young sun 35 sailboatdata

Specifications

Basic information.

• Builder Young Sun
• Model Cutter
• Category Cutter
• Condition Used
• Fuel Type Diesel
• Hull Material Fiberglass
• LOA 35'
• Beam 11'
• Max Draft 5' 6"
• Displacement 193 LBS
• Ballast 6,700 LBS
• Number of Engines 1
• Make Yanmar
• Model 3QM30H
• Power HP 30.00 HP

1982 Young Sun 35'

LOKAVIDU is a strongly built, double-ended 35’ Cutter also known as the Young Sun 35, similar to the 35’ Baba designed by Bob Perry.

Full Description

HULL & DECK:

• Beige topsides, black boottop, red bottom.
• The teak side decks were removed in 1997 and replaced with fiberglass; painted beige.
• Laid and caulked teak on trunk cabin top.
• All deck hardware was removed and replaced with proper backing plates.
• In  2000  all bottom paint was removed and 4 layers of Interlux Interprotect 2000 applied.
• Full keel, with attached rudder, with protected prop.
• 8 bronze opening ports and bow rail.
• Teak cockpit grate; teak bowsprit platform with two rollers; teak cockpit table.
• Double S/S stern rail.
• S/S swim ladder.
• S/S & teak boarding ladder-attached to genoa track.
• Double lifelines; double gates with S/S stanchions.
• Natural-finished teak rubrails and teak exterior trim.
• 4 chrome ventilators.
• 2 deck hatches; one butterfly teak hatch.
• Teak and bronze gallows frame.
• S/S and teak rimmed wheel on  new  S/S pedestal base; rebuilt steering in  2019;  with  new  S/S cable steering.
• Nicro solar vent.
• S/S compression post under mainmast; mast stepped on deck.
• 2021  Dodger by Gemini.

Fuel: 60 gallons in iron tank under cabin sole.

Water: 75 gallons in 2 S/S tanks under port and starboard settees.

Holding: 30 gallons under vee berth in poly tank (never used).

ENGINE & MECHANICAL:

• Yanmar 3QM30H inboard diesel, 30 hp, FWC.
• Engine hours believed to be around 1000 hours (hour meter reads 543 hours).
• Racor 500 fuel filter.
• New  S/S shaft and 3 bladed bronze prop.     
• 2014  replaced exhaust elbow.           
• The engine mounts were replaced with heavy duty mounts in  2000 .
• Cruising speed: 5-5.5 knots.

ELECTRICAL:

• AC-DC circuit breaker panels.
• 2019  2-12V AGM batteries.
• 3 lead acid batteries also.
• New  voltage regulator.
• Dytec Labs marine battery charger.
• 2000  Heart Link 20 battery monitor.
• 2000  High output Balmar alternator.
• Some  new  wiring  2001.
• Newmar GT100 galvanic isolator.
• 50' 30 amp shore power cord – never used.
• Cole Hersee battery selector switch.

ACCOMMODATIONS:

• A conventional but very attractive layout, with varnished teak joinery and with a vee berth forward with filler, including a hanging locker and cabinets.
• Aft to port is the enclosed head with a Groco Marine toilet and a handheld shower.
•  Next aft is an U-shaped dinette with a dropleaf table; opposite is a fore-and-aft settee berth.
• To starboard and aft of the settee is the sit-down nav station, followed by a large double quarter berth.
• Opposite to port is a large U-shaped galley.
• All cabinetry has varnished teak latticework and teak staving.
• Standing headroom in selected areas is 6' 4".
• Varnished teak and holly sole.
• Some LED lights replaced in cabin.
• Double S/S sinks with hot and cold pressure water (10 gallons hot water).
• A well-insulated 10 cu. ft. Nova Cool refrigerator with top and front loading options.
• Kenyon 3-burner propane stove with oven with a new aluminum 10 lb LPG tank.
• 12V Nova Kool refrigerator.

ELECTRONICS:

• Garmin 4210 Radar-GPS Map.
• Standard Horizon Titan VHF.
• Datamarine S-200 depthsounder.
• Autohelm 6000 autopilot  (not presently hooked up  –  sold AS IS).
• Datamarine Corinthian LX-360 wind speed and direction.
• Autohelm 6000 autopilot.
• Kenyon KS200 speedometer-log.
• Raytheon R20 rastar scan radar.

SAILS & RIGGING:

• 2018 new  Mainsail by Pope.
• 2018 new  sailcover.
• 1996  135% genoa.
• Cruising spinnaker with sock.
• Aluminum mast and boom, painted white (needs some paint on mast).
• 1996  Schaefer Roller Furler.
• Replaced S/S standing rigging - oversized.
• Recently, 3 or 4 chainplates taken out, check and found to be fine.
• Two older genoas.
• Boomed staysail with quick disconnect (fair condition).
• 2 Barlow #15 mast winches.
• 1 Barient #21 S.T. main halyard winch.
• 1 Barient reefing winch on the boom.
• 2 Lewmar #48 S.T. 2-speed primary winches.
• 1 Barlow #25 mainsheet winch.
• 1 Barlow #23 staysail sheet winch.
• Harken #16 S.T. roller furler.
• 1 Schaffer S.T. winch for roller furler.
• Winch handles.
• Simpson Lawrence SL555 manual windlass.
• 35 lb CQR Plow type anchor with 150’ chain.
• S/S monitor windvane.
• 4 life jackets.
• Fenders, docklines.
• Brown hatch covers.
• Outboard bracket.
• Seth Thomas lock and barometer.
• 12V cabin fans.
• Mitsubishi stereo system with cassette player and AM/FM radio.
• 1 Manual bilge pump; 2 electric bilge pumps.
• Radar reflector.
• Force Ten propane BBQ grill with 10 lb aluminum tank.
• Binnacle cover.
• Large fenders.
• 2 Boat hooks.
• 2 flotation cushions.
• Horn; bell.
• Emergency tiller.
• 1 Safety harness.
• Screens for all portholes, hatches and companionway.
• LED deck light.
• 2021  Gemini Dodger.

COMMENTS: LOKAVIDU  is a strongly built, double-ended 35’ Cutter also known as the Young Sun 35, similar to the 35’ Baba designed by Bob Perry. These vessels are well-known as spacious, comfortable cruisers capable of crossing oceans. We sold  LOKAVIDU  to her present owners in 2013, and they have continued to make numerous improvements some of which include new Garmin electronics, a new mainsail and cover, some new batteries, new steering, new shaft and prop, new exhaust elbow and much more. Please call us to get aboard this popular Bob Perry Cutter. Thank you for your interest.

Potential purchasers should assume that items on the vessel at the time of viewing, but not specifically listed on this specification sheet, are not included with the sale of the yacht. These specifications are believed to be correct but cannot be guaranteed. Specifications are provided for information purposes. Data was obtained from sources believed reliable but is not guaranteed by owner or brokers. Buyer assumes responsibility to verify all speeds, consumptions, capacities and other measurements contained herein and otherwise provided, and agrees to instruct his surveyor to confirm such details prior to purchase. Vessel subject to sale, price and inventory changes, and withdrawal from market without notice.

Mechanical Disclaimer: Engine and generator hours are as of the date of the original listing and are a representation of what the listing broker is told by the owner and/or actual reading of the engine hour meter. The broker cannot guarantee the true hours. It is the responsibility of the purchaser and/or his agent to verify engine hours, warranties implied or otherwise, and major overhauls as well as ALL other representations noted on the listing.

The company offers the details of this vessel in good faith but cannot guarantee or warrant the accuracy of this information nor warrant the condition of the vessel. A buyer should instruct his agents, or his surveyors, to investigate such details as the buyer desires validated. This vessel is offered subject to prior sale, price change or withdrawal without notice.

These vessels are well-known as spacious, comfortable cruisers capable of crossing oceans. We sold LOKAVIDU to her present owners in 2013, and they have continued to make numerous improvements some of which include new Garmin electronics, a new mainsail and cover, some new batteries, new steering, new shaft and prop, new exhaust elbow and much more. Please call us to get aboard this popular Bob Perry Cutter. Thank you for your interest. Brewer Yacht Sales is pleased to assist you in the purchase of this vessel. This boat is centrally listed by Gray & Gray, Inc.. It is offered as a convenience by this broker/dealer to its clients and is not intended to convey direct representation of a particular vessel

Share this Boat

Little Cunning Plan

A plan so cunning you could stick a tail on it and call it a weasel.

1981 Young Sun 35 Cutter

The beautiful canoe stern. Lovely!

I’ve always liked the looks of this kind of boat with plenty of wood trim. This boat just looks like it would be happy at sea. Although it has the signature canoe stern, apparently this boat was not designed by Bob Perry. (I’ve never seen a Perry boat I didn’t think was pretty. And I do love a canoe stern. They just seem very romantic to me, very graceful.) Seems like this boat is always attributed to him, but we stand corrected in that he didn’t actually do this boat. I’m relieved. Read on to see why.

This boat is one of those that has all the teak inside and looks like a tiny ship both inside and out.

This is what I call “EQUIPMENT”

Sturdy mast pulpits, and belaying pins that are out of the way.

