Date of Birth:

Ordination date:

Date of tonsure:

Day Angel:

A country:

Biography:

Born on April 13, 1967 in Moscow. Graduated high school and vocational school, in 1985-1987. served in the Armed Forces.

In 1987 he entered the Moscow Theological Seminary, from which he graduated in 1991. In the same year he was accepted into the Moscow Theological Academy, from which he graduated in 1995, having defended his dissertation for the degree of candidate of theology in the Department of Patrology on the topic “Reverend Theodore Studit is a teacher of monasticism.”

After completing his studies at the academy, he remained as a teacher at the MDS, where he taught liturgics, homiletics and ancient Greek.

On March 25, 1993, with the blessing of His Holiness Patriarch Alexy II, Archimandrite Venedikt (Knyazev), the first vice-rector of MDAiS, was tonsured a monk with the name Tikhon in honor of St. Tikhon, Patriarch of All Russia.

On April 7, 1993, in the Intercession Academic Church, the rector of Moscow theological schools, Bishop Philaret of Dmitrov, was ordained a deacon. I passed the obedience of a senior deacon at the academy. In August 1995, he was appointed dean of the Intercession Academic Church.

On January 6, 1996, in the Intercession Academic Church, the rector of the Moscow Academy of Arts and Sciences, Bishop Eugene of Vereisky, ordained him to the rank of presbyter. On the occasion of Holy Easter 1996, His Holiness Patriarch II was awarded a pectoral cross.

By the day of Holy Easter 1999 he was elevated to the rank of abbot.

Since 2002, at MDAiS he was responsible for preparing candidates for holy orders, while at the same time accepting the interrogation of proteges before ordination.

On December 24, 2004, by decree of His Holiness Patriarch Alexy II, he was appointed a member of the Russian Spiritual Mission in Jerusalem.

On October 6, 2006, by decree of His Holiness Patriarch Alexy II, he was appointed head of the Russian Spiritual Mission in Jerusalem.

On October 8, 2006, in the Assumption Cathedral of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, His Holiness Patriarch Alexy II elevated him to the rank of archimandrite.

On the 160th anniversary of the Russian Spiritual Mission in Jerusalem on October 28, 2007, he was awarded the Order of St. Sergius of Radonezh III degree.

Since 2008 - member of the Council of the Imperial Orthodox Palestine Society, since 2009 - honorary member of the St. Andrew the First-Called Foundation.

By the decision of the Holy Synod of March 31, 2009 (journal No. 18), he was appointed chairman of the Financial and Economic Administration of the Moscow Patriarchate with the dismissal of the head of the Russian Spiritual Mission in Jerusalem. The Synod also appointed Archimandrite Tikhon (Zaitsev) to be Bishop of Podolsk, vicar of the Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus'.

By decree of His Holiness Patriarch Kirill, he was appointed rector of the Church of St. Nicholas in Khamovniki.

On April 26, 2009, during the Divine Liturgy in the Cathedral of Christ the Savior in Moscow, which was performed by His Holiness Patriarch Kirill and His Beatitude Metropolitan Jonah of All America and Canada, he was consecrated Bishop of Podolsk, Vicar of the Moscow Diocese.

Since 2011, he has been caring for parish churches in the North-Eastern Administrative District of Moscow (Trinity Deanery).

By order of His Holiness Patriarch Kirill dated December 31, 2011, he was appointed manager of the North-Eastern Vicariate within the boundaries of the North-Eastern Administrative District of Moscow and included in the Diocesan Council of Moscow ex officio.

Education:

1991 - Moscow Theological Seminary.

1995 - Moscow Theological Academy (PhD in Theology).

Place of work:

Nicholas Church in Khamovniki (Rector)

Place of work:

Financial and Economic Administration of the Moscow Patriarchate (Chairman)

Diocese:

Moscow diocese (urban) (Vicariate manager)

Scientific works, publications:

• The word of Archimandrite Tikhon (Zaitsev) at the naming of Bishop of Podolsk, vicar of the Moscow diocese;
• Story all-night vigil. Report at a conference on church singing. MDA, 1999;
• The significance of Christian asceticism in the matter of internal transformation of a person. Report at the scientific and theological conference “Heritage St. Seraphim Sarovsky and the fate of Russia." Moscow-Sarov, June 15-18, 2004;
• A word to the participants of the international scientific and public conference “Jerusalem in the Russian spiritual tradition.” Jerusalem, 2005;
• The origins of Russian culture. Report at a scientific conference. Jerusalem, 2006;
• We cannot be indifferent. Interview regarding the outbreak of the Second Lebanon War, 2006;
• Orthodox shrines in the Holy Land: Gornensky Monastery. Interview with the National News Agency. Jerusalem, 2006;
• Respond to God's love. Interview to Pravoslavie.ru website, 2007;
• 160th anniversary of the Russian spiritual mission in Jerusalem. Report at the anniversary conference. Jerusalem, 2007;
• Report at the conference “Role traditional religions in search of peaceful solutions and responses to the challenges of global and regional threats and conflicts”, Bethlehem, February 12-13, 2009 / Documents and materials of International conferences. M., 2009;
• Great mission in the Holy Land. Interview with the magazine “Orthodox Conversation”. No. 3, 2009;
• Man in a global crisis. Abstracts of the report to the scientific conference. M., 2009;
• Religious and cultural significance of Jerusalem. A Christian's view. Report at the International Jerusalem Forum, Rabat, Morocco. October 28-29, 2009;
• Shrines Ecumenical Orthodoxy: Lavra St. Savva the Sanctified. “Orthodox Pilgrim”, No. 14 (57) 2009.

Translations from Greek:

• Bibliographical essay on the book by A-E.N. Tahiaos "Saints Cyril and Methodius". M., 2005;
• Hymn to Our Lady of St. Nectaria of Aegina, 2005;
• Manuscript of the Lavra of St. Savva the Sanctified, 2006;
• Vasily Lavriotis, priest. "Repentance and Confession." M., 2007.

Awards:

Church:

• 2007 - medal of St. Kirill of Turov of the Belarusian Orthodox Church;
• 2007 - Order of St. Sergius of Radonezh III Art.

Secular:

• insignia “For strengthening cooperation with Accounts Chamber Russian Federation".

