the Michael Luzin attempted defense of Sinaiticus from the Uspensky analysis using Abraham Norov’s response

Steven Avery

this shill writing was mentioned earlier.

Here it is placed 0n CARM with the full Google mangle:


And this critique of Tischendorf by Uspensky has been well refuted by Orthodox critics of Uspensky such as Bishop Michael (Luzin) in "About the text of the Sinai manuscript of the Bible" and by Abraham Sergeevich Norov, "Protecting the Sinai manuscript from attacks by Fr. Archimandrite Porfiry (Uspensky)" (see below):

"Being engaged in the publication of the second part of the New Testament (Acts and Epistles of the Apostles) in Greek and Slavonic, in addition to the first part published a year ago, I was greatly facilitated in my research on clarifying the text variants in its application to the Slavic translation through the appearance in the light of the Sinai Bible, IV century, a copy of which I was honored to receive from the generosity of the Sovereign Emperor. This monumental work, so gratifying for the Christian world, published under the high auspices of your Sovereign, was brilliantly executed by the Professor of the University of Leipzig, K. Tischendorf, who acquired a fair reputation in the field of Biblical philology. Following the appearance of the Sinai Bible, I became aware of the printed one, Fr.Archimandrite Porfiry in a brochure entitled: “Opinion on the Sinai manuscript containing The Old Testament is incomplete and the entire New Testament with the epistle of the Holy Apostle Barnabas and the book of Hermas by Archimandrite Porfiry of the Assumption".

"I hastened to acquire it, hoping to take advantage of Fr. the archimandrite, who lived quite a long time in the East, is known for his journey to Sinai, and who was the first to point out this code and partly describe it but I was struck by the strangulation and grieved deeply when I saw that Fr. the archimandrite [wrote] nothing more than the most caustic article, directed primarily at the personality of G. Tischendorf and not withstanding the slightest scholarly criticism, and which should never have come from the pen of a husband invested with a spiritual dignity.

"With extreme regret I take up the pen; but I make it my duty; for my goal is not to analyze the personalities of Fr.archimandrite with G. Tischendorf, and the protection of the sacred monument torn from the flame of Omar, which was kept for so many centuries on Mount Sinai; which was in the hands of the Holy Fathers and hermits, who left traces of their reading on him, and now desecrated, betrayed by the excommunication of the Church, for that only, as is clear from the writings of Fr. archimandrite that G. Tischendorf did not recognize him as the first who discovered him in the Sinai monastery. This is a reproach from a person invested with holy dignity, who says that his opinion “is the fruit of free biblical criticism, and the first fruit on the basis of our theological literature”, and that “no one, having read it, will say later that the Russian clergy have no understanding Bible , there is no seed to sow, there is no threshing machine to separate the tares from the wheat.” This reproach, I say, may make a deep impression on those who are unfamiliar with the Greek language and will not have in their hands this edition, not accessible to everyone at its price and printed in a small number of copies. Above this, oh The archimandrite says the following about the Sinai Bible and other manuscripts brought by G. Tischendorf: “These monuments were put on display to all the people of the capital for two weeks; and this people gazed tenderly at the Sinai antiquity and passionately kissed it, not knowing anything about its heretical origin, and not feeling a bad smell from it.I think that Tischendorf, who knew well how dangerous this antiquity is for us, quietly laughed at our blissful ignorance.

"It is also my duty to denounce the unforgivable censure made by Fr. archimandrite, of all the Sinai brethren, in the person of her venerable Bishop, who with such love looks after the poorest Russian worshipers in the deserts of Sinai, to which I myself was a witness, and who, with holy zeal, worries about the benefits of the Sinai church, and with perfect cordiality provided a precious manuscript for editions.

"fr. Archimandrite, speaking in Constantinople and wherever he traveled, that "the text of the Sinai Gospel does not agree with the text accepted by the entire Catholic Church , and even overthrows the doctrine of the face of the God-man," and, arousing various word disputes on this subject, not only did these services, but perhaps gave rise to polysyllabic rumors, and will now give a bad opinion about the learning of your clergy, both in the East and in the West.

"In my recent journey through the East, I never heard any reproaches from the Sinai for the alienation of the manuscript; for the Russian Government never alienates anything, and if the Sinaiites presented this Bible as a gift to Russia, then, of course, she would remain indebted to them, this very thing would serve to the prosperity of St. a declining monastery, and not a single Eastern Patriarchal See could reproach the Bishop of Sinai for the fact that the manuscript of the Bible, left useless in the deserts of Sinai, served for the prosperity of her church..."


Priest Mikhail Arkhangelsky.