Лекция «Максим Грек» | иером. Иоанн (Гуайта)

Lecture on Maximus the Greek, his role as a foreigner in Renaissance Italy and Russia, and his impact on Orthodox and Catholic relations.

Key Takeaways

Maximus the Greek exemplifies the complex identity and mission of a foreigner in religious and cultural contexts.
Foreigners often hold a privileged, objective position to observe and influence political and spiritual matters.
The historical tensions between Orthodox and Catholic churches shaped Maximus’s life and work.
Monastic life inherently involves a form of foreignness, transcending national and cultural boundaries.
Maximus’s legacy as the first intellectual in Rus bridges Renaissance humanism and Orthodox spirituality.

What the video covers

The lecture explores the historical figure Maximus the Greek, focusing on his life as a foreigner in Italy and Russia during the Renaissance and 16th century.
It discusses the mutual perceptions and conflicts between Latins (Catholics) and Greeks (Orthodox) from the Middle Ages onward.
Maximus the Greek is portrayed as a monk, theologian, humanist, translator, and philosopher who bridged Western and Eastern Christian traditions.
The theme of 'foreigner' is central, examining the social and spiritual roles of foreigners, especially in the context of law, rights, and salvation.
The lecture touches on Maximus’s monastic affiliations in Latin, Athonite, and Russian traditions, highlighting his complex identity.
It addresses historical events such as the failed union of Orthodox patriarchates with Rome and the fall of Constantinople.
The speaker shares personal reflections on emigration and the role of foreigners as objective observers of political and cultural processes.
Maximus’s intellectual contributions include translations of classical Greek and Latin texts and theological treatises.
The lecture also covers Maximus’s conflicts with Russian church authorities and his relationship with Ivan the Terrible.
The speaker hints at ongoing research and a forthcoming book related to these themes.

Chapters

Who was Maximus the Greek and why is he significant?

Maximus the Greek was a monk, theologian, humanist, and translator who lived in Renaissance Italy and Russia. He is significant for bridging Western and Eastern Christian traditions and being considered the first intellectual in Rus.

What does the lecture say about the role of foreigners in society?

The lecture argues that foreigners hold a special and privileged position, often able to view political and cultural events more objectively. Foreigners are also linked to spiritual themes of justice and salvation.

How did Maximus the Greek relate to the Orthodox and Catholic Churches?

Maximus was deeply involved in the complex relations between Orthodox and Catholic Churches, having knowledge of both traditions. His life reflected the tensions and attempts at union between these churches during his time.

Full Transcript — Download SRT & Markdown

Speaker A

Alright, wonderful. Well then, my friends, thank you so much. Indeed, these, well, so far three lectures, as it were, are completely different. Last time, the main content was the mutual perception of Latins and Greeks. As you remember, for those who were present, from the core.

Speaker A

Middle Ages. And how, one could say, the conflict between Catholics and Orthodox began, and how they envisioned each other, and how they envisioned the world. How they understood certain specific concepts—say, new ones, old ones, what it meant to ones and what it meant to others.

Speaker A

Middle Ages. And how, one could say, the conflict between Catholics and Orthodox began, and how they envisioned each other, and how they envisioned the world. How they understood certain specific concepts—say, new ones, old ones, what it meant to ones and what it meant to others.

Speaker A

Florensky and Father Alexander Men. That is something completely different. Mm-hmm. You see, when Masha and I decided, we decided to arrange them chronologically as well. Now we have, let's say, the Renaissance, if one can say so, and the sixteenth century. But in fact, there are many other topics as well. And so

Speaker A

That lecture is very important to me because it is very... But today will be about the same thing, only slightly differently, because the focus is on Maximus the Greek, and he is a fascinating character, wonderfully interesting, as it seems to me. And we will see, then the next one will be about Father Pavel.

Speaker A

different lecture, but one that isn't part of this series. So we'll see how it goes. But generally, this is the theme, so to speak, of the foreigner. Who is a foreigner, and what does it mean to be a foreigner? That is why

Speaker A

Florensky and Father Alexander Men. That is something completely different. Mm-hmm. You see, when Masha and I decided, we decided to arrange them chronologically as well. Now we have, let's say, the Renaissance, if one can say so, and the sixteenth century. But in fact, there are many other topics as well. And so.

Speaker A

or at least these words: "Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no salvation." That is, basically, not to rely on anyone, because salvation is with the Lord alone.

Speaker A

When I was preparing today's lecture, I started, and I wanted to talk about something completely different. I thought: "Well, I'll also mention this, this, and that." Then I realized that it's simply unreal, impossible, because there is just too much. And in fact, what I am about to say right at the beginning could be the subject of a separate.

Speaker A

He keeps truth forever, executes judgment for the oppressed, gives food to the hungry. Further: sets the bound free, that is, frees the prisoners, gives wisdom to the blind, raises up those who are bowed down.

Speaker A

Different lecture, but one that isn't part of this series. So we'll see how it goes. But generally, this is the theme, so to speak, of the foreigner. Who is a foreigner, and what does it mean to be a foreigner? That is why.

Speaker A

but simply foreigners) have to this category of people? Because all these people who are listed here are mistreated, wronged people, right? Say, the bound, that is, those in prison, right? The bowed down, and so on, the oppressed, the hungry, and so forth. And among them,

Speaker A

I connect this with Maximus the Greek, because he was a foreigner. He lived as a foreigner first in Italy, and then in Russia. And what adventures of foreigners, right? And just as a, how should I put it, a foretaste of a possible other lecture—Psalm 145, which I love very much and which everyone knows.

Speaker A

Set in mind that in antiquity, when there was no, so to speak, state ruled by law, right, the law itself was the king or emperor, well, the local ruler. And a foreigner is a person from a country whom nobody knows, and who knows nobody, so he has no rights. And this idea—

Speaker A

Or at least these words: "Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no salvation." That is, basically, not to rely on anyone, because salvation is with the Lord alone.

Speaker A

yes, abroad. And I have a whole theory that a foreigner plays a specific role. They have a special mission. There. And besides, they hold a very privileged position. They can look more objectively at ongoing processes: political, economic, and so on, more impartially,

Speaker A

And then comes what God does. And here, as it were... various actions of God are listed, which...

Speaker A

forgive me, I won't speak about it, but intentionally as a small teaser for you, a foretaste—if there is an opportunity for some other lecture, I will tell you about it with great pleasure sometime. Especially since I am currently writing a book about it. The book

Speaker A

He keeps truth forever, executes judgment for the oppressed, gives food to the hungry. Further: sets the bound free, that is, frees the prisoners, gives wisdom to the blind, raises up those who are bowed down.

Speaker A

time in my life, I am experiencing it specifically as emigration, forced emigration at that. And so I started writing the book back there and am still writing it. It moves very slowly, unfortunately, but nevertheless, I think it is endlessly fascinating. But all of this intertwines with the fate of Maximus the Greek, because,

Speaker A

And then come these somewhat surprising words: "The Lord preserves the strangers; He shall receive the fatherless and the widow." Now, "strangers," clearly, means foreigners, those who came to a foreign land. And from this—what relation do these strangers (who, of course, are not extraterrestrials, as Russians might mean nowadays.

Speaker A

a monk, a theologian, but he is a humanist. He is a translator and scribe, writer, polemicist, hymnographer, philosopher. In Rus, he was mostly referred to simply as a philosopher. By definition—Masha already mentioned it— of Dmitry Likhachev, he is the first intellectual in Rus. It seems to me he is one of the most interesting...

