Conducted church reforms. Baptism with three fingers was introduced, bows from the waist instead of bows to the ground, icons and church books were corrected according to Greek models. These changes caused protest among wide sections of the population. But Nikon acted harshly and without diplomatic tact, as a result provoking a church schism.

1666-1667: Church Council took place. He supported church reform, deepening the schism in the Russian Orthodox Church.

The increasing centralization of the Moscow state required a centralized church. It was necessary to unify it - the introduction of the same text of prayer, the same type of worship, the same forms of magical rituals and manipulations that make up the cult. To this end, during the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich, Patriarch Nikon carried out a reform that had a significant impact on further development Orthodoxy in Russia. The changes were based on the practice of worship in Byzantium.

In addition to changes in church books, innovations concerned the order of worship:

The sign of the cross had to be made with three fingers, not two;

The religious procession around the church should be carried out not in the direction of the sun (from east to west, salting), but against the sun (from west to east);

Instead of bows to the ground, bows should be made from the waist;

Sing Hallelujah three times, not two and some others.

The reform was proclaimed at a solemn service in the Moscow Assumption Cathedral on the so-called Week of Orthodoxy in 1656 (the first Sunday of Lent).

Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich supported the reform, and the councils of 1655 and 1656 approved it.

However, it aroused protest from a significant part of the boyars and merchants, the lower clergy and peasantry. The protest was based on social contradictions that took a religious form. As a result, a split in the church began.

Those who did not agree with the reforms were called schismatics or Old Believers. The schismatics were led by Archpriest Avvakum and Ivan Neronov. The means of power were used against schismatics: prisons and exile, executions and persecution. Avvakum and his companions were stripped of their hair and sent to the Pustozersky prison, where they were burned alive in 1682; others were caught, tortured, beaten, beheaded and burned. The confrontation was especially brutal in the Solovetsky Monastery, which held a siege from the tsarist troops for about eight years.

Patriarch Nikon tried to establish the priority of spiritual power over secular power, to place the patriarchate above autocracy. He hoped that the tsar would not be able to do without him, and in 1658 he pointedly renounced the patriarchate. The blackmail was not successful. The local council of 1666 condemned Nikon and deprived him of his rank. The Council, recognizing the independence of the patriarch in resolving spiritual issues, confirmed the need for subordination to the church royal power. Nikon was exiled to the Belozersko-Ferapontov Monastery.

Results of church reform:

1) Nikon’s reform led to a split in the church into the mainstream and the Old Believers; to transform the church into part of the state apparatus.

2) church reform and schism were a major social and spiritual revolution, which reflected tendencies towards centralization and gave impetus to the development of social thought.

The significance of his reform for the Russian Church is enormous to this day, since the most thorough and ambitious work was carried out to correct Russian Orthodox liturgical books. It also gave a powerful impetus to the development of education in Rus', the lack of education of which immediately became noticeable during the implementation of church reform. Thanks to this same reform, some international ties were strengthened, which helped further the emergence of progressive attributes in Russia European civilization(especially during the time of Peter I).

Even such a negative consequence of Nikon’s reform as a schism had, from the point of view of archaeology, history, culture and some other sciences, its “pluses”: the schismatics left behind a huge number of ancient monuments, and also became the main component of the new one that arose in the second half XVII century, class - merchants. During the time of Peter I, schismatics were also cheap labor in all the emperor’s projects. But we must not forget that the church schism also became a schism in Russian society and divided it. Old Believers have always been persecuted. The split was a national tragedy for the Russian people.

Church schism - Nikon's reforms in action

Nothing amazes as much as a miracle, except the naivety with which it is taken for granted.

Mark Twain

The church schism in Russia is associated with the name of Patriarch Nikon, who in the 50s and 60s of the 17th century organized a grandiose reform of the Russian church. The changes affected literally all church structures. The need for such changes was due to the religious backwardness of Russia, as well as significant errors in religious texts. The implementation of the reform led to a split not only in the church, but also in society. People openly opposed new trends in religion, actively expressing their position through uprisings and popular unrest. In today's article we will talk about the reform of Patriarch Nikon, as one of major events 17th century, which had a huge influence not only for the church, but for all of Russia.

Prerequisites for reform

According to the assurances of many historians who study the 17th century, a unique situation arose in Russia at that time, when religious rites in the country were very different from those around the world, including from Greek rites, from where Christianity came to Rus'. In addition, it is often said that religious texts, as well as icons, have been distorted. Therefore, the following phenomena can be identified as the main reasons for the church schism in Russia:

• Books that were copied by hand over centuries had typos and distortions.
• Difference from world religious rites. In particular, in Russia, until the 17th century, everyone was baptized with two fingers, and in other countries - with three.
• Conducting church ceremonies. The rituals were conducted according to the principle of “polyphony,” which was expressed in the fact that at the same time the service was conducted by the priest, the clerk, the singers, and the parishioners. As a result, a polyphony was formed, in which it was difficult to make out anything.

The Russian Tsar was one of the first to point out these problems, proposing to take measures to restore order in religion.

Patriarch Nikon

Tsar Alexei Romanov, who wanted to reform the Russian church, decided to appoint Nikon to the post of Patriarch of the country. It was this man who was entrusted with carrying out reform in Russia. The choice was, to put it mildly, quite strange, since the new patriarch had no experience in holding such events, and also did not enjoy respect among other priests.

Patriarch Nikon was known in the world under the name Nikita Minov. He was born and raised in a simple peasant family. From the very early years he paid great attention our religious education, we study prayers, stories and rituals. At the age of 19, Nikita became a priest in his native village. At the age of thirty, the future patriarch moved to the Novospassky Monastery in Moscow. It was here that he met the young Russian Tsar Alexei Romanov. The views of the two people were quite similar, which determined the future fate of Nikita Minov.

Patriarch Nikon, as many historians note, was distinguished not so much by his knowledge as by his cruelty and authority. He was literally delirious with the idea of ​​obtaining unlimited power, which was, for example, Patriarch Filaret. Trying to prove his importance for the state and for the Russian Tsar, Nikon shows himself in every possible way, including not only in the religious field. For example, in 1650, he actively participated in the suppression of the uprising, being the main initiator of the brutal reprisal against all the rebels.

Lust for power, cruelty, literacy - all this was combined into patriarchy. These were precisely the qualities that were needed to carry out the reform of the Russian church.

Implementation of the reform

The reform of Patriarch Nikon began to be implemented in 1653 - 1655. This reform carried with it fundamental changes in religion, which were expressed in the following:

• Baptism with three fingers instead of two.
• Bows should have been made to the waist, and not to the ground, as was the case before.
• Changes have been made to religious books and icons.
• The concept of "Orthodoxy" was introduced.
• The name of God has been changed in accordance with the global spelling. Now instead of "Isus" it was written "Jesus".
• Replacement christian cross. Patriarch Nikon proposed replacing it with a four-pointed cross.
• Changing rituals church service. Now the procession of the Cross was performed not clockwise, as before, but counterclockwise.

All this is described in detail in the Church Catechism. Surprisingly, if we consider Russian history textbooks, especially school textbooks, the reform of Patriarch Nikon comes down to only the first and second points of the above. Rare textbooks say in the third paragraph. The rest is not even mentioned. As a result, one gets the impression that the Russian patriarch did not undertake any cardinal reform activities, but this was not the case... The reforms were cardinal. They crossed out everything that came before. It is no coincidence that these reforms are also called the church schism of the Russian church. The very word “schism” indicates dramatic changes.

Let's look at individual provisions of the reform in more detail. This will allow us to correctly understand the essence of the phenomena of those days.

The Scriptures predetermined the church schism in Russia

Patriarch Nikon, arguing for his reform, said that church texts in Russia have many typos that should be eliminated. It was said that one should turn to Greek sources in order to understand the original meaning of religion. In fact, it wasn't implemented quite like that...

