Preamble
The essence of Nikon's church reform in 17 main points:
- at least somehow, if only not in the old way
Nikon wanted not just to correct some errors of scribes, but to change all the old Russian church rites and rites in accordance with the new Greek ones. “The tragedy of the schismatic reform consisted in the fact that an attempt was made to “rule the right along the crooked”. Archpriest Avvakum, in these words, conveyed the order of Patriarch Nikon to “correct” the books to the “referencer”, the student of the Jesuits, Arseny the Greek: “Rule, Arsen, somehow, if only not in the old way". And where in the liturgical books it was previously written "lads" - it became "children", where it was written "children" - it became "lads"; where there was a "church" - it became a "temple", where there was a "temple" - there is a "church" ... There were also such frank absurdities as "the radiance of noise", "to comprehend the hair (i.e. with the eyes)", "to see with the finger", "cross-shaped hands of Moses", not to mention the prayer "evil spirit" inserted into the rite of baptism.
- Two-finger replaced with three-finger
- The ancient custom of electing clerics by the parish was abolished - he began to be appointed
- Recognition of secular power by the head of the church - modeled on Protestant churches
- Prostration canceled
- Marriages with non-Christians and relatives are allowed
- The eight-pointed cross was replaced by a four-pointed one.
- During the processions, they began to walk against the sun
- The word Jesus began to be written with two and - Jesus
- Liturgy began to be served on 5 prosphora instead of 7
- Praise the Lord four times instead of three times
- Removed the word true from the Creed from the words about the Holy Lord
- Changed the form of the Jesus Prayer
- Pour baptism instead of submersible baptism became acceptable
- The shape of the pulpit was changed
- white cowl Russian hierarchs was replaced by the kamilavka of the Greeks
- Changed the ancient shape of the bishop's staves
- Changed church singing and canons of writing icons
1. Two-fingering, an ancient, inherited from apostolic times, form of signing of fingers with the sign of the cross, was called the “Armenian heresy” and replaced by three-fingered. The so-called malaksa, or nominative signage, was introduced as a priestly signet for blessing. In the interpretation of the sign of the cross with two fingers, two outstretched fingers mean the two natures of Christ (Divine and human), and three (fifth, fourth and first), folded at the palm, - the Holy Trinity. By introducing the trinity (meaning only the Trinity), Nikon not only neglected the dogma of the God-manhood of Christ, but also introduced a “God-passionate” heresy (that is, in fact, he claimed that not only human nature Christ, but the whole Holy Trinity). This innovation, introduced in the Russian Church by Nikon, was a very serious dogmatic distortion, since the sign of the cross has always been a visible symbol of faith for Orthodox Christians. The truth and antiquity of the two-fingered addition is confirmed by many testimonies. These include ancient images that have come down to our time (for example, a 3rd-century fresco from the Tomb of St. Priscilla in Rome, a 4th-century mosaic depicting the Miraculous Fishing from the Church of St. Apollinaris in Rome, a painted image of the Annunciation from the Church of St. Mary in Rome, dating from the 5th century); and numerous Russian and Greek icons of the Savior, Mother of God and saints, miraculously revealed and written in ancient times (all of them are listed in detail in the fundamental Old Believer theological work “Pomor Answers”); and the ancient rite of acceptance from the heresy of Jacobites, which, according to the testimony of the Council of Constantinople in 1029, the Greek Church contained as early as the 11th century: “Those who do not baptize two fingers, like Christ, be damned”; and ancient books - Joseph, archimandrite of the Spassky New Monastery, the cell Psalter of Cyril Novoezersky, in the original Greek of the book of Nikon Chernogorets and others: “If anyone is not marked with two fingers, like Christ, let him be damned”3; and the custom of the Russian Church, adopted at the Baptism of Rus' from the Greeks and not interrupted until the time of Patriarch Nikon. This custom was conciliarly confirmed in the Russian Church at the Stoglavy Cathedral in 1551: let him be cursed, like the Holy Fathers rekosha. In addition to the above, evidence that the two-fingered sign of the cross is a tradition of ancient Universal Church(and not only the Russian local one), the text of the Greek Pilot also serves, where the following is written: “The ancient Christians laid their fingers differently to depict the cross on themselves than the current ones, that is, they depicted it with two fingers - middle and index, as Peter of Damascus says. The whole hand, says Peter, signifies the one hypostasis of Christ, and the two fingers, His two natures. As for the tripartite, not a single piece of evidence in its favor has yet been found in any ancient monuments.
2. The bows of the earth, accepted in the pre-schism Church, were canceled, which are an undoubted church tradition established by Christ Himself, as evidenced in the Gospel (Christ prayed in the Garden of Gethsemane, "fell on His face", that is, he made earthly bows) and in patristic creations. The abolition of prostrations was perceived as a revival of the ancient heresy of non-worshipers, since prostrations in general and, in particular, performed in great post are a visible sign of reverence for God and His saints, as well as a visible sign of deep repentance. In the preface to the Psalter of 1646, the edition said: “Cursed be this, and such wickedness is rejected from heretics, if not to bow to the ground, in our prayers to God, in the church on the appointed days. It’s the same about this, and not without a decree from the charter of the holy fathers, such wickedness and heresy have taken root in many people, like knee-deep inflexibility, in Holy Great Lent, and any pious, like the catholic church, the apostolic son can not hear. Such wickedness and heresy, may there be such evil in us in the Orthodox, as the holy fathers say.
3. The three-part eight-pointed cross, which since ancient times in Rus' was the main symbol of Orthodoxy, was replaced by a two-part four-pointed one, associated in the minds of Orthodox people with Catholic teaching and called the “Latin (or Lyatsky) kryzh”. After the beginning of the reform, the eight-pointed cross was expelled from the church. The hatred of the reformers for him is evidenced by the fact that one of the prominent figures of the new church, Metropolitan Dimitry of Rostov, called him “Bryn”, or “schismatic” in his writings. Only from the end of the 19th century, the eight-pointed cross began to gradually return to the New Believer churches.
4. The cry of prayer - the angelic song "Hallelujah" - began to quadruple among the Nikonians, as they sing "Hallelujah" three times and the fourth, equivalent, "Glory to Thee, God." This violates the sacred trinity. At the same time, the ancient “deep (that is, double) hallelujah” was declared by the reformers to be “the godless Macedonian heresy.”
5. In confession Orthodox faith– In the Creed, a prayer listing the main dogmas of Christianity, the word “true” was removed from the words “in the Spirit of the Holy Lord, true and life-giving”, and thus the truth of the Third Person of the Holy Trinity was called into question. A translation of a word "?? ??????”, which stands in the Greek original of the Creed, can be twofold: both “Lord” and “true”. The old translation of the Symbol included both versions, emphasizing the equality of the Holy Spirit with other persons of the Holy Trinity. And this does not in the least contradict Orthodox teaching. The unjustified removal of the word "true" destroyed the symmetry, sacrificing meaning for the sake of a literal tracing of the Greek text. And this caused a fair indignation among many. From the combination “born, not created”, the union “a” was thrown out - the same “az”, for which many were ready to go to the stake. The exclusion of "a" could be thought of as an expression of doubt about the uncreated nature of Christ. Instead of the previous statement “His kingdom has no (that is, no) end”, “there will be no end”, that is, the infinity of the Kingdom of God turns out to be related to the future and thus limited in time. Changes in the Creed, consecrated by centuries of history, were perceived especially painfully. And this was not only in Russia with its notorious "ritualism", "literalism" and "theological ignorance". Here we can recall a classic example from Byzantine theology - the story with only one changed “iota”, introduced by the Arians into the term “consubstantial” (Greek “omousios”) and turned it into “similar” (Greek “omiusios”). This distorted the teaching of St. Athanasius of Alexandria, enshrined in the authority of the First Council of Nicaea, about the relationship between the essence of the Father and the Son. That is why the Ecumenical Councils banned, under pain of anathema, any, even the most insignificant changes in the Creed.
