, all the bishops and the majority of the laity wanted to calm down and find spiritual peace under the authoritative leadership of Metropolitan Agathangel. The Church was thirsting and waiting for the rights of the Locum Tenens to be transferred to him. And how could he not agree and begin to act, at first cautiously, not transferring the rights, but also not preventing Bishop Agathangel from accepting these rights. Metropolitan Peter postponed the final transfer of the rights of the Locum Tenens until the return from exile of the first candidate for this post, Metropolitan Kirill (Smirnov).
A few days later, as if to support the ecclesiastical discord and spiritual unrest and to taste again the bitterness of all these squabbles, Metropolitan Agathangel received a letter from the Locum Tenens, written by him on May 22: "... I have learned that Your Eminence has deigned to assume the duties of the Patriarchal Locum Tenens. With love and goodwill I welcome this accession of yours. Upon your release, if it pleases the Lord God, we will personally discuss the future leadership of the Orthodox Church. Please inform Metropolitan Sergius of my present decision."
On June 1, Metropolitan Agathangel was in Moscow, where he invited Metropolitan Sergius to personally show him the letter of the Locum Tenens, and some bishops, so that, having Metropolitan Peter's letter in hand, he could finally decide the question of the governance of the Church. Not having waited for Metropolitan Sergius and not having received any news from him, Bishop Agathangel sent a letter to Nizhny Novgorod on June 4 with a copy of the letter of the Locum Tenens attached. Metropolitan Sergius, having received the telegram-invitation, was unable to leave, because he had been required to sign a written undertaking not to leave. Seeing, however, that Bishop Peter's letter confirmed Metropolitan Agathangel's determination to take the post of Locum Tenens, Metropolitan Sergius began to collect the opinions of the bishops on this issue.
During these same days of church strife, Metropolitan Sergius entered into negotiations with the authorities on the legalization of church governance and submitted his draft declaration to them. He firmly decided to resist Metropolitan Agathangel's attempts to take the post of Locum Tenens as illegal, with which the majority of the bishops did not agree. Metropolitan Sergius wrote to Metropolitan Agathangel:
It is our common conviction that Your Eminence cannot at present occupy the position of Locum Tenens either without Metropolitan Peter, as you attempted to do by issuing your Perm letter, or through Metropolitan Peter, as you hope to do now. In the first case, you cannot because you do not have any rights to this title and position that belong to you personally... In the second case, because Metropolitan Peter, who transferred to me, albeit temporarily, but completely the rights and duties of Locum Tenens, and himself, deprived of the opportunity to be properly informed about the state of church affairs, can no longer bear responsibility for the course of the latter, nor, even more so, interfere in their management. On the other hand, I (or whoever comes after me), having assumed, together with the office of Locum Tenens, all responsibility for the correct course of church affairs, cannot treat the orders of Metropolitan Peter, issuing from prison, otherwise than as orders or, rather, advice of an irresponsible person, i.e. I can accept them for execution only under my own responsibility insofar as I find them useful for the Church. Such an understanding of the meaning and consequences of the temporary transfer of his office by the Locum Tenens... is practically necessary for us, because only with it can we consider the canonical stability of our church-government system ensured... Let us assume for a moment that I were to change my attitude toward the orders issuing from prison, and, placing all responsibility for the consequences on Metropolitan Peter, I were to transfer the office to you. It is quite likely that you too would have to fight against some unauthorized attempt on the power of the "first bishop." Truth and success are on your side; the struggle is ready to end successfully. And again, an order comes from prison behind your back, recognizing the one you fought against as the rightful Locum Tenens. Having received power yourself through the same order coming from prison, you will be deprived of the opportunity to object to the new, also prison order, and our Church will find itself on the brink of anarchy.
That is why our Council has determined that the Patriarch, while still at liberty, should appoint a temporary successor to himself, to whom he would transfer all his rights and duties. Following this determination, we affirm: let Metropolitan Peter remain the lawful Locum Tenens and let his name be commemorated during the Divine Services; but we will postpone the execution of his orders issued from prison until the time when he himself returns to power and, fully responsible for his actions, decides whether to execute these orders or not...