It’s hard to tell in the photo, but those safety lines are hip height, taller than most. Very nice!

Nice wide side decks. The Allied 36 was short in this area due to the angle of the shrouds and the placement of the belaying pins. One had to step up onto the coach roof to go to the foredeck. This isn’t okay with me.

Awww. I can imagine Mike and me cuddled up here behind the wheel, gazing off into the horizon. Unless it is raining. 

So far, I’m liking this boat. Very good ‘bone’ structure, classic lines, this is a boat that I would probably forgive a lot of flaws, including how heavy it is. Know what I mean? Let’s go inside.

Fabulous wood work. Would take a lot of care, but it’s warm and inviting.

At first glance, I like this interior. the table is low, but is easily raised. The settees are deep. No worries about the missing cushion. That kind of thing always needs replacing on older boats anyhow. So far, so good.

Looking from the base of the companionway.

Full navigation table and quarter berth

First impressions of the interior of this boat were that it would be a beautiful boat when cleaned up and with a few cosmetic fixes. First impressions can be dangerous with boats, though. I’d like to know a little more about what they were thinking when ‘they’ designed this boat interior. Look more closely at the photos, starting with the table. It’s a very nice table, very sturdy and executed well. You can raise or lower it easily. But you cannot get past it to sit on the settee. Nope. No way. You have to step over the table to get to the settee. I’m not kidding. Frankly, I think this is just unreasonable. Had they made the table a wee bit smaller, it would have been no problem.

Likewise, take a look at the photo of me at the nav station. There is about 10 inches of space between the corner of the nav station and cover for the engine. I literally had to SSQQQUUUEEZE into that space and then out again. There would be no ‘quick’ checking of a chart at that table, I can tell you. And I’m sorry for anyone who has to sleep on that berth. They’ll never get out of it without hurting themselves if the seas are high.

Then there are the many doorways from the head to the v berth and then from the passageway into the v berth. Too many doors for such a small space and it feels almost claustrophobic getting through them. It’s really too, too bad. The impression is that they took a 40 foot boat interior and squished it into a 35 foot boat. Something has to give, people! I’m relieved to know that Perry was not responsible for this travesty. His pedestal remains intact.

So we aren’t buying this boat. But I did learn that I do love this KIND of boat, the heavy boats built in the far east by skilled craftspeople. The teak is really lovely, and cabinetry does make the boat feel like a home. So far these heavy boats seem to have the best settees. This pair was the best pair since we saw that Spencer 44 in Seattle. I still like that boat.

We had to look at this boat because when thinking of giving up our house, it helps to imagine a boat that feels as sturdy as an actual home. Unfortunately it’s unlikely that this boat would do much sailing around here since it’s very heavy and our winds are generally light. We probably need to pass on these heavy displacement, teak boats. But they are beautiful and fun to look at.

25 thoughts on “ 1981 Young Sun 35 Cutter ”

Hey Melissa. I just found your boat reviews! I’ve eyed a few of the same. Check out the Tayana 37 at Shilshole. (CL) Mia and I fell in love with it, you guys may too. I’m not sure what your budget is but I had to say farewell when I realized even with a hefty loan it would be too tight. (It is the perfect live aboard)

Hi Laura and Mia! Nice to hear from you on the blog. We haven’t looked at that Tayana 37, but I know the one you are talking about. Mike and I are probably not going to look at boats with a full keel because we want to be able to sail easily in this area. We’ve been on a Tayana, though, and they are really nice boats. Yes, it would be a perfect liveaboard. It seems to be the case that if we find a boat that is perfect for living at the dock, it’s not so great for sailing, and vice versa. Very frustrating. But at the end of the day, we still have Moonrise and might just keep her. We’re still on the fence about that, as is reflected in the fact that she is still on the market.

Hi thankyou so much for this interesting review.Have been looking at the Youngsun 35 for some time..This as helped me a lot…

Hi Steve, and thanks for stopping by the blog. I’m glad this review met your needs. That is a really lovely looking boat and if I wanted a heavy displacement boat like that, I would be giving it another look. The irritations I had with the interior could all easily be addressed, I think, and not everyone would agree that they are irritations. It’s a matter of opinion.

Hi Melissa,

I was the Owner of ‘Clear Horizon’, just finalized the sale today. I wish I could have talked to you before you made your decision not to buy her, I could have explained some things that maybe would have made her more attactive to you. First of all, you rarely see Young Sun 35’s with stancions near the mast. These are particulaly great because you can lean against them if you are working at the mast. She has a full canvas enclosure for the cockpit. This was particularly nice when I lived on her at Shileshole for two years. I had brand new upolstered cushions for the quarter berth made at Seattle Canvas, never been slept on. There is more room in there than you would think. Yes, it’s a bit of squeeze to get by the chart table. The settee table when in the upright position is easy to get by, but it turned out it was more practicle to leave it down most of the time. In that position, it’s the same height as the seats, so you can lay foul weather gear, etc. on top of it and it’s not going anywhere. No, she’s not a tuperware boat that will win races, but she is solid, has good rigging and the best engine in the world. I grew up in a fishing family and this is the safest boat I’ve ever been on, I’d go anywhere on her.

Hi Brad. I’m glad to hear that you’ve sold your boat! I feel lucky to have been able to view the boat, considering that the broker knew we couldn’t really make an offer at that time so he was showing it out of the goodness of his heart. The problem with looking at boats through brokers is that the owner can always tell you a lot more than the broker can. Usually you don’t get to meet the owner unless you are serious about the boat, though. That boat had a lot going for it and felt really solid. We looked at it very early in our search and before we had narrowed down what we wanted. We aren’t racers ourselves, so we wanted to look at some of the beautiful teak boats out there and yours was one of them. Yes, I can imagine that it would take you anywhere in the world safely. In the end, I know that if it had been the kind of boat we were looking for, we could have worked around the issues we brought up in the review. No boat is ever perfect for everyone. I’m glad you found a buyer and hope they sail off into the horizon and love the boat as much as you obviously do!

Hello Melissa and Michael – This is a year after your review of the Young Sun 35, and a year after Brad’s reply (a former owner of “Clear Horizon”). I’m not sure who purchased her from Brad, but I just put an offer on her, and it was accepted. I was told that the owner passed away and she was up as an estate sale. We literally fell upon her accidentally while looking at other boats in the area.

Her name had been changed to “Amiga” … but we could see the faint lettering of “Clear Horizon” on her stern quarters. We looked at her with the wind howling, and the rain pouring … and she is a very nice, snug and cozy little boat! Yep, there are certainly some cosmetic items that can (and will) be addressed, but she sure does suit our needs and expectations … she’s going to go places, that’s for sure!

If at all possible, and if you still have contact info, I’d love it if you could pass my contact info on to Brad, the previous owner … I’d love to chat with him about the boat!

She’s definitely not a family cruiser, but for a couple, or some close friends, I have no doubt that she’ll deliver the goods!

Hope to see you guys out there on the water someday! We’ll likely be messing around the Northwest Washington area for a couple of years, getting to know the boat, but then it will be time to head south!

Congratulations on your new boat. I will send Brad’s email address directly to you and he can reply if he wishes. She is a sturdy boat and cozy. I cannot recall if the bulkhead heater is propane or diesel but I can well imagine feeling about as content as a human can be in her snug saloon with a warm fire.

Will you be keeping the name Amiga or do you have other ideas? We probably won’t be sailing Salish sea till next summer but we will certainly keep an eye out for you.

Thanks Michael … I’m not sure about keeping the name “Amiga”. Somehow, it just doesn’t fit her. But as to what to name her, I honestly don’t know right now.

Yes, she seems very snug! I was smitten as soon as I set foot onboard. She has fine lines, a tidy cabin, and seems like a very sound boat. We’re thinking about keeping her in the Seattle area for the time being (maybe for the next couple of years), and then taking her to more southern areas. I have a special love for the Sea of Cortez, and I suspect she’s going to see a lot of time down there eventually.

Thanks again for the info, and we’ll keep an eye out for you guys!

And by the way … Andromeda is a very sweet vessel!! Congratulations!! And really, a four burner stove??!!! Have you guys gone all “high class”??!!! Honestly, looking at the photos, and reading your blog, she looks and sounds like a fine vessel … how very excellent!

How interesting to find such a group of Young Sun enthusiasts! I must say I understood that it was designed by Bob Perry and he sold it to Mr. Young Sun. I understood that he then added 2’ to the design, and sold it to Mr Tayana. Mr Young Sun apparently objected and refused to pay Mr. Perry any royalties. Ever since then, Mr Perry denied having anything to do with it, but I was told by the person I bought mine from that he hs the plans, for I think $300. I don’t know whether that is true or not, but that’s what I was told, and I have heard that from others as well! I bought my Young Sun 35 in 2001. She was a Canadian Registered Vessel, and had been left in North Carolina. I had her trucked to Vancouver BC. What a mess she was in! Named Finnisterre II, I worked long and hard on her, changed her name to Odyssey as a Registered Vessel in Canada, and sailed her single handed to Oahu and back, with winds up to 60 knots! Not great in that, but there’s very few boats I would rather be in of that size. A wonderful boat. Never had a problem with the table, and the quarter berth is very comfortable. Once you attach a bronze handle to tha nav. station, you can pull yourself out very easily, and for sailing single handed, it is the best! Have now had her for 15 years, and wouldn’t dream of parting with her!