6. In the Nikon books, the very spelling of the name of Christ was changed: instead of the former Jesus, which is still found among other Slavic peoples, Jesus was introduced, and only the second form was declared the only correct one, which was raised by New Rite theologians into a dogma. So, according to the blasphemous interpretation of Metropolitan Dimitry of Rostov, the pre-reform spelling of the name "Isus" in translation allegedly means "equal-eared", "monstrous and meaningless"5.
7. The form of the Jesus Prayer was changed, which, according to Orthodox teaching, has a special mystical power. Instead of the words "Lord, Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me a sinner," the reformers decided to read "Lord Jesus Christ, our God, have mercy on me a sinner." The Jesus Prayer in its pre-Nikonian version was considered universal (universal) and eternal prayer as based on the gospel texts, as the first apostolic confession on which Jesus Christ founded His Church6. It gradually came into general use and even into the Charter of the Church. Saints Ephraim and Isaac the Syrian, Saint Hesychius, Saints Barsanuphius and John, Saint John of the Ladder have references to it. St. John Chrysostom speaks of her like this: “I beg you, brethren, never break or despise this prayer.” However, the reformers threw this prayer out of all liturgical books and, under the threat of anathemas, forbade it to be said "in church singing and in general meetings." She was later called "schismatic".
8. During the processions, the sacraments of baptism and weddings, the New Believers began to walk against the sun, while, according to church tradition, this was supposed to be done in the direction of the sun (salting) - following the Sun-Christ. Here it should be noted that a similar ritual of walking against the sun was practiced by different peoples in a number of harmful magical cults.
9. At the baptism of infants, the New Believers began to allow and even justify the pouring and sprinkling of water, contrary to the apostolic decrees on the need for baptism in three immersions (50th canon of the Holy Apostles). In this regard, the rank of Catholics and Protestants was changed. If, according to the ancient church canons, confirmed by the Council of 1620, which was under Patriarch Filaret, Catholics and Protestants were required to be baptized with a full triple immersion, now they were accepted into the dominant church only through chrismation.
10. The New Believers began to serve the Liturgy on five prosphora, arguing that otherwise “the living body and blood of Christ cannot be” (according to the old Missal Books, it was supposed to serve on seven prosphora).
11. In the churches, Nikon ordered to break the "ambos" and build "lockers", that is, the shape of the ambo (pre-altar elevation) was changed, each part of which had a certain symbolic meaning. In the pre-Nikonian tradition, four pulpit pillars meant four Gospels, if there was one pillar, it meant a stone rolled away by an angel from the cave with the body of Christ. Nikon's five pillars began to symbolize the pope and the five patriarchs, which contains a clear Latin heresy.
12. The white hood of the Russian hierarchs - a symbol of the purity and holiness of the Russian clergy, which distinguished them among the ecumenical patriarchs - was replaced by Nikon with the "horned kamilavka" of the Greeks. In the eyes of Russian pious people, the “horned hoods” were compromised by the fact that they were repeatedly denounced in a number of polemical writings against the Latins (for example, in the story about Peter Gugniv, which was part of the Palea, Cyril Book and Makariev’s Four Mena). In general, under Nikon, there was a change in all the clothes of the Russian clergy according to the modern Greek model (which, in turn, was strongly influenced by Turkish fashion - wide sleeves of cassocks like oriental robes and kamilavki like Turkish fez). According to Paul of Aleppo, following Nikon, many bishops and monks wished to change their robes. “Many of them came to our teacher (Patriarch Macarius of Antioch. - K.K.) and asked him to give them a kamilavka and a klobuk ... Whoever managed to acquire them and who Patriarch Nikon or ours put them on, those faces opened and shone. On this occasion, they vying with each other began to order kamilavki for themselves from black cloth in the same form that we and the Greek monks had, and the hoods were made of black silk. They spat in front of us on their old hoods, throwing them off their heads and saying: “If this Greek robe was not of divine origin, our patriarch would not have put it on first” 7. Regarding this insane spitting on his native antiquity and servility to foreign customs and orders, Archpriest Avvakum wrote: “Oh, oh, poor people! Rus', something you wanted German actions and customs! and called on Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich: “Breathe in the old way, as it used to be under Stefan, kindly, and say in Russian:“ Lord, have mercy on me a sinner! that's what the hell they say; spit on them! After all, Mikhailovich, you are a Russian, not a Greek. Speak your natural language; do not humiliate Evo in church and at home, and in proverbs. As Christ taught us, so it is fitting to speak. God loves us no less than the Greeks; betrayed to us the letter with our tongue by the saint Cyril and his brother. What do we want better? Is it the language of an angel? No, they won’t give it now, until the general resurrection.”9
13. The ancient form of the bishop's staffs has been changed. On this occasion, Archpriest Avvakum wrote indignantly: “Yes, he, the wicked Nikon, started in our Russia with his like-minded people the worst and most unpleasing deed - instead of the rod of St. earthly. And now they sanctify and revere that cursed snake more than all cattle and beasts and bring it into the sanctuary of God, into the altar and into the royal doors, like some kind of sanctification and the whole church service with those rods and with the cursed snakes made, they act everywhere, like some kind of precious treasure, before their face to render those snakes to the whole world evyut, they also form the consumption of the Orthodox faith”10.
14. Instead of ancient singing, a new one was introduced - first Polish-Little Russian, and then Italian. New icons began to be painted not according to ancient patterns, but according to Western ones, which is why they became more like secular paintings than icons. All this contributed to the cultivation in believers of an unhealthy sensuality and exaltation, previously not characteristic of Orthodoxy. Gradually, the ancient icon painting was completely replaced by salon religious painting, which slavishly and unskillfully imitated Western models and bore the loud name of “icons of the Italian style” or “in Italian taste”, about which the Old Believer theologian Andrei Denisov spoke in such a way in “Pomor Answers”: we are not from the ancient likenesses of the holy miracle-working icons of Greek and Russian, but from our own judicious thinking: the appearance of the flesh is thinned (thickened), and in other inscriptions it is not like the ancient holy icons, but like the Latin and others, which are printed in the Bibles and on the canvases maliovani. This pictorial new edition gives rise to doubts for us…”11 Archpriest Avvakum characterizes this kind of religious painting even more sharply: “By God’s permission, the icons of unsimilar art have multiplied in our Russian land… The Savior’s image of Emmanuel is being painted; his face is puffy, his mouth is red, his hair is curly, his arms and muscles are thick, his fingers are puffed up, and the thighs are thick at the feet, and the whole belly and fat of a German man is made, only that saber is not written at the hip. Otherwise, everything is written according to carnal intent: because the heretics themselves love carnal fatness and refuted the valley above ... And the Mother of God is fraught with the Annunciation, as well as filthy filth. And Christ is swollen on the cross: a fat little guy is standing there, and his legs are like chairs.
15. Marriages were allowed with non-Christians and persons in degrees of kinship prohibited by the Church.
16. In the New Believer Church, the ancient custom of electing clerics by the parish was abolished. It was replaced by a decree appointed from above.
17. Finally, later the New Believers destroyed the ancient canonical church structure and recognized secular power as the head of the church, following the model of Protestant churches.
Church reformPatriarch Nikon- undertaken in the 1650s - 1660s, a set of liturgical and canonical measures in the Russian Church and the Moscow State, aimed at changing the ritual tradition that existed then in Moscow (the northeastern part of the Russian Church) in order to unify it with modern Greek. It caused a split in the Russian Church and led to the emergence of numerous Old Believer movements.
Cultural-historical and geopolitical context of the reform
Professor N.F. Kapterev, discussing the reasons that led to “a change in the Russian view of the relative dignity of Greek and Russian piety”, noted:
|
Byzantine influence in Orthodox world was based precisely on the fact that it was for all Orthodox peoples of the East cultural center from where science, education, the highest and most perfect forms of church and public life came to them, etc. Moscow did not represent anything like the old Byzantium in this respect. She didn't know what science was science education, she did not even have a school at all and people who received a correct scientific education; its entire educational capital consisted in scientific point vision, not a particularly rich and varied heritage, which at different times the Russians received mediocre or directly from the Greeks, without 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. |
In the late 1640s, Arseny (Sukhanov), from the courtyard of the Athos monastery in Moldavia, reported to the tsar and the Moscow Patriarch about the burning of books of the Moscow press (and some other Slavic books) that took place on Athos as heretical. Moreover, the Alexandrian Patriarch Paisios, having made an inquiry on the occasion of the incident and not approving the act of the Athonites, nevertheless spoke in the sense that it was the Moscow books that sinned in their ranks and rituals.
