CC BY
52Палеоросия. Древняя Русь: во времени, в личностях, в идеях
Па^ашрюош- е\ %ро\ю, ярооюяю, е\ ег8ег
Научный журнал Санкт-Петербургской Духовной Академии
/
^ooW^L v
в iii
в : §
ш---*
Я iiiuimii *
V %
№ 1 (12)
2020
Л. С. Невес
Создание (и разрушение) Русской церкви согласно Серапиону Владимирскому
DOI: 10.24411/2618-9674-2020-10011
Аннотация: В данной статье мы стремимся исследовать значение Русской церкви (понимаемой нами здесь как община христианской веры, а не как иерархическая структура) согласно Серапиону, епископу Владимирскому, в XIII веке. Святитель за свою жизнь написал несколько проповедей, пять из которых сохранились до наших дней, и все они посвящены катастрофам, случившимся с Русью по вине русских. Характер источника и его риторика позволяют выделить экклезиологические элементы, которые, по мнению Серапиона, составляли идею религиозного сообщества, которое подверглось нападению и серьезно пострадало. Таким образом, действия членов, которые несут ответственность за указанное разрушение, являются действиями против «узаконенного священного», связывающего все сообщество.
Ключевые слова: Русь, Русская Церковь, Серапион Владимирский, проповеди, экклези-ология, Церковь в Монгольской Руси.
Об авторе: Леандро Сезар Сантана Невес
Аспирант социальной истории Федерального университета Рио-де-Жанейро, Бразилия, со стипендией CNPq. E-mail: lcneves.clio@ufrj.br ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8829-313X
Ссылка на статью: Невес Л. С. С. Создание (и разрушение) Русской церкви согласно Серапиону Владимирскому // Палеоросия. Древняя Русь: во времени, в личностях, в идеях. Научный журнал. 2020. № 1 (12). С. 131-139.
Paleorosia. Ancient Rus in time, in personalities, in ideas
naLatoprncta- ev cpovw, ev ppoompw, ev etSet Scientific journal of Saint-Petersburg Theological Academy № 1 (12) 2020
L. C. S. Neves
The Construction (and Destruction) of the Rusian Church according to Serapion of Vladimir
DOI: 10.24411/2618-9674-2020-10011
Abstract: In the following article, we aim to examine the meaning of a Rusian church (understood by us here as the community of Christian faith rather than the sacerdotal body) according to Serapion, bishop of Vladimir during the 13th century. The prelate wrote several sermons during his life, five of which managed to survive until the present times, and all being about catastrophes that happened to Rus by the Rusians' own fault. By the source's nature and rhetoric, it is possible to identify ecclesiological elements that, in Serapion's mind, would constitute the idea of a community of faith that was attacked and severely damaged. The practices of the members that were responsible for said destruction, therefore, are practices against the "institutionalized sacred" that binds the entire community.
Keywords: Rus, Rusian Church, Serapion of Vladimir, Sermons, Ecclesiology, Church in Mongol Rus.
About the author: Leandro César Santana Neves
PhD student in Social History at Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil,
with a scholarship from CNPq.
E-mail: lcneves.clio@ufrj.br
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8829-313X
Article link: Neves L. C. S. The Construction (and Destruction) of the Rusian Church according to Serapion of Vladimir. Paleorosia. Ancient Rus in time, in personalities, in ideas, 2020, No. 1 (12), p. 131-139.
Serapion of Vladimir (f1275) is at the same time one of the most fascinating and yet understudied ecclesiastical authors of Ancient Rus1. Writing during the Mongol conquest and administration in Rus2, and seldomly mentioned in annalistic literature, this prolific once-monk from the Kievan Caves Monastery and then bishop left five sermons - or as V. V. Milkov arguments, an accusatory literature3 - dealing with troubles that afflicted his flock and how they could be avoided by fixing the congregation's allegedly misbehavior. According to V. A. Kolobanov, it's possible that Serapion participated in the Synod of Vladimir in 1274, a key moment in the institutional development of the Rusian Church, and also influenced the writing style of the rule of metropolitan Kirill II (1242-1280)4, solidifying even more the bishop's importance in Russian's literary pantheon.