Abbot of the Sretensky Monastery, confessor of the Putin family.

Archimandrite Tikhon, aka Georgy Alexandrovich Shevkunov, was born in 1958. Graduated from the screenwriting department of the All-Union Institute of Cinematography. Soon after graduating from VGIK he went to Pskov-Pechersky Monastery, where he was a novice for nine years and then took monastic vows. He returned to Moscow and worked in the publishing department of the Moscow Patriarchate.

Ten years ago, Shevkunov first appeared in print as one of the ideologists of the fundamentalist direction of the Russian Orthodox Church, publishing the article “Church and State,” in which he openly expressed his attitude towards democracy. “A democratic state,” quotes Father Tikhon from Free Lapse Breau, “will inevitably try to weaken the most influential Church in the country, bringing into play the ancient principle of “divide and conquer.” This statement seems important due to the fact that the Russian media call Father Tikhon the confessor of President Putin, that is, a person who influences the worldview of the leader of the state.

In church circles, Tikhon is spoken of as a well-known intriguer and careerist. The certified film screenwriter took the first step in his brilliant church career shortly after his return to Moscow from the Pskov-Pechersky Monastery in 1991. Then he initiated a scandal around a fire in the Donskoy Monastery, where he lived. According to investigators, the cause of the fire was a drunken monastery watchman who fell asleep with a lit cigarette. Shevkunov accused Western intelligence agents sent to us under the guise of believers of the Russian Orthodox Church abroad of “malicious arson.” (By the way, now “foreigners,” despite the long-standing scandal, support Father Tikhon. According to rumors, they see him as the main candidate for the post of the next Patriarch of All Rus'.) They say that the certified screenwriter himself is not averse to taking the highest position. church post Russia.

There is also information about Tikhon’s father’s connection with the KGB. Perhaps these connections subsequently helped him get to know Vladimir Putin better. One of the parishioners of the Sretensky Monastery is a close friend of Father Tikhon, Lieutenant General Nikolai Leonov. He served in the KGB from 1958 to 1991. In the 60-70s he worked in the First Main Directorate (PGU) of the KGB of the USSR, and was deputy head of the department. (In the 70s, Putin also served at PSU.) Tikhon (Shevkunov) and Nikolai Leonov are on the editorial board of the Russian House magazine, which is published at the Sretensky Monastery publishing house. Leonov is a political commentator on the program of the same name, which airs on the Moscovia channel, and Shevkunov is also the confessor of both projects - the magazine and the television show. Among the frequent guests of the Russia House are representatives of Russian National Unity (RNU) and the Black Hundred.

Father Tikhon is also known for more global projects. He was one of the activists of the movement for canonization royal family. He led a “crusade” against the tour of magician David Copperfield in Russia, informing the congregation that “the magic tricks of this vulgar American Woland” make the audience “dependent on the darkest and most destructive forces.” And his most famous project is the fight against “satanic” barcodes and individual taxpayer numbers (TIN). In the barcodes and tax identification number, according to Father Tikhon, the “number of the beast” is hidden - 666. In addition, the universal accounting system subjects the Orthodox to total control by the secular, anti-Orthodox, from Tikhon’s point of view, state. His article “Schengen Zone” dedicated to this “ global problem”, was published in the RNE publication “Russian Order”. Despite the fact that Father Tikhon denies his connection with the Russian Nazis, their views are very, very close.

Here are the holy father's thoughts on censorship. “Censorship is a normal tool in a normal society, which should cut off everything extreme. Personally, of course, I am for it - both in the religious area and in the secular area. As for state censorship, sooner or later society will come to a sober understanding of the need for this institution. Let us remember how Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin in his youth scolded censorship and did not rhyme it except with the word “fool”. And later he advocated censorship.” Tikhon’s last phrase, however, has baffled researchers of A.S.’s work. Pushkin. Well, Pushkin didn’t write something like that!

Tikhon was one of the first to congratulate Putin on his “ascension” and then publicly rejoiced at Yeltsin’s timely departure, condemning the “era of Yeltsinism.”

Father Tikhon hides the story of his acquaintance with Putin. But he advertises his closeness to the first person in every possible way. There is talk in church circles that the rumor that Tikhon is the president’s confessor was started by Tikhon himself. The certified screenwriter himself does not confirm this rumor, but does not refute it either - he flirts: “What are you trying to make of me as some kind of Richelieu?” Nevertheless, journalists from Moscow publications confidently wrote from Tikhon’s words that “Vladimir Putin constantly confesses to him. It is he who instructs the president in spiritual life.”

In any case, certified screenwriter Tikhon actively takes advantage of his real (or imaginary) closeness to the president. As they say, now even the Patriarch himself is afraid of him.

“After fifteen years, I’ve become pretty tired of these kinds of journalistic questions and guesses.”

Bishop Tikhon (in the world Georgy Aleksandrovich Shevkunov; July 2, 1958, Moscow) - bishop of the Russian Orthodox Church, Bishop of Yegoryevsk, vicar of the Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus', manager of the Western Vicariate of the city of Moscow.

Deputy of the Moscow Sretensky stauropegial monastery. Executive Secretary of the Patriarchal Council for Culture. Co-chairman of the Church and Public Council for Protection from the Alcohol Threat. Member of the board of trustees of the St. Basil the Great Foundation (the founder of the fund is businessman Konstantin Malofeev). After graduating from high school, he entered the Pskov-Pechersky Monastery as a novice. In September 2003, he accompanied the head of state to the United States, where Putin conveyed the invitation of Patriarch Alexy II to the First Hierarch of the ROCOR (Russian Orthodox Church Abroad), Metropolitan Laurus, to visit Russia. In the media, Bishop Tikhon (Shevkunov) was called the confessor of Konstantin Malofeev (but Malofeev himself claims that his confessor is a monk from the Trinity-Sergius Lavra) and Vladimir Putin.

- Let's move on to another difficult topic - as a rector, do you understand the structure of the economy of the Russian Orthodox Church?

— As abbot, I understand how the economy of our monastery works. As for the patriarchate’s budget, as far as I know, it consists of contributions from dioceses and donations from Christians.

— How much does your monastery contribute to the patriarchate?