"In the 17th century. relations with the East become particularly lively. Grecophilism gradually finds itself more and more supporters in society, and in the government itself it becomes more and more sincere. Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich himself was a staunch Greekophile. In extensive correspondence with the Eastern patriarchs, Alexei Mikhailovich's goal is quite clearly expressed - to bring the Russian Church into complete unity with the Greek. Political Views Tsar Alexei, his view of himself as the heir of Byzantium, the vicar of God on earth, the defender of all Orthodoxy, who, perhaps, will free Christians from the Turks and become king in Constantinople, also forced him to strive for such an identity of the Russian and Greek faiths. From the East they supported his plans in the king. So, in 1649, Patriarch Paisios, on his visit to Moscow, at a reception with the tsar, directly expressed the wish that Alexei Mikhailovich become tsar in Constantinople: “may you be the New Moses, may you free us from captivity.” The reform was placed on a fundamentally new and broader ground: the idea arose by Greek forces to bring Russian church practice into full agreement with the Greek. Similar ideas were instilled in the tsar and the patriarch by the former Ecumenical Patriarch Athanasius III Patellarius, who was in Moscow in 1653, and who took a direct part in the right.
Another significant geopolitical factor that pushed the Moscow government to reform was the accession of Little Russia, then under the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the See of Constantinople, to the Muscovite state:
The similarity of the Little Russian liturgical practice with the Greek one was due to the reform of the liturgical charter by Metropolitan Peter Mogila not long before.
Speaking about the peculiarities of the religiosity of Patriarch Nikon and his contemporaries, Nikolai Kostomarov noted: “Having spent ten years as a parish priest, Nikon, involuntarily, learned all the rudeness of the environment around him and transferred 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 a Russian person consisted in the most accurate execution of external methods, to which a symbolic power was attributed, bestowing God's grace; and Nikon's piety did not go far beyond ritualism. 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, with which he addressed immediately after the Council of 1654 to Patriarch Paisios. The latter “expresses the view of the Greek Church on the rite as an insignificant part of religion, which can have and has had different forms. As for the answer to the question of the three-finger, Paisius evaded a definite answer, confining himself only to explaining the meaning that the Greeks invest in the three-finger. Nikon understood Paisius' answer in the sense he desired, since he could not rise to the Greek understanding of the rite. Paisius did not know the situation in which the reform was being carried out and the sharpness 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 of its elements that are determined not by bookish tradition, but by oral church tradition (and these include such significant customs as, for example, the sign of the cross), is known on the basis of the information that is available in the writings of the Holy Fathers. In the works of the early holy fathers, before the 8th century, one finger is most often mentioned as a sign of the cross, very rarely many fingers and never two fingers (dual and plural in Greek are written differently). By the 9th century, and by the time of the Baptism of Rus', in the Byzantine Empire, in Constantinople there was a two-finger for the sign of the cross, there are detailed Scientific research Christian texts from Golubinsky. Later, from about the middle of the 13th century, the Greeks began to switch to three-fingered. As for the number of prosphora on the proskomedia, the special or triple hallelujah, the direction of the movement of the procession, there was no uniformity here. Among the Russians, a combination of customs alone gained a dominant position (double-fingering, a special hallelujah, salting, etc.), which would later be called old rite, and the Greeks later (especially after the fall of Constantinople) gradually established a set of other customs, which would later be called a new rite.
The process of political and cultural delimitation of North-Eastern (Vladimir, and then Moscow) and South-Western Rus' (which became part of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania), which began in the 13th-14th centuries, led to the penetration of modern Greek liturgical traditions through Lithuania, although, for example, in Lithuania itself and even among the Serbs in early XVII centuries, double-fingering was still quite widespread. In this regard, in Muscovite Rus' the question arose of what order in worship should be followed. At the Stoglav Cathedral in 1551, this question was answered: “If anyone does not bless two fingers, like Christ, or does not imagine the sign of the cross, let him be damned, holy fathers rekosha. "(Stoglav 31) is a correct statement of the text in meaning:" , ἀνάθεμα." , from the Greek liturgical collections of the "Euchologies" of the 10th-12th centuries, translated into Slavonic, from the rites: "Απόταξις τῶν αιρετικῶν Αρμενιῶν"; “... it is not befitting the holy alleluia to slay, but say alleluia twice, and on the third -“ glory to you, God ”...” (Stoglav 42).
The well-known linguist and historian of the Russian and Church Slavonic languages, Boris Uspensky, described the difference between the pre-Nikon and post-Nikon traditions as follows:
|
On the example of the sign of the cross, we see that Byzantinization can only be spoken of conditionally: we are talking about orientation towards Byzantium, but since Byzantium no longer existed by that time, modern Greeks were perceived as bearers of the Byzantine cultural tradition. As a result, assimilated forms and norms could very significantly differ from Byzantine ones, and this is especially noticeable in the field of church culture. Thus, the Russian clergy under Patriarch Nikon dressed in Greek dress and generally resembled the Greek clergy in their appearance (the dressing of the clergy in Greek dress under Nikon preceded the dressing of civil Russian society in Western European dress under Peter I). However, the new clothes of the Russian clergy do not correspond to the clothes that the Greek clergy wore in Byzantium, but to the one they began to wear under the Turks, after the fall of the Byzantine Empire: this is how the kamilavka appears, the shape of which goes back to the Turkish fez, and a cassock with wide sleeves, also reflecting the Turkish style of clothing. Following the Greek clergy, Russian clergy and monks begin to wear long hair. However, the Greek clergy in the Ottoman Empire wore long hair, not because it was customary in this environment in Byzantium, but for another - the opposite reason. Long hair in Byzantium was a sign of secular, not spiritual power, and the Greek clergy began to wear them only after the Turkish conquest - since the administrative responsibility was assigned to the Patriarchate of Constantinople in the Ottoman Empire and thus the clergy were vested with secular power. As a result, the tonsure, adopted in due time in Byzantium, disappears; in Rus', tonsure ("gumentso") was adopted before Nikon's reforms (later it is preserved by the Old Believers). - Uspensky B. A. History of the Russian literary language (XI-XVII centuries). - 3rd ed., Rev. and additional - M.: Aspect Press, 2002. - S. 417-418. - 558 p. -5000 copies - ISBN 5-7567-0146-X |
Chronology of the schism in the Russian Church
- February 1651- After the new church council, it was announced the introduction of "unanimity" in worship instead of "multiple voices" in all churches. Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, without approving the conciliar resolution of 1649 on the admissibility of "multiple opinions" supported by the Moscow Patriarch Joseph, turned to the Patriarch of Constantinople, who decided this issue in favor of "unanimity". The tsar's confessor Stefan Vonifatiev and the bed-keeper Fyodor Mikhailovich Rtishchev also stood on this, who begged Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich to approve unanimous singing in churches instead of polyphonic.
- February 11, 1653- Patriarch Nikon indicated to omit in the edition of the Followed Psalter the chapters on the number of prostrations at the prayer of St. Ephraim the Syrian and on the sign of the cross with two fingers.
- February 21, 1653 - 10 days later, at the beginning of Great Lent in 1653, Patriarch Nikon sent a "Memory" to Moscow churches about replacing part of the prostrations at the prayer of Ephraim the Syrian with waist and about the use of a three-fingered sign of the cross instead of a two-fingered one.
- September 1653 - Archpriest Avvakum is thrown into the basement of the Androniev Monastery, where he spent 3 days and 3 nights "not eating or drinking." Exhorted to accept the "new books", but to no avail. Patriarch Nikon ordered that he be cut. But the tsar intercedes, and Avvakum Petrov was exiled to Tobolsk.