On June 14, he sent this letter to Metropolitan Agathangel, attaching to it the written opinion of the archpastors of Ukraine and the bishops who had joined them and who shared the same views as Metropolitan Sergius.
The transfer from the position of a defender of Orthodoxy, for which Metropolitan Agathangel suffered imprisonment and exile, to the position of almost a schismatic teacher, as Metropolitan Sergius presented it, unpleasantly struck the elder. He was in no way a schismatic teacher and did not want to be. Bishop Agathangel was seventy-one years old, time was bringing him to the last line of his earthly life, and he was increasingly aware that he had to prepare for the transition to the eternal world. Faced with the unyielding position of Metropolitan Sergius and the bishops who shared his views, not wanting to be the culprit of new unrest, he decided to renounce his claims to the post of Locum Tenens and on June 8 notified the civil authorities of his decision.
The GPU, however, decided to carry out its plan for a schism to the end. Tuchkov persuaded Metropolitan Peter to transfer the duties of the Locum Tenens to Metropolitan Agathangel (already knowing that he had refused). On June 9, the Locum Tenens sent Metropolitan Agathangel a letter in which he confirmed "the transfer to him of the locum tenens rights and duties..." The Lord, however, advised him to make an important reservation that protected the Church from the anarchy that would have ensued in the event of Bishop Agathangel's refusal to assume the locum tenens and the absence of a legitimate successor to this post: "In the event of Metropolitan Agathangel's refusal to accept power or the impossibility of exercising it, the rights and duties of the Patriarchal Locum Tenens shall return again to me, and the deputyship to Metropolitan Sergius."
All these events seriously damaged the health of Bishop Agathangel and, wishing to improve it, he left Yaroslavl in mid-June for a village not far from Tolga. Here he rented a room. He ran the household himself, chopped wood for the stove, cooked dinner. At this time, it seemed that all diocesan and church affairs had receded into the background for him.
On October 29, 1926, the Deputy Locum Tenens of the Patriarch, Metropolitan Sergius, was arrested. Archbishop Joseph (Petrovykh) assumed control of the Russian Orthodox Church, but on December 8, 1926, he issued an order to transfer power to one of the three deputies he had appointed: Archbishops Korniliy (Sobolev) of Yekaterinburg, Thaddeus (Uspensky) of Astrakhan, and Seraphim (Samoilovich) of Uglich. Archbishop Korniliy was unable to assume his duties because he was in exile. Archbishop Thaddeus was detained by Tuchkov on his way to Moscow, and Archbishop Seraphim assumed temporary control of the Russian Orthodox Church.
In December, Bishop Agathangel returned to Yaroslavl. At first, he rented a small room in a private house, where he had a dining room, a bedroom, and an office; here he received the clergy and laity who came to him for spiritual needs. Only shortly before his death, the believers built a separate house for the Metropolitan, where he had three small rooms. A strange situation had been established in the diocese. Metropolitan Agathangel was the ruling bishop, and the vicar subordinate to him, Archbishop Seraphim, was the head of the entire Russian Orthodox Church. But the Metropolitan did not object. He ruled the Yaroslavl diocese in the conditions in which the Lord had placed him, understanding that with the atheism accepted by the authorities as the official ideology, the differences of opinion among the archpastors, pastors, and Orthodox laity could end in many schisms. And he did not interfere with the general church orders of Archbishop Seraphim, which he gave to visiting bishops.
Archbishop Seraphim was soon summoned to the Moscow GPU, where Tuchkov offered him to accept his conditions for legalization. The archbishop refused, citing the fact that he could not make fundamental decisions in the absence of senior bishops. In early April 1927, Metropolitan Sergius was released from prison, and on April 7, Archbishop Seraphim handed over his management affairs to him. Church life in the Yaroslavl diocese returned to normal, and it seemed that the time of schisms had passed.