- Sretensky Monastery transfers an annual contribution to the Patriarchate - it changes from year to year, but the order is from 3 to 5 million rubles. in year. If the situation is difficult, and all funds are spent on maintaining the life of the monastery, then the patriarch exempts from contributions for general church needs. This happens everywhere with churches being revived and under construction; The first especially difficult years and we did not transfer funds to the patriarchate.

— Do you transfer the annual contribution to the patriarchate’s account?

- Which bank?

— If I’m not mistaken, to Sberbank.

“We can and do earn money ourselves”​

— How is Sretensky Monastery financed?

— The main source is our monastery publishing house. We publish up to four hundred titles of books: spiritual, historical, scientific and fiction. Second: we have an agricultural production - the cooperative "Resurrection" in the Ryazan region, we took it over in 2001 in a completely ruined state.

— It seems you still have the Unholy Saints cafe.

— This position is rather costly. A small cafe where people go after Sunday service to socialize, that’s what we created it for. Yes, we still receive money from the church - but no one walks around with a plate during our services; the parishioners themselves leave as much as they see fit for the maintenance of the church.

— There are also candles.

— You can take candles from us for free or deposit a small amount. Expensive pure wax and large candles have a certain cost.

— How much does it cost you to maintain the monastery?

- These are large funds, I don’t see the need to disclose them. We support the highest religious institution created in the monastery - the seminary. Last year, 250 people studied there. Seminarians - six years on full board.

— Former accountant of the Patriarchate Natalya Deryuzhkina estimated the annual maintenance of two seminaries - Moscow and St. Petersburg - at 60 million rubles. How much of this amount do you spend on running the seminary? Half?

- Approximately. The brethren of the monastery themselves earn money for the seminary, for the maintenance and ongoing repairs of the entire monastery, for helping an orphanage in which 100 children are raised, for the website, for many of our educational projects, and for charity. We can and do earn money for all this ourselves.

- There are donors...

- Yes, sure. The help of philanthropists is very important, and we are sincerely grateful to them all. Once upon a time, within a few very difficult years revival of the destroyed monastery, Sergei Pugachev (former senator and ex-owner of Mezhprombank, sentenced to two years in prison; in this moment is located in France. — RBC). To make it clear the ratio of what the monks themselves earned and what they received from donations to the monastery, then best years charitable funds amounted to no more than 15% of the budget for the maintenance of the monastery. But in the case of new construction, help is needed. This happened when we realized that the size of our church for the parish was already hopelessly small, and we took the blessings of His Holiness Patriarch Kirill to build a new church.

— I know Rosneft is helping you.

- Yes, without her and without the help of other benefactors we would not have built a new temple. But the brethren of the monastery do not stand aside: 370 million rubles, all the funds received from the sale of almost two million copies of my book “Unholy Saints”, we allocated for construction.

— Does businessman Konstantin Malofeev really help you a lot?

— The St. Basil the Great Foundation (the founder of the fund is Malofeev. — RBC) twice participated in partial financing of our historical exhibitions in Manege, and once transferred 50% of the required budget for the maintenance of the seminary. At all, charitable help- this is not something permanent. Over the seventeen years of the seminary’s existence, we received such help from philanthropists only three times; in the remaining years we managed on our own.

— Do questions about money irritate you?

- Rather, they surprise. To be honest, it always seemed to me that such questions were, to put it mildly, unethical. Just in case, I will warn you: if somewhere in Germany, or in England, or in France you have a conversation on such topics, the conversation will immediately be stopped. But, I repeat, if this is so interesting to you and your readers, I am ready to answer. Speaking of help, once, for example, we held an event to distribute free Gospels. They were published at the expense of Oleg Deripaska. This does not apply specifically to Sretensky Monastery, but ours a joint project The “Historical Park” at VDNKh was prepared by the joint efforts of the Moscow government, the Patriarchal Council and the Norilsk Nickel company.

“I have to interact with a wide range of people”

- You, if I'm not mistaken, big number influential acquaintances.

— I am the chairman of the Patriarchal Council for Culture, and I really have to interact with a wide range of people, including well-known people in society.

Bishop of Yegoryevsk Tikhon Shevkunov, Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus' Kirill and Russian President Vladimir Putin (Photo: Alexey Nikolsky/TASS)

- I'm talking about something else, rather. Is it easy for you to communicate with government representatives? Forgive me, please, but I constantly catch myself thinking that FSB officers - it’s right next door to you - are, figuratively speaking, apples from the apple tree that shot priests in Soviet times.

— I understand that you, as a journalist, are exacerbating the issue. But to equate the atrocities of the security officers, who repressed and destroyed their own people, and the current military personnel serving in law enforcement sphere, is possible only in the incurable consciousness of an ultra-liberal. With this approach, I must refuse to talk with you, saying: “Since your predecessors, journalists of previous news agencies and publications, for many years they blatantly lied to the whole world and their own people, I do not intend to communicate with you!”

- When did you lie? Then? Now?

— As for what is happening now, you know better. But in this case I'm talking about Soviet times when journalists sometimes lied so much that everyone around them blushed. There are numerous currently operating departments that worked not only in the USSR, but also in previous, very distant times. We must understand whether the vector of attitude towards the people, towards the individual, towards the church has changed today, even in punitive agencies, or not? Is there now a command from the state to repress the church? No.

— Is there any contradiction in this position? Now there is no persecution of the Russian Orthodox Church, but will the church stand up for those who are being repressed?

“If there are unjust persecutions, he will definitely stand up.”

- Agree, nevertheless, paradoxical things are happening - in schools they are proposing to introduce a single history textbook, in which Joseph Stalin looks almost like an effective manager. And there are clerics who adhere to the same position (in particular, priest Evstafiy Zhakov, rector of the Church of the Holy Equal-to-the-Apostles Princess Olga in Strelna, openly expressed his respect for Stalin and even hung an icon depicting the Generalissimo in the church. — RBC).

— In the version of the future textbook that I saw, the assessment of the Stalinist period is presented in a very balanced manner. If you have a version of the textbook with a different interpretation, please send it to me. Among today's clergy there are very different views on the personality of Stalin, but at the same time I have never seen a priest who would say: “Stalin is my ideal!” and even more so would justify the repressions or at least remove Stalin’s personal responsibility for them.

— Don’t you think that the church goes through pendulum periods in its relations with the state? Love is hate. Now, for example, love. This means that hatred must return.

