05 — The Condemnations of 1935

Three distinct official acts were issued within four months of one another in the autumn and winter of 1935, and this collection keeps them rigorously separate, as the repository’s hub essay does. Moscow Ukaz No. 1651 of 7 September 1935, issued by Metropolitan Sergius (Stragorodsky) as deputy locum tenens, called Bulgakov’s teaching alien to the Orthodox faith and warned the faithful against it, while stopping short of a formal charge of heresy. The Determination (Opredelenie) of the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, at Sremski Karlovci under Metropolitan Anthony (Khrapovitsky), dated 17/30 October 1935, went further and declared the teaching heretical. Moscow Ukaz No. 2267 of 27 December 1935, addressed to Metropolitan Eleutherius of Lithuania and Vilnius, confirmed the first decree and extended the criticism to Bulgakov’s kenotic Christology — again without pronouncing him personally a heretic.

Tradition: Russian Orthodox — Moscow Patriarchate and the Russian Church Abroad (ROCOR)

The Standard Applied Here

Per METHODOLOGY §4.1, the fact and the content of these acts are reported as fact. They happened, they say what they say, they have never been rescinded, and this collection does not soften them, explain them away, or subordinate them to the modern reappraisal.

Per METHODOLOGY §4.2, the further question — whether sophiology is in truth heretical, salvageable, or a legitimate though flawed theologoumenon — is a genuinely live intra-Orthodox dispute, and is treated as such in Section 08, where the parties are named and nothing is adjudicated.

Four precisions belong in this header because they are as much part of the record as the condemnations themselves:

  • Moscow did not pronounce Bulgakov personally a heretic. Neither ukaz did so.
  • Bulgakov was not heard before the first decree was issued. He learned of it after the fact and replied by memorandum.
  • No pan-Orthodox condemnation of sophiology was ever issued. The acts were those of the Moscow Patriarchate and of ROCOR. The Ecumenical Patriarchate — in whose Western European exarchate Bulgakov actually served — never condemned him.
  • No canonical penalty ever attached to him. He was not suspended, deposed, or excommunicated by anyone, and remained dean of St. Sergius until his death.

Files in This Section

File Description
The Moscow Ukazy of 1935 Ukaz No. 1651 of 7 September 1935 and Ukaz No. 2267 of 27 December 1935: their authorship, content, jurisdictional standing, and limits
The ROCOR Determination and Seraphim Sobolev The Sremski Karlovci determination of 17/30 October 1935, its charges, and the theological case supplied by Archbishop Seraphim (Sobolev)

See Also