Speaker A

But simply foreigners) have to this category of people? Because all these people who are listed here are mistreated, wronged people, right? Say, the bound, that is, those in prison, right? The bowed down, and so on, the oppressed, the hungry, and so forth. And among them.

Speaker A

that is, changing. This is pre-Renaissance Italy, specifically in Florence where he lived, where such a ferment of culture was happening at that exact time. And on the other hand—it is a self-asserting Muscovy. He also left Italy, via Mount Athos as we will see, and ended up in Russia and Moscow,

Speaker A

Well, one can easily understand orphans and widows. But where do foreigners fit in, it would seem, right?

Speaker A

He was a Greek, an Orthodox Christian, but he knew the Western Church very well from the inside, as I will show later, and he stood between three monastic traditions, because he managed to be a monk in the Latin

Speaker A

Set in mind that in antiquity, when there was no, so to speak, state ruled by law, right, the law itself was the king or emperor, well, the local ruler. And a foreigner is a person from a country whom nobody knows, and who knows nobody, so he has no rights. And this idea—

Speaker A

in Moscow. He wrote an entire treatise about it, so he knew Western monasticism inside out, yet he himself was an Athonite monk. On top of that, he arrived in Moscow and stayed at the Chudov Monastery.

Speaker A

That a foreigner is a person without rights—is immensely interesting. And the role of such a person in any community, in any society... I have a long-standing theory that I am a professional foreigner, because I've lived most of my life abroad and still live.

Speaker A

organized by the Russian Academy of Sciences several years ago. And then... there is a whole chapter dedicated to Maximus the Greek. In this book right here, a short promotional plug, yes. Now, who was Maximus? As I said: the first intellectual in Rus, pre-Renaissance Italy,

Speaker A

Yes, abroad. And I have a whole theory that a foreigner plays a specific role. They have a special mission. There. And besides, they hold a very privileged position. They can look more objectively at ongoing processes: political, economic, and so on, more impartially.

Speaker A

He was a very productive author, he wrote a lot, as around one hundred and fifty of his works have survived to our day. But generally, according to various estimates, it is believed he wrote far more—more than three hundred and fifty different texts, including whole books, treatises, and other works.

Speaker A

And so forth. But there is a certain price they must pay, since they are precisely a foreigner, a person without rights by definition. But I decided... I initially wanted to talk about this, I even told someone, thought: "Domostroy, take something from there, immensely interesting, but there's no time." So.

Speaker A

But we must step back a bit and talk about who taught Maximus the Greek himself and how he ended up in Italy. The fact is that Maximus arrived in Italy, most likely, when he was very young, at twenty-two years old. A young Greek man arrived, invited by

Speaker A

Forgive me, I won't speak about it, but intentionally as a small teaser for you, a foretaste—if there is an opportunity for some other lecture, I will tell you about it with great pleasure sometime. Especially since I am currently writing a book about it. The book.

Speaker A

Italy. And you probably know that right after the fall of Byzantium, the Renaissance began in Italy and humanism began to flourish. So Greek authors were published and translated, a huge interest arose in Greek literature above all, as well as sculpture, painting, and so on throughout Italy, but most of all in Florence, around the court

Speaker A

I am writing right now is actually titled: "The Lord Preserves the Strangers." That is, the Lord protects foreigners. Yes. And I began writing it in Russia when I wasn't thinking about emigration. I have a very strange fate, because I was a foreigner in Russia, but now, at this current.

Speaker A

He simply traveled to Constantinople or Greece and bought, with Lorenzo the Magnificent's money, a huge number of books. He transported these books, naturally by ship, to Italy. And this was the beginning of the interest in Greek literature. Imagine, based on those books, the main library

Speaker A

Time in my life, I am experiencing it specifically as emigration, forced emigration at that. And so I started writing the book back there and am still writing it. It moves very slowly, unfortunately, but nevertheless, I think it is endlessly fascinating. But all of this intertwines with the fate of Maximus the Greek, because.

Speaker A

Sorry, I forgot to show you. Here—Lorenzo de' Medici... the key player of humanism in France. And a person very close to him was Guillaume Budé, who stood at the origins of humanism in France. So it's endlessly fascinating: a Greek who, both in Italy

Speaker A

As I already mentioned, he was a foreigner both in Italy and in Russia. Who was he? It is difficult to give an exact definition of Maximus the Greek, because he is a saint of the Russian Orthodox Church while not being Russian. He is.

Speaker A

two main libraries: the National Library in Rome, the Laurentian Library in Florence, and also a library in Venice. Lascaris was involved with all three. Afterward, he persuaded the Medici to establish a Greek Academy, and then here in France, in Fontainebleau, he stood at the

Speaker A

A monk, a theologian, but he is a humanist. He is a translator and scribe, writer, polemicist, hymnographer, philosopher. In Rus, he was mostly referred to simply as a philosopher. By definition—Masha already mentioned it— of Dmitry Likhachev, he is the first intellectual in Rus. It seems to me he is one of the most interesting.

Speaker A

Lascaris held great authority in Rome with Pope Leo X as well. There he founded a Greek gymnasium, then returned to France and here proposed... effectively persuaded King Francis I to found a Greek College in Paris, though ultimately it was Guillaume Budé who created it.

Speaker A

One of the most interesting figures. And in the culture, say, of 15th-century Muscovy, here is what is interesting. He is neither Russian nor Italian, but he, like no one else, facilitated contact between the cultures of Italy and Russia. And that at the precise moment when these two cultures were undergoing a crisis.

Speaker A

place is his tomb, and there is an epigram he composed for himself. Yes. "Lascaris is buried in a foreign land," he writes of himself, knowing that he doesn't regret this hospitality, considering it sweet. The pain lies in the fact that the fatherland no longer offers free land for

Speaker A

That is, changing. This is pre-Renaissance Italy, specifically in Florence where he lived, where such a ferment of culture was happening at that exact time. And on the other hand—it is a self-asserting Muscovy. He also left Italy, via Mount Athos as we will see, and ended up in Russia and Moscow.

Speaker A

Yet how did Lascaris himself get to Italy? He got there thanks to another Greek. Lascaris was older than Maximus the Greek, if I'm not mistaken, by about twenty-five years. And he got there...

Speaker A

Muscovy. At the very moment when Muscovy was rising, when before Ivan the Terrible, under Vasily III, Moscow truly became a real capital. And even this pseudo-religious, pseudo-philosophical concept emerged: "Moscow is the Third Rome." Moreover, that's not all; he was a person at the crossroads. Look how interesting it is.

Speaker A

He was the Archbishop of Nicaea, and together with Emperor John VI he arrived in Ferrara first, then Ferrara, then Florence, and eventually the council ended in Rome.

Speaker A

He was a Greek, an Orthodox Christian, but he knew the Western Church very well from the inside, as I will show later, and he stood between three monastic traditions, because he managed to be a monk in the Latin.

Speaker A

That is, representatives of various Orthodox churches, different patriarchates, signed a union with Rome. Why? Hoping for support, and to prevent the Ottomans from taking Constantinople, they counted on military support from the West. Unfortunately, they were deceived, because everyone signed it, yet no support came. Constantinople fell. As a result,

Speaker A

Church with the Catholics before becoming a monk on Mount Athos. Thus, he knew Western monasticism, knew it wonderfully well. He was the first in Rus to write about what monastic orders in the West were, that there were Franciscans, Dominicans, and so on. Nothing was known about this yet.