- For more than nine hundred years - since the Baptism of Rus' - love. Then several decades - hatred. So, what do you think? Rather, everything is more complicated here. As for the essence of your question - about the interaction of church and state - today we have a dominant position on the undoubted reasonableness and mutual benefit of the separation of church and state. There can be no talk of any unification of the two institutions - the state and the church. This will only bring harm.

— Why do you get the feeling that the Russian Orthodox Church and the authorities go hand in hand?

- Well, let them go hand in hand where it cannot but be welcomed. Together, the church and state institutions are engaged in charity, helping those in need, and preserving ancient cultural monuments related to the church and its history. And also projects in the field of culture, historical science, and some general diplomatic programs. But of course you are talking about politics?

- Yes.

— I can reassure you: the Russian Church has long passed a law that priests and bishops should not participate in political life countries.

“Nevertheless, representatives of the Russian Orthodox Church speak quite actively on political topics.

— Representatives of many public organizations express their opinions on a wide range of social, cultural and political phenomena, but this does not mean their real participation in state policy.

— Father Vsevolod Chaplin actively spoke out in support of the residents of Donbass.

— Father Vsevolod Chaplin is a separate conversation.

- Yes, but Chaplin is not alone. For example, the rector of a church near St. Petersburg openly consecrates body armor for DPR militias.

- Well, what's the crime? A bulletproof vest can save lives.

— If we talk about Father Chaplin, he has recently demanded to disclose the items of income and expenses of the Russian Orthodox Church.

- So here’s the thing: your interview about church finances is some kind of greeting to us from Father Vsevolod?! Well, there are special financial monitoring bodies, let them check everything competently and responsibly.

“I hear and know that there are also abuses by church authorities in some dioceses”

— How do you feel about the law on the return of religious property? By the way, do you not own the monastery?

- No. Indefinite and free use. Everything in the monastery is the property of the state.

- Why? Is it more convenient for you?

- It happened that way.

— Did they give you money under the federal program “Culture of Russia”?

- Once ten years ago - to restore the frescoes in the temple. But they didn’t give it to us, but to a restoration organization that wonderfully restored these frescoes. What else should I report on? The city authorities allocated funds for paving stones for the ancient part of the monastery courtyard.

— As far as I know, you head the public council under Rosalkogolregulirovanie. Why do you need this?

- Very necessary. Seven years ago, with the blessing of Patriarch Kirill, the Church-Public Council for Protection against the Alcohol Threat was created. The co-chairs were the writer Valentin Rasputin and me. A few years later, I was invited to head the public council under Rosalkogolregulirovanie. For me, the main task of my work is to reduce consumption alcoholic products in the country, primarily among adolescents and young people. We have done something: according to the latest data, alcohol consumption in Russia has fallen by 18% over six years.

- By your prayers?

— Through the prayers and common efforts of many people.

— As far as I understand, life is easier for priests in Moscow than in the provinces - in the periphery the percentage of diocesan contributions is higher, there are many times fewer parishioners, and the people are poorer. The priests are complaining.

— As for the fact that the percentage of deductions is higher, I don’t know about that. I basically know the parish life only of the Pskov diocese, which I myself described in the book “Unholy Saints.” My friends are very poor priests who also helped their grandmothers from their salaries. The late Father Nikita and Father Victor did not pay anything to the Pskov diocese at all, because they had nothing - their parishes were completely poor. But this is my knowledge of the diocese about ten years ago. Of course, I hear and know that there are also abuses by church authorities in some dioceses. Well, if so, then this is a disaster.

“I’m not the first to tell you about such problems.”

- No no.

“Nevertheless, there was no talk about this at the last Council of Bishops.

— Financial topics were not the subject of discussion at the Council of Bishops.

One of the most high-profile film premieres of next year promises to be the film “Matilda” by Alexei Uchitel. And one of the sharpest too. Letters are being sent to deputies and the Ministry of Culture demanding not to show the film, which again, according to an inescapable Soviet habit, tarnishes the image of the last Russian emperor. Many were frightened by the trailer for the future film, presenting it as a searing melodrama. The validity of these reactions is commented on by a member of the Presidential Council for Culture and Art, Bishop Tikhon (Shevkunov) of Yegoryevsk.

– Alexey Uchitel is a wonderful director, artist, not a hack, this is proven by both his films and film awards, he chose for his new film the plot of the love of the last Russian emperor for the ballerina Matilda Kshesinskaya. A true artist is free to choose any subject...

– Who dares to challenge this? Of course, the artist is free to choose any historical subject. It is a thankless task to discuss a film that has not yet been released.

“But spears are already being broken because of him today.”

– No wonder: the film is released in early spring 2017, exactly on the centenary of the February 1917 coup. Hence the special interest. The coming year will inexorably confront us with the need to comprehend the grandiose civilizational catastrophe that occurred in Russia a hundred years ago. The events that took place then had a decisive impact on the lives of almost all people living in the Russian Empire, in the Soviet Union, and influenced the destinies of the whole world. Scientists, politicians, religious and public figures will look for answers to many questions related to this date. The same task will face art. Theatre, painting, music - they will all be called upon to contribute to the artistic, imaginative understanding of the causes and consequences of the Russian tragedy. As we see today, cinema will not remain on the sidelines. On such a symbolic anniversary, Russian cinema will be represented by the film “Matilda”, the only one, at least among the announced feature films, on this topic. The premiere date was chosen in advance and, of course, not by chance - March 2017: exactly the centenary of the coup and abdication of Nicholas II.

– Isn’t a premature conflict flaring up around “Matilda”?

– In preparation for our meeting, I reviewed the discussion materials. This is what the director of the film, Alexey Uchitel, says: “They discuss and make some statements and write to the prosecutor’s office that no one saw anything, not a single frame. Therefore, when people try to express something, they must have a subject of conversation, but he doesn’t exist.” But actually it is not. A few months ago, the creators of “Matilda” posted a trailer for the film on the Internet, and anyone can easily see not just “one frame,” but watch several excerpts from the most key scenes of the future film. So there is quite a subject for conversation. There is another important subject on this topic - the real history of the relationship between Tsarevich Nikolai Alexandrovich and Matilda Kshesinskaya.

– What sources, including documentary ones, can tell us about this story?