Thanks for your enthusiastic endorsement of the Young Sun 35. They are very fine boats and just a great size for single handing.

Hi. Are there any of you Young Sun 35 owners or ex owners still out there. I would like some info if possible please.

hi all.. zephyra is a 1981 young sun 35 cutter laying at Bowen Island just outside Vancouver BC.. When we purchased her in 1995 see had the nav stn and awkward gulll wing table.. both were corrected by Dennis a true shipwright of the British order.. the navy stn was rebuilt reduced in size and lays down when not in use allowing easy access to quarter berth and the table was replaced by a custom unit that fit on the original legs. If I could figure out how to include photos or if anyone wants them I can send along.

She has plied the waters of the pacific northwest down to Costa Rica..and the med for 7 years out of Malta. Back here in Canada.. next trip back to the sea of Cortez in 2022.. lovely craft.. smooth seas all. Jim Bach svzephyra @hotmail.com

I just reviewed that post after reading your comment. Young Sun’s are sure beautiful boats and a great boat for passages. We are heading back to the Northwest but are making plans to return south in 2022 as well. Maybe our wakes will cross one day.

HI All, Another Young Sun caretaker here with s/v Vegvisir. I purchased her in 2016 from someone in Marquette, Michigan (Lake Superior), then know as Lady Slipper. The previous owner had sailed her back from Massachusetts where he purchased her to Lake Superior. He then sailed her down to Florida where he lived on her for several months. I sailed her down from Marquette, MI, to Milwaukee, WI where we have done a ton of work on her. The progress has been slow and steady, but sailing has been great fun and she always inspires confidence when in a seaway. Planning to do more Great Lakes cruising in the near future.

I wish there was still a Young Sun Owners group, since I’m sure that many of us have similar challenges with maintenance, re-coring, chainplates, etc. There is a really nice Facebook page called Young Sun 35 that documents many Young Suns with photos and information. Just thought I’d spread the YS35 word!

Cheers! Kevin Petajan kpetajan at gmail dot com

Thanks Kevin for giving other aspiring Young Sun owners additional resources. Research, maintenance and repair of older boats is can be a full time undertaking.

I purchased my young sun Freelife in 2005 in Brisbane Australia Freelife having sailed from Sanfransco and not returned. Financial needs caused me to sell her 5 years later. I recently found her in a boatyard on a hardstand looking fairly tired.I now own her again refurbishment is underway. The hulls on these boats are 13/8 thick round turn of the bilge the interior leaves other boaties shocked at the volume of teak etc.She sails slow safe and steady,but is very able when the going gets rough.I can see why the previous American owner chose her to sail halfway around the world. This is more than a very good boat. john

How great that you get a second shot at living your dream. Thanks for sharing your story.

After a long deliberation – we have decided to find a new owner for Zephyra – she is about to get new rigging and her new sail package will arrive in a week. – she has been repowered with a refurbished Yanmar 3QM30 – simple – powerful cost effective. She is ready to go – if you have the dream – please call or write . $75.000 USD . Jim Bach 604 202 9868 – [email protected]

Glad I found this thread. I just recently picked up a 1981 Young Sun 35. I have never sailed or even owned a boat but went in on it with 3 of my friends and we are now the proud owners of an awesome boat. From the looks of it, it is a fairly solid boat with the only issue being that it has a wood mast and boom, for now we don’t plan on doing any real sailing and will just take the next few months to make small repairs and clean it up. Once, and if we learn to sail and want to make a real trip we will look into replacing the rig for a proper one and go from there. For now we will just learn the basics and have some fun. Wish us luck. Hopefully you don’t hear about us in the news.

Fell in love with my 81 Young Sun 35 “Capricious” on the 4th of July, 2019. I had been a racing crew member in my younger years but with retirement a year away I yearned for a vessel I could single hand… feel confident plying the roughest Puget Sound waters… and feel “at home” within while at anchor or planning my next adventure at pier side. The thought of maintaining the gorgeous Salty look of all the well placed teak on the exterior didn’t scare me off… in fact it was my life saver during the pandemic!!! The table clearance is not a big issue for me.. I just invite my smaller friends to sit and slide into the “best” side of the table first:)…. The three doors leading to the head and v- birth I leave (secured) open … closing only at anchor if crew are on board. Lots of ventilation options…. Love Summer sailing with gull wing windows open…. Favorite tunes cranked …. Trimming sails and tidying up while on autopilot… cooking salmon dinner while sipping my favorite at anchor beverage… being rocked to sleep wrapped in all the teak beauty of my YoungSun!!! My wood mast is beautiful and strong… I have had wind gusts push me to the wet gunnels (scarey!!) point yet the mast and all rigging held up fine! Aluminum too needs maintenance that is often overlooked at corrosive points where rigging and options are fastened. Would enjoy sharing maintenance and sailing tips wit any YS owners willing

Your vessel sounds lovely and it sounds like you truly love your boat, which is the best! I imagine a lot of teak got redone during Covid! We were glad to be on a boat for the worst of that time.

I’m looking at a YS 35, what is the headroom in your boat? I’m 6’3″ so it kind of important to me that I can stand up straight!

6 feet 4 inches

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Sort Designs
• Site Upgrades
• Alajuela 33
• Alajuela 38
• Anastasia 32
• Andromeda 48
• Baba 40 Pilothouse
• Birdwatcher II
• CatFisher 28
• Cheoy Lee 43 MS
• Cheoy Lee 53
• Colin Archer Finnish Pilot Boat
• Corbin 39 CC
• Crealock 34
• Crealock 37
• Crealock 44
• CT-44 Pilothouse
• Dartsailor 27
• Dartsailor 30
• Dreadnought 32
• Fairey Fisherman 27
• Fales 32 Navigator
• Fales 38 Explorer
• Fantasia 35
• Fast Passage 39
• Finnclipper 34
• Finnsailer 29
• Finnsailer 35
• Fisher 30 MS
• Fisher 34 MS
• Fisher 37 MS
• Flying Dutchman 12
• Gale Force 34
• Hallberg-Rassy 94 Kutter
• Halman Horizon
• Hans Christian 33
• Hans Christian 36
• Hans Christian 38 MKII
• Hans Christian 38T
• Hans Christian 41
• Hans Christian 43
• Hans Christian 48
• Knud Aage Nielsen Snow Star
• Landfall 39
• Lapworth 50
• LM Mermaid 315
• Lord Helmsman
• Lord Nelson 35
• Lord Nelson 41
• Midget 15'
• Minstrel 23
• Montagu Whaler
• Monterey Clipper
• Nauticat 33
• Nauticat 331
• Nimble 25 Arctic
• Nimble Kodiak 24
• Nor'Sea 27
• Nor'Sea 37
• Norselander 53
• North Sea 33
• Offshore 39
• Offshore 43
• Offshore 45
• Pacific Seacraft 25-1
• Pacific Seacraft 34
• Pacific Seacraft 37
• Pacific Seacraft 40
• Pacific Seacraft 44
• Pacific Seacraft Pilothouse 40
• Passagemaker 33
• Passport 42
• Passport 51
• Puget Sound Daysailer
• Quickstep 24
• Redningsskoyte
• Rhodes Design #1600
• Rossiter Pintail
• Roughwater 33
• Sakonnet 23
• Scanyacht 290
• Sea Eagle 31
• Sea Pearl 28
• Seaforth 24
• Searaker 28
• Southern Cross 28
• Southern Cross 31
• Southern Cross 32
• Southern Cross 35
• Southern Cross 39
• Storfidra 25
• Sun Seeker 23
• Tahiti Ketch
• Tashiba 36 Pilothouse
• Tiffany Jane 34
• Traveller 32
• True North 34
• Vagabond 31
• Vagabond 39
• Valiant 40 Pilothouse
• Valiant 42RS
• Vancouver 25
• Vancouver 36
• Vancouver 42
• Victoria 26
• Victoria 30
• Viksund 31 Goldfish MS
• Vineyard Vixen 29
• Vineyard Vixen 34
• Watson 19.5
• Watson 31.5
• Watson 34.5
• Weatherly 32
• Westsail 28
• Westsail 32
• Westsail 42
• Westsail 43
• Willard 30/8T