Speaker A

At first, Bessarion's line prevailed, and the Union was signed, but later Mark of Ephesus's position won out. A third library came into being thanks to Bessarion. Bessarion, then, became... once the Union was signed, he was made the Latin Patriarch of Constantinople. When

Speaker A

In Moscow. He wrote an entire treatise about it, so he knew Western monasticism inside out, yet he himself was an Athonite monk. On top of that, he arrived in Moscow and stayed at the Chudov Monastery.

Speaker A

in Rome. But toward the end of his life, Bessarion himself did a great deal to import books and invite to Italy the most educated Greeks who, after the fall of Constantinople, were left, well, stranded with nothing, not knowing what to do. And so Bessarion, and after

Speaker A

So, you see, three traditions—that too is remarkable. What I am about to tell you is material compiled from various lectures of mine and so on. I once spoke about this at a colloquium titled "Russia and Italy: Experiences and Images of Dialogue between Intellectual Cultures." It was organized... a conference.

Speaker A

in Venice. Remarkable: Italy's three main libraries were created by these two men, Greeks, alongside whom Maximus the Greek stood at a certain point. Maximus the Greek was born in the Greek town of Arta. Here is a map showing where Maximus was born. He was apparently

Speaker A

Organized by the Russian Academy of Sciences several years ago. And then... there is a whole chapter dedicated to Maximus the Greek. In this book right here, a short promotional plug, yes. Now, who was Maximus?

Speaker A

most likely he even traveled physically with Lascaris... Oh, wonderful. Thank you. See, without these... Ah no, yours is more advanced. Mine is an iPhone, yes, but quite old. Just a second, wait. Well, maybe I have a cable for another one myself. Well,

Speaker A

uh, yes, I do. Did you think only?.. Yes. Ah, here's one. Ah, okay, okay, okay, nothing needed. All of civilization in... Excuse me, friends, let's see if it's charging or not.

Speaker A

Yes, seems so. So, Michael Trivolis was Maximus the Greek's secular name, because he became Maximus later upon taking monastic vows. He, most likely on the same ship with Lascaris and other intellectuals from Greece, arrived in Italy. And as a result, Lascaris served as his mentor,

Speaker A

so to speak, teacher, and so on. What was Maximus doing? At first, he was copying various Greek manuscripts, and later translating them once he gained better command of Italian and Latin. Among other things, we recently found a manuscript—in

Speaker A

2016 we found a manuscript of a work by Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite titled "On the Divine Names." Expertise confirmed that it was copied by Maximus the Greek. It is his autograph.

Speaker A

Why is this interesting? Dionysius the Areopagite is one of the Greek Fathers of his time. No, he copied Dionysius the Areopagite. And the primary commentator, so to speak, of Dionysius the Areopagite was Maximus the Confessor. Notice, Maximus the Greek is always depicted in icons with a huge, broad beard.

Speaker A

It's not entirely clear why; there are various conjectures that it wasn't a beard, but something...

Speaker A

Look here, see, here too, everywhere. And it's broad rather than long specifically in depictions of Maximus the Greek. That's how you can recognize him. Returning to Dionysius the Areopagite right here, his chief interpreter was Maximus the Confessor.

Speaker A

Maximus the Confessor was the Greek Father who had the best relations with the Latins. He even offered the first interpretation of the Filioque, saying that no, the Latins are not heretics, because in Latin it can be said that way, whereas in Greek it cannot, but in Latin it is acceptable. Curiously,

Speaker A

today, in the 20th... well, recently in the 20th century, Catholics began to explain the Filioque in the exact same manner Maximus the Confessor did back then: that it is a purely linguistic issue, permissible in Latin, but not in Greek. Be that as it may, theological

Speaker A

intricacies might not interest us as much, but something else is intriguing: since it was Maximus the Confessor, perhaps later, when taking monastic tonsure, Michael Trivolis chose the name Maximus because he remembered copying that very manuscript in Florence, which was discovered recently,

Speaker A

ten years ago in Florence. Interesting, isn't it? How life works out. But the point is that Florence at this time, late 15th to early 16th century, was above all about Girolamo Savonarola. Girolamo Savonarola was an extraordinary religious figure,

Speaker A

and a political one simultaneously, as he also ruled Florence for a few years, four years at the very end of the 15th century. Who was Savonarola? We must recall that at this time, along with the discovery of ancient manuscripts, Italians were becoming

Speaker A

fascinated by ancient Greek culture. What did that signify? It signified paganism. After the Middle Ages, when Greek culture wasn't discussed much because it was pagan, and focus was placed on their own Christian culture, Thomistic thought, and so forth, suddenly

Speaker A

a keen interest in Greek culture surged. Naturally, if you recall Italian paintings from that era, painters like Botticelli, who depicted Greek secular culture extensively, faced opposition, primarily from Girolamo Savonarola, who as a strict monk viewed it as a return to paganism

Speaker A

that could under no circumstances be tolerated. Therefore, Girolamo Savonarola organized various events, including the so-called Bonfire of the Vanities, that is, auto-da-fé. They burned Greek manuscripts, books, and so on, as well as certain paintings. Naturally, they burned Boccaccio's "Decameron",

Speaker A

works by Ovid, because those were pure paganism. But among other things, there is a tradition— though not one hundred percent verified, but allegedly... Yet it is one hundred percent certain that Savonarola staged these bonfires right in the Piazza della Signoria in Florence, in the very heart of Florence.

Speaker A

Supposedly on one occasion, most importantly, on Shrove Tuesday, at the peak of the carnival, right before Lent in 1497, paintings and canvases by Botticelli were burned in one of these bonfires.

Speaker A

Sandro Botticelli himself reportedly threw his paintings into the fire. Be that as it may, Savonarola was a brilliant preacher, and he vehemently denounced the morals and customs of the time. Here is a bas-relief showing the Bonfire of the Vanities. Well, you see, everything being burned there, and so on. This is from slightly later.

Speaker A

Maximus the Greek in all likelihood attended Savonarola's sermons several times, because he tells us... here is a quote about this Hieromonk Jerome, as he calls him in a completely Orthodox manner: "Hieromonk Jerome, who for two hours, sometimes more,

Speaker A

standing at the teaching pulpit, copiously poured forth streams of instruction upon his listeners, not holding a book in his hands, but drawing testimonies supporting his words, borrowing them from the treasury of his vast memory." This is a bas-relief from that era—Savonarola preaching in Florence.

Speaker A

Be that as it may, the story of Savonarola himself is quite terrible, because he was burned at the stake. What he did to works of art was done to him in 1498. Why? Well, because at some point the Florentines turned on him; he went too far, so to speak,

Speaker A

and at a certain point he was accused of heresy and, by decision of an ecclesiastical tribunal, burned at the stake. But the point is that 1498 passed—and we have a very interesting date: 1502, when our dear Maximus the Greek becomes a monk

Speaker A

in a Catholic Dominican monastery where Savonarola had previously lived. That exact monastery of San Marco in the center of Florence. A stunning, beautiful monastery, today a museum, where remarkable people lived, including, besides Maximus, a certain Beato Angelico, one of Italy's finest painters, who painted his masterpieces directly

Speaker A

onto the walls of this monastery. Among them, for instance, the "Annunciation", or here—"Noli me tangere", depicting the risen Christ appearing to Mary Magdalene, and so forth. And all this splendor painted on monastery walls, along with works by Ghirlandaio. And this was painted

Speaker A

just shortly before Maximus the Greek's stay there. So Maximus saw all this with his own eyes when he was a young monk in that monastery. I should note right away that everyone mentions Maximus's time in Florence, including official Orthodox sources and Russian historiography. But

Speaker A

the detail that he was a monk there... is rarely discussed. Why? Well, it seems awkward: a Greek, an Orthodox... Very complicated for inter-church relations. After the Union failed, how could a young Greek become a Latin monk? Did he convert to

Speaker A

Catholicism? What rite did Catholics perform over him? Any at all? It remains unclear. Overall, not much is said about Maximus living in this monastery. However, again relatively recently, in 2003, a book was discovered— a book belonging to the San Marco monastery itself. It's titled, I believe, the "Book of Clothing".