On July 29, Metropolitan Sergius' declaration appeared. It did not cause any reaction in the Yaroslavl diocese. Bishop Agathangel, having read the declaration, sent Archpriest Dmitry Smirnov to the censorship to ask permission to print it. The censorship agreed, but on the condition that no separate messages commenting on this declaration be printed. After listening to Fr. Dmitry, the Metropolitan decided to completely abandon the printing. It would have been inconvenient for him, a former candidate for Locum Tenens, to print Metropolitan Sergius' declaration and not deliver his archpastoral word.
Vicar of the Yaroslavl diocese, Archbishop Joseph (Petrovykh), was elevated to the rank of metropolitan by Metropolitan Sergius and assigned to the Leningrad cathedra, but the GPU forbade him entry into the city. Then Metropolitan Sergius assigned him to Odessa, but Bishop Joseph did not go there himself. Both of Metropolitan Agathangelus' vicar bishops, Archbishops Joseph and Seraphim, were against Metropolitan Sergius' declaration. And just as they had ardently urged the elder just a year ago to renounce his claims to the post of Locum Tenens and not to quarrel with Metropolitans Peter and Sergius, so now they ardently urged him to separate from the deputy Locum Tenens. They argued with Metropolitan Agathangel with such unwavering conviction, with such determination to follow the chosen path to the end, that the elder bishop saw that new turmoil and schism were brewing.
At the end of 1927, some bishops declared their separation from Metropolitan Sergius, expressing their intention to govern their dioceses independently. At the beginning of January 1928, Archbishop Seraphim of Uglich and Metropolitan Joseph came to Metropolitan Agathangel and began to persuade the bishop to leave Metropolitan Sergius. That which Bishop Agathangel cherished most of all - church peace - was clearly being violated. Both Archbishop Seraphim and Metropolitan Joseph were adamant in their convictions. Metropolitan Joseph, left without a cathedra, with an unclear prospect regarding his place in the church hierarchy, was ready to take extreme measures. The conversation was so difficult that after the bishops left, the metropolitan had a heart attack. And then his health deteriorated so much that on January 30 he performed his last service in the Holy Spirit Church in Yaroslavl and was no longer able to serve until his death.
The brewing church schisms, the threat of religious unrest for the Yaroslavl flock - all this finally destroyed the health of the bishop. Two years had passed since the exile of the Metropolitan-Confessor ended, but it turned out that the difficulties of imprisonment and exile were easier to bear than those internal sorrows that had now befallen him, deeply wounding his soul and heart. To tell the truth, from the very moment of his release from the Perm prison in the spring of 1926, he had not known rest or peace. The threat of schisms and unrest, the fear of serving them with any action or word, of doing something to tempt the believers - this was felt more difficult than persecution from the atheists for the name of Christ and exile. And his age was such that there would be no time to correct mistakes. If it were not for the hot persistence of the bishops, if it were not for the seemingly reliable information that church unrest was reigning in other dioceses and that many were separating from Metropolitan Sergius, Metropolitan Agathangelus would hardly have signed any document concerning issues of church policy.
On the name day of Metropolitan Agathangel on February 5, vicar bishops - Archbishops Seraphim (Samoilovich), Varlaam (Ryashentsev) and Bishop Evgeny (Kobranov) of Rostov - came to congratulate the bishop, priests and laymen came to congratulate him. The next day, the Metropolitan handed over to his secretary, Archpriest Dmitry Smirnov, a declaration of separation from Metropolitan Sergius and asked him to take one copy to the local GPU and distribute the others among the deans. After the Yaroslavl declaration was made public, the Metropolitan suffered another heart attack, and heart attacks did not leave him until his death.
Metropolitan Sergius, having received the document on the departure of the Yaroslavl diocese from him, was extremely concerned about this circumstance. The church movement was growing, which, as he believed, had no positive prospects. The nineteenth century would not return, the Soviet power would rule the country for a long time. All the old social movements that fought against it had run out of steam, and it had set up the education of the youth in such a way that it had completely separated them from the Orthodox Church. The Church had no opportunity left to educate children. In a decade or two, a generation would grow up for whom the Orthodox Church with its Church Slavonic language and ancient liturgy would look like a museum relic. The departure of Metropolitan Agathangel only increased the general confusion. Against this background, the agents of the Soviet power would do everything to deepen and strengthen the schisms.