– Letters and diary entries, memoirs, reports of fiscal services. The heir and Matilda Kshesinskaya met in 1890 at a ballet school graduation. He was a little over twenty, she was 18. The girl falls in love with the crown prince, and he is ready to be carried away by her, if only to dispel the sadness of his father’s categorical refusal: Emperor Alexander III forbade the heir to even think about marrying the young German princess Alix, whom Nicholas fell in love with when she visited Russia a year ago. At first, the acquaintance of the Tsarevich and Kshesinskaya continues fleetingly: they meet either on the street or in the theater. Then Nikolai sails away for a long time trip around the world, and upon returning, he meets Matilda, and their feelings flare up again. Nikolai called them the “brightest” pages of his youth. But by 1893 these relations became calmer, they were becoming less and less common. And when the girl whom the heir actually dreamed of marrying, Princess Alice of Darmstadt, agreed to the marriage, and Emperor Alexander III nevertheless agreed to it, Nicholas sincerely told Matilda about this. In 1894, all relations between Nicholas and Matilda were terminated. Forever. Although he still treated Kshesinskaya very warmly. They remained friends, and neither side made a tragedy out of the separation. We agreed that she would call him both “you” and Niki. He helped her in every possible way, but they never met alone again. The heir considered it his duty to tell the bride about Matilda. There is a letter from Alix to her fiancé, where she writes: “I love you even more since you told me this story. Your trust touches me so deeply... Can I be worthy of it?” The love of the last Russian Emperor Nikolai Alexandrovich and Empress Alexandra Feodorovna, amazing in the depth of feelings, fidelity and tenderness, continued on earth until their last martyrdom hour in the Ipatiev House in July 1918. That, in fact, is the whole story.

– And, probably, there is nothing wrong with a talented director talking about her in his film.

Hugs with Matilda, hugs with Alexandra... What is this - the author's vision? No - slander real people

– It would be good if that were so. The film by Alexei Uchitel claims to be historic, and the trailer is titled nothing less than “The Main Historical Blockbuster of the Year.” But after watching it, I honestly admit I can’t understand: why did the authors do it this way? Why touch on this topic in this way? Why do they force the viewer to believe in the historicity of the heartbreaking scenes of the “love triangle” they invented, in which Nikolai, both before and after his marriage, melodramatically rushes between Matilda and Alexandra? Why is Empress Alexandra Feodorovna depicted as a demonic fury walking with a knife (I'm not kidding!) towards her rival? Vengeful, envious Alexandra Fedorovna, unhappy, wonderful, magnificent Matilda, weak-willed Nikolai, rushing to one or the other. Hugs with Matilda, hugs with Alexandra... What is this - the author's vision? No – slander against real people. But that's not all. Why invent Nicholas's fainting during the coronation with his crown spectacularly flying off his crowned head? Is this a “subtle” hint of future upheavals? Why force Alexandra III pronounce a completely delusional maxim, especially in his mouth, that he is the only one of the Romanovs who did not live with ballerinas? Who is the slogan of the trailer that appears on the screen: “Love that changed Russia”? Complete idiots? Why, who do they want to fool with another masterpiece slogan: “The Secret of the House of Romanov”? What other secret? The whole of secular Petersburg knew about the relationship between the heir and Kshesinskaya. Should the centenary of the collapse of the dynasty be celebrated with a heartbreaking Hollywood melodrama? And by the way love triangle with explicit scenes? Despite the fact that a considerable part of our viewers will perceive the film, released in the year of the centenary of revolutionary upheavals, as real story Russia. And the main thing that is impossible to understand is: don’t the authors understand that all these vulgar falsifications will inevitably be exposed; the film will not be helped by either skillfully filmed spectacular scenes, or expensive sets and costumes, or foreign actors. Or are those who say: nothing personal, just business, right? I don't want to think like that.

– But there is still no film yet...

– The film was not released, and any objections against it can easily be restrained by reminding him of the shameful phrase: “I haven’t read Pasternak, but I condemn him.” But shouldn’t the trailer, as an author’s summary of the film, alert anyone familiar with Russian history? I'm not even talking about how alarming this is. Orthodox people, for whom Nicholas II and his family are holy martyrs.

- But the sovereign was not glorified for every scene of his life - for his martyrdom.

– Yes, he is glorified for the path he has traveled since 1917. And this was the way of the cross - with five children, a wife and several relatives. It was for his courageous confession, for the kind of Christian he remained in the last year and a half of his life, that he was glorified in the Church.

– So what, the Church will demand a ban on the film?

Film bans are an absolutely dead-end and wrong path. A warning about truth and untruth, that's what's important...

– I am sure that this is an absolutely dead-end and wrong path. Not demands for prohibitions, but a warning about truth and untruth - this is the goal that can and should be set in connection with the upcoming wide screening of the film. If the film lives up to the trailer, it will be enough to simply talk widely about the real former history. Actually, that's what we are doing now. And then the viewer will decide for himself.

– Vladyka, but you studied at VGIK and you understand that good film impossible without drama. And doesn’t the artist have the right to artistic invention?

– But not on fraudulent misrepresentation. IN historical novel“Fiction is not deception,” Okudzhava also convinced. IN work of art about historical figures, of course, the author's fiction, artistic, dramatic reconstruction of events are necessary. But if the artist is not deprived of elementary moral responsibility, he will not go beyond the boundaries of historical accuracy and will never turn history into its opposite. Deliberate distortion of history is either deception or propaganda.

– Based on history, not contrary to it, not contrary to it. It's all a matter of taste and talent. Of course, you can take historical characters and make them do whatever the author wants. Kutuzov in the film adaptation of “War and Peace” can surrender not only Moscow, but also St. Petersburg. And Pugachev in the film based on “The Captain’s Daughter” will become Catherine’s lover. It just has nothing to do with art. Or it is called a special genre - fantasy. Then the film should be labeled that way.

– Did you tell Alexey Uchitel about this?

- Yes, I talked to him on the phone. He said exactly the same thing as you.

– And what did he answer?

– That the trailer and even the script are not a film yet. In this sense he is right.

– Have you read the script?

– The director gave me the script to read, but I promised him to refrain from commenting on the script.

– Apparently, your position has not changed after reading the script?

– I will not comment on the script.