Speaker A

But yes, this is essentially a list of all the monks who lived there, with dates: when they entered the monastery, when they took their vows, when they died, and so on. And here, among other things, in Latin we find an entry dated June 12, 1502, which reads: "Brother

Speaker A

Michael Emmanuel from the city of Arta", that is, Maxim the Greek, who was Michael, the son of Emmanuel, entered the monastery. But further on there are also columns where the date of taking vows and the date of death should be,

Speaker A

and nothing is written there. It states when he entered the monastery, after which he disappears.

Speaker A

We know that Maxim actually stayed there for about a year or a little over a year, perhaps, but not much longer, because already in 1503 or 1504 we find him in Venice. That is, he left, abandoned the monastery. In Venice, too, he was in the company of insanely interesting

Speaker A

people, because there was someone like Aldus Manutius. And Aldus Manutius is the main actor, so to speak, in Venice, the main person engaged in publishing books in Venice. And Maxim was close to him.

Speaker A

We even know that there was correspondence between them. Maxim asked for some work, and Aldus Manutius found it for him. But be that as it may, a little more time passes, and he does not stay long in Venice, where he worked for Manutius, because around 1508

Speaker A

we find him in the Vatopedi Monastery on Mount Athos. So, the young Greek, after trying to become a monk among the Latins and after changing his mind or, I don't know, not finding what he was looking for, first returned

Speaker A

simply to secular life, and then returned to his homeland and became a monk. Moreover, on Mount Athos, which means a great deal — a very strict rule. And it was precisely in the Vatopedi Monastery that Maxim the Greek lived for some time, took his vows, and received the monastic name Maxim, as I already said.

Speaker A

But the point is that his life is quite peculiar, because around 1508 he was in Vatopedi, and we know when he ended up in Moscow.

Speaker A

And why did he end up in Moscow? He ended up in Moscow because the Grand Prince of Moscow, Vasily the Third — and this is the father of Ivan the Terrible — appealed to the Athonite monks with a request to send

Speaker A

to Rus a translator, and the choice fell precisely on probably the most educated Maxim, because he was already a polyglot. He knew both Latin and Italian well, because after all, the fifteenth century is Italian, and not Latin, of course. Yes. He knew both of these languages, and he was sent to Muscovy,

Speaker A

but he did not know Slavic in detail, so he was sent as a translator. And we know that he was staying in the Chudov Monastery. And first of all, he undertook the translation of the Psalter. This, by the way,

Speaker A

is his autograph. This is the handwriting of Maxim the Greek. Around himself, he apparently gathered many educated Russian monks who helped him in the work of translation. In fact, they translated very much. We know that they translated the works of Basil the Great, Gregory the Theologian, John Chrysostom,

Speaker A

but also secular literature. Josephus Flavius is the main writer on the history of Christianity, an ancient author; Menander and so on. Where do all these translations from Greek suddenly come from and for what purpose?

Speaker A

Where did they get the originals, these Greek texts? The fact is that Vasily the Third is the son of Sophia Paleologue, who, being a Greek, was the wife of Ivan the Third. Therefore, of course, we know that Sophia Paleologue had a huge library. It was from this library, apparently, that Maxim the Greek took

Speaker A

the originals in the Greek language and translated them. It must be said that they also translated Plato, Aristotle, Xenophon, Plutarch, Lucian, Cicero, and so on. That is, a huge so to speak, translation workshop. Here is his handwriting. Beautiful, isn't it?

Speaker A

So, it turns out that a monk from Athos, who knew Italian humanists very well, who was at the origins, one might say, of the Italian Renaissance, undertook such translations in Russia, in Muscovy.

Speaker A

Now, if Laskaris, as I said, was in both Italy and France, then Maxim was in both Italy and Muscovy, but, overall, the results were a bit different. This miniature is Maxim the Greek, translating. How did Maxim translate, not knowing the Slavic language? Through Latin or through

Speaker A

Italian. That is, he translated from Greek into Latin or Italian, and educated people, monks and others who were in his translation workshop, translated into Slavic. Insanely interesting collective work like this. But this is where the adventures begin—not of Italians in Russia,

Speaker A

but of Greeks in Russia. The fact is that Maxim, yes, grew up next to Italian humanists, was a witness to this, but he was also a disciple of Savonarola. On the one hand, he sees everything, how all of Florence's society and cultural life are seething, insanely interesting. On the other hand,

Speaker A

his own spiritual father, so to speak, condemned this and preached against it. And Maxim deeply respected Savonarola, as we shall see. And Savonarola, as you know, criticized both the church equally and the Medici family who ruled in Florence, and therefore suffered both from the church and from the prince,

Speaker A

let's say, in this case. So, Maxim does the exact same thing. Here is another point: Savonarola was a strict monk, he was against corruption. And in Russia at this time, an insanely interesting, one might say, conflict is taking place in the monastic environment between the Non-Possessors and, conversely, the Possessors. That is,

Speaker A

these two monks—Nilus of Sora and Joseph of Volokolamsk—they are representatives of completely opposite ideas about monastic life, because Joseph of Volokolamsk believed that yes, a monk should have nothing, but the monastery can be rich and even should be rich in order to be strong. But Nilus of Sora

Speaker A

believed the exact opposite. And this kind of opposition takes place precisely at the time when Maxim arrives in Muscovy, and he immediately takes the side of the Non-Possessors and Nilus of Sora, which is not surprising, because he was a disciple of Savonarola, and this is entirely connected.

Speaker A

But the trouble is that among other disciples of Joseph of Volokolamsk, that is, in the opposing, shall we say, party, was the Metropolitan of Moscow. Therefore, the ruling, if one may say so, hierarch, under whom Maxim the Greek found himself...

Speaker A

It is known that Daniel, Metropolitan of Moscow, was both a disciple of Joseph of Volokolamsk and a supporter of this way of conducting monastic life. And Daniel, Metropolitan of Moscow, invited the young monk, who had just arrived from the Holy Mountain, to translate the church history

Speaker A

of Theodoret of Cyrrhus. But the fact is that this Theodoret of Cyrrhus somehow had some connection to the Nestorians, heretics. And since the Greek Maxim knew church history very well, he refused to fulfill the metropolitan's blessing. He said: "No, I will not translate this."

Speaker A

And this is where problems begin for poor Maxim. Next, I will say a little faster that Maxim quite openly preached against prejudices and superstitions, firstly, that existed among the common people in the Russian Church. And the educated Greek says a lot of things: "No,

Speaker A

well, you don't believe correctly. This is all paganism. Many of your customs are wrong." First. Second: much in your divine service is wrong, you do not serve as you ought, your books are full of mistakes, and so on. And Maxim spoke about this, yes, absolutely, but he didn't just talk about it.

Speaker A

Maxim also spoke about the fact that he was against authoritarianism, against corruption — equally among the church hierarchy and at the court of the grand prince, which he speaks and writes about completely openly. He criticizes, one might say, the feudal system of Muscovy in the era of Vasily the Third,

Speaker A

he criticizes despotism, the greed of the church authorities, the episcopate, the abbots of monasteries.