In this brief article, we attempt to investigate how Serapion perceived his community of faith and the relation sacred-mundane present in his sermons5. We believe that, by examining the circumstances in which the community of faith lost its connection to the sacred, it's possible to reach a new and unexplored chapter in Rusian Church history in its institutionalization; understanding "institution" not as petrified regulatory power, but as an authority that justifies itself on its importance for a common good6. In that case, institutionalization means the justification over the monopoly of said regulatory power. While it can happen through a variety of ways such as bureaucracy or violence, in this particular case we'll be analyzing how the Rusian Church as an institution discursively and rhetorically. Thus, we consider that a socio-intellectual reading of Serapion's oeuvre focused on his ecclesiology can help understand ecclesiastical instances of power and legitimation during what are considered to be adverse times, namely natural catastrophes and Mongol subjugation.
Before we briefly describe each of sermon and their relationship with the Church, it's important to address what we comprehend as said word in this article. When confronting authors from Sociology7, Anthropology8, and Theology9 that tackled the subject, although useful to help delimitate a concept of Church, their approaches often forget the historicity of both the congregation and the sacred component. As such, along with the academic
1 The most authoritative work on Serapion's life continues to be: ПетуховЕ.В. Серапион Владимирский, русский проповедник XIII в. СПб., 1888. A smaller but still useful biography is present in: ТвороговО.В. Серапион, епископ Владимирский // СККДР. Вып. 1. (XI — первая половина XIV в.). Л., 1987. С. 387-390. In western languages, arguably the best survey on his life and works is found in: Romoli F. Predicatori nelle terre slavo-orientali (XI-XIII sec.): Retorica e strategie comunicative (Kindle version). Florence, 2009, loc. 1136-2702.
2 On Rus under Mongols' control, see: Вернадский Г. В. Монголы и Русь. Тверь; М., 201. С. 221 — 396. For the original English version, see: Vernadsky G. The Mongols and Russia. New Haven, 1953, p. 214-396; Halperin Ch. J. Russia and the Golden Horde: The Mongol Impact on Medieval Russian History. Bloomington, 1985.
3 «Поучения» Владимирского епископа Серапиона // Памятники древнерусской мысли: исследования и тексты. Вып. IX. М., 2016. C. 348.
4 Колобанов В. А. Обличение княжеских междоусобий в поучениях Серапиона Владимирского // ТОДРЛ. М., 1961. Т. 17. С. 333. On Kirill II, see: Флоря Б.Н. Кирилл II // Православная Энциклопедия. Т. 34. М., 2014. С. 547-551.
5 On the transmission of Serapion's literary oeuvre, see: «Поучения» Владимирского епископа Серапиона... C. 353-358.
6 Rust L. D. "Colunas de Sao Pedro": a política papal na Idade Média Central. Sao Paulo, 2011, p. 520-524
7 Weber M. Economia e Sociedade: Fundamentos da Sociologia Compreensiva. Vol. 1. Brasilia, 2000, p. 34.
8 Durkheim É. As Formas Elementares da Vida Religiosa. Sao Paulo, 2008, p. 76-77.
9 Florovsky G. The Church: Her Nature and Task. In: Bible, Church, Tradition: An Eastern Orthodox View (Collected Works of George Florovsky, Volume I). Belmont, 1972, p. 57. See also: Kehl M. A Igreja: uma eclesiologia católica. Sao Paulo, 1997, especially p. 97-148.
disciplines mentioned above, History can help giving the ecclesiastic term human and temporal elements that help understand its role in shaping, as well as being shaped, by society at a given time, particularly the studies of French historian Dominique Iogna-Prat10. Hence, borrowing, whenever we use the word "Church", it means a community of faith that organizes itself around a Christian notion of sacred; said notion being constructed by the upper echelons of the ecclesiastic hierarchy (and to a lesser extent, the lay people too) via the authority to consecrate, often in dispute with non-dominant conceptions of wouldn't be profane. So, when Serapion makes reference to sacred being the common denominator of his community, he's employing an ecclesiological discourse - that is, the Church talking about "itself'11, and there's where our hypothesis can be found.