Young Sun 35

• Young Sun 43
• Adventurous
• Barca Verde
• Big Adventure
• Bladerunner
• Celestial Melody
• Charity Rose
• De Vrouwe Christina
• Eagles Quest
• Emerald Mistress
• Fascination
• FRANCIS LEE
• Golden Hour
• Imagine 2012
• Kleinkapitalist
• Little Wing
• Loose Cannon
• Magic Dragon
• Maitresse de Mer
• Montagu Whaler 536
• Morning Light
• Mystic Voyager
• Northern Light
• Ramblin Rose
• RS 1 Colin Archer
• RS 6 Nordland
• s/v Veritas
• Sea Anemone
• Sea Biscuit
• Sea Sisters
• Sherri Lynn
• Small Wonder
• Speculation
• Star Chaser
• Three Quarter Time
• Trustworthy
• Wandering Star
• Wave Dancer
• Wind Dancer
• W. Aarnipalo
• Eivind Amble
• Bent Juul Andersen
• Carl Andersson
• Colin Archer
• William Atkin
• Daniel J. Avoures
• Jay R. Benford
• Bruce Bingham
• Phillip Bolger
• Peter Bruun
• Wendell H. Calkins
• Terry Compton
• William Crealock
• Robert Dufour
• Olle Enderlein
• Joe Fennell
• William Garden
• Thomas Gillmer
• Thomas Hale
• Trygve Halvorsen
• John G. Hanna
• Robert B. Harris
• George S. Hawn, Jr.
• L. Francis Herreshoff
• Lyle C. Hess
• Alan F. Hill
• Eva Hollman
• C. Raymond Hunt
• Stan Huntingford
• Harwood Ives
• Ron Johnson
• John Kaiser, Sr.
• Paul R. Kotzebue
• Bill Lapworth
• Arvid Laurin
• Dick Lefeber
• B. Malta-Muller
• Henry Mohrschladt
• Ed Monk, Sr.
• Palle Mortensen
• Knud Aage Nielsen
• Lars Olof Norlin
• Chuck Paine
• Robert Perry
• Angus Primrose
• Knud Reimers
• Philip Rhodes
• Raymond Richards
• Hugh Rossiter
• Stephen Seaton
• Grahame Shannon
• Robert Slater
• Scott Sprague
• Charles Street
• Ron Swanson
• Yves-Marie de Tanton
• David Thomas
• Reuben Trane
• Turun Veneveistramo
• Erling Viksund
• Michael Volmer
• Willem de Vries-Lentsch
• Gordon R. Wyatt
• Share on Facebook
• Tweet Widget

Marketed as the Westwind 35 in Europe and Young Sun 35 in the US, the Young Sun yard in Taiwan produced these vessels starting in 1979. Over the years, the yard produced nearly 150 hulls. Young Sun often claimed, as in the advertisement below, that Robert Perry designed the boat. Perry has even said that at one point a representative from the yard offering to give him royalties if they could use his name in the advertising. However, Perry turned them down because he had not actually penned the lines. It seems the boat was a pirated and barely altered Baba 35 , which was being produced about thirty miles north of Young Sun at Ta Shing. In fact, Ta Shing even rigged at least some of the Young Sun 35s.

All Young Sun 35s on Double Enders

• Log in or register to post comments

All Designers

All vessels, all designs.

Select a Designer

Select a Vessel

• Forum Listing
• Marketplace
• Advanced Search
• About The Boat
• Boat Review Forum
• SailNet is a forum community dedicated to Sailing enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about sailing, modifications, classifieds, troubleshooting, repairs, reviews, maintenance, and more!

Young Sun 35 Opinions

• Add to quote

Hello folks I'm still on the hunt for an old heavy cruiser. I've been looking at Westsail 32, Tayana 37, Alberg 30/37, I just recently viewed a Young Sun 35. I can't find much information on the boat. It was pretty clean on the inside The deck was covered almost entirely with teak. It looked maintained just needed some polish. Mostly cosmetic issues. Any opinions on the quality of this boat and how it compares to other vintage heavy cruisers?? Thanks!!  

IIRC this was a pirated Perry design very similar to the Baba series. No idea, though, how build quality compares. Hopefully Bob will weigh in.  

Used to be one of these in my local marina. Looked like a nice, seaworthy heavy cruiser that won't win any speed races. Had nice hardware on it, but I don't know if that was replaced or original. The biggest worry for me about these style boats are the teak decks, which are prone to leaks and ruining the deck core underneath. They are alot of work to maintain the teak decks, and all the brightwork. Assuming good build quality and no problems with the example you found, I would think it would be a good, comfortable offshore passage maker. Not so much fun as a daysailer.  

Faster is correct. Again. The Young Sun is not my design but similar to several of my designs. To give the company credit, I had breakfast with a nice young Taiwanese lady from the company and she offered me royalties for the boat if they could use my name. I told her I could not accept the royalties because it was not my design. Plain and simple. But they at least tried.  

• ?            
• 174.2K members

Top Contributors this Month

Young sun 43

The young sun 43 is a 42.67ft cutter designed by ron amy and built in fiberglass by young sun (taiwan) since 1978..

The Young sun 43 is a heavy sailboat which is a reasonably good performer. It is reasonably stable / stiff and has an excellent righting capability if capsized. It is best suited as a heavy bluewater cruising boat. The fuel capacity is excellent. There is an excellent water supply range.

Young sun 43 for sale elsewhere on the web:

Main features

Login or register to personnalize this screen.

You will be able to pin external links of your choice.

See how Sailboatlab works in video

We help you build your own hydraulic steering system - Lecomble & Schmitt

Accommodations

Builder data, other photos.

Modal Title

The content of your modal.

Personalize your sailboat data sheet

• Home  
•  / Our doctrine
•  / Principles of National Restoration
•  / Holy Russia
• / Vladimir Soloviev, prophet of Russia's conversion

VLADIMIR SOLOVIEV prophet of Russia’s conversion

T HE conversion of Russia will not be the work of man, no matter how gifted he may be, but that of the Immaculate Heart of the Virgin Mary, the Mediatrix of all graces, because this is God’s wish, which he revealed to the world in 1917. The life and works of Vladimir Soloviev are a perfect illustration of this truth of Fatima. He whom our Father regards as « the greatest Russian genius of the 19th century », was in his own way a prophet of the “ conversion ” of his beloved Country, announcing the necessity of her returning to the bosom of the Roman Church. «  Rome or chaos  », such was his catchphrase, Rome whose anagram is not a matter of chance, but a providential sign, a definition: ROMA , AMOR . Led by this incomparable guide, we would like « to anticipate in our thoughts, our hearts and our prayers this consecration, this long-awaited conversion, which must mark the beginning of a time of sacred peace throughout the world, the beginning of the universal reign of the Most Blessed and Immaculate Heart of Mary, and through Her, of God’s Kingdom » (English CRC, December 1982, p. 23).

A PERSONAL CONVERSION

Through the example of his life, Soloviev recalls the indispensable means of this immense work: self-renunciation, personal and collective sacrifice, in Russian the podwig , the only way in which the Church, nations, saints and heroes can become the instruments of God’s designs. If he managed to surpass his master Dostoyevsky by his « truly universal Catholicism and far superior mystical vision », this was not without without a conversion of mind and heart on his part.

Our Father summarises the principal stages of his life as follows: « Born of an honourable Muscovite family, of part Kievian ancestry, Vladimir Soloviev began, in a world where only Germany counted, by being a victim of all the poisons of the West. He himself relates how he was a zealous materialist at the age of thirteen, had read Renan’s Life of Jesus at fifteen, and had become an evolutionist and therefore (!) an atheist and a nihilist at eighteen, in « It was Spinoza and then Schopenhauer who pulled him out of this bottomless void. Whereupon in 1872 a mysterious encounter with “  Wisdom  ” suddenly shook him out of the scientific naturalism in which he had been vegetating and made him aware, as he says, of invisible Beauty, the “  Sophia tou théou  ”, the daughter of God. He thus became the fervent witness of Wisdom’s indwelling in the world and of Her desire for total incarnation and universal queenship. His quest for wisdom, scientific, aesthetic and mystical, had commenced. He was nineteen years old. The quest would never end for this new style Russian pilgrim ; it would be of an unparalleled fruitfulness despite its touching brevity. He died of exhaustion in 1900, at the age ! » (English CRC, December 1982, p. 35)

We will limit ourselves in this article to his prophetic insights on the Union of the Churches. In his Lessons on Theandry (1878) – he was then twenty-five ! – our philosopher applies himself to contemplating the Wisdom of God at work in history, perfectly incarnated in Jesus and His virginal Mother, as well as in the Church as she awaits her eschatological transfiguration. The most serious sin, throughout this history, has been that of schism. Who is responsible for this vast Vladimir Soloviev began by throwing all responsibility for it on the Catholic Church, so much so that he provided the inspiration for Dostoyevsky’s famous “ myth of the Grand Inquisitor ” in The Brothers Karamazov . But, at the beginning of the 1880’s, through studying the question more closely, he understood that the sin of schism was in fact that of the East. This was a stroke of genius on his part for which our Father commends him greatly:

« I must beg pardon of my master Msgr. Jean Rupp, of Solzhenitsyn, Volkoff and so many others, but it seems obvious to to me, as it did to Soloviev in the end, that the schism of Moscow in setting itself up as the third Rome was the beginning of all the ills suffered by these admirable Christian peoples of European Russia . And I must say so because this rupture still weighs heavily on the world of today and because it is precisely of this rupture that Our Lady of Fatima speaks when She foretells “  the conversion of Russia  ”. (English CRC, December 1982, p. 24)

Let us follow Soloviev in his commendable mystical conversion which has opened up a path of light for his people, allowing a spring of grace and mercy to gush forth.