In the 10th century, when Russia adopted Christianity, there were 2 charters in Greece:

• Studio. The main charter of the Christian church. For many years it was considered the main one in the Greek church, which is why it was the Studite charter that came to Rus'. For 7 centuries, the Russian Church in all religious matters was guided by precisely this charter.
• Jerusalem. It is more modern, aimed at the unity of all religions and the commonality of their interests. The charter, starting from the 12th century, became the main one in Greece, and it also became the main one in other Christian countries.

The process of rewriting Russian texts is also indicative. The plan was to take Greek sources and harmonize religious scriptures on their basis. For this purpose, Arseny Sukhanov was sent to Greece in 1653. The expedition lasted almost two years. He arrived in Moscow on February 22, 1655. He brought with him as many as 7 manuscripts. In fact, this violated the church council of 1653-55. Most priests then spoke out in favor of the idea of ​​​​supporting Nikon's reform only on the grounds that the rewriting of texts should have occurred exclusively from Greek handwritten sources.

Arseny Sukhanov brought only seven sources, thereby making it impossible to rewrite texts based on primary sources. Patriarch Nikon's next step was so cynical that it led to mass uprisings. The Moscow Patriarch stated that if there are no handwritten sources, then the rewriting of Russian texts will be carried out using modern Greek and Roman books. At that time, all these books were published in Paris (a Catholic state).

Ancient religion

For a very long time, the reforms of Patriarch Nikon were justified by the fact that he made the Orthodox Church enlightened. As a rule, there is nothing behind such formulations, since the vast majority of people have difficulty understanding what the fundamental difference is between orthodox beliefs and enlightened ones. What's the difference really? First, let's understand the terminology and define the meaning of the concept “orthodox.”

Orthodox (orthodox) comes from the Greek language and means: orthos - correct, doha - opinion. It turns out that an orthodox person, in the true sense of the word, is a person with a correct opinion.

Historical reference book

Here, correct opinion does not mean modern meaning(when this is what they call people who do everything to please the state). This was the name given to people who carried ancient science and ancient knowledge for centuries. A striking example is the Jewish school. Everyone knows very well that today there are Jews, and there are Orthodox Jews. They believe in the same thing, they have common religion, general views, beliefs. The difference is that Orthodox Jews conveyed their true faith in its ancient, true meaning. And everyone admits this.

From this point of view, it is much easier to evaluate the actions of Patriarch Nikon. His attempts to destroy the Orthodox Church, which is exactly what he planned to do and successfully did, lie in the destruction of the ancient religion. And by and large it was done:

• All ancient religious texts were rewritten. Old books were not treated on ceremony; as a rule, they were destroyed. This process outlived the patriarch himself for many years. For example, Siberian legends are indicative, which say that under Peter 1 a huge amount of Orthodox literature was burned. After the burning, more than 650 kg of copper fasteners were recovered from the fires!
• The icons were rewritten in accordance with the new religious requirements and in accordance with the reform.
• The principles of religion are changed, sometimes even without the necessary justification. For example, Nikon’s idea that the procession should go counterclockwise, against the movement of the sun, is absolutely incomprehensible. This caused great discontent as people began to consider the new religion to be a religion of darkness.
• Replacement of concepts. The term “Orthodoxy” appeared for the first time. Until the 17th century, this term was not used, but concepts such as “true believer”, “true faith”, “immaculate faith”, “Christian faith”, “God’s faith” were used. Various terms, but not “Orthodoxy”.

Therefore, we can say that orthodox religion is as close as possible to the ancient postulates. That is why any attempts to radically change these views leads to mass indignation, as well as to what today is commonly called heresy. It was heresy that many people called the reforms of Patriarch Nikon in the 17th century. That is why the split in the church occurred, since the “orthodox” priests and religious people called what was happening heresy, and saw how fundamental difference between old and new religion.

People's reaction to church schism

The reaction to Nikon's reform is extremely revealing, emphasizing that the changes were much deeper than is commonly said. It is known for certain that after the implementation of the reform began, massive popular uprisings took place throughout the country, directed against changes in the church structure. Some people openly expressed their dissatisfaction, others simply left this country, not wanting to remain in this heresy. People went to the forests, to distant settlements, to other countries. They were caught, brought back, they left again - and this happened many times. The reaction of the state, which actually organized the Inquisition, is indicative. Not only books burned, but also people. Nikon, who was particularly cruel, personally welcomed all reprisals against the rebels. Thousands of people died opposing the reform ideas of the Moscow Patriarchate.

The reaction of the people and the state to the reform is indicative. We can say that mass unrest has begun. Now answer a simple question: are such uprisings and reprisals possible in the event of simple superficial changes? To answer this question, it is necessary to transfer the events of those days to today's reality. Let's imagine that today the Patriarch of Moscow will say that now you need to cross yourself, for example, with four fingers, bows should be made with a nod of the head, and books should be changed in accordance with the ancient scriptures. How will people perceive this? Most likely, neutral, and with certain propaganda even positive.

Another situation. Suppose that the Moscow Patriarch today obliges everyone to make the sign of the cross with four fingers, to use nods instead of bows, to wear a Catholic cross instead of an Orthodox one, to hand over all the icon books so that they can be rewritten and redrawn, the name of God will now be, for example, “Jesus,” and the religious procession will continue for example an arc. This type of reform will certainly lead to an uprising of religious people. Everything changes, the entire centuries-old religious history is crossed out. This is exactly what the Nikon reform did. This is why a church schism occurred in the 17th century, since the contradictions between the Old Believers and Nikon were insoluble.

What did the reform lead to?

Nikon's reform should be assessed from the point of view of the realities of that day. Of course, the patriarch destroyed ancient religion Rus', but he did what the tsar wanted - bringing the Russian church into line with international religion. And there were both pros and cons:

• Pros. Russian religion ceased to be isolated, and began to be more like Greek and Roman. This made it possible to create greater religious ties with other states.
• Minuses. Religion in Russia at the time of the 17th century was most oriented towards primitive Christianity. It was here that there were ancient icons, ancient books and ancient rituals. All this was destroyed for the sake of integration with other states, in modern terms.

Nikon’s reforms cannot be regarded as the total destruction of everything (although this is exactly what most authors are doing, including the principle “everything is lost”). We can only say with certainty that the Moscow Patriarch made significant changes to the ancient religion and deprived Christians of a significant part of their cultural and religious heritage.

Discussing the reasons that led to “a change in the Russian view of the relative merits of Greek and Russian piety,” he noted:

Byzantine influence in Orthodox world <…>was based precisely on the fact that it was for everyone Orthodox peoples the east as a cultural center, from where science, education, the highest and most perfect forms of church and social life, etc. came to them. Moscow did not represent anything similar to old Byzantium in this regard. She did not know what science and scientific education were; she did not even have a school or people who had received a proper scientific education; her entire educational capital consisted of scientific point view, not a particularly rich and varied inheritance, which at different times the Russians received mediocre or directly from the Greeks, adding almost nothing to it on their part. It is natural, therefore, that the primacy and supremacy of Moscow in the Orthodox world could only be purely external and very conditional.

The similarity of Little Russian liturgical practice with Greek was due to the reform of the liturgical charter carried out shortly before by Metropolitan Peter Mogila.

Speaking about the peculiarities of the religiosity of Patriarch Nikon and his contemporaries, Nikolai Kostomarov noted: “Having been a parish priest for ten years, Nikon, involuntarily, internalized all the rudeness of the environment around him and carried it with him even to the patriarchal throne. In this respect, he was a completely Russian man of his time, and if he was truly pious, then in the old Russian sense. The piety of the Russian person consisted in the most accurate execution of external techniques, to which symbolic power was attributed, bestowing God's grace; and Nikon’s piety did not go far beyond ritual. The letter of worship leads to salvation; therefore, it is necessary that this letter be expressed as correctly as possible.”