Speaker A

Well, all this reminds one of the denouncing speeches of Savonarola. Remarkably reminiscent. Well, you understand that, alas, here too one can somehow tie this back to the discussion about foreigners. A foreigner has a relative right to criticism precisely because

Speaker A

he is a foreigner, but he cannot afford the luxury of criticism, because they will tell him: "But you don't know, and forgive me." Yes, and that is precisely what happens. In short, the Local Council of the Russian Church in 1525 accuses Maxim of heresy. They charge him

Speaker A

with many different accusations, including the fact that he spoke openly against the autocephaly of the Russian Church. He found a place to talk about this—in Moscow. And as a result, he was condemned, he was locked up right in the Joseph-Volokolamsk Monastery [1] — in the monastery of those whom he didn't really respect

Speaker A

and love. He was kept in the harshest conditions, that is, he was starved, frozen, not allowed to read or write. And so he spent six years. But the most important thing — he was excommunicated, which means he was deprived of communion. He could neither partake of communion nor approach any sacraments.

Speaker A

And they did not give him, as I already said, either to read or write. But still he managed to write: he wrote a canon to the Spirit the Comforter on the wall of his cell simply with a piece of charcoal. That which

Speaker A

you see there on the right. But among other things, meaning, further on Maxim was still quite famous, therefore there was some universal outrage that he was condemned. And many people said that something wrong was going on here after all and that he must certainly be forgiven. And,

Speaker A

in short, a council gathered again in 1531, but besides his previous crimes, he was also accused of heretical corruption of liturgical books.

Speaker A

And as a result, the church court found him guilty on all counts for the second time.

Speaker A

So poor Maxim was evidently grieving very much, but at the same time he was sentenced to exile to another place — the Tver Otroch Monastery. And there was a bishop there, Akaky, who deeply respected Maxim and who, conversely, began to treat him very paternally. And as written in the chronicle:

Speaker A

"so that he even sat at the refectory table together with the hierarch," that is, with the bishop, "and ate from a single dish." That is how the bishop treated him, despite the fact that he had been condemned by a church tribunal.

Speaker A

Imagine, in the forties, the Patriarchs of Alexandria and Constantinople simultaneously appealed several times to the grand prince and to the Metropolitan of Moscow with a request to allow Maxim the Greek to return to Athos, but received no answer to these requests. But the point is

Speaker A

that politics is such a thing that changes. And why did it change here? It changed because Vasily the Third himself, the grand prince, died in 1533. And here is his son Ivan the Terrible, but he is three years old. And he will be the grand prince in Muscovy. As you understand,

Speaker A

it will not be he at the age of three who will rule, but the boyars and the guardians of the young prince — the Shuiskys. And these Princes Shuysky — at some point they clashed with Metropolitan Daniel, removed him, deposed him

Speaker A

and also sent him to the very same Joseph-Volokolamsk Monastery, in place of Maxim essentially, where Metropolitan Daniel was now sitting. By the way, yes, there is... ah, yes, here is the miniature.

Speaker A

Next what happens is that in 1542 Maxim asked the new metropolitan Makary, and I quote: "Be pleased to grant to me, your unworthy servant, the communion of the divine gifts of Christ, of which I have been deprived, I know not for what reason, for seventeen years now."

Speaker A

However, yes, it is hard after all, believe me. And indeed, he was allowed, but even later, in 1547, he received permission to receive the sacraments, that is, his excommunication was somehow lifted.

Speaker A

In the same year, 1547, Maxim wrote to Ivan the Terrible, who was already grown a bit older, with a request to return to Athos. Unfortunately... This, by the way, is considered to be a sort of self-portrait of Maxim the Greek, that is, in the manuscript such an almost caricature,

Speaker A

but where, perhaps, he depicted himself. Be that as it may, at the end of his life he was allowed, firstly, to move to the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, where he subsequently died, but he was rehabilitated more and more. And this rehabilitation was the work of Ivan the Terrible, surprisingly enough. Here

Speaker A

Maxim had a hard time with his father, but Ivan the Terrible respected him so much that he visited him. The Terrible visited Maxim in the monastery and did a lot for him. As a result, Maxim participated, for example,

Speaker A

in preparing the councils convened by Metropolitan Makary — the famous council in Moscow. And Maxim died in the Lavra, in the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, in 1556, on the feast day of his patron saint, that is, Maxim the Confessor. An amazing

Speaker A

thing too. 1556. And imagine, eight years after his death we find his image on a fresco in the gallery of the Annunciation Cathedral of the Moscow Kremlin.

Speaker A

Do you know when Maxim the Greek was canonized? Here, he is buried in the Lavra, but not where he was before, because his relics were found later and moved to the Refectory Cathedral, but that doesn't matter. But the point is a little

Speaker A

that Maxim was canonized very late — in 1988. This is the year of the Millennium of the Baptism of Rus. Then there was a council, and first of all they canonized Maxim the Greek. Why so late? So much time had passed. Because he was inconvenient as a saint — well,

Speaker A

because he criticized much too sharply the men of power and politicians of his time, and most importantly — the church.

Speaker A

Therefore, they were not in a hurry to recognize him. But despite the fact that he was canonized so late, as I already said, he is depicted already eight years after his death. He is depicted as a saint on a fresco, moreover in the Moscow Kremlin, in the Annunciation Cathedral.

Speaker A

He is highly revered by Old Believers. Well, such an Italian humanist. And I said that he was against the concept of "Moscow is the Third Rome." I said that criticizing the authorities is a dangerous thing.

Speaker A

I would like to show you, because I see that time is pressing, quickly anyway. This is the testimony of a foreigner who at the end of the sixteenth century was in Moscow, met with Ivan the Terrible and left this record:

Speaker A

"The father of the current sovereign, Vasily, imprisoned a Greek priest summoned from the Patriarch of Constantinople. When this priest learned that the Muscovites differ in dogmas of faith and certain rites not only from the Latins, but also from the Greeks,

Speaker A

he openly stated this to Vasily. After that, he was never able to free himself from imprisonment.

Speaker A

By the way, the Turkish sultan in his letters objected to this not very decisively. And there, they say, he will end his days." Imagine, such a record, such testimony of an Italian, who was on a diplomatic mission in Muscovy. Now I must ask Masha,

Speaker A

how many more minutes she will give me. And how many do you need? I would like to show a few quotes from Maxim himself. Can I have a little? I'll be quick. The fact is that Maxim wrote a lot of

Speaker A

treatises against the Latins. After all, he considered them heretics and wrote against the filioque, wrote various things. But I won't talk about this now, because there really isn't time. But there is another treatise by Maxim, which is called: "On the Perfect Monastic Life",

Speaker A

about monastic life. And there he actually speaks about Latin monasticism. Here is an amazing thing: he considered them heretics of a sort, but still wrote quite a lot and wrote with complete admiration about monastic life in the West. What he saw with his own eyes, by the way. Here are several

Speaker A

quotes: "In their cells you will find nothing else except a few books and the rags they wear upon themselves. Where do they have some special delicious food or drink, or some vegetables, or anything else that delights the palate?" Touching, isn't it? And further: "Where do they have

Speaker A

the accumulation of silver and gold?" and so on. But let's not go into details, but this is still very touching and very amusing. Next: "Where is their rejection of the vows that they made to God when taking vows? You won't find any of this." Even having labored greatly...