Metropolitan Sergius sent Metropolitan Seraphim (Alexandrov) to Yaroslavl with explanations of the details of the current church situation, wishing to persuade Metropolitan Agathangel to refuse to organize autocephaly in the Yaroslavl diocese. Metropolitan Sergius wrote:
"For my part, I cannot find strong enough words to beg you to maintain communion with us, to suffer a little longer our infirmities, until it becomes clear with certainty where we want to lead the church ship: to a relatively tolerable existence in the given conditions or to destruction, whether we are striving to affirm the faith or sacrifice it for the sake of personal well-being. It is always possible to break communion if there are undoubted grounds for this; but to break communion and split the body of the church for reasons imaginary and still only expected and assumed, think what a risky and responsible step this is and what consequences this may lead to both for the Church and for the one doing it...
But you and I have already approached that line at which all earthly values and all earthly accounts lose their absolute significance; and only one thing remains: to give a good answer at the judgment seat of Christ. In the name of this our common hope and in the name of the good of the Holy Church, I ask and beg you, do not break off communion with us, do not go over to the side of our enemies, of whom our cause already has many. Remain with us and with your authoritative name and your wise advice support our efforts to arrange church affairs and thereby stop the undertakings of others who strive for division. Believe me, that we are not betraying the holy faith, nor are we renouncing and do not intend to renounce church freedom. We only do not close our eyes to the situation in which we have to act, and we believe that, no matter how this situation binds us, we cannot justify our inaction by it: we must act and do what we can in the given conditions...
The Yaroslavl bishops remained in their previous position, and Metropolitan Sergius sent Archbishop Pavel (Borisovsky) of Vyatka to them once again for explanations, having passed on a letter with him. Metropolitan Agathangel avoided a direct answer, citing the fact that neither Metropolitan Joseph nor Archbishop Seraphim were in the Yaroslavl diocese any more.
In response, Metropolitan Sergius wrote:
Your Eminence asserts that you do not intend to cause a schism, since "you are separating not because of differences of opinion in faith, but only in the order of administrative management." But according to the canons, a schism is precisely a division not because of faith, but because of issues that can be healed, or because of an unwillingness to submit to the order of the legitimate church authority ("unauthorized gathering"). As for maintaining prayerful communion during an administrative break, one can very much doubt whether such relations are possible at all, or, more precisely, canonically legal, between two bishops belonging to the same Local Church and recognizing the same spiritual head in the person of the first bishop. But if such relations are possible anywhere in fact, then only between bishops who are administratively independent of each other and not bound to each other by any obligations. Meanwhile, by order of our first bishop, I have the grave duty of replacing him; I bear all his responsibilities for the governance of the Russian Church and therefore have the right to expect from my fellow bishops the same canonical obedience that they owe to the first bishop himself. To declare oneself in obedience to the first bishop and at the same time to break administratively with the deputy whom the first bishop appointed would mean contradicting oneself. "He who receives whom I send receives Me" (John 13:20) and vice versa; this is a general law that does not allow exceptions.
Thus, an administrative break with me, the deputy of the first bishop of the Russian Church, cannot be considered an act of indifference to the bishops of the same Church, but will undoubtedly be assessed from a canonical point of view as a refusal to obey the first bishop. And such a refusal is not considered punishable by the canons only in the case when the first bishop publicly begins to preach a deliberate heresy. That is why Metropolitan Joseph and his worthy co-workers are exhausting their strength, trying to bring my administrative actions (I readily admit, not infallible) under the concept of heresy; they accuse me of betrayal (traditionism) and of desecrating the Church, and of renouncing Christ, God and, finally, eternal salvation, which is even worse than heresy. But the more terrible the accusations, the more monstrous the conclusions drawn from them, the more urgently their factual verification is required, and not by amateur volunteers, but by a fully competent and authoritative body of the ecclesiastical court - a council of bishops. The rupture of communion with me before the verdict of such a council, due to some incorrect administrative orders, especially without a factual verification, on the basis of popular rumor, artificially inflated, will be canonically defined as a schism, with all the consequences for its teachers indicated in the church canons.