– When “Matilda” is released as a series, maybe it’s worth accompanying each episode with a documentary film that returns historical consciousness viewer to the correct perception?

– I can’t really imagine it. I think it's enough for people to know about the true story.

– I watched a lot yesterday documentaries about the heir and Kshesinskaya - completely disgusting in tone and persistently convincing that the affair continued into the sovereign’s marriage. With comments from esotericists, dubious psychologists and others. And no one calls out the yellow TV channels for their vileness, but for some reason we are in a hurry to make claims against the undoubted artist.

– Pseudo-documentary creations do not have much influence on the minds and souls of people; they do not attract as much attention. A big feature series is another matter.

– The film stars an outwardly gorgeous Polish actress, a wonderful German director, Thomas Ostermeier, and an actor from his famous Schaubühne theater, Lars Eidinger. That is, in addition to a good director, the film had a wealthy producer.

– The film is designed not only for domestic audiences, but also for international distribution. It was made according to the worldwide, globalistic, Hollywood “laws of the genre.” I think that from a purely entertainment point of view it will be a spectacular, pompous picture.

– Over the past 20 years, the State Hermitage has held many exhibitions abroad dedicated to Russian sovereigns. Mikhail Piotrovsky believes that this managed to largely change the views of the European establishment on the Russian tsars. They are no longer seen through jokes about Catherine’s lovers, but as people high culture, With great taste, historical power. Against the backdrop of such efforts, it would be a pity to again show the world the image of Nicholas II through a love triangle...

– Nicholas II like no other for a hundred years recent years was discredited and slandered. People at the everyday level are accustomed to this. And they are latently ready to accept a new film about a completely insignificant, depraved last king who betrays his word and does not know the honor and loyalty. But all this again falls into the old basket - a strange state, strange people, strange kings. It's a pity.

– But the film hasn't come out yet.

“That’s where we started the conversation.” It is a thankless task to discuss a film that has not yet been released. I know first-hand what it’s like to make a movie. This is a huge work of many people, and first of all the director. And it’s all the more offensive when the plan is initially based on a plot that can only be called historical bad taste.

– Recently, there have been constant reproaches against the Church that it demands to ban this or that performance or film, citing protests about insulting religious feelings. Famous actors and directors see this as a violation of creative freedom.

– Activists are offended. The directors are outraged. The press warns society about new facts of interference of the Russian Orthodox Church in the sphere of freedom of creativity. Progressive society is indignant. The issue of censorship is being raised at the Presidential Council on Culture and Art... It’s just some kind of drama. Stronger than Goethe's Faust. I just want to say: curtain!

– But in reality, not everything is so simple in this performance.

– Indeed, there were appeals against the showing of the famous rock opera in Omsk. But these protests were not made by the Russian Orthodox Church, but one of many thousands of public associations, unions, brotherhoods operating today in our country. A group of Orthodox activists demands that this performance be filmed, it seems, in all the cities where the St. Petersburg Opera Theater comes on tour. Recently there were similar appeals, for example, in Tobolsk. They were reviewed and not satisfied. The Tobolsk diocese had nothing to do with the demands to cancel the performance. And in Omsk, according to the producer, the showing of the play was agreed upon with the metropolitanate. In any case, the official representative of the diocese stated the following: “It is not the business of the diocese to regulate the repertoire policy of this or that theater. I only know that the performer's confessor leading role blessed him for this 30 years ago.” The head of the information department of the Russian Orthodox Church, Vladimir Legoyda, after the start of the media hype, reported through all news agencies that the Church does not support the demands to remove the play from the theaters’ repertoire. And the producers informed that the performance in Omsk was canceled because only a little more than forty tickets were purchased for the thousandth hall. Last year, they said, the same performance was shown here in Omsk, although even then there were appeals from citizens asking for the cancellation of the performance. But the tickets sold out and the performance took place.

– All this known facts. But only one thing can be heard everywhere: the Russian Orthodox Church demands that the play be filmed and is getting its way.

– Recently, one priest from Armavir, remembering Vasily Zhukovsky’s editing of Pushkin’s fairy tale about Balda, where the priest was replaced by a merchant, published a brochure in the Armavir printing house with a merchant and without a priest in a circulation of four thousand copies. And then headlines appeared in dozens of media outlets, including central ones: “The Russian Orthodox Church is editing Pushkin!” And despite the fact that the head of the publishing council of the Russian Orthodox Church, Metropolitan Kliment of Kaluga and Borovsk, also stated through all news agencies that in this case this is the personal initiative of an individual priest and that the classics cannot be changed and edited even with the most good purposes, journalistic statements that the Church has reached the point of complete insanity, so that Pushkin is being altered, are joyfully dazzling to this day. This is our multi-part drama. It is obvious that its authors really like it. There are also enthusiastic spectators. So without a doubt - to be continued. But we have long been accustomed to this, so, as they say, take up the flag! As for the film, I am sure that most likely individuals and groups, including Orthodox Christians, will demand its ban. I’ll say right away: we respect and understand their position. And we will encourage you to take it into account. But, I repeat once again, I consider the path of prohibitions to be a dead end. It is the business of the Church to prohibit and permit when necessary, in spiritual world. But not in a secular way. Including neither theatrical nor cinematic. But this does not mean that we will not openly express our beliefs.

– And "Tannhäuser"? After all, there was a protest from the official Church - the Novosibirsk Metropolis.

– And not only a protest, but also a lawsuit was initiated based on the claim of the Novosibirsk Metropolis for an innovative variation on a theme by Wagner. In the production, no matter how many theater critics no matter how they fooled us, the only “artistic find”, the goal and the center of attention was blasphemy against the image of Christ. Public hearings were held, then the Novosibirsk Metropolis filed a lawsuit in full accordance with the law. And she lost this trial.

– But the performance was filmed.

– This difficult, unpleasant and unprecedented decision of the Ministry of Culture should be assessed in the context of the bloody tragedy of Charlie Hebdo that erupted later. As life has shown, this decision turned out to be the correct and necessary prevention from irresponsible and extremely dangerous, especially in the conditions of our multinational and multireligious country, public experiments and provocations, which someone wants to call creativity.