Speaker A

And so on. Further, another amazing thing: "Such is their perfect brotherly love, obedience to their superiors. They have nothing of their own, but everything is in common. They love non-possession as a great spiritual good, for it preserves their peace both in all truth and in the firmness

Speaker A

of thoughts, and far from all avarice and extortion." Truly interesting, isn't it? So, just a second. Yes, about the fact that the Franciscans live solely on alms. And now further it describes by what means they procure food for themselves every day for the day and so on. Yes.

Speaker A

Further: "Thus it behooves us Orthodox as well, regarding us monks, and that by councils of God-bearing fathers the abbots of sacred monasteries should be chosen, and not so that by gifts of silver and gold given to public scribes, abbot positions are attained by those desiring them,

Speaker A

many of whom are completely uneducated in this divine subject and lead a disorderly life, engaging constantly themselves in drunkenness, in all gluttony. And those under their rule brethren, deprived of care for their bodily needs and in spiritual neglect, wander about

Speaker A

the trackless wastes like sheep having no shepherd. Alas, alas, spare, Lord, spare." Imagine, here is a Greek monk who thus criticizes his own brethren, moreover as a Greek criticizing Russians. And it is clear that Russians for Greeks are, forgive me, still brothers, so to speak, yes. But the very

Speaker A

last thing — at one point Maxim in the same treatise writes about Savonarola. And here is how he writes: "Florence is a most beautiful city, the best of the cities located in Italy that I myself have seen.

Speaker A

In that city there is a monastery where monks live, called in Latin the Preachers. Preachers, that is, God's preachers. At the church of this sacred abode, the most holy apostle, evangelist Mark is the patron and intercessor before the Lord. In this abode the abbot was a certain

Speaker A

hieromonk named Jerome, a Latin by origin, by faith, filled with every wisdom, understanding of God-inspired Scripture and external science, that is, philosophy, an ascetic great and abundantly adorned with divine zeal... The same wisdom and reason, the art of God-inspired and external Scripture I observed in them, and more than others — in Jerome,

Speaker A

who preached for two hours." We have already read this. Good. Further he tells about the execution of Jerome. And here to you, my friends... No, right here. Ah, a pity. This is precisely the execution of Savonarola.

Speaker A

Moreover, generally speaking, almost a contemporary. Well, also Maxim himself is a contemporary, who tells about how Savonarola and several of his brethren were burned at the stake. And then writes the following: "With joy I would compare the fallen monks with the ancient defenders of piety, if they were not Latins by faith.

Speaker A

For a fervent zeal for the glory of the Savior Christ, similar to the ancient martyrs, and for the salvation and correction of the faithful, I observed in those venerable monks." Listen, everywhere he calls them "venerable".

Speaker A

Venerable is a holy monk. How are they saints if they are Latins? That is what is interesting.

Speaker A

And here is what he writes: "The Latins, although in many things they were seduced, turning to erroneous and strange teachings, seduced by the polymathy of Hellenic sciences inherent to them, — the Greek writes, yes, — but have not finally fallen away from faith, and hope, and love in the Savior Christ,

Speaker A

for whose sake their monks diligently organize their monastic life according to His holy commandments.

Speaker A

So that their accord, and brotherly love, and non-possession, and stillness, and pacification, and care for the salvation of many, we too should imitate, so as not to turn out worse than them. Carefully. This I say regarding the diligent fulfillment of commandments.

Speaker A

For just as the diligently fulfilled commandment of the Savior does not make them perfect, until they renounce their heresies, so neither does the Orthodox faith alone make us perfect, if we do not complement it with the diligent fulfillment of evangelical commandments." An insanely interesting position.

Speaker A

Here, it seems to me, is the greatness of this man: despite everything he went through, he remained honest — and so much so that he sees everything positive that even heretics could have, and he writes about it completely

Speaker A

calmly. Here, it seems to me, is an amazing person, an amazing monk, and simply a very honest intellectual. Well, and probably we should stop, yes. One hour and five minutes. I apologize.

Speaker A

— Thank you very much. I think that we will have many questions from the audience. Yes, please. One by one.

Speaker A

— Sergei Andryonkin. Well, first of all, thank you very much, very interesting. You have an excellent command of the audience, and I really liked that the lecture is built mostly on quotes, on documents.

Speaker A

But my question is the following: what part in all of this is the author's vision or the author's fiction? Because, for example, phrases like this to me, when he says to them: "You serve incorrectly," or when he drew something with charcoal... He was poorly fed — it's understandable,

Speaker A

that in prison for six years, but is this written anywhere? Or the fact that he drew with charcoal — well, that's more like a beautiful legend. Or the fact that Ivan the Terrible visited him often and helped him — where is

Speaker A

that from? Or is it the author's vision? — My vision, yes? No, of course not. No, no, this is history itself. That is, it is in the documents. Absolutely. Yes, there are documents.

Speaker A

— That is, if you say that he told them: "You serve incorrectly," meaning he wrote something, addressed them? But is it known that someone wrote down after him that he said that we serve incorrectly? I mean, how did he criticize? — Let's say, this is in his treatises. You can easily

Speaker A

read this. These are the treatises that are known to us, and as I said, there are quite a few of them, but still there are those that are unknown to us — that is, they have not reached us, reached us fragmentarily, still disputed. That is, here

Speaker A

work continues, attribution and so on. But everything that you heard today is, certainly, not invented. That he wrote with charcoal on the wall — there is evidence of this in many places, but evidence from his contemporaries who wrote that he wrote such and such on the wall,

Speaker A

and they copied it down afterwards. Yes. — Thank you. Thank you, it was very interesting.

Speaker A

— You're welcome. Tatyana, and I have a question. Natalia Malenky Lacus. Are you yourself not from Florence? — No, no, I am a Sardinian. But I, truly, studied a little in Florence, just like Maxim, for about two years or so, yes.

Speaker A

— Well, generally a technical question. You said that he took his vows on Athos. And in the Monastery of San Marco in Florence did he not take them? — One hundred percent he did not take them. He was a novice. Yes,

Speaker A

absolutely right. This is his novitiate, that is, the initial period that... about two-three years... Well, he lived there for about a year, in all likelihood, then left.

Speaker A

— Well, and the last comment. I too... I didn't think about this before, but read somewhere — I can't say where, because I need to check my notes. They say, that Vasily the Third threw him into prison for Maxim criticizing him for divorcing his previous wife

Speaker A

and marrying the next one. And he said that a son would be born who would be terrible.

Speaker A

And this is, as it were, a somewhat more complex story. — Maxim openly criticized the grand prince for wanting to divorce his wife. But the funniest thing — Vasily received a blessing from the metropolitan for this, from the very same Metropolitan Daniel with whom Maxim conflicted. And Maxim

Speaker A

says: "No, this is wrong." Interesting, right? Despite the fact that this is a metropolitan — that's one.

Speaker A

Then Maxim... I just, excuse me, along the way shortened things, because I understand, that I didn't say a lot, but Maxim was connected with the opposition in fact, that is, he was friends.

Speaker A

And at that time — now I might find for you — a well-known, let's say, oppositionist of that time, there was such a boyar who was, well, you could say, a diplomat. And now, perhaps, I will find for you...

Speaker A

And here is Maxim the Greek. Then their story was quite sad, because during the first, if I understand correctly, trial, Maxim was interrogated. And, apparently, interrogated not for nothing. And Maxim, generally speaking, spoke out, essentially betraying a person. This is a rather sad story.