AN EVANGELICAL DISCOURSE

In 1881, Soloviev published a long article, still very antipapist, entitled Spiritual power in Russia . There the pope was presented as Antichrist institutionalised ! Our theorist placed all his hope in the regenerative mission of Holy Russia and in the Tsar who was to be her « divine figure, religious guide and animating wisdom ». But were the Russian people still capable of accomplishing such One particular event was to shake Soloviev’s patriotic faith. On March 1, 1881, Alexander II was assassinated by revolutionaries. A few days later, Soloviev gave a Discourse in which he recommended that his successor, Alexander III, show mercy to the regicides. Certainly not as a matter of weakness or abdication before the Revolution, even less out of the spirit of non-violence that a certain Tolstoy was already preaching, but « as an example of Russian piety », that famous podwig « which lies at the heart of the Russian people’s evangelical soul, of which the tsar is the living icon ». Alas, Soloviev was not understood... This was a painful stage in his life, the first step he had taken beyond his master Dostoyevsky.

The following year, he published another article entitled “  Schism in the Russian people and society  ”. Delving deep into the past, he accused Metropolitan Nikon of having broken, at the time of Peter the Great, the communion, the Sobornost , so beloved of the Russian people, by excommunicating Raskol, the fierce guardian of traditional popular religion... Ever since then, the Orthodox hierarchy, enslaved to the imperial power, had proved powerless to govern and sanctify Orthodoxy. It was nothing now but a shrunken, secularized “ local Church ” which, if it were to be restored and revived, would need to open itself up to “ the universal Church ”.

In the spring of 1882, Soloviev was powerfully affected by an unusual dream. In his dream he met a high-ranking Catholic ecclesiastic and entreated him to give him his blessing. The priest refused, so Soloviev insisted, declaring, « The separation of the Churches is the most disastrous thing possible. » Finally, the ecclesiastic agreed to give him his blessing.

This premonitory dream was to awaken in Vladimir Soloviev a burning desire for reconciliation with Catholicism, and to stimulate him to write a series of articles to be published every month in his friend Aksakov’s slavophile newspaper Rouss and then to be collected together in a work with the resonant title: The Great Controversy and Christian Politics . One particular maxim constantly reappeared under the Russian writer’s pen:

«  FIRST AND FOREMOST WE MUST WORK TO RESTORE THE UNITY OF THE CHURCH, AND TO MAKE THE FIRE OF LOVE BURN IN THE HEART OF CHRIST’S SPOUSE . »

By an irony of fate, the term “ Controversy ”, which for Soloviev referred to the conflict between Rome and the East, was going to give place to a bitter controversy between himself and his Orthodox and slavophile friends.

A MARVELLOUS AND ADORABLE WISDOM

T HE world’s beauty appeared to Soloviev as a living figure, a real existence, changing and yet immortal. He saw her and held her as the queen of his spiritual universe under her venerable name of Sancta Sophia . At the end of his life, in 1898, he celebrated the Three Encounters he had had with this Beauty which for him was Wisdom.

“ Three times in his life he had been overwhelmed by the radiant visit of Wisdom who appeared to him in the form of an absolutely heavenly female being, dazzling him and enlightening him profoundly. Not without reason certain authors think that all his religious and even philosophical works derive from this illumination. ”

And let us immediately point out, in order to acclimatize the Western reader who is highly likely to be disconcerted by these accounts, that trustworthy interpreters of Soloviev have attributed a marian character to these visions. For them, the whole of the Philosopher’s work derives from the AVE MARIA GRATIA PLENA . “ It is a marvellous perspective ”, adds Msgr. Rupp. “ Wisdom is closely allied to the Immaculate who is its seat. ” ( Le message ecclésial de Soloviev , p. 340)...

What I am going to say next will perhaps surprise my reader. Nothing is more biblical than this vision, and I am astonished at the astonishment of theologians and their impatient criticisms. This Sophia was already well known, hymned and even boldly adored by the scribes of the Old Testament under this very name of Wisdom. Far from being “ pantheist ”, this idea, this vision touches the essence of created beings, and is clearly poles apart from the Platonic idea and far more profound than Aristotle’s substance; it lies at the very heart of being, there where nothing exists except relationship to God, the term of a will and a wisdom that are infinite, there where exists a pure reflection, a fragment of the image of God’s beauty.

George de Nantes , A mysticism for our time , French CRC no. 133, p. 7.

THE GREAT CONTROVERSY

In January 1883, he fired the opening shots with an open letter to Aksakov: « As I reflected on the means of curing this interior disease (of Christianity), I became convinced that the origin of all these evils lies in the general weakening of the earthly organisation of the visible Church, following her division into two disunited parts. » He demonstrated that, in order to establish herself on earth and to endure throughout history, the Christian religion had need of a higher authority, and he explained that it was therefore essential to restore « the union of all Christian and ecclesiastical forces under the standard and under the power of one central ecclesiastical authority ».

On February 19, Soloviev gave a talk in homage to his master Dostoyevsky. It was almost a panegyric of the Roman Church ! He declared his ardent hope for the reconciliation of the two Churches, for the two parts of the universal Church which should never have been separated and whose centre lay in... Rome . As a result of this speech, he saw himself banned from speaking in public. The newspapers made no mention of his speech. For the first time, and it would not be the last, Soloviev was the victim of the censure of Constantin Petrowitch Pobiedonostev, Russia’s Grand Inquisitor and the Tsar’s adviser on religious matters. Pobiedonostev championed a sacral conception of political power, akin to that of the French legitimists of the time, but he was fiercely Orthodox, and any opening towards the Catholic religion was pitilessly censured.

Soloviev responded to this censure with a smile. So his speech had been described as « infantile chattering » ? « If we are not converted », he said to his friends, « and become like little children again, we will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven. » He went on: « When I was a pretentious little boy [teaching German philosophy: Kant, Hegel, Fichte, Schopenhauer and Nietzsche], people listened with great respect to my “ truly infantile ” prattling. And now it is fitting that the only way I can attain the perfection of humility is by everyone ! »

At the same time, he wrote to Aksakov: « It is necessary to defend Catholicism against the false accusations being brought against it... Consequently, in advocating a reconciliation with Catholicism, I assume that Catholicism is not in principle erroneous, for one cannot be reconciled with error . » Now there we have a true ecumenism ! The life of Soloviev, writes our Father, « was ».

To the charge of “ papism ” levelled against him, Soloviev responded in March 1883 with an admirable profession of faith, already Catholic:

« It seems to to me that you concentrate only on “ papism ” whereas I focus first and foremost on the great, holy and eternal Rome, a fundamental and integral part of the universal Church. I believe in this Rome, I bow before it, I love it with all my heart, and with all the strength of my soul I desire its rehabilitation for the unity and integrality of the universal Church. And may I be accursed as a parricide should I ever utter one word of condemnation against the Holy Church of Rome . »

THE REALISATION OF THE DREAM

In May 1883, on the occasion of the coronation of the Emperor Alexander III, the Moscow press complained that too many concessions were being made to restore diplomatic relations with the Vatican broken in 1866, but Soloviev protested: such an agreement was necessary, were it only to improve relations with the Catholics of Poland. The Pope was represented at the ceremony by his special envoy Msgr. Vincenzo Vanutelli. Had not Alexander III written to Leo XIII shortly beforehand: « Never has unity between all Churches and all States been so necessary, in order to realise the wish expressed by Your Holiness of seeing the peoples abandoning the disastrous errors responsible for the social malaise and returning to the holy laws of the Gospel... »

A few days after the ceremony, Soloviev was crossing Moscow in a hired car. Suddenly, he recognized the route he had followed in his dream the previous year. Soon he came to a stop in front of a house from which a Catholic prelate was just leaving: it was Msgr. Vanutelli in person... There was the same hesitation of this latter to give his blessing to a schismatic, and the same entreaties of Soloviev, who finally !

In the summer of 1883, our author wrote two articles on The Catholic Question . According to Soloviev, it was for Russia to take the first step towards the Catholic Church. Imagine !

His articles were not of the sort to leave his readers indifferent. On the Orthodox side, there was an increasing irritation, while on the Catholic side, surprise soon gave way to enthusiasm. The news crossed the borders, spreading to Poland and even to Croatia, where Msgr. Strossmayer was finally seeing his desires realised. The jurisdiction of his diocese of Djakovo extended into Bosnia and Serbia, that is into Orthodox territory. Endowed with a superior intelligence and animated by great apostolic zeal, this Croatian bishop keenly felt the need for a true, intelligent and benevolent ecumenism. He wrote in 1883 to one of his friends, Father Martynov:

« In my opinion, the principal task of the Catholic Church and of the Holy See this century is to draw as closely as possible to the Slav nation, principally the Russian nation . By winning it over to the divine unity of the Catholic Church, we would at the same time win over everyone in the world who still possess a positive faith. »

IN THE RADIANCE OF THE IMMACULATE

In the summer of 1883, Soloviev wrote five long letters to a Russian Uniate priest on the subject of The Immaculate Conception of the Most Blessed Virgin Mary . At the same time he translated Petrarch’s “ Praise and prayer to the Most Blessed Virgin ”, wherein he contemplated Her “ clothed in the Sun, crowned with stars... Her glance radiating infinity ! ” It is highly significant that Soloviev was simultaneously attracted by the mystery of the Catholic Church and the mystery of the Immaculate Virgin. The dogma of the Immaculate Conception was the first Catholic dogma which he embraced, and his favourite painting was the Immaculate Conception by Murillo.