In view of all this, I welcome with particular joy your willingness to reconsider the statement of 6 February and I most earnestly urge you not to delay this revision.
For the third time, Archbishop Juvenaly (Maslovsky) of Ryazan was sent to Yaroslavl. He first spoke with the vicar archbishop Varlaam, and then with Metropolitan Agathangel. On May 10, Metropolitan Agathangel, Archbishop Varlaam and Bishop Evgeny wrote to Metropolitan Sergius:
In clarification of our declaration of February 6 of this year and in addition to the letters of Metropolitan Agathangel addressed to Your Eminence, we find it necessary to say the following:
1. We have not yet interrupted and will not interrupt our prayerful communication with the Deputy Patriarchal Locum Tenens, Metropolitan Sergius.
2. We do not wish to cause any schism and we do not do so.
3. We have not introduced and are not introducing any innovations in the church life of our diocese.
4. In principle, we do not deny your authority as deputy.
5. The orders of the deputy, which disturb our and the people's religious conscience and, in our opinion, violate church canons, due to the circumstances that arose on the spot, we could not and cannot carry out.
6. We have not rejected and do not reject from the unity of the Church all those bishops, clergy and laity from other diocesan churches who have approached us with a request to lead them and accept them into prayerful and canonical communion, but, bringing peace, we have directed them - certainly to Your Eminence and the Synod, having first, as far as possible, calmed their troubled religious conscience.
At this point, the Yaroslavl bishops considered the incident closed. On May 10, Metropolitan Agathangel showed the letter to the secretary of the diocese, Archpriest Dmitry Smirnov, who suggested that this document be made public. But the Metropolitan replied that since the letter of February 6 had not been made public, there was no need to make this public either, and the Yaroslavl deans already knew everything.
Metropolitan Agathangel's health, which had deteriorated significantly at the beginning of the year, never recovered. He had several heart attacks, during which he always first resorted to the Mysteries of the Body and Blood of Christ and only then accepted medical assistance. In mid-September, he had a heart attack so severe that the Metropolitan took to his bed. Doctors recommended complete rest. But even lying in bed, he took an active part in the management of the diocese, saying what needed to be done in this or that case. Sensing the nearness of death, the Bishop asked Archpriest Dimitry Smirnov to go to the Deputy Locum Tenens, Metropolitan Sergius, to ask him for church peace and to say that he, of course, was under his control, and if something was wrong, he asked for his forgiveness. Father Dimitry did not get ready right away, and the bishop was forced to hurry and ask him not to postpone the trip and to emphasize to Metropolitan Sergius that he wanted to be completely reconciled with him; at the same time, he instructed Father Dimitry that when Metropolitan Sergius sent a bishop to administer the diocese after his death, he would certainly be accepted. Father Dimitry went and handed everything over to the Deputy Locum Tenens.
Despite the efforts of three doctors, the bishop's health was deteriorating, and on October 2 he wished to receive the sacrament of Holy Unction, which was performed by Archbishop Varlaam (Ryashentsev), the Metropolitan's spiritual father, Archimandrite Ignatius of the Yaroslavl Spassky Monastery, and Archimandrite Gregory of the Tolga Monastery. During the sacrament, the bishop felt cheerful and joyful. He was in such a mood as if the bright days of Easter were approaching. There was no fear of approaching death, he looked to the future with great hope and, trusting in the mercy of God, he boldly foresaw the great blessings and joy that await those who inherit eternal life. Calling Archbishop Varlaam, he said to him:
"Convey my blessing to everyone - both the clergy and the laity, I ask forgiveness from everyone if I have offended or upset anyone, and I forgive everyone myself, I have nothing against anyone, I ask for the prayers of all the saints."
"Pray to God for us too," asked those present.