Characteristic is the answer received by Nikon in 1655 to his 27 questions, which he addressed immediately after the Council of 1654 to Patriarch Paisius. The latter “expresses the view of the Greek Church on ritual as an insignificant part of religion, which can and has had different shapes <…>As for the answer to the question about triplicity, Paisius avoided a definite answer, limiting himself only to explaining the meaning that the Greeks put into triplicate. Nikon understood Paisius’ answer in the sense he desired, since he could not rise to the Greek understanding of the ritual. Paisius did not know the situation in which the reform was carried out and the urgency with which the question of rituals was raised. The Greek theologian and the Russian scribe could not understand each other.”

Background: Greek and Russian liturgical customs

The evolution of the rite of Christian worship in ancient times, especially those elements of it that are determined not by book tradition, but by oral church tradition (and these include such essential customs as, for example, the sign of the cross), is known only fragmentarily, based on the information which are found in the writings of the Holy Fathers. In particular, there is an assumption [ specify] that in the 10th century, at the time of the Baptism of Rus', two customs competed in the Byzantine Empire regarding sign of the cross, the number of prosphoras at the proskomedia, a special or three-sided hallelujah, the direction of the procession, etc. The Russians borrowed one, and from the Greeks subsequently (especially after the fall of Constantinople) the other was finally established.

Main features of the Nikon reform

The first step of Patriarch Nikon on the path of liturgical reform, taken immediately after assuming the Patriarchate, was to compare the text of the Creed in the edition of printed Moscow liturgical books with the text of the Symbol inscribed on the sakkos of Metropolitan Photius. Having discovered discrepancies between them (as well as between the Service Book and other books), Patriarch Nikon decided to begin correcting the books and rites. About six months after his accession to the patriarchal throne, on February 11, 1653, the Patriarch indicated that in the publication of the Followed Psalter the chapters on the number of bows at the prayer of St. Ephraim the Syrian and on the two-fingered sign of the cross should be omitted. Some of the inspectors expressed their disagreement, as a result, three were dismissed, among them Elder Savvaty and Hieromonk Joseph (in the world Ivan Nasedka). 10 days later, at the beginning of Lent in 1653, the Patriarch sent out a “Memory” to Moscow churches about replacing part of the prostrations at the prayer of Ephraim the Syrian with waist ones and about using the three-fingered sign of the cross instead of the two-fingered one. This is how the reform began, as well as the protest against it - a church schism organized by the Patriarch’s former comrades, archpriests Avvakum Petrov and Ivan Neronov.

During the reform, the liturgical tradition was changed in the following points:

1. Large-scale “bookishness on the right”, expressed in the editing of the texts of the Holy Scriptures and liturgical books, which led to changes even in the wording of the Creed - the conjunction was removed - the contrast “a” in the words about faith in the Son of God “begotten, not made”, about the Kingdom They began to speak of God in the future (“there will be no end”), and not in the present tense (“there will be no end”), and the word “True” was excluded from the definition of the properties of the Holy Spirit. Many other innovations were also introduced into historical liturgical texts, for example, another letter was added to the name “Isus” (under the title “Ic”) and it began to be written “Iesus” (under the title “Iis”).
2. Replacing the two-finger sign of the cross with the three-finger sign and the abolition of “throwing”, or small prostrations to the ground - in 1653, Nikon sent out a “memory” to all Moscow churches, which said: “it is not appropriate to do throwing in the church on your knee, but you should bow to your waist.” ; I would also naturally cross myself with three fingers.”
3. Nikon ordered religious processions to be carried out in the opposite direction (against the sun, not in the direction of salt).
4. The exclamation “Hallelujah” during the service began to be pronounced not twice (special hallelujah), but three times (three-guba).
5. The number of prosphora on the proskomedia and the style of the seal on the prosphora have been changed.

Reaction to the reform

The Patriarch was pointed out that such actions were arbitrary, and then in 1654 he organized a council, at which, as a result of pressure on the participants, he sought permission to conduct a “book inquiry on ancient Greek and Slavic manuscripts.” However, the comparison was not with old models, but with modern Greek practice. On the Week of Orthodoxy in 1656, an anathema was solemnly proclaimed in the Moscow Assumption Cathedral against those who cross themselves with two fingers.

The harshness and procedural incorrectness (for example, Nikon once publicly beat, tore off his robe, and then, without a conciliar decision, single-handedly deprived him of the chair and exiled the opponent of the liturgical reform, Bishop Pavel Kolomensky) of the implementation of the reforms caused discontent among a significant part of the clergy and laity, who also had a personal hostility towards the distinguished intolerance and ambition to the patriarch. After the exile and death of Pavel Kolomensky, the movement for the “old faith” (Old Believers) was led by several clergy: archpriests Avvakum, Loggin of Murom and Daniil of Kostroma, priest Lazar Romanovsky, deacon Fedor, monk Epiphanius, priest Nikita Dobrynin, nicknamed Pustosvyat, etc.

The Great Moscow Council of 1667, having condemned and deposed Nikon for leaving the department without permission, anathematized all opponents of the reforms. In the future, in force state support Church reform, the name of the Russian Church was assigned exclusively to those who made the decisions of the Councils and, and adherents of liturgical traditions (Old Believers) began to be called schismatics and persecuted.

Views of Old Believers on reform

According to the Old Believers, Nikon’s views on a particular tradition, in this case Greek, as a standard one, were similar to the so-called “trilingual heresy” - the doctrine of the possibility of the existence of Holy Scripture exclusively in the languages ​​in which the inscription on the cross of Christ was made - Hebrew, Greek and Latin. In both cases, it was a question of abandoning the liturgical tradition that naturally developed in Rus' (borrowed, by the way, on the basis of ancient Greek models). Such a refusal was completely alien to the Russian church consciousness, since the historical Russian church was formed on the Cyril and Methodius tradition, the essence of which was the assimilation of Christianity, taking into account the national translation of the Holy Scriptures and the liturgical corps, using the local foundations of the Christian tradition.

In addition, the Old Believers, based on the doctrine of the inextricable connection between the external form and the internal content of sacred rites and sacraments, since the time of “Answers of Alexander the Deacon” and “Pomeranian Answers” ​​insist on a more precise symbolic expression Orthodox dogmas precisely in the old rituals. Thus, according to the Old Believers, the two-fingered sign of the cross reveals deeper than the three-fingered sign of the cross the mystery of the incarnation and death on the cross Christ, for it was not the Trinity that was crucified on the cross, but one of Her Persons (God the Son incarnate, Jesus Christ). Similarly, a special hallelujah with the addition of the Slavic translation of the word “hallelujah” (glory to Thee, God) already contains threefold (according to the number of Persons of the Holy Trinity) glorification of God (in the pre-Nikon texts there is also a three-fold alleluia, but without the application “glory to Thee, God”) , while the three-pronged hallelujah with the appendix “glory to Thee, O God” contains the “fourfold” of the Holy Trinity.

Research by church historians of the 19th-20th centuries (N.F. Kapterev, E.E. Golubinsky, A.A. Dmitrievsky, etc.) confirmed the opinion of the Old Believers about the inauthenticity of Nikonova’s “right” sources: borrowings, as it turned out, were made from modern Greek and Uniate sources.

Among the Old Believers, the patriarch received the nickname “Nikon the Antichrist” for his actions and the brutal persecution that followed the reform.

The term "Nikonianism"

During the liturgical reform, special terms appeared among the Old Believers: Nikonianism, Nikonian schism, Nikonian heresy, New Believers - terms with a negative evaluative connotation, polemically used by adherents of the Old Believers in relation to supporters of the liturgical reform in the Russian Orthodox Church of the 17th century. The name comes from the name of Patriarch Nikon.