- 1654- Patriarch Nikon arranges a church council, at which, as a result of pressure on the participants, he seeks permission to hold a "book right on ancient Greek and Slavic manuscripts." However, the alignment was not on the old models, but on the modern Greek practice. Among the participants of the cathedral was Bishop Pavel of Kolomna and Kashirsky. At the council, he openly spoke out in defense of the “old books”, and under the council resolutions, instead of a signature, he wrote: “If anyone takes away from the faithful customs of the holy cathedral church, or attaches to them, or corrupts them in any way, let him be anathema.” Nikon beat Pavel at the cathedral, tore off his mantle, deprived him of the episcopal chair without a conciliar court and exiled him to the Paleostrovsky monastery.
- 1654 - By order of Patriarch Nikon begin to burn old icons. It was a shock for the mass of believers, in whose minds the principle of icon veneration is unconditional for Orthodox Christian culture.
- Approx. 1655- The exile of Archpriest Avvakum with his family "to the Daurian land." Avvakum spent six years there, reaching Nerchinsk, Shilka and Amur. By 1663, after leaving the affairs of Patriarch Nikon, he was returned to Moscow.
- Early 1656- The Local Council, held in Moscow, and assembled by Patriarch Nikon with the participation of four Eastern hierarchs: Patriarch Macarius of Antioch, Patriarch Gabriel of Serbia, Metropolitan Gregory of Nicaea and Metropolitan Gideon of All Moldavia, condemned two-fingeredness, and cursed all those who were baptized with two-fingered. All those who were baptized with two fingers were declared heretics, excommunicated from the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
- On the week of Orthodoxy (on the first Sunday of Great Lent) in 1656, in the Moscow Assumption Cathedral, Patriarch Macarius of Antioch, Patriarch Gabriel of Serbia and Metropolitan Gregory of Nicaea solemnly proclaimed an anathema against those who are baptized with two fingers during worship.
- April 3 (16), 1656 - Bishop Pavel Kolomensky was transferred under stricter supervision to the Novgorod Khutynsky monastery, where he was apparently killed.
- 1664- Archpriest Avvakum was exiled to Mezen, where he continued his preaching and supported his adherents, scattered throughout Russia, with messages in which he called himself "a slave and messenger of Jesus Christ", "protosingel of the Russian church."
- April 29, 1666- Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich delivered a speech in front of the Great Moscow Church Cathedral, in which he said that in Rus' the Orthodox faith was planted by the apostles through Cyril and Methodius, Olga and Vladimir. The king called this faith pure wheat. Further, he listed the errors of the opponents of the reform (“schismatics” or “devil’s seed”), who spoke about the church of blasphemy: “as the church is not a church, divine mysteries are not mysteries, baptism is not baptism, bishops are not bishops, writings are flattering, teachings are unrighteous, and all filth and not pious.” Further, the king said that it was necessary to cleanse the wheat (church) from the tares (schismatics), relying on the authority of the four "adamantes": the Eastern Greek patriarchs. In response, on behalf of the Russian bishops, Metropolitan Joachim spoke, who agreed with the tsar, calling the schismatics "enemies and adversaries" of the church, and who asked the tsar to help subdue the enemies of the bishops with the help of royal power.
- May 15, 1666 - Archpriest Avvakum appeared before the Great Moscow Church Cathedral, who refused to repent, and was sentenced to exile in the Pustozersky jail on Pechora. At the cathedral, priest Lazarus also refused to repent, for which he was exiled to the same prison. The deacon of the Annunciation Cathedral Theodore was brought to the cathedral, who did not repent at the cathedral, was anathematized, and was exiled to the Nikolo-Ugreshsky Monastery. Soon he sent his written repentance to the cathedral, was forgiven, but then returned to his former views, for which in 1667 they would cut off his tongue and send him to the Pustozersky prison, into exile, and then burn him alive in a log house along with Archpriest Avvakum.
- At the second stage of the Great Moscow Church Council of 1666-1667, Patriarch Macarius of Antioch, together with Paisios, Patriarch of Alexandria, also participating in the work of the Council, managed to impose extremely harsh definitions on the Russian Old Believers, which actually made the schism in the Russian Church irreversible. The Council approved the books of the new press, approved the new rites and rites, and imposed oaths and anathemas on the old books and rites. Supporters of the old rites were declared schismatics and heretics. The country was on the brink of a religious war.
- 1667- Due to the refusal of the brethren of the Solovetsky monastery to accept innovations, the government took strict measures, ordered to confiscate all the estates and property of the monastery.
- From 1667 to 1676 the country was engulfed in riots in the capital and on the outskirts. Old Believers attacked monasteries, robbed Nikonian monks, and seized churches.
- June 22, 1668- The royal regiments arrived at Solovki and began the siege of the monastery (Solovki uprising).
- November 1671- The Supreme Palace Noblewoman, a representative of one of the sixteen highest aristocratic families of the Moscow state, Theodosia Morozova, an ardent adherent of the old rite, was transported to the Chudov Monastery in the Kremlin, from where, after interrogations, she was transported to prison in the courtyard of the Pskov-Caves Monastery.
- 1672- In the Paleostrovsky Monastery, 2,700 Old Believers committed self-immolation. The first known case of mass self-immolations, the so-called "fires".
- End of 1674- Boyarynya Morozova, her sister Evdokia Urusova and their associate, the wife of the Streltsy Colonel Maria Danilova, were brought to the Yamskaya Yard, where they tried to convince them of loyalty to the Old Believers by torture on the rack. By order of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, she herself and her sister, Princess Urusova, were exiled to Borovsk, where they were imprisoned in an earthen prison in Borovsky city prison, and 14 of their servants for belonging to old faith at the end of June 1675 they burned it in a log house.
- September 11 (21), 1675- Princess Evdokia Urusova died of complete exhaustion.
- November 2 (12), 1675 - Feodosia Morozova was also starved to death in an earthen prison.
- January 22 (February 1), 1676- The Solovetsky Monastery was taken by storm. The riot in the Solovetsky monastery, during which 400 people died, was brutally suppressed.
- In 1677 and in 1678 at the Small and Large local church councils of the Russian Church, the blessed princess Anna Kashinskaya (in the schema, the nun Sophia) was decanonized, only because the hand of the holy princess, who died in the 14th century, depicted two fingers, and her relics lay open in the cathedral of the city of Kashin for general worship. She was declared not a saint, her relics were buried, the grave was reduced to nothing and it was forbidden to serve her, and only memorial services were ordered to be sung. The church was renamed in honor of the princess. Moreover, at first, a visiting commission of several people in Kashin buried the relics and declared her not a saint, closed the church, took away the icons depicting St. Anna, and then retroactively held two cathedrals. Anna Kashinskaya was canonized as a saint only in 1649 at the local church council of the Russian Church, then solemnly in the presence of the entire royal family and with a large gathering of people they transferred the imperishable relics to Cathedral, (the tsar traveled to Kashin twice in 1649 and in 1650: to open and transfer the relics), wrote holy icons with her image, which stood in the church for worship, wrote the church service to Anna, which they served and prayed to St. Anna, in honor of Anna they called the newly baptized children.
- From 1676 to 1685, according to documented information, about 20,000 Old Believers died from self-immolation. Self-immolations continued into the 18th century.
- January 6, 1681- An uprising organized by adherents of the Old Believers in Moscow. Its likely organizer was Avvakum Petrov.
- 1681 - the new church cathedral recognized the necessary combined struggle of the spiritual and secular authorities with an intensified “split”, asked the tsar to confirm the decisions of the Great Moscow Cathedral in 1667 on the reference of the persistent schismatics to the Gradsky court, decided to select the old printed books and in return to issue the corrected ones, established supervision for the sale of notebooks, which, under the kind of extract from the Holy Writing,, which, under the kind of extract from the Holy Writing. They contained blasphemy on church books.
- April 14 (24), 1682, Pustozersk - Burning in a log house of Archpriest Avvakum and his three comrades in prison (see Pustozersky sufferers). Archpriest Avvakum at the time of burning, according to legend, predicted imminent death Tsar Fedor Alekseevich.