Before you read this essay, please watch this video:

It seems, as they say, “both laughter and tears”... But after laughing, those to whom I happened to show these interviews usually became noticeably sadder. And it’s true: if this is the case everywhere, there is nothing to laugh about: “The connection of times has been broken,” no more and no less than a Shakespearean theme.

Every year we accept new students to Sretensky Theological Seminary. More than half are yesterday's schoolchildren, the rest are young people with higher education. The level of their humanitarian training is simply appalling. Although many graduated from school with excellent grades. I hear the same thing from rectors and teachers of secular higher educational institutions.

To rectify the situation, we teach a course in Russian literature for three years as a bachelor, as they say, from scratch, and four years for history. To be fair, it should be said that in each course there are one or two well-prepared students, but there are only a few of them. An average Soviet graduate from some 1975–1980 is a luminary compared to the excellent students of the Unified State Exam 2016.

The interviews you saw were, at our request, conducted by two well-known television companies, “Red Square” and “Workshop,” whose correspondents interviewed university students and young people with higher education. Many young people refused, saying that they were not ready to answer questions of a humanitarian nature. What is presented is by no means a selection of the worst answers: this was our condition, the fulfillment of which was assured to us by the television company workers.

When preparing this video for publication, we initially wanted to hide the faces of young people. But then they decided to leave everything as it was. Firstly, the young people answering our questions are surprisingly lively, attractive, resourceful and smart (this is not irony). And secondly, in my opinion, it is not their fault that they are practically not even familiar with the literature, art and culture of Russia - the great heritage not only of our country, but of all humanity. But this property belongs primarily to these young people - by right of birth, by right native language. It is really not they who are to blame for the current situation, but those who did not pass on their rightful spiritual inheritance to them. These are none other than us - people of the middle and older generations. We are to blame.

Our parents and grandfathers, in the difficult, to put it mildly, conditions of the 20th century, were able to pass on to us a priceless treasure - the great Russian culture: literature and art, instilling taste and love for them. We, in turn, had to do the same for the next generations. But they failed to fulfill their duty.

Many reasons can be found for what happened - from the influence of the Internet, unprofessionalism and negligence of reformer officials to the machinations of liberals and the machinations of the West. It is possible to explain very convincingly why everything happened exactly this way. But this will not change the essence of the matter: our generation, quite obviously, has not fulfilled its duty towards those to whom we will hand Russia over, these guys from the screen.

Having dealt with our first traditional and sacramental question, “Who is to blame?”, Let’s move on to the second traditional question: “What to do?”

Last year, the Society of Russian Literature was formed, headed by His Holiness Patriarch Kirill. One of the projects of the society will be the association “Pushkin Union”, the task of which, so to speak, is the return of Russian classics and, more broadly, national culture, literature and art in the field of spiritual and intellectual life younger generation. Members of the Society of Russian Literature, Ministers of Culture and Education V.R. Medinsky and O.Yu. Vasilyeva, Rector of Moscow State University V.A. Sadovnichy, rectors of many other universities, heads of creative unions, and cultural figures have already met twice to discuss and develop a program of action.

It was obvious to everyone: the worst thing that can be done in the current situation is to begin to force people to love the classics with all the power of the state, the Church and society. In fact, the real and most important thing is to convey to young people who have already left school at least the basics of our cultural heritage, which neither school nor family were able to introduce them to. Instill a taste for Russian literature and art. For current and future schoolchildren and students, through joint efforts, instead of the current simulacrum of humanitarian education, it is necessary to create an effective and holistic educational system with live teaching methods. This is what many departments and public associations are now doing, with the general coordination of the Society of Russian Literature. By the way, a similar and positive experience already exists: the activities of the Russian Historical Society.

What was great about the Soviet education system, if we leave aside its ideological component? After all, by the mid-1970s, communist ideology, even without any restructuring, remained outside the lessons of most thinking teachers. The phenomenon of Soviet education was based on two extraordinary and brilliant achievements. The first is the Teacher. Second - a unique system schooling and education.

A good and even outstanding teacher was not an exception, but an excellent, but also familiar norm. I remember my regular Moscow school. All our teachers, from a human point of view, were extremely interesting personalities. From the point of view of their specialty, they are outstanding professionals.

It’s not for me to judge how things are now. But looking at the system of so-called practice-oriented education currently existing in pedagogical universities, one is at least amazed at the courage of its creators. I remember the Soviet five-year pedagogical education of the then students. Prepared for university by that school at that level, students were allowed to practice in the classroom, starting only from the penultimate year. Now undergraduate students (four years of study) are removed from lectures and sent to practical work to school from the first year. The teachers I have talked to on this topic are horrified by this system.

And now about the system. Soviet education was built and streamlined in such a way that even a teacher of average abilities interested students in a humanitarian subject, conveyed and made clear and relatable the values ​​that ours carried. great literature. In addition, endless essays (let me remind you: school essays, canceled by our reformers, returned to schools only by direct order of the President just three years ago), surveys, control of RONO, subordinate to the Ministry of Education, excluded for the majority cultural amnesia and large-scale illiteracy as a phenomenon.

Today, schools are not under the Ministry of Education. Their superiors are regional and municipal authorities. This is the same as if local garrisons in the army were subordinate not to the Ministry of Defense, but to the governors.

The comparison of the educational sphere with the army is not accidental. I remember the significant words of the Leipzig geography professor Oskar Peschel, spoken by him after the victory of the Prussian army over the Austrians in 1866: “Public education plays decisive role in war. When the Prussians beat the Austrians, it was a victory of the Prussian teacher over the Austrian schoolteacher.” These words hit the mark so much that their authorship is still attributed to the unshakable authority in state and national construction, Otto von Bismarck.

The current education system, its reforms and programs have been criticized so often that there is no point in taking up this matter again. At the first congress of the Society of Russian Literature, President V.V. Putin has set very specific tasks, the main ones being the formation of a state language policy and a “golden” list of works required to be studied in schools. Let me remind you that today it depends on the teacher (a classmate of those guys whom we just saw on the screen) whether his class will study such masterpieces as “I loved you: love is still, perhaps...”, “I erected a monument to myself not made by hands...” A.S. Pushkin, “Motherland”, “I go out alone on the road...” M.Yu. Lermontov. Or the teacher will replace them with works that are much more “perfect” from his point of view. This is the right of today's teacher.