Evolution of the attitude of the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC)

The condemnation of supporters of the old rites as non-Orthodox, carried out by the councils of 1656 and 1666, was finally sanctioned by the Great Moscow Council in 1667, which approved the reforms of Patriarch Nikon, and anathematized all those who did not accept the council decisions as heretics and disobedient to the Church.

Reference material. Plan.

I. “New” and “old” in the life of the Moscow state in the 17th century. Reasons for Nikon's church reforms and protests against them.

II. Church reforms of Nikon.

Patriarch Nikon.

Nikon's ideas about the Universal Church.

Preparation of reforms.

Church reforms: content, methods of implementation, reaction of the population.

III. Split.

Old Believers, their views and actions.

Archpriest Avvakum.

Actions of the church and secular authorities towards the Old Believers.

IV. Decisions of the Church Council of 1666-1667.

Anathema (curse) of the Old Believers by the cathedral.

Nikon crash.

Basic concepts and terms.

Moscow piety, innovations, the idea of ​​the Universal Church, spiritual (church) and secular (royal) power, disagreement in rituals, unification of Russian and Greek rites, church reforms, Nikonianism, Nikonians, Old Believers, Old Believers (Old Believers), schism of the Orthodox Russian Church, Antichrist, expectation of the end of the world, heretics, schismatics, anathema, Church Council.

Historical names.

Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, Patriarch Nikon, Old Believers: Archpriest Avvakum, Daniel, noblewoman F.P. Morozova.

Key dates.

1654 - the beginning of Nikon's church reforms. The beginning of the schism of the Russian Orthodox Church.

1666-1667 - Church council that condemned the Old Believers and overthrew Nikon.

New and old With the accession of Boris Godunov, innovations began in Russia, very necessary, but unusual for Russians, who were afraid of everything foreign “more than the devil incense.”

Under Mikhail and Alexei Romanov, foreign innovations began to penetrate into all external spheres of life: blades were cast from Swedish metal, the Dutch set up iron factories, brave German soldiers marched near the Kremlin, a Scottish officer taught Russian recruits about the European system, fryags staged performances. Some Russians (even the Tsar's children), looking in Venetian mirrors, tried on foreign costumes, someone created an atmosphere like in the German Settlement...

But was the soul affected by these innovations? No, for the most part, Russian people remained the same zealots of Moscow antiquity, “faith and piety,” as their great-grandfathers were. Moreover, these were very self-confident zealots, who said that “Old Rome fell from heresies, the Second Rome was captured by godless Turks, Rus' was the Third Rome, which alone remained the custodian of the true faith of Christ!”

To Moscow in the 17th century. The authorities increasingly called for “spiritual teachers” - the Greeks, but part of society looked down on them: weren’t it the Greeks who cowardly concluded a union with the Pope in Florence in 1439? No, there is no other pure Orthodoxy other than Russian, and there never will be.

Due to these ideas, the Russians did not feel an “inferiority complex” in front of a more learned, skillful and comfortable foreigner, but they were afraid that these German water-cocking machines, Polish books, together with the “flattering Greeks and Kievites” would not touch the very foundations of life and faith .

In 1648, before the Tsar’s wedding, they were worried: Alexei had been “learned German” and now he would force him to shave his beard in German, force him to pray in a German church - the end of piety and antiquity, the end of the world was coming.

The king got married. The salt riot has died down. Not everyone kept their heads, but everyone had beards. However, the tension did not subside. A war broke out with Poland over the Orthodox Little Russian and Belarusian brothers. The victories inspired, the hardships of the war irritated and ruined, the common people grumbled and fled. Tension, suspicion, and expectation of something inevitable grew.

IdeaUniversal ChurchAND It was at such a time that Alexei Mikhailovich’s “son friend” Nikon, who became patriarch in 1652, conceived church reforms.

Nikon was completely absorbed in the idea of ​​the superiority of spiritual power over secular power, which was embodied in the idea of ​​the Universal Church.

1- The Patriarch was convinced that the world is divided into two spheres: universal (general), eternal, and private, temporary.

The universal, the eternal, is more important than everything private and temporary.

The Moscow state, like any state, is private.

The unification of all Orthodox churches - the Universal Church - is what is closest to God, what personifies the eternal on earth.

Everything that does not agree with the eternal, universal must be abolished.

Who is higher - the patriarch or the secular ruler? For Nikon this question did not exist. The Patriarch of Moscow is one of the patriarchs of the Ecumenical Church, therefore, his power is higher than the royal one.

When Nikon was reproached for papism, he replied: “Why not honor the pope for good?” Alexei Mikhailovich was apparently partly captivated by the reasoning of his powerful “friend.” The Tsar granted the Patriarch the title of “Great Sovereign.” This was a royal title, and among the patriarchs only Alexei’s own grandfather, Filaret Romanov, bore it.

Before the reforms The Patriarch was a zealot of true Orthodoxy. Considering Greek and Old Slavonic books to be the primary sources of Orthodox truths (for from there Russia took the faith), Nikon decided to compare the rituals and liturgical customs of the Moscow church with the Greek ones.

And what? Novelty in the rituals and customs of the Moscow Church, which considered itself the only truly Christ's Church, was everywhere. The Muscovites wrote “Isus”, not “Jesus”, served the liturgy on seven, and not on five, like the Greeks, prosphoras, were baptized with 2 fingers, personifying God the Father and God the Son, and all other Eastern Christians made the sign of the cross with 3 fingers (“pinch”), personifying God the father, son and Holy Spirit. On Mount Athos, one Russian pilgrim monk, by the way, was almost killed as a heretic for two-fingered baptism. And the patriarch found many more discrepancies. In various areas, local service characteristics have developed. The Holy Council of 1551 recognized some of the local differences as all-Russian. With the beginning of printing in the second half of the 16th century. they have become widespread.

Nikon came from peasants, and with peasant straightforwardness he declared war on the differences between the Moscow Church and the Greek.

Nikon's reforms 1. In 1653, Nikon sent out a decree ordering one to be baptized “with a pinch,” and also informing how many prostrations it is correct to make before reading the famous prayer of St. Ephraim.

Then the patriarch attacked the icon painters who began to use Western European painting techniques.

It was ordered to print “Jesus” in the new books, and Greek liturgical rites and chants according to the “Kievan canons” were introduced.

Following the example of the Eastern clergy, the priests began to read about the stories of their own composition, and the tone here was set by the patriarch himself.

Russian handwritten and printed books on divine services were ordered to be sent to Moscow for viewing. If discrepancies with the Greek ones were found, the books were destroyed and new ones were sent out in return.

The Holy Council of 1654, with the participation of the Tsar and the Boyar Duma, approved all of Nikon’s undertakings. The patriarch “blowed away” everyone who tried to argue. Thus, Bishop Pavel of Kolomna, who objected at the Council of 1654, without co-

the military court was defrocked, severely beaten, and exiled. He went crazy from humiliation and soon died.

Nikon was furious. In 1654, in the absence of the tsar, the patriarch's people forcibly broke into the houses of Moscow residents - townspeople, merchants, nobles and even boyars. They took icons of “heretical writing” from the “red corners,” gouged out the eyes of the images and carried their mutilated faces through the streets, reading a decree that threatened with excommunication for everyone who painted and kept such icons. “Faulty” icons were burned.

Split Nikon fought innovations, thinking that they could

cause discord among the people. However, it was his reforms that caused a split, since part of the Moscow people perceived them as innovations that encroached on faith. The church split into “Nikonians” (the church hierarchy and the majority of believers accustomed to obey) and “Old Believers.”

Old Believers The Old Believers hid books. Secular and spiritual authorities persecuted them. From persecution, zealots of the old faith fled to the forests, united into communities, and founded monasteries in the wilderness. The Solovetsky Monastery, which did not recognize Nikonianism, was under siege for seven years (1668-1676), until the governor Meshcherikov took it and hanged all the rebels.