The first of Serapion's works, known as "Sermon of our venerable father Serapion (Слово преподобного отца нашего Серапиона)"12, is possibly the earliest one written by the bishop, either in the decade of 1230 or 1250 due to references regarding "recent omens"13. Said omens (earthquake, eclipses, erratic movement of the stars, and famine) are, according to Serapion, signs of punishment for the increasing disdain towards the Christian way by the Rusians. They have abandoned the teachings of the Bible as well as the Church Fathers - mentioned there are Basil the Great (330-379), Gregory of (329-390), and John Chrysostom, (347-407) - and thus many calamities happened. Serapion interprets this as a message urging for a change of heart from his community, or else God's wrath may be invoked once more.
The second work, titled "Teaching on the Tuesday of Lent's first week" (Поучение вторника первой недели поста) or "Teaching of the venerable Serapion" (Поучение преподобного Серапиона), is more introspective than the others in the dealing with the audience's guilt. Here, Serapion is much more active as he inserts himself in the discourse and expresses all of his sadness and disappointment for his flock, for they supposedly didn't changed their bad behavior despite the prelate's constant admonitions, and for that the community has brought the wrath of God upon itself. It must be noted, however, that just like in the case of the inhabitants of Nineveh who regretted their wickedness and calmed God, so can the Rusians if they abandon their troublesome practices. It's also in this work that the menace of the pagans (поганы), most likely the Mongols14, is first documented by the bishop, saying that for almost forty years the Rusians have been captive and endured famine and pestilence.
A harsher description of consequences regarding the low faith of the Rusians can be seen in the third work, often called "Sermon of the holy venerable Serapion (Слово святаго преподобного Серапиона)15". Said homily has Serapion describing the horrible deeds done by the Golden Horde, especially to the sacred patrimony - temples were destroyed, sacred objects were broken, clergymen were murdered - as well as other atrocities. The supposed ravaging of Rus by the Mongols was already dealt with by other scholars much better than
10 For example, see: Iogna-Prat D. Iglesia y Sociedad en la Edad Media. México, 2013, p. 14.
11 Iogna-Prat D. La «substance» de l'Église (XlIe -XVe siècle). Bulletin du centre d'études médiévales d'Auxerre [En ligne], Hors-série n° 7, 2013, p. 1.
12 It should be noticed that the English translation by Serge Zenkovsky calls it "Sermon on Omens", cf. Zenkovsky S. A. Medieval Russia's Epics, Chronicles and Tales. New York, 1974, p. 246.
13 Gorlin M. Sérapion de Vladimir, prédicateur de Kiev. Révue des études slaves, t. 24, fasc. 1-4, 1948. p. 24. Francesca Romoli, however, argues that dating the work after the earthquake of 1252 is as valid, especially with references to his audience as "sons", indicating his position as a bishop, cf. Romoli F. Predicatori nelle terre slavo-orientaliloc. 2545-2551.
14 Charles Halperin rightfully points out that Serapion never attributed to the supposed menace any ethnonym or specific denomination aside from "foreigners" (иноплеменик) and the aforementioned "pagans". See: Halperin Ch. J. The Tatar Yoke: The Image of the Mongols in Medieval Russia. Bloomington, 2009, p. 79.
15 Zenkovsky translates it as "Sermon on the merciless heathens", cf. Zenkovsky S. A. Medieval Russia's Epics..., p. 243.
we could in this article16, however the destruction's description will be talked below as it's important for understanding Serapion's ecclesiology. The bishop makes sure that his audience is the one to blame for the scourge due to their bad behavior, and lists prophylactic measures against possible future punishments: love, charity, cleanliness.
The fourth work, known as "Teaching of the venerable Serapion (Поучение преподобного Серапиона)", is much more direct with practical accusations than the previous sermons. In that, the prelate condemns his listeners for punishing17 sorcerers by fire and drowning. Even worse, Serapion admonishes his flock for believing in sorcery and attributing divine punishment to the work of magic, which is an indicative that the Rusians have not completely forgotten the old pagan ways. Therefore, the community is still castigated by natural disasters and the foreign scourge that, in Serapion's view, brought slavery and death. Finally, the greatly concerned bishop of Vladimir, as he sees the evil of his flock as his own failure, urges his audience to prefer consulting the Scriptures rather than random words, and that he can see some Rusians happily going to the church. We will focus on this admonition later.