In The Foundations of the Spiritual Life (1884), he exalted the « All Holy and Immaculate » Virgin Mary. In Russia and the Church Universal (1889), he would praise Pope Pius IX for having quoted, in support of his dogmatic definition, the Old Testament texts referring to Wisdom, the “  Sophia  ” of his personal intuitions:

« If, by the substantial Wisdom of God, we were exclusively meant to understand the Person of Jesus Christ, how could we apply to the Blessed Virgin all those texts in the Wisdom books which speak of this Wisdom ? However, this application, which has existed from the very earliest times in the offices of both the Latin and Greek Churches, has today received doctrinal confirmation in the bull of Pius IX on the Immaculate Conception of the Most Blessed Virgin. » (quoted by Msgr. Rupp, Le message ecclésial de Soloviev, p. 338)

In September 1883, when the sixth chapter of The Great Controversy was published, a rumour spread through Moscow that Soloviev had “ passed over ” to Catholicism, but there was no truth in it. Moreover, curious though this may seem to us, he was not looking “ to pass over to Catholicism ”, but only to open Orthodoxy up to the universality of the Roman Church.

His seventh and final chapter aroused a lively debate, one that is ever topical. The question turned on the attitude of the Byzantine Greeks in conflict with the Crusaders of the West. Soloviev wrote: « On the day that Constantinople fell, seeing the Turkish armies poised to attack, the final spontaneously expressed cry of the Greeks was, “ Better Islamic slavery than any agreement with the Latins. ” I do not mention this as a reproach to the unfortunate Greeks. If, in this cry of implacable hatred, there was nothing Christian, then neither has there been anything especially Christian in all the formal and artificial attempts to reunite the Churches… »

Aksakov, his Orthodox pride deeply irritated by this remark, retorted: « What does he mean, nothing Christian ? May the Greeks be blessed a hundred times over for having preferred a foreign yoke and bodily torture to the abandonment of the purity of their faith in Christ and for having thus preserved us from the distortions of papism at the precise moment [ the beginning of the 13th century ! ] when it had reached the height of its deformity. May they win eternal glory for this ! »

Nonetheless, Soloviev continued his search for truth, surmounting every obstacle. His article “  Nine Questions to Father Ivantsov-Platonov  ” published in December 1883, created a deep stir even in the West. Here he put nine questions to his former master in Orthodoxy on those points of controversy which set the Church of the East against the Church of Rome. Here is the setting:

« How is it that the countries of the East are separated from the Roman Church ? Did the latter proclaim an heretical proposition ? One would be hard pushed to maintain this, for the addition of the Filioque to the Creed, which is put forward to justify the separation, does not have the character of a heresy. Furthermore, it is absurd to say that the Roman Church is in a state of schism with regard to the Eastern Churches. Thus, the latter’s separation from the former has no basis. Let us acknowledge this and, putting aside all human viewpoints, let us work towards Unity or rather let us work so that Unity, which already has a virtual existence, may become a reality. »

THE THREAD OF AN ANCIENT TRADITION

During 1884, the Russian philosopher studied Catholic dogmatics. He read the works of Perrone, the theologian of Gregory XVI and Pius IX, as well as the texts of the Councils. He was particularly interested in Popes Gregory VII and Innocent III, whom he read in the original text.

At the same time he had a great enthusiasm for the Croatian priest George Krijanich who « had come from Zagreb to Moscow in the 17th century to spread the ideal of the Holy Kingdom of God, Roman Catholic and panslavic, gathering together under the sceptre of the tsars and the crook of the Pope all the Slav peoples who would thereby be freed and protected from the twofold burden pressing them on both sides like a vice, the Germanic powers and the Turks. Thus the Croats would work to free themselves from Austrian control and at the same time they would assist the Serbs, their Orthodox brothers, to shake off Moslem domination.

« To realise this grand design, capable at one blow of powerfully advancing the Kingdom of God on earth, Krijanich came to Moscow and preached on the subject of Russia’s reconciliation with Rome . This should not be difficult, he said, because the Russians had only fallen into schism through ignorance and not through heresy or malice. He himself was already preaching that everyone should recognise their own individual faults, be they unconscious or involuntary, and the need for expiation. God’s blessings would follow as a result, immense and eternal blessings. Sergius Mikhailovich Soloviev, our great man’s father, a historian and the author of a monumental history of Russia, admired Krijanich as “ the first of the Slavophiles ” and also, in his eyes, “ the most paradoxical ”, so alien did Catholicism then appear to the Russian consciousness. » (English CRC, December 1982, p. 32)

Soloviev intended to prove the contrary. And it was just at this time that he entered into friendly relations with the Croatian Bishop Strossmayer, thereby resuming the thread of an ancient tradition, one which was apparently marginal but which in reality was pregnant with a splendid future. Early in December 1885, Soloviev for the first time received a letter from the Croatian bishop. He replied to him on December 8, “  the blessed Day of the Immaculate Conception of the Most Blessed Virgin  ”:

« On the reunion of the Churches », he wrote, « depends the fate of Russia, the Slavs and the whole world. We Russian Orthodox, and indeed the whole of the East, are incapable of achieving anything before we have expiated the ecclesiastical sin of schism and rendered papal authority its due . » And he ended with these words: « My heart burns with joy at the thought that I have a guide like you. May God long preserve your precious leadership for the good of the Church and the Slav people. » In his pastoral letter of January 1886, the bishop of Djakovo quoted large extracts from this letter.

Encouraged by such support, in 1886 Soloviev undertook a study on Dogmatic development and the question of the reunion of the Churches , which provoked the fury of Orthodoxy. However, at a conference given at the ecclesiastical Academy of Saint Petersburg, Soloviev attempted to justify himself: « I can assure you that I will never pass over to Latinism. » He thereby sought to register his attachment to the Eastern rite. No question for him of adopting the Latin rite ! After that, he set out on a journey to Europe.

FIRST STAY IN ZAGREB (1886)

At the beginning of July, he was the guest of the honourable Canon Racki, President of the Yugoslav Academy of Zagreb, founded by Msgr. Strossmayer, and a personal friend of the latter. Every morning the Orthodox Soloviev assisted at the Catholic Mass with great enthusiasm. He made the sign of the cross in the Catholic manner, but prayed in the Greek manner, crossing his arms on his chest. He willingly admitted to his host – and this was not due to any desire to please on his part – that Croatian Catholics, like the Ukrainians, were more religious than his Orthodox compatriots !

Following an article published in the Croatian journal Katolicki List , Soloviev for the first time encountered opposition from a Catholic priest.

During his stay in Zagreb, he also published a letter in the Russian newspaper Novoie Vremia , wherein he refuted the widespread opinion in Russia that the Croats were the instruments of the Austro-Hungarian government’s attempt to Latinize the Eastern Slavs.

In August, he joined Msgr. Strossmayer in the Styrian Alps, and spent ten marvellous days with him. These two minds were truly made to get along. The mutual admiration they felt for one another reinforced their spiritual friendship. But Soloviev continued to receive Holy Communion at the hands of the Orthodox priest of the Serb parish of Zagreb... Rising above the inevitable criticisms, he then wrote a letter to Msgr. Strossmayer, summarising their initial conversations:

«  The reunion of the Churches would be advantageous to both sides . Rome would gain a devout people enthusiastic for the religious idea, she would gain a faithful and powerful defender. Russia for her part, she who through the will of God holds in her hands the destinies of the East, would not only rid herself of the involuntary sin of schism but, what is more, she would thereby become free to fulfil her great universal mission of uniting around herself all the Slav nations and of founding a new and truly Christian civilisation, a civilisation uniting the characteristics of the one truth and of religious liberty in the supreme principle of charity, encompassing everything in its unity and distributing to everyone the plenitude of the one unique good. »

Such was his transcription of the well known Catholic principle: «  In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas : unity in essentials, liberty in matters of doubt, and in all things charity . Such must be the Charter of Catholic ecumenism under the crook of the one Shepherd. From the start of this crisis, such has been the invitation we have made to our bishops and to our brothers. Today, it is also the will of the Holy Father », wrote our Father in his editorial for September 1978, dedicated to John Paul I, another Saint Pius X without knowing it (English CRC no. 102, p. 6).

When he informed his friends of Soloviev’s letter, Msgr. Strossmayer presented its author as « a candid and truly holy soul ».