The leaders of the Old Believers, Archpriests Avvakum and Daniel, wrote petitions to the Tsar, but, seeing that Alexei did not defend the “old times,” they announced the imminent arrival of the end of the world, because the Antichrist had appeared in Russia. The king and the patriarch are “his two horns.” Only the martyrs of the old faith will be saved. The preaching of “purification by fire” was born. The schismatics locked themselves in churches with their entire families and burned themselves so as not to serve the Antichrist. The Old Believers captured all segments of the population - from peasants to boyars.

Boyarina Morozova (Sokovina) Fedosia Prokopyevna (1632-1675) gathered schismatics around her, corresponded with Archpriest Avvakum, and sent him money. In 1671 she was arrested, but neither torture nor persuasion forced her to renounce her beliefs. In the same year, the noblewoman, shackled in iron, was taken to captivity in Borovsk (this moment is captured in the painting “Boyaryna Morozova” by V. Surikov).

The Old Believers considered themselves Orthodox and did not disagree with the Orthodox Church in any dogma of faith. Therefore, the patriarch did not call them heretics, but only schismatics.

Church Council 1666-1667 He cursed the schismatics for their disobedience. The zealots of the old faith ceased to recognize the church that excommunicated them. The split has not been overcome to this day.

Nikon crash Did Nikon regret what he did? May be. At the end of his patriarchate, in a conversation with Ivan Neronov, the former leader of the schismatics, Nikon said: “both old and new books are Good; no matter what you want, that’s how you serve...”

But the church could no longer give in to the rebellious rebels, and the latter could no longer forgive the church, which had encroached on the “holy faith and antiquity.” What was the fate of Nikon himself?

The patience of the Quiet King was not unlimited, and no one could subordinate him to their influence to the end. Nikon's claims led to a quarrel with Alexei Mikhailovich. As a sign of protest, Nikon himself left the patriarchal throne in 1658 and retired to the Resurrection Monastery he founded near Moscow ( New Jerusalem).

Did the patriarch expect that they would beg him to return? But Nikon is not Ivan the Terrible or the Emperor of Moscow. Cathedral 1666-1667 with the participation of two eastern patriarchs, he anathematized (cursed) the Old Believers and at the same time deprived Nikon of his rank for his unauthorized departure from the patriarchate.

Nikon was exiled to the north, to the Ferapontov Monastery.

Additional material.Patriarch Nikon.

And now let’s talk about whom Klyuchevsky said: “Of the Russian people of the 17th century. I don’t know a person larger and more unique than Nikon,” and Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich called him “the chosen and strong-standing shepherd, the mentor of souls and bodies, the beloved favorite and comrade, the sun shining throughout the entire universe...”

The Tsar's friendship with Nikon began even before the latter occupied the patriarchal chair, when Nikon was abbot of the Novo-Spassky Monastery, where the family tomb of the Romanov boyars was located. Nikon was the first to encourage the young king to rule independently. Alexey was amazed by Nikon’s fanatical dedication to his work. The tsar also admired the behavior of Nikon, the Archbishop of Novgorod, when during the Novgorod riot of 1650 he went out to the rebels, allowed himself to be beaten by them, if only they would listen to his admonitions.

Who is Patriarch Nikon? He was called a reformer, a zealot of the faith; a short-sighted politician who initiated untimely church reforms; a cruel person, a sympathetic person; “co-friend” of the king; a church hierarch who plotted to subordinate secular power to spiritual power; denouncer of the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich...

Nikon was born in 1605 into a peasant family Nizhny Novgorod. He himself mastered reading and writing, abandoned the work of his fathers and became a village priest, and early accepted the monastic rank. He zealously performed the service, carried out fasts, and buried himself in books. His ability to convince people and subjugate them to his influence was revealed. Monk Nikon did not seek security; he lived for quite a long time as a stern hermit in ascetic northern monasteries. His spiritual exploits became known, and Nikon made a quick career, becoming the archimandrite of a prestigious Moscow monastery, the Archbishop of Novgorod and, finally, at the age of 47, the Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia.

We will not touch again on his views and reforms; we will dwell only on some facts of the patriarch’s life and the characteristics of his character. For the merciless extermination of Nikon's opponents, everyone considered him evil and cruel. This is undoubtedly true, but contemporaries say that the patriarch was burdened by enmity, and he easily forgave his enemies if he noticed that they were ready for reconciliation.

Nikon became the kindest “nurse” for his sick friends. He often picked up dying people on the street and nursed them to health. He provided charitable assistance to many and was faithful in his friendship in his own way. When the tsar was on a campaign in 1654, Moscow was gripped by a terrible disease. Many boyars and clergy fled from the capital. Nikon “recovered from infection” royal family He fought the epidemic as best he could and consoled the sick with rare courage.

The great sovereign Patriarch Nikon sincerely measured that his power was higher than the royal one. Relations with the soft and compliant, but to a certain extent, Alexei Mikhailovich became tense, until, finally, grievances and mutual claims ended in a quarrel. Nikon retired to New Jerusalem (1658), hoping that Apexey would beg him to return. Time passed... The king was silent. The Patriarch sent him an irritated letter, in which he reported how bad everything was in the Muscovite kingdom.

“Worldly judges judge and rape, and for this reason you have gathered against yourself on the day of judgment a great council, crying out about your iniquities. You preach to everyone to fast, but now it is unknown who is not fasting for the sake of the scarcity of grain; in many places they fast to the point of death because there is nothing to eat.

There is no one who has been shown mercy: the poor, the blind, the widows, the monks and the monks, they are subject to heavy tributes; everywhere there is lamentation and contrition; there is no one rejoicing in these days” (letter 1661).

And further, until the Holy Council of 1666-1667, Nikon, who had voluntarily renounced patriarchal affairs, passionately denounced Alexei, painting a picture of Russia with the darkest colors. In the latter he could compete with Prince Khvorostin-

At the council of 1666-1667. Nikon behaved like a prosecutor denouncing the Tsar, and Alexei only made excuses for not encroaching on the Russian Church. But the council deprived Nikon of the rank of patriarch and exiled him north to the Ferapontov Monastery to cells “smelly and smoky,” as Nikon himself called them.

In the Ferapontov Monastery, Nikon began to instruct the monks in the true faith, however, he no longer did shocking things, as in 1655, when he declared

Holy Cathedral, that although he is the son of a Russian and Russian, his faith is Greek, and then, in front of all the honest people in the Assumption Cathedral, he took off the Russian hood from his head and put on a Greek one.

In the Ferapontov Monastery, Nikon also treated the sick and sent the king a list of those cured. But in general, he was bored in the northern monastery, as all strong and enterprising people who are deprived of an active field are bored. The resourcefulness and wit that distinguished Nikon in a good mood were often replaced by a feeling of offended irritation. Then Nikon could no longer distinguish real grievances from those invented by him. Klyuchevsky related the following incident. The tsar sent warm letters and gifts to the former patriarch. One day, from the royal bounty, a whole convoy of expensive fish arrived at the monastery - sturgeon, salmon, sturgeon, etc. “Nikon responded with a reproach to Alexei: why didn’t he send apples, grapes in molasses and vegetables?”

Nikon's health was undermined. “Now I am sick, naked and barefoot,” the former patriarch wrote to the king. - For every need... I scolded, my hands are sore, the left one does not rise, there is an eyesore from smoke and smoke, stinking blood comes from the teeth... My legs are swollen...” Alexey Mikhailovich several times ordered to ease Nikon’s maintenance. The king died before Nikon and before his death he unsuccessfully asked Nikon for forgiveness.