Speaker A

There was such a person as Ivan Bersen-Beklemishev. He was a disgraced diplomat under Vasily the Third. And they communicated a lot with Maxim, but Maxim was significantly younger than this Ivan. And, apparently, the latter heavily criticized the grand prince in Maxim's presence. And descriptions have reached us even

Speaker A

of Maxim himself about how they talked, how they discussed various topics, and so on. But at some point, during this interrogation, Maxim actually pointed to this person and said, that yes, he told me that the sovereign is stubborn and does not like objections against himself. Well, objections —

Speaker A

meaning objections, yes. And they asked: "And did you really speak?" And the person confessed: "Yes, I said this." He was sentenced to death. Imagine, a very sad story. All this also concerned the divorce of Vasily the Third too. That is, there was another charge: Maxim

Speaker A

communicated with the Turkish ambassador, and this was regarded as high treason. That is you, well, such a monk, a rather famous intellectual at court, communicating with a diplomat of a foreign power.

Speaker A

— Of a different faith. — In fact, he was not of a different faith, because he was a Turkish ambassador, but he was a Greek, so Maxim communicated with him. And besides, Maxim the Greek had precisely clear political positions: he wanted to convince the grand

Speaker A

prince and the powers of Western Europe to nevertheless attack the Ottomans and liberate Constantinople. This is right after the capture of Constantinople. Consider, he had such a dream, and we know about this, he writes in various places. And with this ambassador it's not very clear, because the ambassador,

Speaker A

well, of course, could not participate in this, quite obvious, although he was a Greek, yes.

Speaker A

But, perhaps, he had something else with the ambassador. He was trying... Because even the Turkish government indeed wrote a letter in defense of Maxim the Greek, after all, he was their citizen, so to speak, being a Greek. And then his own hometown was also in the Ottoman Empire,

Speaker A

naturally. Therefore, this is his ambassador, despite the fact that he's a Greek, yes, well, a Turkish ambassador, yes. That is why the story is rather complex. This is an entire detective novel. This is an insanely interesting trial against Maxim the Greek. Now there are researchers who are dealing with this,

Speaker A

and literally there are publications of this year, last year. That is this... Did you want? Yes, please, let's have the linguistic question. — How does it turn out to be possible to say, that in Greek it cannot be said, but in Latin it can? — And that's just how it is. I can explain to you. The thing is

Speaker A

that I have an entire course on the relations of Catholics and Orthodox consisting of thirteen lectures.

Speaker A

Imagine, among other things I analyze this. That is, this is the notorious story with the filioque, yes? What is the filioque? In the Creed we say: "I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Giver of Life, Who proceeds from the Father." To this the Latins add the word "filioque" — "Who proceeds from the Father

Speaker A

and the Son." Yes. Now, if the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son as from a source, then this Son is the Father — He as it were begets the Holy Spirit. Then this trinity, it turns out somewhat strange. And this is a very well-known heresy even of the first centuries, which identified the Father and

Speaker A

the Son. But in this case the Son is the source of the Holy Spirit. Then the Son is the Father, yes. But the point is, that the Greek verb in this place of the Creed and the Latin verb "procedere"...

Speaker A

Here the Latin verb "procedere" does not mean the beginning of movement, the continuation of movement... verbs mean a little...

Speaker A

In Greek it cannot be said, because the verb... The beginning of movement in Russian, in Slavic is a heresy, just as in Greek. But in Latin no, in French no, in Italian no. It can be said in Latin, as well as in Neo-Latin languages,

Speaker A

using the verb "procedere". Because "procedere" is to continue movement. How to explain this? When I taught in Italy at the university, it's very interesting, just imagine the Italian boot, yes, Italy. Here is Milan, further south — Florence or Bologna, even

Speaker A

further south — Rome, further — Naples, further — Sicily. Yes, as a rule, trains go along the boot, along this Italian one. So from Milan they travel, say, to Sicily, to Naples via Florence and Rome. Yes, if you are at the station in Rome and see a train from northern Italy, and you ask: "Is this a train

Speaker A

from Florence?" Yes, this is a train from Florence, going to Rome. But this is not a Florentine train, this is a Milanese train. It began its movement earlier. Meaning it arrives in Rome via Florence. Yes, that is the whole

Speaker A

essence. It is not a Florentine train, but it is from Florence. The same with the filioque. It came to us...

Speaker A

Because Jesus Christ in the Gospel of John twice says two different things. Once says: "I will pray, and My Father will send you the Spirit the Comforter." Meaning the Father will send. And in another place He says: "I will send you the Spirit." Yes. Therefore, it's not clear. Meaning we receive the Spirit both from the Father and from the Son,

Speaker A

but the Son does not beget. That's the whole trick. Can you imagine? And in this sense, imagine, that Catholics were adding and added the word "filioque" to the Creed in all editions, in various translations, but not in the Greek language. If Catholics read the Creed in Greek,

Speaker A

they never read "filioque", because it is a heresy in Greek. But the mistake was in Moscow, when they began to serve mass in modern Russian and translated from Latin, in the Creed they said: "Who... well, Who proceeds from the Father and the Son", but He

Speaker A

does not proceed from the Son. That is the whole explanation. Clear? Thank you. Thank you. Theology like that, in a nutshell, please. Praise God. — Magnificent lecture, thank you very much.

Speaker A

Such a journey from Renaissance Florence, where the spirit of Savonarola hovered not only, as it turned out, over Italy, Florence, but moved to Russia as well. Actually, two questions, but they are connected.

Speaker A

What was the status of the Greek learned men invited to work in Muscovy? Was this negotiated in some way? That is, purely legally it is understood, that any legal agreements could be violated by an autocrat in anger, whom one could not contradict. But were there any conditions?

Speaker A

And the second question: how many more learned monks could Maxim the Greek bring with him — his, let's say, scribes, paper processors and so on? And what is known to us, are there studies on how work on translations took place in the scriptorium? This internal laboratory,

Speaker A

insanely interesting. So, perhaps, lists can be compared, perhaps, one can find some purely textological nuances between different versions. By the way, where is this manuscript with the signatures of Maxim the Greek? — Oh, I won't tell you that. I think that it is

Speaker A

either in St. Petersburg or in Moscow, but I cannot tell you, I don't know. But this is easy to check, I can find it for you, if I dig through my notes. Regarding April 1st — come, don't refuse. Regarding the first part of the question, look, what rights and duties were

Speaker A

stipulated. This is very interesting. I think, yes, but one must not forget one moment here: Maxim is a monk.

Speaker A

He arrived out of obedience. And a monk, precisely like a foreigner, is a person who has no rights.

Speaker A

Yes. And, by the way, this is also such a theory of mine, yes, that a monk is like a foreigner everywhere, all over the world he is a foreigner, even if he stays in his own country and so on. A monk is by definition a foreigner, because

Speaker A

by definition he is a person who has no rights. Therefore, in the case of Maxim, I do not think, that he could as if appeal, could, how to say, refer to the fact that, say, what rights do I have. Well,

Speaker A

hello, what rights do you have? You have no rights at all. This is a very short conversation in the church. This is not only during the time of Maxim the Greek, since then it has been like this. That's one. Two — what were...