Oddly enough, the only work with a title - "Sermon of the venerable Serapion on the incredulity" (Слово блаженного Серапиона о маловерии), the final homiletic product is by far the most passionate and accusatory one. Serapion admonishes his audience, whom he constantly calls what could be translated to English "incredulous" or "with little faith", and charges with accusations regarding rejection of the word of Lord and following pagan customs, such as burning people. These misbehaviors, in consonance with the rest of his oeuvre, is the reason why so many disasters and divine punishments were sent to the Rusian community of faith. This sermon shares some similarities with the previous one18, and unless more works by Serapion are discovered, it ends his literary cycle19.
Kolobanov points out that the sermons are not exclusively theological, containing some hints on the social climate of their time20, and we agree with his hypothesis. After all, homiletic literature cannot be separated from their audience, as the rhetoric needs to resonate with them to achieve a desired interpretation by the preacher21. There is a clear sense of belonging and some sort of ties between the bishop and his target audience. However, it
16 Halperin Ch. J. The Tatar Yoke..., passim.
17 Referred in the document as вълхвъ, but translated as колдун, [citar as tradu<5es]. On sorcerers and sorcery in Russia, both вълхвъ and колдун, as well other denominations, see Ryan W. F. The Bathhouse at Midnight: An Historical Survey of Magic and Divination in Russia. University Park Pennsylvania, 1999, p. 70-86.
18 According to Gorlin, the differences between the fourth and fifth sermon are due to different audiences, as the former would've been written in Kiev and the latter in Vladimir: Gorlin M. Serapion de Vladimir..., p. 26-27.
19 V. A. Kolobanov believes that a 13th century instruction known as "Teachings to the priests" (Поучения к попам) was penned by Serapion: Колобанов В. А. О Серапионе Владимирском как возможном авторе «Поучения к попом» // ТОДРЛ. М., 1958. Т. 14. С. 159-162. However, more recente works consider the author to be anonymous, for example: Мелентьев Ф.И. «Правило» митрополита Кирилла и «Поучение к попом» // Макариевские чтения: Русь исконная — Русь крещеная. Материалы XIX Российской научной конференции, посвященной памяти святителя Макария. 2012. Вып. 19. C. 197-205 (the list of possible candidates appears in p. 198).
20 Kolobanov argues that Serapion hints at princely conflicts (as he could not directly talk about them) in his sermons when talking about the misdeeds, cf. Колобанов В. А. Обличение княжеских междоусобий в поучениях Серапиона Владимирского // ТОДРЛ. М., 1961. Т. 17. С. 331-332.
21 This article offers a more discursive approach to Serapion's sermons. For a rhetorical analysis, see Bogert R. On the rhetorical style of Serapion Vladimirskij. In: Birnbaum Henrik; Flier Michael S. (Ed.). Medieval Russian Culture: California Slavic Studies XII. Los Angeles, 1984, p. 280-310 (the fourth sermon only); Romoli F. Predicatori nelle terre slavo-orientali..., loc. 1200-2517 (the first three sermons).
seems ingenuous to agree on a so called "patriotism"22 that guided the words of Serapion. Rather than that, we believe that the bishop comprehends his listeners and himself as a community of faith - a Church.
What presumably unites Serapion and his audience, and all of those who became victims of the Mongols, is not ethnicity or place of living. Instead, the Rusians are bound by a certain element of sacredness, with the prelate being the keeper of that adjective. Knowing that his role in the soteriological plan is to guide the community towards salvation, and feeling that he is not accomplishing his goal, the bishop feels the necessity of fixing what's wrong and establishing order. Hence, we have the hypothesis that the destruction of the Rus referred by Serapion is a direct result of the desacralization of the congregation, which has taken out the sacred quality of the community.
Let us elaborate further on the relationship between the sacred and the community. All the sermons share similarities regarding their messages and ideas conveyed, mainly in relation to the orthopraxy or, in the case of Serapion's audience, their lack thereof. The prelate argues that his community is suffering and will probably suffer much more, all thanks to their behavior. The misconducts, both practical and emotional, are listed: disobedience, theft, involvement in quarrels, envy, anger, among others. It should be clear that what unites the Serapion's community is the orthopraxy, both on how to act and how to control certain emotions. This correct behavior has an impact in the relationship between earthly and divine plan as that's what characterizes a Christian, having a direct relation with the soteriological logic.