After the death of Alexei (1676), the persecution of Nikon intensified, he was transferred to the Cyril Monastery. But then the son of Alexei Mikhailovich, Tsar Fedor, decided to soften the fate of the disgraced man and ordered him to be taken to New Jerusalem (Resurrection Monastery). Nikon could not stand this last trip and died on the way on August 17, 1681.

Archpriest Avvakum.

Little Tsar Peter remembered for the rest of his life how the Moscow archers stormed the royal palace and threw people close to him onto spears. Many of the archers crossed themselves with two fingers. Since then, “old times” - “schism” - “rebellion” have become the same concepts for Peter.

The split was indeed a revolt of “ancient Muscovy” against various foreign innovations. The most famous schism teacher of the 17th century. Archpriest Avvakum stated this directly: “Oh, poor Rus'! Why did you want Latin customs and German actions?

Avvakum himself was a kind of mirror of the end of the 17th century. His personality is so strong and unique that it is impossible not to mention the archpriest when talking about the rebellious century.

Avvakum, like Nikon, was born in the Nizhny Novgorod land, in 1620 or 1621. His father, a resident of the village of Grigorov, did not contribute anything to the upbringing of his son, for he was constantly “drinking intoxicating drinks.” But Avvakum’s mother, Marya, was an extraordinary woman: smart, literate, loved books and was distinguished by piety, which her children inherited.

Avvakum amazed his fellow villagers with his “bookishness” and asceticism. He wanted to devote himself to serving God. In 1641, he married a religious fellow villager, Nastasya Markovna, who was no less religious and was ordained a deacon, and in 1643 he became a priest in the village of Lopatitsy.

Avvakum devoted himself entirely to the task. He preached zealously, taught the villagers “the righteous life,” denounced the non-Christian behavior and sins of those around him, regardless of their faces. Like any bright person, Avvakum formed a circle of students and followers. However, for many of the boyar children, the “priest poking his head into everything” was like a bone in the throat.

Avvakum quarreled with some “bosses.” They once almost “crushed him to death,” then they shot at the priest. Avvakum was forced to flee to Moscow, where he found a good reception from his fellow countryman Ivan Neronov and the royal confessor Stefan Vonifatiev. These clergy, close to Alexei Mikhailovich, helped Avvakum return to Lopatitsy as a winner. True, he was soon expelled again and from 1648 to 1652. found himself in Moscow, “working” with his former patrons.

Patriarch Nikon was once close to the “Vonifatievsky circle”, but with the beginning of his reforms and “cruelties” he completely broke up with the tsar’s confessor. Habakkuk came from the people and understood Orthodox faith in a popular way, i.e. for him there was no difference between church rite and the essence of Christian teaching. Avvakum saw in Nikon’s events an attack on the holy of holies - on faith.

In 1652, Habakkuk left the capital for a short time. He was made archpriest of the city of Yuryevets. But he lasted there only 8 weeks. Local population, irritated by his sermons, forced Avvakum to flee to Moscow. This is where the transformation of the obsessive priest into a defender of the old faith, idolized by fans, began.

Avvakum and Kostroma archpriest Daniel write a petition to the king. Gently, they try to convince Alexei that Nikon’s reforms are “ungodly.” Avvakum speaks in churches, on the streets, in boyars' and merchants' chambers, whose owners oppose Nikonianism.

Already in 1653, Avvakum ended up in the dungeon of the Androniev Monastery, and then went into exile in Tobolsk. In the “Siberian capital” the archpriest did not calm down, and in 1655 he was ordered to be taken even further to the Lena River, and a year later he was sent on a campaign with Afanasy Pashkov to the land of the Daurs. Whether Pashkov’s Cossacks and Pashkov himself were indifferent to the old faith or for other reasons, Avvakum’s relationship with the pioneers did not work out. Like everyone else, Avvakum endured hardship and hunger, but in addition, the “mischievous governor” (according to the archpriest) often took his anger out on him and once even beat him until he lost consciousness.

Avvakum’s Moscow friends managed to obtain his forgiveness only in 1662. Avvakum went to Moscow, and on the way through towns and villages he again began preaching against the “heresy of Nikon.” The Old Believers boyars met the archpriest in 1664 in the capital “like an angel.” The Tsar graciously accepted him, settled him in the Kremlin in the courtyard of the Novodevichy Convent and, passing by the window of Avvakum’s cell, he always bowed low to the archpriest and asked him to bless and pray for him.

Avvakum discovered changes in Moscow that he may not have expected. He realized that the people of the Vonifatiev circle were fighting not against Nikon’s innovations, but against Nikon himself. Only the head of the Moscow Old Believers, Ivan Neronov, considers Nikonianism a heresy, but Neronov’s struggle is weakening, for he is afraid of a curse from the ecumenical Orthodox patriarchs. Somewhat later, Neronov would actually move away from the schism.

Avvakum wants to fight not against Nikon, but against Nikonianism. The busiest time in his life begins. The archpriest preaches everywhere, writes petitions, composes “conversations,” instructs the Old Believers, unites this socially diverse religious brotherhood into a community, everywhere demonstratively crosses himself “not with a demonic cookie,” but as from time immemorial - with two fingers, calls for martyrdom, disobedience and even self-immolation in name of faith. Avvakum's wife, noblewoman Morozova (Urusova), dozens of nameless holy fools, disobedient priests and monks, and the Solovetsky monastery strengthen the schism.

The king and his entourage recoil from Habakkuk. “They didn’t like how I started talking again,” noted the archpriest. “They love how silent I am, but it just didn’t work out for me!”

In August 1664, the “flamed” archpriest was taken into exile in Pustozersk, but he did not get there; he lived for a year in Mezin. He continued to “speak”, and all of Russia heard his words. Many commoners and noble people saw in him a living holy martyr, and Habakkuk’s authority grew.

In 1666, Avvakum and a number of other schismatic teachers appeared at the Holy Council in Moscow. They tried to reason with them. The Eastern patriarchs turned to Avvakum: “You are stubborn, archpriest: all of our Palestine, the Serbs, the Albanians, the Romans, and the Poles - all cross themselves with three fingers; You’re the only one who stands on your own... it’s not proper.” “Universal teachers! - Avvakum answered, “Rome fell long ago, and the Poles died with it, and remained enemies of Christians to the end; Yes, and your Orthodoxy is motley, you have become weak from the violence of the Turkish Makhmet, and in the future, come to us to study; We have an autocracy by God’s Grace, and before the apostate Nikon, Orthodoxy was pure and immaculate!” And, clearly mocking the ecumenical patriarchs, Avvakum collapsed at the door of the chamber, declaring that he would sleep.

Avvakum was stripped of his hair and anathematized. Together with his like-minded people, he wandered through the icy deserts to Pustozersk. There he continued to write, finishing, in particular, his autobiography - “The Life of Archpriest Avvakum”, a work written as the life of a saint and a polemical pamphlet at the same time, in a simple, rough language, but bright and intelligible to the last beggar. The archpriest equated the Tsar and Nikon with the servants of the Antichrist, called upon them not to obey the authorities, to flee to the forests, mountains, deserts, to burn themselves with their children and loved ones, for the end of the world was near, the Last Judgment was coming, and it must be met purified in the flames. Avvakum also wrote to the kings - Alexei, then Fyodor, calling on them to return to the true faith. This continued until 1681.