"Yes, if I receive boldness from the Lord, I will pray too," the elder answered.
The Bishop's health was rapidly deteriorating, and on October 9 he was only receiving Holy Communion, since by that time he could not take any food. After receiving the Holy Communion he felt much better. The improvement continued the next day, so that those around him began to hope for his recovery. The Bishop, however, felt that the end was approaching, and gave orders for his death. Many were surprised at the calm with which he gave these orders, as if they were connected not with his own burial, but with a solemn holiday. On October 14, calling Archimandrite Gregory, he said:
"I'm celebrating an anniversary in a few days, I need to get ready."
"What anniversary?" The Archimandrite did not understand.
"It's my anniversary, there will be many priests and strangers."
And the next day, on the eve of his death, he repeated to his cell nun Nina: "Tomorrow evening we will have a solemn all-night vigil in our apartment, there will be many priests, invite Bishop Varlaam too."
The next morning, October 16, he became noticeably worse, and at half past ten in the morning Metropolitan Agathangel died. The news instantly spread around the city, and twelve strokes of the bells of thirty Yaroslavl churches announced the death of the saint.
It was decided to hold the funeral service for the bishop in the Nikitsky Church, and to bury him in the Church of St. Leonty of Rostov. Until the funeral service, memorial services were held and the Gospel was read in front of the Metropolitan's coffin in the Nikitsky Church. All this time, people were coming to say goodbye to the deceased. People prayed, cried, kissed the cross and the hands of the deceased saint. Here is how an eyewitness of the events, Archpriest Sergiy Lileyev, describes the funeral:
On Sunday, liturgies were held throughout the city earlier than usual, in view of the upcoming service at the Metropolitan's coffin at eight o'clock in the morning. After the liturgy, sermons about the deceased bishop were delivered in all churches and memorial services were held. The bells began ringing for the liturgy in the Nikitsky Church at eight o'clock. At half past eight, Archbishops Varlaam (Ryashentsev) and Pavel (Borisovsky) arrived and the liturgy began.
The Church of the Holy Great Martyr Nikita can accommodate up to four thousand people, but it could not accommodate even a fifth of those who came to the funeral. There were eighteen priests in the service of the two archbishops, and fifty priests, more than twenty deacons, came out for the funeral. After the reading of the Gospel, Archbishop Pavel gave a sermon on the greatness of the deceased. After the verse after the sacrament, the sermon was given by the presbyter of the Moscow Dormition Cathedral, the officiating priest of the Yaroslavl Church of St. John Chrysostom, Fr. Vladimir Gradusov. At the end of the liturgy, Archbishop Varlaam gave a sermon on the deceased. The funeral service began. A special mood was felt, similar to a bright, Easter mood.
It was already four o'clock in the evening, and the people kept coming and coming. Around four o'clock the coffin with the body of the deceased was carried out of the church, the banner-bearers surrounded it and the solemn funeral procession moved forward - a religious procession around the church, then to the Leontievskoye Cemetery. A solemn red bell began to ring throughout the city, in all the churches. There were so many people that it was difficult to drive along the streets. On the way to the cemetery they stopped at least ten times to perform funeral litias. They arrived at the cemetery at the beginning of six. There was water in the crypt under the church. And the coffin remained in the church until the next day. On Monday, October 22, the archbishops celebrated the Divine Liturgy. By three o'clock in the afternoon the grave was drained and filled with cement. A box covered with galvanized iron was prepared, in which the coffin itself was to be placed. The oak coffin, sealed by the bishops, was lowered into the grave while the litiya was being sung, and after "eternal memory" the troparion "Assuring the general resurrection before Thy passion..." was sung by all. And it seemed that the bishop had not died, but remained, as before, with us, an invisible guardian of the Yaroslavl diocese.
So on the seventh day they buried the bishop. And what is surprising is that there was no smell of a corpse at all, on the contrary: at times some kind of fragrance wafted from the coffin. His face was as on the first day of his death: bright, white, calm. Eternal memory to him and rest with the saints! May he not abandon us as his guide after his death and pray for our souls!