- April 27, 1682 - at the age of 20, Tsar Fedor Alekseevich died without making an order regarding the succession to the throne. The issue of succession to the throne caused unrest, which was resolved by the decision to crown two tsars at the same time - the minors Ivan V and Peter I under the regency of their elder sister Sofya Alekseevna.
- July 5, 1682 - Dispute about faith in the Faceted Chamber of the Moscow Kremlin. The official church was represented by Patriarch Joachim (chief actor on the part of the Orthodox, it was not he, but Athanasius, Bishop of Kholmogory and Vazhesky), the Old Believer - Nikita Pustosvyat. The dispute boiled down to the mutual accusation of the parties of heresy and ignorance and, in the end, to abuse and almost to a fight. The Old Believers left the Kremlin with their heads held high and on Red Square they announced publicly their complete victory, although in fact the dispute did not come to any result. The archers, blackmailed by Tsarevna Sophia, retreated from the Old Believers, accusing them of confusion and the desire to restore the archers against the kings. I. A. Khovansky barely managed to save the rest of the Old Believers, whom he had previously guaranteed safety. The next morning, Princess Sophia ordered the schismatics to be seized: Nikita Pustosvyat was executed at the Execution Ground, and his associates were sent to the monasteries, from where some managed to escape.
- In 1685 under Princess Sophia, a decree was issued on the persecution of detractors of the Church, instigators of self-immolation, harborers of schismatics up to the death penalty (some by burning, others by the sword). Other Old Believers were ordered to be beaten with a whip, and, depriving of property, exiled to monasteries. The concealers of the Old Believers "are beaten with batogs and, after the confiscation of property, they are also exiled to the monastery." Until 1685, the government suppressed riots and executed several leaders of the schism, but there was no special law on the persecution of schismatics for their faith.
The main features of Nikon's reform
The first step taken by Patriarch Nikon on the path of liturgical reform, taken immediately after joining 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. Finding discrepancies between them (as well as between the Missal and other books), Patriarch Nikon decided to start correcting the books and rites. Approximately six months after ascension to the patriarchal throne, on February 11, 1653, the Patriarch ordered that the chapters on the number of prostrations at the prayer of St. Ephraim the Syrian and on the sign of the cross with two fingers be omitted from the edition of the Followed Psalter. Some of the referees expressed their disagreement, as a result, three were fired, among them Elder Savvaty and Hieromonk Joseph (in the world Ivan Nasedka). 10 days later, at the beginning of Great Lent in 1653, the Patriarch sent a “Memory” to the Moscow churches about replacing part of the bows to the ground at the prayer of Ephraim the Syrian with waist ones and about using the sign of the cross with three fingers instead of two fingers. Thus began the reform, as well as the protest against it - a church schism organized by the former comrades of the Patriarch, Archpriest Avvakum Petrov and Archimandrite Ivan Neronov.
During the reform, the liturgical tradition was changed in the following points:
- Wide-ranging "book right" expressed in text editing Holy Scripture and liturgical books, which led to changes even in the wording of the Creed - the conjunction-opposition “a” was removed in the words about faith in the Son of God “born, not created”, they began to talk about the Kingdom of God in the future (“there will be no end”), and not in the present tense (“no end”), 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 “Jesus” (under the title “Ic”) and it began to be written “Jesus” (under the title “Іс”).
- Replacing the two-fingered sign of the cross with a three-fingered sign and the abolition of “throwing”, or small bows to the earth - in 1653, Nikon sent a “memory” to all Moscow churches, which said: “it is not appropriate to throw on the knee in the church, but bow to your belt; even with three fingers they would be baptized.”
- Nikon ordered the religious processions to be carried out in the opposite direction (against the sun, and not salting).
- The exclamation of "Hallelujah" during the divine service began to be pronounced not twice (extreme hallelujah), but three times (triple one).
- The number of prosphora on proskomedia and the inscription of the seal on prosphora have been changed.
Reaction to reform
The patriarch was pointed out the arbitrariness of such actions, and then in 1654 he arranges a council, at which, as a result of pressure on the participants, he seeks permission to hold a "book right on ancient Greek and Slavic manuscripts." However, the alignment was not on the old models, but on the modern Greek practice. In 1656, Patriarch Nikon convened a council in Moscow, at which all those who were baptized with two fingers were declared heretics, excommunicated from the Father, Son and Holy Spirit and damned. On the week of Orthodoxy (on the first Sunday of Great Lent) in 1656, an anathema was solemnly proclaimed in the Moscow Assumption Cathedral on those who are baptized with two fingers during worship.
The sharpness and procedural incorrectness (for example, Nikon once publicly beat, tore off his mantle, and then, without a conciliar decision, single-handedly deprived the chair and exiled the opponent of the liturgical reform, Bishop Pavel Kolomensky) of the reforms caused dissatisfaction among a significant part of the clergy and laity, which also fed on personal hostility towards the intolerant and ambitious patriarch. After the exile and death of Pavel Kolomensky, the movement for the “old faith” (Old Believers) was led by several clerics: archpriests Avvakum, Longin of Murom and Daniil Kostroma, priest Lazar Romanovsky, deacon Fyodor, monk Epiphanius, priest Nikita Dobrynin, nicknamed Pustosvyat, and others.
The Great Moscow Cathedral of 1667, having condemned and deposed Nikon for leaving the chair without permission in 1658, and confirmed the decision of the Moscow Cathedral of 1656 that all heretics who are baptized with two fingers, banned the Russian rites of the 17th century (the old rites) and approved only the Greek rites of the 17th century (the new rites) and anathematized all opponents of the reforms. Subsequently, due to state support for church reform, the name of the Russian Church was assigned exclusively to those who made the decisions of the Councils of 1666 and 1667, and adherents of liturgical traditions (Old Believers) began to be called schismatics and persecuted.
Views of the Old Believers on the reform
According to the Old Believers, Nikon's views on some separate tradition, in this case Greek, as a reference 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 was made on the cross of Christ - Jewish, Greek Latin. In both cases, it was about the rejection of the liturgical tradition that had naturally developed in Rus' (borrowed, by the way, on the basis of ancient Greek models). Such a refusal was completely alien to the Russian ecclesiastical consciousness, since the historical Russian ecclesiasticism was formed on the basis of the Cyril and Methodius tradition, in essence which was the assimilation of Christianity, taking into account the national translation of the Holy Scriptures and the liturgical corpus, using local backlogs 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 the rites and sacraments, since the time of the "Answers of Alexander the Deacon" and "Pomor Answers" insist on a more accurate symbolic expression Orthodox dogmas in the old rites. So, according to the Old Believers, the two-fingered sign of the cross deeper than the three-fingered one reveals the mystery of the incarnation and death of Christ on the cross, for it was not the Trinity that was crucified on the cross, but one of Her Persons (the incarnated God-Son, Jesus Christ). Similarly, the double hallelujah with the addition of the Slavic translation of the word “hallelujah” (glory to Thee, God) already contains a threefold (according to the number of Persons of the Holy Trinity) glorification of God (in the pre-Nikonian texts there is also a strict hallelujah, but without the appendix “glory to Thee, God”), while the strict hallelujah with the appendix “glory to Thee, God” contains the “quadrupling” of the Holy Trinity.
Studies 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 the sources of Nikonova’s “right”: borrowing, as it turned out, was 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 persecutions that followed the reform.
The term "Nikonianism"
During the time of 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 liturgical reform in the Russian Orthodox Church of the 17th century. The name comes from the name of Patriarch Nikon.
The evolution of the attitude of the local Russian Orthodox Church to the old rites
The condemnation of the supporters of the old rites as non-Orthodox and heretical, carried out by the councils of 1656 and 1666, was finally sanctioned by the Great Moscow Cathedral in 1667, which approved the reforms of Patriarch Nikon, and anathematized all those who did not accept the council's decisions as heretics and recalcitrant to the Church.