The prelate complains that even among the infidels "who do not know God's law23" some of the misbehaviors are not present, implying that Serapion's community does not differ itself from non-Christian communities and, as rightfully points out A. S. Abramyan, puts the enemies in a moral place above Serapion's community24. The comparison between the Mongols and the audience goes even further because Serapion accuses his flock of killing those with the same faith25, something that even the supposedly godless pagans do not practice, meaning that the community is broken within because of its members condemnable actions. As such, those misbehave should be purged as David once did in Jerusalem in order to return the audience to the salvation.
One point we should make clear is that Serapion sees the manifestation of the sacred bond between God and humanity mainly in the community's orthopraxy. Hence, the occurrence of omens as highlighted by the prelate can be interpreted as signs of not only impending doom, but also of disruption between the congregation and the supernatural that is occurring during the supposed end of times, as well as punishments for the bad behavior. The bishop quotes Mt 24, 7 in the exordium of the first sermon and then reminds the listeners of similar events in his recent memory26. The disasters, as Serapion continues, are also a pedagogical tool to remind his listeners that they are not acting according to orthopraxy and it's the only "instructive" way that God can communicate with the sinners27.
A Church, as we pointed out at the start, is a community that recognizes of a (correct) Christian notion of sacred and its worshipping as a common social denominator.
22 Колобанов В. А. Обличение княжеских междоусобий..., p. 333. A similar idea of Serapion as a nationalistic writer is also present in: Vodoff V. Naissance de la Chrétienté Russe: La conversion du prince Vladimir de Kiev (988) et ses consequences (XP-XIIF siecles). Paris, 1988, p. 359-360.
23 «Поучения» Владимирского епископа Серапиона... C. 399; 401.
24 Абрамян А. С. «Русский Мессианизм»: Предыстория (XI-XIV века) // Тетради по консерватизму. 2018. № 2. C. 212.
25 «Поучения» Владимирского епископа Серапиона... C. 399; 401.
26 Там же. C. 361; 365.
27 Там же. C. 362; 365.
Theologically speaking, the church will be saved, however if the community doesn't have its ties it's not safe. The allusion to Nineveh in the second sermon was not simply empty rhetoric, as it represents a group that abandoned their evil ways and repented, presumably reconnecting themselves with the divine plane28. Serapion's ecclesiology leads us to infer that the catastrophes are happening because God, in His infinite mercy, needs to punish the community so that the bond between both is reaffirmed and that the congregation returns to its status as a Church.
At first glance, the pagans could also be considered as a divine reminder to the Rusians to correct themselves, but they also constitute as a special kind of interaction within the soteriological dynamic. The community, after all, is responsible for the Mongol attack and subjugation with their bad practices29. However, such is the evil of Serapion's listeners that they allowed the pagans to completely devastate the manifestations of the sacred as well as the saintly30. Enumerating the damage of ecclesiastic property, the bishop talks about destroyed churches, desecrated (сквернени) vessels, and murdered ecclesiastic personnel before damage done to the mundane aspect31. In fact, the devastation suffered by the sacred and by those that can consecrate drove away the secular authorities and enslaved the flock.
While the full destruction is far from the true extent of the Church-Mongol relations, as its complexity is shown by the historiography32, the damage done by the pagans needs to be tremendous to emphasize the consequences of misbehaving. Again, based on Serapion's comprehension of his community of faith, the sacred that held all together was weakened enough by the abandonment of orthopraxy to allow massive destruction his congregation and its subsequent expelling from the soteriological plane.
The bond between sacred and community was not only severed by the Mongols in Serapion's ecclesiology, however. Something that also needs to be considered are the allusions to sorcerers and sorcery, present mostly in the fourth and fifth sermons. It's not our objective to talk about the persecution of practitioners of magic in Rus, or who was perceived and punished as such33. What's more important is that Serapion condemns the accusation, subsequent verdicts, and even methodology, being pagan34, of the persecutions, for these people shouldn't be condemned at all in the prelate's words. Punishing supposed sorcerers shows that the community actually believes in their magical way and is replacing the sacred authority of the clergy for them, both in the trust on sorcerers by some people as the bishop argues35, or, the more evident case, that a connection between the earthly and divine plan can be done outside the hands of supposed specialists. This also leads the flock to attack each other in the search of a pariah for they believe one can be found36,
28 Там же. C. 372-373; 375.
29 Там же. C. 372; 374.