“Alternative”, that is, essentially not mandatory for study, is, in addition to the works already cited, also, for example, “War and Peace”. At school, we didn’t read this novel in full either, missing the author’s historiosophical reflections, but most of Tolstoy’s masterpiece, accessible to a teenager, shaped the worldview of generations. “Crime and Punishment” is also from the list of variable, read, optional works for studying. Even “Mumu”, where we learned compassion and mercy, is from the same group. “Young people won’t read this!” With energy worthy best use, we are persuaded and forced to accept this “advanced” point of view.

But, firstly, young people, if they are truly introduced to the world of domestic and world literature and art, discover an amazing interest in them. And they only wonder why until now they have been excommunicated from all this treasure. And secondly, the alternative to turning to the best examples of culture created by previous generations is completely obvious. A. S. Pushkin clearly reminds us of what a deliberate and snobbish disregard for the classics leads to: “Respect for the past is the feature that distinguishes education from savagery.”

Of course, let the professionals judge all this in the end. But we, the humble recipients of their students and pupils in society as a whole and in higher school in particular, we cannot help but ask questions.

In fact, the Society of Russian Literature was created as a platform for such discussions. Of course, no one is going to force young people to delve only into the classics and force them to completely forget about modern culture. This is how one can interpret public concern about the decline of liberal arts education only if one looks at the problem through the eyes of malevolent partiality. I am writing this because there are many who want to discredit the cause of the return of Russian classics.

Let me give you one last but illustrative example. Recently, Minister of Culture V.R. Medinsky gathered the most popular video bloggers to discuss exactly the issues we are talking about today. The audience of these bloggers is millions of subscribers, representatives of exactly the generation we are talking about. It is a well-known fact: many young people hardly read. They don't watch TV. Therefore, even if plans for new productions of classics in TV series are implemented, these young people simply will not see such films. With rare exceptions, they do not attend popular, let alone scientific, lectures. The cultural figures beloved by older generations are not convincing to them and are absolutely not interesting. The new generation spends a significant part of their lives online. Representatives of their culture, who have enormous influence on them, are completely unknown to us. Or they cause us approximately the same rejection that a current student with an earring in his nose experiences towards people of art of the last century who are significant to us. Sometimes it seems that we are becoming more and more aliens to each other.

The bloggers turned out to be very interesting interlocutors and thoughtful people. At a meeting with the minister, they made several important proposals, among which was the idea of ​​attracting the attention of young people to the classics through those whom the young people themselves are ready to hear. We suggested thinking about whether it was possible modern performers, which gathers huge youth audiences, will unite to hold special concerts featuring the best works of Russian poetry and music. Such performers, like no one else in our situation, could help the common cause. This idea, it seemed to me, was unanimously supported by all our young interlocutors.

And if, they added, these singers also read excerpts from their favorite poetic and prose works classics and encourage listeners to seek and find the beauty of the best creations of Russian poets, then, without a doubt, they will be heard. Moreover, some of the most popular performers today give video lectures, for example, on issues of culture and art of the early twentieth century. All these were working moments of the discussion. Everyone understood that final decisions were still far away.

The bloggers, despite their youth, turned out to be professional and - most importantly - noble interlocutors: nothing from the preliminary discussion was “thrown” into the network by them. But a correspondent from one of the leading news agencies present at the meeting taught them a lesson in “professionalism”: having taken several phrases out of the context of the discussion and without explaining any details, she published sensational news in her agency that the Patriarchal Council for Culture had made a proposal to popularize the classics with with the help of swearer Shnur and rapper Timati. This was, of course, quite strange, but for me the most important thing in this story was the decency and professionalism of our young interlocutors. And there will still be plenty of people who want to discredit the planned work. Sometimes from the most unexpected areas. And you need to be prepared for this.

“What does the Church have to do with it?” - they will ask us a question from the church environment. (From the secular environment we expect tougher questions, but let’s leave them aside for now.) So, what is the point for the Church to participate in the solution of, of course, an important, but purely secular problem? The best way The Church's interest in humanitarian education was expressed by one of the most famous elders of the twentieth century - Reverend Silouan Afonsky: “In last times Educated people will find the way to salvation.”

I have no doubt that, despite all the complexity, the problem we raised today will be solved. The key to this is the common concern of parents and teachers, secular and church people, government officials and cultural figures. Losses cannot be avoided, but in general many real steps have been outlined by our ministries and creative and public communities.

But there is another factor that gives hope.

“Uncle, without looking at anyone, blew off the dust, tapped the lid of the guitar with his bony fingers, tuned it and adjusted himself in the chair. He took (with a somewhat theatrical gesture, placing the elbow of his left hand) the guitar above the neck and, winking at Anisya Fedorovna, began not to Barynya, but took one sonorous, clean chord and measuredly, calmly, but firmly began to finish at a very quiet pace famous song“Along the u-li-i-itsa pavement.” At once, in time with that sedate joy (the same that breathed through Anisya Fedorovna’s entire being), the motive of the song began to sing in the souls of Nikolai and Natasha. Anisya Fedorovna blushed and, covering herself with a handkerchief, left the room laughing...

Lovely, lovely, uncle! more more! - Natasha screamed as soon as he finished. She jumped up from her seat, hugged her uncle and kissed him. - Nikolenka, Nikolenka! - she said, looking back at her brother and as if asking him: what is this?

...Natasha threw off the scarf that was draped over her, ran ahead of her uncle and, putting her hands on her hips, moved her shoulders and stood.

Where, how, when did this countess, raised by a French emigrant, suck into herself from the Russian air that she breathed, this spirit, where did she get these techniques that pas de châle should have long ago been supplanted? But these spirits and techniques were the very same, inimitable, unstudied, Russian ones that her uncle expected from her. As soon as she stood up and smiled solemnly, proudly and slyly and cheerfully, the first fear that gripped Nikolai and everyone present, the fear that she would do the wrong thing, passed, and they were already admiring her.

She did the same thing and did it so precisely, so completely accurately that Anisya Fedorovna, who immediately handed her the scarf she needed for her business, burst into tears through laughter, looking at this thin, graceful, so alien to her, well-bred countess in silk and velvet. “, who knew how to understand everything that was in Anisya, and in Anisya’s father, and in her aunt, and in her mother, and in every Russian person.” - L.N. Tolstoy "War and Peace".