The hierarchs of the Russian Church at the end of the 17th - beginning of the 18th centuries (the cathedral book "The Rod", Patriarch Joachim in the "Spiritual Counsel", Pitirim of Nizhny Novgorod in the "Sling", Dimitri of Rostov in the "Search", etc.), following the oaths of the Great Moscow Cathedral, especially condemned the following "old rites":
- Double-faced sign of the cross as "devil's legend", "fig", "demo-sitting", Arianism, Nestorianism, Macedonianism, "Armenian and Latin command", etc.;
- a special hallelujah - as "heretical and ungodly"
- The eight-pointed cross, especially revered by the Old Believers - as "Brynsk and schismatic"
Since 1800, the Holy Synod to one degree or another began to allow the use of the old rites (one faith, fellow believers were allowed to pray in the old way, subject to the new-rite hierarchies).
The personal royal Decree of Nicholas II, given to the Senate, On the strengthening of the principles of religious tolerance of April 17, 1905, in particular, read:
“In order to heal church divisions due to the old rites and to give the greatest calm to the conscience of those who use them within the fence of the Russian Orthodox Church,” the synod under the deputy locum tenens of the patriarchal throne, Metropolitan Sergius (Stragorodsky), who later became the patriarch of Moscow and All Russia, on April 23, 1929 recognized the old rites as “saving”, and the oath prohibitions of the cathedrals 1 656 and 1667 "Canceled, as if not former."
The local council of the Russian Orthodox Church in 1971, convened to elect a patriarch, specifically considered the issue of "swearing to the old rites and to those who adhere to them" and made the following decision:
|
In 1974, the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad made a similar decision.
Such annulment of oaths, however, did not lead to a resumption of prayerful communion between any major ecclesiastical jurisdiction of New Believers and Old Believers.
Criticism of the reform in the ROC
Church historian and leader (regent) of the Spassky Cathedral of the Andronikov Monastery in Moscow, Boris Kutuzov, believes that the main political aspect of the reform was the “Byzantine charm”, that is, the conquest of Constantinople and the revival of the Byzantine Empire with the help and expense of Russia. In this regard, Tsar Alexei wanted to eventually inherit the throne of the Byzantine emperors, and Patriarch Nikon wanted to become the Ecumenical Patriarch. Kutuzov believes that the Vatican had a great interest in the reform, which wanted, using Russia as a weapon against Turkey, to strengthen the influence of Catholicism in the East.
~~~~~~~~~~~
Many modern historians admit that this reform, apart from strife and disaster, brought nothing to Russia. Nikon is scolded not only by historians, but also by some churchmen for the fact that, allegedly at the behest of Patriarch Nikon, the church split, and two appeared in its place: the first is the church renewed by reforms, the brainchild of Nikon (the prototype of the modern Russian Orthodox Church), and the second is that old church that existed before Nikon, which later became known as the Old Believer Church.
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 hides the true reasons for this reform and the true customers and executors. There is another suppression of information about the past of Rus'. The great scam of Patriarch Nikon...
Nikon, in the world Nikita Minin (1605-1681), the sixth Moscow Patriarch, was born into an ordinary peasant family, by 1652 he rose to the rank of patriarch, and somewhere from that time began "his" transformations. Moreover, upon entering into his patriarchal duties, he enlisted the support of the king not to interfere in the affairs of the Church. The tsar and the people undertook to fulfill this testament, and it was fulfilled. Only now the people were not really asked, the opinion of the people was expressed by the tsar (Aleksey Mikhailovich Romanov) and the court boyars. And 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. True Goals reforms are hidden from the unenlightened minds of the Russian people. The people, who have been robbed of the true memory of their great past, trampled upon all their heritage, have no choice but to believe in what they are presented on a silver platter. Only it's time to remove rotten apples from this saucer, 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 an instigator and executor, although Nikon was just a “pawn” in the capable hands of puppeteers who stood not only behind him, but also behind Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich himself.
And what is even more interesting, despite the fact that some churchmen blaspheme Nikon as a reformer, the changes that he made continue to operate until now in the same church! Those are double standards!
Let's now see what kind of reform it was.
The main reformatory innovations, according to the official version of historians: The so-called "book right", which consisted in rewriting liturgical books. Many textual changes were made to the liturgical books, for example, the word "Jesus" was changed to "Jesus". The double-fingered sign of the cross has been replaced by a three-fingered one. Prostrations have been cancelled. Religious processions began to be carried out in the opposite direction (not salting, but anti-salting, i.e. against the sun). He tried to introduce a 4-pointed cross and for a short period of time he succeeded.
Researchers cite a lot of reformist changes, but the above are especially emphasized 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 tenth century. the Greeks had two charters: Studian and Jerusalem. In Constantinople, the Studian Rule was first spread, which passed to Rus'. But the Jerusalem statute began to become more widespread in Byzantium, which by the beginning of the 14th century had become universal. ubiquitous there. In this regard, the liturgical books have been imperceptibly changed there for three centuries. This was one of the reasons for the difference in the liturgical practice of Russians and Greeks. In the 14th century, the difference between the Russian and Greek church rites was already quite noticeable, although the Russian liturgical books fully corresponded to the Greek books of the 10th-11th centuries. Those. there was no need to rewrite books at all! In addition, Nikon decided to rewrite books from Greek and ancient charate Russians. How did it really turn out?
But in fact, the cellar of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, Arseniy Sukhanov, is sent by Nikon to the East specifically for sources for the “right”, and instead of these sources he brings mostly manuscripts “not related to the correction of liturgical books” (books for home reading, for example, the words and conversations of John Chrysostom, the conversations of Macarius of Egypt, ascetic words of Basil the Great, the works of John of the Ladder, patericons etc.). Among these 498 manuscripts there were also about 50 manuscripts of even non-church writing, for example, the works of Hellenic philosophers - Troy, Afilistratus, Focleus "on sea animals", Stavron the philosopher "on earthquakes, etc.). Doesn't this mean that Arseniy Sukhanov was sent by Nikon for "sources" to avert his eyes? 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 the 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, procure the works of pagan philosophers, manuscripts on earthquakes and marine animals far away, instead of the necessary sources for correcting liturgical books. Therefore, he had Nikon's instructions for this...
But, in the end, it turned out even more “interesting” - the books were copied according to new Greek books that were printed in the Jesuit Parisian, Venetian printing houses. The question why Nikon needed the books of "pagans" (although it would be more correct to say Slavic Vedic books, not pagan ones) and ancient Russian charate books remains open. But it was with the church reform of Patriarch Nikon that the Great Book Burn in Rus' began, when whole carts of books were dumped into huge fires, doused with tar and set on fire. And those who resisted the “book rights” and the reform in general were sent there too! The Inquisition, carried out in Rus' by Nikon, did not spare anyone: boyars, peasants, and church dignitaries went to the fires. Well, during the time of Peter I, the impostor, the Great Book Gar gained such power that at the moment the Russian people have almost no original document, annals, manuscripts, books left. Peter I continued Nikon's work on a wide scale in erasing the memory of the Russian people. There is a legend among Siberian Old Believers that under Peter I, so many old printed books were burned at the same time that after that 40 pounds (which is equal to 655 kg!) Of molten copper fasteners were removed from the fires.
During Nikon's reforms, not only books were burning, but also people. The Inquisition marched not only across the expanses of Europe, and Rus', unfortunately, affected no less. Russian people were subjected to cruel persecutions and executions, whose conscience could not agree with church innovations and distortions. Many preferred to die than to betray the faith of their fathers and grandfathers. Faith Orthodox, not Christian. The word Orthodox has nothing to do with the church! Orthodoxy means Glory Rule. Rule - the world of the Gods, or the worldview taught by the Gods (Gods used to be called people who had reached certain abilities and reached the level of creation. In other words, they were just highly developed people). The Russian Orthodox Church got its name after the reforms of Nikon, who realized that it was not possible to defeat the native faith of the Rus, it remained to try to assimilate it with Christianity. The correct name of the ROC MP in the outside world is "Orthodox autocephalous church of the Byzantine persuasion."