On April 14, 1681, Avvakum, priest Lazar, deacon Fyodor, and monk Epiphanius, as teachers of the schism and “blasphemers of the royal house,” were burned at the stake. However, about 60 works of Avvakum remained among the Old Believers and are still revered by them.

~~~~~~~~~~~

Yes, Patriarch Nikon was far from being the “lamb” of God, but the way this reform is presented by history suggests that the same church is hiding real reasons of this reform and the true customers and executors. There is another silencing of information about the past of Rus'. The great scam of Patriarch Nikon...

Nikon, in the world Nikita Minin (1605-1681), is the sixth Moscow Patriarch, born into an ordinary peasant family, by 1652 he had risen to the rank of patriarch and somewhere from that time he began “his” transformations. Moreover, upon assuming his patriarchal duties, he secured the tsar’s support not to interfere in the affairs of the Church. The king and the people pledged to fulfill this will, and it was fulfilled. Only the people weren’t actually asked; the people’s opinion was expressed by the tsar (Alexey Mikhailovich Romanov) and the court boyars. Almost everyone knows what the notorious church reform of the 1650s - 1660s resulted in, but the version of the reforms that is presented to the masses does not reflect its entire essence. The true goals of the reform are hidden from the unenlightened minds of the Russian people. A people who have been robbed of the true memory of their great past and trampled upon all their heritage have no choice but to believe in what is handed to them on a silver platter. It’s just time to remove the rotten apples from this platter and open people’s eyes to what really happened.

The official version of Nikon’s church reforms not only does not reflect its true goals, but also presents Patriarch Nikon as the instigator and executor, although Nikon was just a “pawn” in the skillful hands of the puppeteers who stood not only behind him, but also behind Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich himself .

And what’s also interesting is that despite the fact that some churchmen blaspheme Nikon as a reformer, the changes that he made continue to operate to this day in the same church! That's double standards!

The main reform innovations according to the official version of historians: The so-called “book right”, which consisted of rewriting liturgical books. Many textual changes were made to the liturgical books, for example, the word “Iesus” was replaced with “Jesus.” The two-finger sign of the cross has been replaced by the three-finger one. Canceled prostrations. Religious processions began to be carried out in the opposite direction (not salting, but counter-salting, i.e. against the sun). I tried to introduce a 4-pointed cross and succeeded for a short period of time.

Researchers cite many reform changes, but the above are especially highlighted by everyone who studies the topic of reforms and transformations during the reign of Patriarch Nikon.

As for the “book right”. During the baptism of Rus' at the end of the 10th century. The Greeks had two charters: Studite and Jerusalem. In Constantinople, the Charter of the Studios was first widespread, which was passed on to Rus'. But the Jerusalem Charter began to become increasingly widespread in Byzantium, which became early XIV V. ubiquitous there. In this regard, over the course of three centuries, the liturgical books there also changed imperceptibly. This was one of the reasons for the difference in the liturgical practices of Russians and Greeks. In the 14th century, the difference between Russian and Greek church rites was already very noticeable, although Russian liturgical books were quite consistent with the Greek books of the 10th-11th centuries. Those. There was no need to rewrite the books at all! In addition, Nikon decided to rewrite books from Greek and ancient Russian charateans. How did it really turn out?

But in fact, the cellarer of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, Arseny Sukhanov, is sent by Nikon to the East specifically for sources for the “right”, and instead of these sources he brings mainly manuscripts “not related to the correction of liturgical books” (books for home reading, for example , words and conversations of John Chrysostom, conversations of Macarius of Egypt, ascetic words of Basil the Great, works of John Climacus, patericon, etc.). Among these 498 manuscripts there were also about 50 manuscripts even of non-church writing, for example, the works of Hellenic philosophers - Troy, Afilistrate, Phocleaus “on sea animals”, Stavron the philosopher “on earthquakes, etc.). Doesn't this mean that Arseny Sukhanov was sent by Nikon to look for “sources” to divert attention? Sukhanov traveled from October 1653 to February 22, 1655, that is, almost a year and a half, and brought only seven manuscripts for editing church books - a serious expedition with frivolous results. “Systematic Description of Greek Manuscripts of the Moscow Synodal Library” fully confirms the information about only seven manuscripts brought by Arseny Sukhanov. Finally, Sukhanov, of course, could not, at his own peril and risk, obtain works of pagan philosophers, manuscripts about earthquakes and sea animals far away, instead of the necessary sources for correcting liturgical books. Consequently, he had the appropriate instructions from Nikon for this...

But in the end it turned out even more “interesting” - the books were copied from new Greek books, which were printed in Jesuit Parisian and Venetian printing houses. The question of why Nikon needed the books of “pagans” (although it would be more correct to say Slavic Vedic books, not pagan ones) and ancient Russian charatean books remains open. But it was with the church reform of Patriarch Nikon that the Great Book Burn in Rus' began, when entire carts of books were dumped into huge bonfires, doused with resin and set on fire. And those who resisted the “book law” and reform in general were sent there! The Inquisition, carried out in Rus' by Nikon, did not spare anyone: boyars, peasants, and church dignitaries were sent to the fires. Well, during the time of Peter I, the impostor, the Great Book Burn gained such power that this moment The Russian people did not have almost a single original document, chronicle, manuscript, or book left. Peter I continued Nikon's work in erasing the memory of the Russian people on a wide scale. Siberian Old Believers have a legend that under Peter I, so many old printed books were burned at the same time that after that 40 pounds (equivalent to 655 kg!) of melted copper fasteners were raked out of the fire pits.

Until the 16th century, even in Russian Christian chronicles you will not find the term “Orthodoxy” in relation to the Christian religion. In relation to the concept of “faith”, epithets such as “God’s”, “true”, “Christian”, “right” and “faith” are used. immaculate.” And even now you will never find this name in foreign texts, since the Byzantine Christian church is called - orthodox, and is translated into Russian - correct teaching (in defiance of all the other “wrong” ones).

Orthodoxy - (from the Greek orthos - straight, correct and doxa - opinion), a “correct” system of views, fixed by the authoritative authorities of a religious community and mandatory for all members of this community; orthodoxy, agreement with the teachings preached by the church. Orthodox is mainly called the church Middle Eastern countries (for example, the Greek Orthodox Church, Orthodox Islam or Orthodox Judaism). Unconditional adherence to some teaching, firm consistency in views. The opposite of orthodoxy is heterodoxy and heresies.

Never and nowhere in other languages ​​will you be able to find the term “Orthodoxy” in relation to the Greek (Byzantine) religious form. The substitution of imagery terms for the external aggressive form was necessary because THEIR images did not work on our Russian soil, so we had to mimic existing familiar images .

The term "paganism" means "other languages". This term previously served the Russians simply to identify people speaking other languages.

Changing the two-finger sign of the cross to the three-finger one. Why did Nikon decide to make such an “important” change in the ritual? For even the Greek clergy admitted that nowhere, in any source, is it written about baptism with three fingers!

Regarding the fact that the Greeks previously had two fingers, the historian N. Kapterev provides undeniable historical evidence in his book “Patriarch Nikon and his opponents in the matter of correcting church books.” For this book and other materials on the topic of reform, they even tried to expel Nikon Kapterev from the academy and tried in every possible way to impose a ban on the publication of his materials. Now modern historians say that Kapterev was right that double-fingered fingers have always existed among the Slavs. But despite this, the rite of three-fingered baptism has not yet been abolished in the church.

The fact that two fingers have existed in Rus' for a long time can be seen at least from the message of the Moscow Patriarch Job to the Georgian Metropolitan Nicholas: “Those who pray, it is appropriate to be baptized with two fingers...”.

But double-finger baptism is an ancient Slavic rite, which the Christian Church initially borrowed from the Slavs, modifying it somewhat.

Here is what Svetlana Levashova writes in her book “Revelation” about this:

“...Going into battle, each warrior went through a unique ritual and uttered the usual spell: “For HONOR!” For CONSCIENCE! For FAITH! At the same time, the warriors made a magical movement - they touched the left and right shoulders with two fingers and the middle of the forehead with the last... And the ritual of movement (or baptism) was “borrowed” by the same Christian church, adding to it the fourth, lower part... part of the devil.” As a result, all Christians ended up with the well-known finger baptism ritual, albeit with a modified sequence - according to the Christian rite, first the fingers are placed on the forehead, then on the stomach (in the navel area), then on the right shoulder and finally on the left.

In general, if we analyze the pre-Nikon church, we will see that very much in it at that time was still Vedic. Elements of the solar cult of the Slavs were in everything - in clothes, in rituals, in singing, and in painting. All temples were strictly built on the sites of ancient Vedic temples. Inside the temples, the walls and ceilings were decorated with swastika symbols. Judge for yourself, even the religious procession took place after salting, i.e. according to the sun, and the baptism procedure took place without a font of water, people crossed themselves with two fingers and much more. It was only Nikon who introduced elements of the lunar cult into the Russian church, and before him there were relatively few of them.

Patriarch Nikon, understanding the special attitude of the Russian people to ancient rituals, which could not be eradicated not only among the ordinary population, but also among the aristocracy and boyars, decided to completely erase them from memory by simply replacing some rituals with others! And he succeeded like no one before. This was successful for the simple reason that after the forced baptism of Rus' into the Greek religion (Christianity), 2/3 of the population was exterminated. And over time, after just a few centuries, there were very few people left who would remember and could pass on true knowledge about the past to their descendants. The memory of the past lived only in rituals, traditions and holidays. Real Slavic holidays! But they too were destined for a difficult task.

Scientist and academician Nikolai Levashov, at one of his meetings with readers, told what vileness Patriarch Nikon committed:

It turns out that all that was necessary was to impose Christian holidays on the Slavic holidays, on the Gods - the saints, and “the trick is in the bag,” as they say.

Patriarch Nikon found a very correct solution to destroy the memory of our past. This is replacing one thing with another!

This is how vilely, through the hands of Nikon, the transformation of the Russian man, free by nature and worldview, into a real slave, into “Ivan, who does not remember his kinship,” continued.

Now let's see what kind of holidays and saints N. Levashov spoke about in his speech.

date
Russian holiday
Christian holiday

06.01
Festival of God Veles
Christmas Eve

07.01
Kolyada
Nativity

24.02
Day of God Veles (patron of livestock)
Saint's Day Blasia (patron of animals)

02.03
Madder Day
Saint's Day Marianna

07.04
Maslenitsa (celebrated 50 days before Easter)
Annunciation

06.05
Day of Dazhbog (the first pasture of cattle, the agreement between the shepherds and the devil)
Saint's Day St. George the Victorious (patron of livestock and patron of warriors)

15.05
Day of Boris the Breadgrower (celebration of the first shoots)
Transfer of the relics of the faithful Boris and Gleb

22.05
Day of God Yarila (god of spring)
Transfer of the relics of St. Nicholas of Spring, bringing warm weather

07.06
Triglav (pagan trinity - Perun, Svarog, Sventovit)
Holy Trinity (Christian Trinity)

06.07
Mermaid Week
Agrafena swimsuit day (with mandatory swimming)

07.07
Ivan Kupala Day (during the holiday they poured water on each other and swam)
Nativity of John the Baptist

02.08
Day of God Perun (god of thunder)
Saint's Day Elijah the Prophet (Thunderer)

19.08
Feast of First Fruits
Feast of the Blessing of Fruits

21.08
Day of the god Stribog (god of the winds)
Day of Myron Carminative (bringer of wind)

14.09
Volkh Zmeevich Day
Day of St. Simon the Stylite

21.09
Holiday of women in labor
Nativity of the Virgin Mary

10.11
Day of the Goddess Mokosh (the spinning goddess who spins the thread of fate)
Day of Paraskeva Friday (patron saint of sewing)

14.11
On this day Svarog discovered iron to people
Day of Kozma and Damian (patrons of blacksmiths)

21.11
Day of the gods Svarog and Simargl (Svarog - god of sky and fire)
Michael the Archangel Day

This table is taken from the book by D. Baida and E. Lyubimova “Biblical pictures, or what is “God’s grace?”

Quite clearly and demonstratively: everyone Slavic holiday according to Christian, everyone Slavic God according to the saint. It is impossible to forgive Nikon for such a forgery, as well as the churches in general, who can safely be called criminals. This is a real crime against the Russian people and their culture. And they erect monuments to such traitors and continue to honor them. In 2006 In the city of Saransk, a monument to Nikon, the patriarch who trampled on the memory of the Russian people, was erected and consecrated.

In general, the “reform” marks the milestone from which a sharp decline in faith, spirituality and morality begins in Russian society. Everything new in rituals, architecture, icon painting, and singing is of Western origin, which is also noted by civilian researchers.

The “church” reforms of the mid-17th century were directly related to religious construction. The order to strictly follow the Byzantine canons put forward the requirement to build churches “with five peaks, and not with a tent.”

Tent-roofed buildings (with a pyramidal top) were known in Rus' even before the adoption of Christianity. This type of building is considered originally Russian. That is why Nikon, with his reforms, took care of such “trifles”, because this was a real “pagan” trace among the people. Threatened death penalty master craftsmen and architects managed to preserve the shape of a tent in both temple and secular buildings. Despite the fact that it was necessary to build domes with onion-shaped domes, the general shape of the structure was made pyramidal. But not everywhere it was possible to deceive the reformers. These were mainly the northern and remote areas of the country.

also in wooden churches The role of the refectory changes, transforming from a room that is secular in its own way into a purely cultic one. She finally loses her independence and becomes part of the church premises. The primary purpose of the refectory is reflected in its very name: public meals, feasts, and “brotherhood gatherings” dedicated to certain solemn events were held here. This is an echo of the traditions of our ancestors. The refectory was a waiting area for those arriving from neighboring villages. Thus, in terms of its functionality, the refectory contained precisely the worldly essence. Patriarch Nikon turned the refectory into a church child. This transformation was intended, first of all, for that part of the aristocracy that still remembered ancient traditions and roots, the purpose of the refectory and the holidays that were celebrated in it.

Nowadays, free-standing wooden bell towers have survived only in the north of Russia, and even then in very small numbers. In its central regions they were long ago replaced by stone ones.

“Nowhere, however, in pre-Petrine Rus' were bell towers built in connection with churches, as was the case in the West, but were constantly erected as separate buildings, only sometimes attached to one side or another of the temple... Bell towers, which are in close connection with the church and are included in its general plan, appeared in Russia only in the 17th century!” writes A.V. Opolovnikov, a Russian scientist and restorer of monuments of Russian wooden architecture.

It turns out that bell towers at monasteries and churches became widespread thanks to Nikon only in the 17th century!

Initially, bell towers were built wooden and served a city purpose. They were built in the central parts of the settlement and served as a way to notify the population about a particular event. Each event had its own chime, by which residents could determine what happened in the city. For example, a fire or a public meeting. And on holidays, the bells shimmered with many joyful and cheerful motifs. Bell towers were always built wooden with a hipped top, which provided certain acoustic features to the ringing.

The church privatized its bell towers, bells and bell ringers. And with them our past. And Nikon played a major role in this.

Now it becomes obvious that there were no grounds at all for carrying out church reform. The reasons were completely different and had nothing to do with the church. This is, first of all, the destruction of the spirit of the Russian people! Culture, heritage, the great past of our people. And this was done by Nikon with great cunning and meanness. Nikon simply “planted a pig” on the people, so much so that we, the Russians, still have to remember in parts, literally bit by bit, who we are and our Great Past.

To be continued…
***
Materials used:

B.P.Kutuzov.“The Secret Mission of Patriarch Nikon”, publishing house “Algorithm”, 2007.

S. Levashova, "Revelation", vol. 2, ed. "Mitrakov", 2011 N.F. Kapterev. “Patriarch Nikon and his opponents in correcting church books,” ed. M.S. Elova, 1913 D. Baida and E. Lyubimova,

“Biblical Pictures, or “What is God’s Grace?”, ed. "Mitrakov", 2011 A.V. Opolovnikov.

"Russian wooden architecture", ed. "Art", 1983 What is Orthodoxy?