30 Sociologically speaking, we differ "saintly" / "saint" from "sacred" based on how an object/person got its characteristic. "Saintly" has its status intrinsically, while the "sacred" can only be "sacred" by means of human intervention, that is, consecrated.
31 «Поучения» Владимирского епископа Серапиона... C. 380-381; 384.
32 For an overview on the historiography of Rusian Church and the Mongols, see: Галимов Т. Р. Киевские митрополиты между Русью и Ордой (вторая половина XIII в.). Казань, 2019, C. 11-43. A work that was not cited by Galimov's masterful balance but is worth taking a look is: FennellJ. A History of Russian Church to 1488. Essex, 1995, p. 132-239.
33 This aspect in the very sermons were already studied in Петухов Е. В. Серапион Владимирский, русский проповедник XIII в. СПб., 1888. C. 56-142.
34 «Поучения» Владимирского епископа Серапиона... C. 388; 391.
35 Там же. C. 388; 391.
36 For an anthropological view of "scapegoating", see Girard R. O Bode Expiatorio. Sao Paulo, 2004.
whereas the only culprit for disasters are their own misbehaviors. Serapion even remarks that since the audience believes in sorcery, they should pray for the sorcerers instead37.
In other words, Serapion postulates that the community is substituting an official, "tamed" and institutionalized sacred for a "savage" (and non-Christian!) one38, which contradicts the idea of a congregation soteriologically set. The community is accused of still holding out some pre-Christian practices, specified in trusting in those with no true authority on the sacred and also believing that sorcerers' magic works and thus burning any suspect. By the same premise, the listeners swapped their confidence on a priest for the believing on sorcerers' trickery. We do not believe this is a case of the famous "dual faith" expressed in Serapion's sermons39, but rather a lack of institutionalized control of the supernatural by the Church and, without the control, the community of faith has no reason to exist or to be saved. More than disobeying the Scriptures, the Rusians are ignoring the very authority of the ecclesiastic hierarchy itself, and therefore the community is losing its status of being a church, and it means that Serapion is "afflicted with great sadness40" for not being able to legitimate the authority of God, and as a result he can't put the community back in its salvation tracks. No matter how many seeds he throws, the bishop can't seem to get any fruits41. If there are any minor clergymen as part of Serapion's audience, it is implied that they lost the ability to consecrate, as they are also part of the listeners accused of misbehaving.
We conclude this article with the thesis that Serapion wrote guided mainly by an ecclesiological point of view. In his sermons, the bishop tries to convince his community that the destruction is entirely their fault for not adhering to the orthopraxy. This misbehavior caused the desecration of the sacred that binds the congregation with God's plan. In turn, not acting correctly according the Scriptures, by committing sins and believing in sorcery, the official sacred was broke and the Rusian Church cannot be considered as an ecclesiastic community while there's no repentance. Under these circumstances, both sociohistorical and intellectual, the Church under Serapion (and, to a lesser extent, the whole Rusian metropolitanate) cannot be considered an institution, as the hierarchs are failing to affirm themselves.
Sources and References
1. Абрамян А. С. «Русский Мессианизм»: Предыстория (XI-XIV века) // Тетради по консерватизму. 2018. № 2. С. 207-218.
2. Вернадский Г. В. Монголы и Русь. Тверь: Леан; М.: Аграф, 1997.
3. Галимов Т. Р. Киевские митрополиты между Русью и Ордой (вторая половина XIII в.). Казань: Институт истории им. Ш. Марджани АН РТ, 2019.
4. Колобанов В. А. К вопросу об участии Серапиона Владимирского в соборных «деяниях» 1274 г. // ТОДРЛ. М., 1960. Т. 16. С. 442-445.
37 «Поучения» Владимирского епископа Серапиона... C. 388; 391.
38 Borrowing the terms from Bastide R. O Sagrado Selvagem. Cadernos De Campo (Sao Paulo 1991), No 2 (2), p. 143-157.
39 «Поучения» Владимирского епископа Серапиона... C. 348-349. For rather convincing arguments against "dual-faith" as well as an academic trajectory of the concept, see: Rock S. Popular Religion in Russia: 'Double belief' and the Making of an Academic Myth. Oxon, 2007.
40 A motif repeated across multiple sermons: «Поучения» Владимирского епископа Серапиона... C. 371; 374 (second); 398; 400 (fifth).