Until the 16th century, even in Russian Christian chronicles, you will not find the term "Orthodoxy" in relation to Christian religion. In relation to the concept of “faith”, such epithets as “divine”, “true”, “Christian”, “right” and “immaculate” are used. And in foreign texts you will never come across this name even now, since Byzantine Christian church is called - orthodox, and translated into Russian - the correct teaching (in defiance of all the rest "wrong").
Orthodoxy - (from the Greek orthos - direct, correct and doxa - opinion), the "correct" system of views, fixed by the authoritative authorities of the 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 of the Middle Eastern countries (for example, the Greek Orthodox Church, Orthodox Islam or Orthodox Judaism). firm consistency in views The opposite of orthodoxy is heterodoxy and heresy.
Never and nowhere in other languages can you find the term "Orthodoxy" in relation to the Greek (Byzantine) religious form. The replacement of the terms of imagery by the external aggressive form was necessary because THEIR images did not work on our Russian soil, so we had to mimic the already existing familiar images.
The term "paganism" means "other tongues". This term previously served the Russians simply to identify people who speak other languages.
Change of the two-fingered sign of the cross to the three-fingered one. Why did Nikon decide to make such an “important” change in the rite? For even the Greek clergy admitted that nowhere, in any source, is it written about baptism with three fingers!
Regarding the fact that earlier the Greeks had two fingers, the historian N. Kapterev cites indisputable historical evidence in his book “Patriarch Nikon and His Opponents in Correcting Church Books”. For this book and other materials on the topic of the reform, Nikon Kapterev even tried to be expelled from the academy and tried in every possible way to impose a ban on the printing of his materials. Now, modern historians say that Kapterev was right about the fact that the two-fingeredness of the Slavs has always existed. But despite this, the rite of three-toed baptism has not yet been canceled in the church.
The fact that two-fingeredness has long existed in Rus' can be seen at least from the message of the Moscow Patriarch Job to the Georgian Metropolitan Nikolai: “Prayers, be baptized with two fingers ...”.
But two-fingered baptism is an ancient Slavic rite, which the Christian church originally borrowed from the Slavs, modifying it somewhat.
Here is what Svetlana Levashova writes in her book Revelation on this subject:
“... Going to battle, each warrior went through a kind of ritual and uttered the usual spell: “For HONOR! For CONSCIENCE! For FAITH!" At the same time, the soldiers made a magical movement - they touched the left and right shoulders with two fingers and the last - the middle of the forehead ... And the ritual of movement (or baptism) was "borrowed" by the same Christian church, adding to it the fourth, lower part ... the part of the devil. As a result, the well-known ritual of baptism with fingers turned out to all Christians, however, with a changed sequence - according to the Christian rite, fingers are first placed on the forehead, then on the stomach (in the navel), then on the right shoulder and finally on the left.
In general, if we analyze the pre-Nikonian church, we will see that a lot of it was still Vedic at that time. Elements of the solar cult of the Slavs were in everything - in clothes, and in rituals, and in singing, and in painting. All temples were strictly built on the sites of ancient Vedic temples. Inside the temples, walls and ceilings were decorated with swastika symbols. Judge for yourself, even the procession was performed after salting, i.e. according to the sun, and the baptismal procedure took place without a font with 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 the ancient rites, which could not be eradicated not only among the ordinary population, but also among the aristocracy, the boyars, decided to completely erase them from memory by simply replacing one rite with another! And he succeeded like no other before. This was possible 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 only a few centuries, very few people remained 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 also had a hard time to take into account.
Despite the baptism of Rus' in new religion, the people both celebrated and continue to celebrate their ancient Slavic holidays. Still! Probably everyone loves to eat pancakes on Maslenitsa and ride ice slides. Only few people know that this holiday used to be called Komoyeditsa. And it was celebrated at a completely different time. Only when Nikon tied the holidays of the Slavs to the lunar cult, there were slight shifts in some holidays. And Maslenitsa (Komoeditsa) is a real Slavic holiday in its essence. This holiday is so loved by the Russian people that the clergy are still struggling with it, but to no avail. The Slavs had many holidays, on which their beloved and dear Gods were revered.
The scientist and academician Nikolai Levashov, at one of his meetings with readers, told what meanness Patriarch Nikon committed:
It turns out that all that was necessary was to impose Christian holidays on the Slavic holidays, on the Gods - saints, and "it's in the bag," as they say.
Patriarch Nikon found a very correct solution to destroy the memory of our past. This is a replacement for one another!
So vilely, by the hands of Nikon, the transformation of a Russian man, free by nature and worldview, into a real slave, into "Ivan, who does not remember his kinship," continued.
And now let's see what kind of holidays and saints N. Levashov spoke about in his speech.
date
Russian holiday
Christian holiday
06.01
Feast of the god Veles
Christmas Eve
07.01
Kolyada
Nativity
24.02
Day of the god Veles (patron of cattle)
St. Day Vlasia (patron of animals)
02.03
Madder Day
St. Day Marianne
07.04
Maslenitsa (celebrated 50 days before Easter)
Annunciation
06.05
Day of Dazhbog (the first cattle pasture, an agreement between shepherds and the devil)
St. Day George the Victorious (patron of cattle and patron of warriors)
15.05
Day of Boris the Khlebnik (the holiday of the first sprouts)
Transfer of the relics of Saints Boris and Gleb
22.05
Day of the 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 Bathing Day (with obligatory bathing)
07.07
Ivan Kupala Day (during the holiday they poured water on each other, swam)
Nativity of John the Baptist
02.08
Day of the god Perun (god of thunder)
St. Day Elijah the Prophet (Thunderer)
19.08
Feast of First Fruits
Feast of the consecration of fruits
21.08
Day of the god Stribog (god of the winds)
Day of Miron Vetrogon (bringing the wind)
14.09
Day of Volkh Zmeevich
Saint Simon the Stylite Day
21.09
Holiday of women in childbirth
Nativity of the Virgin
10.11
Day of the Goddess Mokosh (the spinning goddess spinning the thread of fate)
Day of Paraskeva Friday (patron saint of sewing)
14.11
On this day, Svarog discovered iron to people
Day of Cosmas and Damian (patrons of blacksmiths)
21.11
Day of the gods Svarog and Simargl (Svarog - the god of sky and fire)
Day of Michael the Archangel
This table is taken from the book by D. Bayda and E. Lyubimova “Bible pictures, or what is” God's grace?».
Quite clearly and indicatively: every Slavic holiday on a Christian, every Slavic God according to the holy It is impossible to forgive Nikon for such a forgery, as well as churches in general, which can be safely called criminals. This is a real crime against the Russian people and its culture. And such traitors are erected monuments and continue to be honored. In 2006 in the city of Saransk, a monument was erected and consecrated to Nikon, the patriarch who trampled on the memory of the Russian people.
The “church” reform of Patriarch Nikon, as we already see, did not affect the church, it was clearly carried out against the traditions and foundations of the Russian people, against Slavic rites, and not church ones.
In general, the "reform" marks a milestone from which begins a sharp impoverishment of faith, spirituality and morality in Russian society. Everything new in rituals, architecture, icon painting, singing - western origin, which is also noted by civilian researchers.
The "church" reforms of the middle of the 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 buildings (with a pyramidal top) are known in Rus' even before the adoption of Christianity. This type of buildings is considered primordially Russian. That is why Nikon took care of such a “little thing” with his reforms, because it was a real “pagan” trace among the people. Under the threat of the death penalty, craftsmen, architects, as soon as they did not manage to keep the shape of a tent near temple buildings and worldly ones. Despite the fact that it was necessary to build domes with onion cupolas, 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 regions of the country.
Since then, temples have been built with domes, now the hipped form of buildings through the efforts of Nikon is completely forgotten. But our distant ancestors perfectly understood the laws of physics and the influence of the shape of objects on space, and it was not without reason that they built it with a tent top.
This is how Nikon cut off the memory of the people.