Msgr. Strossmayer and Soloviev had agreed to meet again in Rome for the jubilee pilgrimage of 1888. The Croatian bishop decided to pave the way in Rome by writing to Leo XIII’s Secretary of State, Cardinal Rampolla. He presented his Russian friend as «  toto corde et animo catholicus  ». The Pope at first took a personal interest in the affair: « Here is a sheep », he said, « who will soon be clearing the gate of the sheepfold. » But curiously, there was to be no follow-up. It seems that Leo XIII failed to appreciate Soloviev’s genius... However, things were different in France, where an unassuming and ardent rural parish priest latched on to everything that his apostolic zeal could extract from the lightning advances made by the Russian thinker ( see inset , p. 19).

Soloviev returned to Russia at the beginning of October 1886, rather discouraged by the criticisms directed against him on all sides: there were the Orthodox, some of whom had accused him of bringing Orthodoxy into disrepute abroad... and certain Catholics, like Fr. Guettée in France, a modernist priest with little to commend him, whom he had met in Paris in 1876 and who had recently published an article of rare violence against him !

THE “ RETURN OF THE DISSIDENTS ”

June 18, 1887: a young Capuchin, Leopold Mandic, from Herzeg Novi in Bosnia, under the jurisdiction of Msgr. Strossmayer, and studying at the friary in Padua, heard the voice of God inviting him to pray for and promote the return of the Orthodox to the bosom of the one Church of Christ. «  The goal of my life , he would later say, must be the return of the Eastern dissidents to Catholic unity; I must therefore employ all my energies, as far as my littleness allows, to co-operate in such a task through the sacrifice of my life . » Fifty years later, he would still remember this grace: «  June 18, for the record: 1887-1937. Today, I offered the Holy Sacrifice for the Eastern dissidents, for their return to Catholic unity . » Thus the Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate united, in this one same “ ecumenical ” work, the ardent heart of a young Capuchin destined for the altars, the apostolic wisdom of a bishop and the brilliant intuitions of a great thinker.

In January 1887, from the Monastery of Saint Sergius where he had celebrated Christmas, Soloviev wrote an article in which he provided philosophic justification for the three Catholic dogmas which the Orthodox reject, namely the Filioque, the Immaculate Conception and papal infallibility . Here is a « basis for working towards the reunion of the Churches », he explained. A few months later, he published in Zagreb (on account of the censure directed against him in Russia) his book The History and Future of Theocracy .

There he retraced the vast movement of history towards the establishment of the Kingdom of God. Universal Theocracy, the successor of Jewish Theocracy, cannot be conceived, he explained, without an integrally Christian politics, and he concluded with a splendid anthem to Christ Pantocrator receiving from His Father all power on earth and in Heaven and acting through His emissaries, the Apostles and their successors. Soloviev always believed in the privileged vocation of Russia within the Catholic community of Christian nations, even if he stigmatized what he called “ the sin of Russia ”, which was to oppress and hate all those it dominated, in particular Polish Catholics, Greek Uniates, Ruthenians and Jews !

Like a true prophet, he was vigorous in preaching repentance to his people . In order that they might be faithful to their vocation within the great Slav family, Soloviev asked them to give up their inordinate ambitions, to return to a truer and more Christian conception of their destiny, and to accomplish this within the only international organization which could direct its course, Catholicism, that is to say Roman universalism.

«  One of my theses is that the cause of the Reunion of the Churches in Russia demands a podwig (sacrifice) even heavier to bear than that which, already demanding great self-denial, was needed to ensure Russia’s receptivity to Western culture, an event truly disagreeable to the national sentiment of our ancestors .

«  Well ! this sacrifice consists in drawing closer to Rome and it must be attained at all costs. In this lies the remedy for the Russian sin . »

It goes without saying that Soloviev earned himself new enemies with his book. It cost him great personal suffering, but he could not fail the Truth, which he contemplated with ever greater clarity... What greatness of soul this universal genius possessed !

SAINT VLADIMIR AND THE CHRISTIAN STATE

1888 marked the ninth centenary of the baptism of Saint Vladimir, the first prince of Kiev, whose kingdom after his conversion became « the model of Christian States, with evangelical morals », writes our Father (English CRC, December 1982, p. 23). Soloviev used the occasion to give a conference in Moscow, where he reaffirmed that Russia’s destiny was to turn towards Rome, as King Vladimir had ! However, having hardened itself in its schism, the Muscovite hierarchy was no longer animated by the spirit of St. Vladimir. Hence the fury of the Orthodox hierarchs !

At the same time, Msgr. Strossmayer had gone to Rome for the Jubilee. In vain did he wait for Soloviev there. The latter, fearing perhaps that he had made a definitive break with the Orthodox world which he dreamed on the contrary of winning for the Union, had given up the idea of making this journey. It must also be said that Vatican diplomacy hardly inspired more confidence in him. Leo XIII was revealing himself less and less slavophile, reserving his favours for the Germany of old Bismarck and the young William II ! Msgr. Strossmayer lamented this in a letter to Fr. Martynov: «  The Pope is acting against the Slavs. The Roman prelates are like people insane and think only of temporal power !  »

What a difference between Leo XIII and his successor, St. Pius X, who was, in the words of Msgr. Rupp and our Father, the greatest slavophile pope of our times !

Early in May 1888, Soloviev was on a visit to Paris. To explain his thinking to the French public, he gave a conference on the Russian Idea , « the true national idea eternally fixed in the design of God », who longs to spread His light over the whole world. However, Soloviev remained lucid about his own Church: « If the unity of the universal Church founded by Christ only exists among us in a latent state, it is because the official institution represented by our ecclesiastical government and our theological school is not a living part of the universal Church. »

In passing, he described the destruction of the Greek-Uniate Church by the Orthodox as a «  veritable national sin weighing on Russia and paralysing her moral strength  ». That is still the case today...

In July, Kiev celebrated the feast of the baptism of St. Vladimir. From Zagreb Msgr. Strossmayer sent a telegram in which he exalted Russia’s future role in the manner of his friend Soloviev. Scandal ! His remarks were universally reported by the press. Cardinal Rampolla informed the Croatian bishop that Leo XIII was seriously displeased ! The bishop of Djakovo also earned himself the bitter reproaches of Emperor Francis Joseph of Austria, which is more understandable given the rivalry existing between the two Empires.

In the summer of 1887, Soloviev published in the Universe , the newspaper of Louis Veuillot, three articles on St. Vladimir and the Christian State which caused a great stir. Then he journeyed to Croatia where he remained for one whole month with Msgr. Strossmayer. This meeting was rather sad, for the two friends were increasingly aware that their attempt to reunite the Churches would not succeed, at least in their lifetime.

It was in Djakovo that Soloviev finished the immense prologue to his magisterial book, Russia and the Church Universal , in which one can already glimpse signs of the discouragement that would overwhelm the thinker in the latter part of his life. We know from Fatima that the work of the conversion of Russia, something humanly impossible, has been entrusted to the Immaculate Heart of Mary who has a particular love for this Nation such as to inspire jealousy in others. But this only makes it all the more extraordinary that our prophet should have traced out the course of this conversion, like a true Precursor !

« RUSSIA AND THE CHURCH UNIVERSAL »

Soloviev does not hesitate to delve deep, extremely deep, into the past. To realise its designs in the world, divine Wisdom wished to become incarnate, and the Verb to take flesh like our own. As that was not enough, He also wished to unite to Himself a social and historical body, one that could reach the universality of mankind and communicate to all men His own divine Life. In this magnificent perspective, Soloviev compares the formation of that Body through which God wishes to be united with humanity to that effected in the womb of the Virgin Mary at the time of the Incarnation, and to that which operates every day in the Eucharistic mystery... What was needed for this work was a solid foundation, a Rock:

« This bedrock has been found », he writes, « it is Rome. It is only on the Rock [of Peter and his successors] that the Church is founded. This is not an opinion, it is an imposing historical reality . »

It is also an evangelical truth: «  You are Peter, and on this Rock I will build my Church . » Here Soloviev addresses the Protestants who seek to outbid each other in their attacks against the Primacy of Peter by quoting Jesus’ own words to His Apostle when he was obstructing the Master’s path: «  Get behind me, Satan !  » Soloviev’s response once again shows the clarity of his intelligence and his perfect knowledge of Catholic dogma:

«  There is only one way of harmonising these texts which the inspired Evangelist did not juxtapose without reason. Simon Peter, as supreme pastor and doctor of the universal Church , assisted by God and speaking for all, is, in this capacity, the unshakeable foundation of the House of God and the holder of the keys of the heavenly Kingdom. The same Simon Peter, as a private person, speaking and acting through his own natural forces and an understanding that is purely human , can say and do things that are unworthy, scandalous and even satanic. But personal defects and sins are passing, whereas the social function of the ecclesiastical monarch is permanent. “ Satan ” and the scandal have disappeared, but Peter has remained.  »

Soloviev’s doctrine agrees with that of Vatican Council I and with that of our Father who, at the same time as he makes us venerate Peter’s magisterium, magnificently illustrated by Blessed Pius IX, St. Pius X and John Paul I, accuses John XXIII, Paul VI and John Paul II of being instruments of “ Satan ” for the ruin of the Church.