41 «Поучения» Владимирского епископа Серапиона... C. 371; 374.
5. Колобанов В. А. О Серапионе Владимирском как возможном авторе «Поучения к попом» // ТОДРЛ. М., 1958. Т. 14. С. 159-162.
6. Колобанов В. А. Обличение княжеских междоусобий в поучениях Серапиона Владимирского // ТОДРЛ. М., 1961. Т. 17. С. 329-333.
7. Мелентьев Ф. И. «Правило» митрополита Кирилла и «Поучение к попом» // Мака-риевские чтения: Русь исконная — Русь крещеная. Материалы XIX Российской научной конференции, посвященной памяти святителя Макария. 2012. Вып. 19. C. 197-205.
8. «Поучения» Владимирского епископа Серапиона // Памятники древнерусской мысли: исследования и тексты. Вып. IX. М.: Мир философии, 2016. C. 346-405.
9. Петухов Е. В. Серапион Владимирский, русский проповедник XIII в. СПб., 1888.
10. Творогов О. В. Серапион, епископ Владимирский // Словарь книжников и книжности Древней Руси. Вып. 1. (XI — первая половина XIV в.). Л., 1987. С. 387-390.
11. Флоря Б.Н. Кирилл II // Православная Энциклопедия. Т. 34. М., 2014. С. 547-551.
12. Bastide R. O Sagrado Selvagem. Cadernos De Campo (Sao Paulo 1991), No. 2 (2), p. 143-157.
13. Bogert R. On the rhetorical style of Serapion Vladimirskij. In: Birnbaum Henrik; Flier Michael S. (Ed.). Medieval Russian Culture: California Slavic Studies XII. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1984, p. 280-310.
14. Durkheim É. As Formas Elementares da Vida Religiosa. 3a Ediçao. Sao Paulo: Paulus, 2008.
15. Fennell J. A History of Russian Church to 1488. Essex: Longman, 1995.
16. Florovsky G. The Church: Her Nature and Task. In: Bible, Church, Tradition: An Eastern Orthodox View (Collected Works of George Florovsky, vol. I). Belmont: Nordland, 1972, p. 57-73.
17. Girard R. O Bode Expiatório. Sao Paulo: Paulus, 2004.
18. Gorlin M. Sérapion de Vladimir, prédicateur de Kiev. Révue des études slaves, t. 24, fasc. 1-4, 1948, p. 21-28.
19. Halperin Ch. J. Russia and the Golden Horde: The Mongol Impact on Medieval Russian History. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1985.
20. Halperin Ch. J. The Tatar Yoke: The Image of the Mongols in Medieval Russia: Corrected Edition. Bloomington: Slavica, 2009.
21. Iogna-Prat D. Iglesia y Sociedad en la Edad Media. México: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, 2013.
22. Iogna-Prat D. La «substance» de l'Église (XIIe-XVe siècle). Bulletin du centre d'études médiévales d'Auxerre [En ligne], Hors-série n° 7, 2013, p. 1-16.
23. Kehl M. A Igreja: uma eclesiologia católica. Sao Paulo: Loyola, 1997.
24. Romoli F. Predicatori nelle terre slavo-orientali (XI-XIII sec.): Retorica e strategie comunicative (Kindle version). Florence: Firenze University Press, 2009.
25. Rock S. Popular Religion in Russia: 'Double belief' and the Making of an Academic Myth. Oxon: Routledge, 2007.
26. Rust L. D. "Colunas de Sao Pedro": a política papal na Idade Média Central. Sao Paulo: Annablume, 2011.
27. Ryan W. F. The Bathhouse at Midnight: An Historical Survey of Magic and Divination in Russia. University Park: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 1999.
28. Vernadsky G. The Mongols and Russia. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1953.
29. Vodoff V. Naissance de la Chrétienté Russe: La conversion du prince Vladimir de Kiev (988) et ses consequences (XF-XIIF siecles). Paris: Fayard, 1988.
30. Weber M. Economia e Sociedade: Fundamentos da Sociologia Compreensiva. 3a Ediçao. Vol. 1. Brasilia: Editora UNB, 2000.
31. Zenkovsky S. A. Medieval Russia's Epics, Chronicles and Tales. New York: E. P. Dutton & co, 1974.