Speaker A

This is insanely interesting. This, true, is not my... I haven't studied this topic very much, but, certainly, there were Greeks who in different waves arrived and were invited. But remember Theophanes the Greek, for example, who is also an insanely interesting personality and also at the origins of changes right in icon art,

Speaker A

because his direct disciple is Andrei Rublev. Andrei Rublev is a disciple of Theophanes, but Russian. And immediately in this the difference between them is visible, yes? This is a direct opposite to each other, but a great lesson of Theophanes the Greek. That is, everything is very simple, some kind of minimalism. Certainly,

Speaker A

we find this also in Rublev, although Rublev — is such a lover of mankind who is absolutely from Russian Orthodoxy, yes? And in Theophanes they are strict ascetics in these frescoes. This is insanely interesting, just the same. But here it turns out... Maxim... It is known that at the same time there were other

Speaker A

Greeks, but they were not so... They will not play such a huge role as Maxim played, because Maxim was, well, a very erudite person, very deeply educated, and, besides, very deeply spiritual, as all his history shows us. Therefore... Yes, please.

Speaker A

— Thank you very much for your lecture. I wanted to know what prompted you precisely to research the image of this person? Were there partly some autobiographical moments here?

Speaker A

— No, I am a foreign monk, he is a foreign monk. He is one of my favorite saints, I revere him very much.

Speaker A

I think that, you know, there is such a virtue, about which later, by the way, almost never and no one in Russia spoke about, called parrhesia. Parrhesia in Greek means "to speak the truth." Parrhesia, yes, imagine, it turns out that speaking the truth is a virtue. That is, speak the truth as

Speaker A

it is, do not try to diplomatically somehow please someone and so on. Speak the truth. Вот this is an absolute monastic virtue. Вот Maxim is an example. He spoke what he thought, he wrote what he thought, but suffered. This, as they say, is another moment. But I believe,

Speaker A

that a real monk in a sense is obliged to do this. Part of his calling is not to please, but to speak what he considers right. Спасибо. Да, пожалуйста, пожалуйста.

Speaker A

— Could you explain once again that paradox that you mentioned, that Old Believers especially revere Maxim the Greek, who specifically, as you said, criticized their liturgical, church books?

Speaker A

— Yes, but carefully. Firstly, Old Believers, as you understand, arose considerably later. Maxim is a whole century, more than a century earlier. Certainly, there were mistakes. Here is the problem of the Old Believers: there were so many mistakes that indeed Nikon at some point said:

Speaker A

"That's it, now we need to fix everything." Yes, but by order regarding... And subsequently this became Old Believerism, yes, because of which the church split. Maxim tried to do this from within, yes, but firstly, these are not necessarily the same mistakes, it's just that many more of them accumulated

Speaker A

much more. Another very interesting person — is Gennady, Archbishop of Novgorod, who was engaged in translating the Bible. These are precisely they going one after another: Gennady, Maxim the Greek and so on, then Old Believerism. That is, it was felt in the Russian Church,

Speaker A

that there is a certain provincialism. But the most interesting: when Maxim began to point, to point to all these mistakes, this was a moment of a very strong Russian Church. This is the moment of the concept "Moscow — Third Rome", a bit earlier. This is the moment of the autocephaly of the Russian Church. Therefore — how so,

Speaker A

we have just become independent, and now this Greek says: "You know nothing, you pray poorly, you incorrectly..." You understand? This was completely out of place. That is, in this sense he turned out not to be a diplomat, yes. And what did I want?.. Yes. And why Old Believers?.. Among

Speaker A

other things there is one place where Maxim speaks about the two-finger sign. That is why, actually, Old Believers love him, yes? That is, he corrected, as Nikon later corrected what they do not like. But, on the other hand, among other things he says, that no, it is correct to cross oneself like this — with two fingers,

Speaker A

yes, the Greek in one place. In one place, evidently, yes, in one place Maxim the Greek writes about this. Well, here two, and there three, or vice versa, the difference is small. The difference is very small. But how much in

Speaker A

the history of the church blood because of such small... — ...pour que l’histoire de l’Église...a été rajouté parmi les catholiques. — Bien sûr, Saint Ignace d'Antioche, c'est un des premiers évêques d'Antioche, donc il a toujours été reconnu par les catholiques. Ce qui

Speaker A

était rajouté, c'est pour ça que j'étais un peu... C'est Isaac de Ninive. Isaac de Ninive, c'est un saint... C'est très... Si vous connaissez un peu la chrétienté orientale, grosso modo, il y a des groupes complètement différents. Donc, vous avez les orthodoxes, c'est

Speaker A

par exemple le patriarcat œcuménique, les orthodoxes, tous les Russes, les Serbes. Et puis, vous avez deux Églises qu'autrefois on appelait les nestoriens, qui sont les Assyriens — en fait, ils ne sont pas vraiment nestoriens — et les autres, on les appelait les

Speaker A

monophysites, qui en fait sont les Syriaques occidentaux. Et les nestoriens, ou Assyriens, sont des Syriaques orientaux, d'accord. Ils ont des christologies complètement opposées, parce que les nestoriens, en effet, c'est comme Nestorius qui parle de natures complètement différentes, et l'autre, le monophysisme, c'est une seule nature, c'est la nature divine qui

Speaker A

a écrasé la nature humaine, en quelque sorte. Donc, ils ont des visions de la théologie et de la christologie complètement différentes, hein. Justement, non, mais...

Speaker A

Isaac de Ninive, on a pensé qu'il faisait partie, disons, soit de ceux qui sont orthodoxes, soit des occidentaux. Au vingtième siècle, un chercheur français, un syriologue, en étudiant bien, a trouvé une autre vie de Saint Isaac de Ninive, dans laquelle on voit qu'il était en fait des

Speaker A

Assyriens, donc des nestoriens. Bon, mais il est vénéré par les nestoriens, par les monophysites et par les orthodoxes, parce qu'il est syriaque, ils aiment bien le texte et tout, mais pas par les latins, évidemment. Alors, imaginez que l'année passée, le pape l'a rajouté dans le martyrologe

Speaker A

romain, l'année passée. Donc, vous voyez, les latins catholiques peuvent faire des choses comme ça. Il y a des saints orthodoxes qui ont été rajoutés au martyrologe romain, par exemple Serge de Radonège, qui sont des saints russes, donc après le schisme, pour ainsi dire. Mais une

Speaker A

chose encore plus étonnante, c'est Grégoire de Narek, qui est le plus grand poète arménien et qui faisait partie de l'Église arménienne, qui s'est séparée des autres à la moitié du cinquième siècle, en quatre cent cinquante et un, alors que Grégoire de Narek a vécu au

Speaker A

onzième siècle. Eh bien, l'Église catholique l'a rajouté à ses saints. Les catholiques ont cette capacité, disons, de revoir l'histoire, ils pourraient très bien...

Speaker A

Are there any other questions, comments? Then, if you'll allow... Father John, firstly, I want to thank you, of course, but we will thank you again. I want to remind you, that the next lecture will be on April 1st, meaning next Wednesday there will be no lecture. And on April 1st

Speaker A

we move into the twentieth century, yes, with Father Pavel Florensky and Father Alexander Men. Yes.

Speaker A

And, meaning, this title, yes, reads precisely: "The Scientist-Priest in the Context of the Atheistic State", yes, a conversation about Pavel Florensky and Alexander Men, who were both scientists: one a physicist and mathematician, the other a biologist, so insanely interesting.

Speaker A

And if you want to acquire one of the two books or both books of Father John that are for sale, then please approach Father John right after the lecture. And now we thank you once again. ```

Topics:Maximus the GreekOrthodox ChurchCatholic ChurchRenaissance16th centuryforeignermonasticismRussian historytheologyemigration

Get More with the SozAI App

Transcribe recordings, audio files, and YouTube videos — with AI summaries and speaker detection. 30 minutes free.

App Store Google Play

Or transcribe another YouTube video here →

Free tools: TXT to SRT · SRT Validator · Merge SRT · Subtitle to Text · All tools