However, Christ wished that it should be around Peter that the unity of faith and charity should be formed: «  Since the unity of the faith does not presently exist in the totality of believers, seeing that not all of them are unanimous in matters of religion, it must lie in the legal authority of a single head, an authority assured by divine assistance and the trust of all the faithful . This is the ROCK on which Christ founded His Church and against which the gates of hell will never prevail.  »

Why did this ROCK settle in Rome, and not in Jerusalem, Constantinople or Moscow ? Here we have a further brilliant response from Soloviev: historically Rome represented the order, civilization and terrestrial Empire that would best allow the Church to become the universal spiritual Empire desired by Christ. In a mystical view of the history of Salvation – we would say divine “ orthodromy ” – Soloviev shows how God, wishing to extend salvation to the whole world,  decided one day that His Kingdom should leave Israel for Rome, so that the capital of the pagan Empire should become “ the conjoint instrument ” of His designs:

« The universal monarchy was to stay put; the centre of unity was not to move. But central power itself, its character, its source and its sanction were to be renewed... Instead of an Empire of Might, there was to be a Church of Love. » One thinks of Constantine’s conversion and his imposition throughout the Roman Empire of laws favouring Christianity, and of Theodosius declaring the Christian religion the religion of State. What decisive support for the Gospel ! The remarkable Roman civilization, already the heir of Greece, was put at the service of the Cross of Christ !

Soloviev had some wonderful expressions to describe this, as for example the following: «  Jesus unthroned Caesar... By unthroning the false and impious absolutism of the pagan Caesars, Jesus confirmed and immortalised the universal monarchy of Rome and gave it its true theocratic foundation . »

« Let us not think », comments our Father, « that our theosophist loses his way in a contemplation of evangelical love and freedom. Fully aware of the frailty and shortcomings of humanity, he declares that it is essential, for its effective salvation, that supreme divine power be joined to the firmest social structure, to the virile principle , and not as formerly to the female principle of a virginal flesh for the Incarnation. This firm principle is the imperial monarchical institution which is Rome and Caesar. Converted, elevated and unabolished, the Power of Rome continues in the Pope for the service of the universal community.

« It is only this divino-human pontifical paternity that is capable of forming the basis of the universal fraternity of the peoples, not only through its spiritual influence but also through its authority and its supranational organization. In this monarchy, sacred but popular, the Pope, the Universal Emperor, clearly remains the servant of the servants of God and is, for that very reason, the sovereign Head of the Nations. Opposed to any kind of papolatry, antagonistic to all the encroachments of papism, and quite capable of denouncing such a Pope as Satan, Soloviev raised an imperishable monument to the glory of Rome and pointed out – him, a member of the Orthodox Church – the path of the world’s salvation, which lay in one place only, in the universal Christian order of a restored Roman Catholic Church ... » (French CRC no. 131, July 1978, p. 6)

In his lifetime, Soloviev ran up against a wall of hostility and incomprehension: « I am not so naive », he said, « to seek to convince minds whose private interests are greater than their desire for religious truth. In presenting the general evidence for the permanent primacy of Peter as the basis of the universal Church, I have simply wanted to assist those who are opposed to this truth, not because of their interests and passions, but merely because of their unwitting errors and hereditary prejudices. »

The final period of his life might seem to some like a decline and a renunciation of his prophetic insights, but our Father writes: « Soloviev was too great a mind to be discouraged or to modify his ideas in accordance with the fluctuations of his worldly success. What is certainly true is that his bitter experiences gave him a better knowledge of the Evil that was at work in the world, throwing up formidable obstacles to God’s designs and going so far as to erect a kind of caricature of them. This he denounced as the power of the Antichrist, the Prince of this world, announced in the Scriptures. » (French CRC no. 132, August 1978, p. 12)

At the beginning of the 1890’s, relations between Soloviev and the Orthodox Church deteriorated. «  Given the papaphobia reigning among us , he wrote to a friend, sometimes revealing its underhand character and at other times its stupidity, and always in any event unchristian, I considered and I continue to consider that it is necessary to draw people’s attention to the Rock of the Church laid by Christ Himself and to its positive significance . »

As he persisted in his criticisms, even going so far as to compare the Greco-Russian Church with « the Synagogue », the Orthodox hierarchy, in the person of Pobiedonostev, the Holy Synod’s prosecutor, employed the ultimate weapon at its disposal: it deprived him of the sacraments. One day in 1894, being seriously ill, Soloviev asked to receive the sacraments. His Orthodox confessor refused to give him absolution unless he renounced his Catholic views. Soloviev refused to yield, preferring to forego confession and Holy Communion.

AN AUTHENTIC CONVERSION

The moment had come. On February 18, 1896, he went to see Fr. Nicholas Alexeyevich Tolstoy, a Catholic priest of the Eastern rite exercising his ministry in Moscow. This priest, a former officer, owed him his vocation, his formation (Soloviev having been his teacher) and his conversion to Catholicism. That February 18 was the feast day of Pope St. Leo so dear to Soloviev. Before Mass, he read on his knees the Tridentine symbol of the faith containing the Filioque and a formula declaring that the Church of Rome must be regarded as the head of all the particular Churches. Then he received the Body of Christ at the hands of the Catholic priest.

On the following day, Fr. Tolstoy was denounced and arrested. He managed to escape and to reach Rome first, then France. It was only in 1910 that he would give an account in the Universe of the authentic conversion of Soloviev, and in 1917 that the two witnesses present at the scene would confirm the celebrated Russian’s profession of the Catholic faith. Nevertheless, this conversion was disputed not only by the Orthodox but also by Catholics imbued with a false ecumenism like Msgr. d’Herbigny of sinister memory. But in this matter the facts are indubitable. His entry into the Catholic Church did not, however, in Soloviev’s mind, exclude him from what he called « the true and authentic Eastern or Greco-Russian Church ». Never did he embrace the Latin rite. After the exile of Fr. Tolstoy, as there were no longer any Catholic priests in Moscow apart from those belonging to the Latin rite, Soloviev decided to refrain from receiving the sacraments...

In 1897, a census of the whole of Russia was carried out in which a question was asked about religion. «  I am both Catholic and Orthodox; let the police work that out !  » Soloviev answered.

« Self-important people from Rome and Moscow declared themselves scandalized », writes our Father. « The hour had not yet come for the podwig , for self-renunciation and reconciliation in truth and justice ( pravda ), and for the restoration of the wholly divine unity of communion in love ( sobornost ). Msgr. Rupp thinks that we achieved it with Vatican II. Alas, no ! I hope for and expect it to come with Vatican III... but only after the trial, after conversion and expiation... and after Our Lady’s humble requests have been met. » (English CRC, December 1982, p. 36)

UNDER THE SIGN OF MARY

«  This glow from Heaven emanates from Mary, And vain remains the attraction of the serpent’s venom.  »

On July 17, 1900, sensing death approaching, Soloviev sent for a priest. He was most insistent about this: « Will it be morning soon ? When will the priest come ? » The next day, he made his confession and received Holy Communion at the hands of an Orthodox priest. He died peacefully a few days later, on July 31, «  in the communion of Russian Orthodoxy to which he had ever been faithful, without however disowning the Catholicism of his heart, assured by the example of the Fathers of Russian Christianity, Saints Cyril and Methodius, Saint Vladimir, and so many strastoterptsi , innocents who had suffered the passion , and startsi , slavophiles and romanophiles at the same time, without schism or constraint, in the love of Holy Church and Holy Russia, the Kingdom of God to come !  »

But all this is too beautiful for us not to revisit it, so our Father has decided that we will study in more depth the work of this great Russian thinker, in three parts to appear in subsequent editions of Resurrection , Deo volente:

The vocation of Russia in the designs of God and the concert of the Christian nations: up to and including Putin ?

The Immaculate Virgin Mary , throne of Wisdom, essential beauty of the created world, our ultimate recourse !

The Antichrist unmasked by Soloviev . This was the last service the “ inspired prophet ” rendered to his beloved Russia: that of putting her on her guard against the seductions of the Antichrist. In Rome, at the same time, St. Pius X was also announcing his advent in his encyclical E supremi Apostolatus of October 4, 1903: « The Antichrist is present among us. The Evil shaking the world should not affright us, it will only last a short while. What must fall will fall, and the Church will be reborn from the trial, assisted by her Saviour and ready for extraordinary developments. »

Brother Thomas of Our Lady of Perpetual Help He is risen ! n° 8, August 2001, pp. 13-22

Reference */?>

• Holy Russia
• Vladimir Soloviev, prophet of Russia's conversion
• The Immaculate Conception and the Divine Sophia
• Soloviev (Vladimir)
• Our founder
• The 150 Points of the Phalange
• Catholic Counter-Reformation Analyses
• Preparing the Catholic Renaissance
• Principles of National Restoration
• New publications on the CRC website
• Archives HE IS RISEN!
• Books of Accusation
• Make a donation
• CCR Glossary
• VOD website
• Nederlandstalige site
• Articoli in italiano
• Artículos en español
• Artigos em Português

• New comments
• Military Photos
• Russian Military
• Anti-Aircraft
• SA-21/S-400 Triumf

92N6E Radar, S-400

• Oct 18, 2010

Media information

Share this media.

• This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register. By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies. Accept Learn more…