Also in wooden churches, the role of the refectory is changing, turning from a room in its own way into a purely cult 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, “brotherhoods” were held here, timed to coincide with certain solemn events. This is an echo of the traditions of our ancestors. The refectory was a waiting area for arrivals from neighboring villages. Thus, in terms of its functionality, the refectory carried precisely the essence of the world. Patriarch Nikon made a church brainchild out of the refectory. This transformation was intended, first of all, for that part of the aristocracy that still remembered the ancient traditions and roots, the purpose of the refectory and the holidays that were celebrated in it.
But not only the refectory was taken over by the church, but also the bell towers with bells, which have nothing to do with Christian churches at all.
Praying Christian clergy convened blows on a metal plate or wooden board - a beat, which existed in Rus' at least until the 19th century. Bells for monasteries were too expensive and were used only in rich monasteries. Sergius of Radonezh, when he called the brethren to a prayer service, beat it on the beater.
Now free-standing wooden bell towers have been preserved only in the north of Russia, and even then in very small numbers. In its central regions, they have long been replaced by stone ones.
“Nowhere, however, in pre-Petrine Russia, bell towers were built in connection with churches, as was the case in the West, but were constantly erected as separate buildings, only sometimes adjoining one or another side of the temple ... Bell towers, which are in close connection with the church and are part of its general plan, were wound up in Russia only in the 17th century!”, - writes A.V. Opolovnikov, a Russian scientist and restorer of Russian wooden monuments dchestvo.
It turns out that bell towers at monasteries and churches were widely used thanks to Nikon only in the 17th century!
Initially, the bell towers were built of wood and carried 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 motives. The bell towers were always built of wood with a tented top, which provided certain acoustic features to the ringing.
The church privatized its bell towers, bells and ringers. And with them our past. And Nikon played a major role in this.
Substituting Slavic traditions to alien Greek, Nikon did not ignore such an element of Russian culture as buffoonery. The appearance of a puppet theater in Rus' is connected with buffoon games. The first chronicle information about buffoons coincides in time with the appearance on the walls of the Kiev Sophia Cathedral of frescoes depicting buffoon performances. The monk-chronicler calls the buffoons servants of the devils, and the artist who painted the walls of the cathedral found it possible to include their image in church decorations along with icons. Buffoons were associated with the masses, and one of the types of their art was "gum", that is, satire. Buffoons are called "fools", that is, scoffers. Glum, mockery, satire will continue to be firmly associated with buffoons. First of all, the Christian clergy ridiculed buffoons, and when the Romanov dynasty came to power and supported church persecution of buffoons, they began to mock statesmen as well. The secular art of buffoons was hostile to the church and clerical ideology. The episodes of the fight against buffoonery are described in detail by Avvakum in his Life. The hatred that the churchmen had for the art of buffoons is evidenced by the records of the chroniclers (“The Tale of Bygone Years”). When the Amusing Closet (1571) and the Amusement Chamber (1613) were arranged at the Moscow Court, buffoons found themselves in the position of court jesters there. But it was during the time of Nikon that the persecution of buffoons reached its climax. They tried to impose on the Russian people that buffoons are servants of the devil. But for the people, the buffoon has always remained a “good fellow”, a daredevil. Attempts to present buffoons as jesters and servants of the devil failed, and buffoons were massively imprisoned, and subsequently subjected to torture and execution. In 1648 and 1657, Nikon sought the adoption of decrees from the tsar to ban buffoons. The persecution of buffoons was so massive that by the end of the 17th century they disappeared from the central regions. And already by the time of the reign of Peter I, they completely disappear, as a phenomenon of the Russian people.
Nikon did everything possible and impossible so that the true Slavic heritage disappeared from the expanses of Rus', and with it the Great Russian People.
Now it becomes obvious that there were no grounds at all for carrying out church reform. The grounds were completely different and had nothing to do with the church. This is, above 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, and such that we, the Russians, still have to piecemeal, literally bit by bit, remember who we are and our Great Past.
To be continued…
***
Materials used:
B.P. Kutuzov."The Secret Mission of Patriarch Nikon", ed. "Algorithm", 2007.
S. Levashova, "Revelation", v.2, ed. Mitrakov, 2011 N.F. Kapterev. "Patriarch Nikon and his opponents in the matter of correcting church books", ed. M.S Elova, 1913 D. Baida and E. Lyubimova,
"Bible Pictures, or What is God's Grace?", ed. Mitrakov, 2011 A.V. Opolovnikov.
"Russian wooden architecture", ed. "Art", 1983 What is Orthodoxy?
Mid 17th century marked by important changes that have taken place in the life of the Russian Orthodox Church. The history of the reform of rites carried out at that time and the book "right" (corrections of liturgical books) is quite fully covered in the works of historians of the Russian church. In particular, the books by A. V. Kartashov "Essays on the History of the Russian Church" (St. Petersburg, 2004), Metropolitan Macarius (Bulgakov) "History of the Russian Church. T. 5" (M., 1996), E. E. Golubinsky "History of the Russian Church. T. 2" (M., 1997). The Old Believer view of the reform of Nikon and Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich is reflected in the book by F. E. Melnikov " Short story Old Orthodox (Old Believer) Church" (Barnaul, 1999).
N. F. Kapterov, the author of the books Patriarch Nikon and His Opponents in the Correction of Church Rites (Moscow, 1887) and the two-volume book Patriarch Nikon and Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich (Sergiev Posad, 1909, 1912), attempted to investigate the history of the schism objectively. As early as 1912, he admitted that “The condemnation by the Council of 1667 of the Russian Old Rite was, as a more thorough and impartial study of this phenomenon shows, a complete misunderstanding, a mistake, and therefore should cause a new conciliar review of the whole matter and its correction, in the form of appeasement and destruction of the age-old strife between the Old Believers and New Believers, so that the Russian Church would still become one, what it was before the patriarchate Nikon".
The need to improve morality and revitalize spiritual life was first discussed by members of the circle of zealots of piety (the name was given by N. F. Kapterev) formed at the court of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich in the late 1940s. 17th century This small community of theologians and scribes included the tsar’s confessor Stefan Vonifatiev, the deacon of the Cathedral of the Annunciation Fyodor Ivanov, the archimandrite of the Novospassky Monastery in Moscow Nikon (later Metropolitan of Novgorod, and from 1652 – patriarch), the rector of the Kazan Cathedral on Red Square Ivan Neronov, the tsar’s bed-keeper F. M. Rtishchev and other persons of authority in this environment.
In 1649, Patriarch Paisios of Jerusalem arrived in Moscow and reproached Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich and Patriarch Joseph for deviating from the rites of the Greek Church. Indeed, in the XII-XV centuries. important changes took place in the ranks and rites of the Jerusalem, Constantinople, Antioch and Alexandrian Orthodox autocephalies (they switched to the Jerusalem Church Rule, compiled in the 5th century by the Monk Savva the Sanctified), after which they began to differ greatly from the Russian rites based on the ancient Studian Rule. This became especially noticeable after the frequent visits to Rus' by theologians from Serbia, Ukraine, and other Orthodox kingdoms. The matter was complicated by the difference in church rites that existed in different parts of the Muscovite state itself. This was largely due to discrepancies in the liturgical books. For many centuries, mistakes were made in the rewriting of sacred texts, many of which changed their meaning. When preparing them for printing at the end of the XVI-XVII centuries. these errors and discrepancies could not be corrected.
There were two possible ways to correct Russian liturgical books:
- 1) according to Greek books. It was this path that was ultimately chosen by the hierarchs of the Russian Orthodox Church;
- 2) according to ancient Russian "charate" (parchment) books. But all attempts to do this ran into an insurmountable obstacle: it was not possible to find two identical books and establish what corresponds to the "paternal" canon and what does not.
In justification of Nikon, who became patriarch in 1652 and began church reform, we note that he did not violate the canon, but changed only the ritual side of Russian Orthodoxy, i.e. brought it into line with the rites of other Orthodox countries.
From now on, it was necessary to make the sign of the cross (be baptized) not with two fingers, as before, but with three, to sing "Hallelujah" not two, but three times, during the procession to move not according to the sun (salting), but against it (from west to east), to make bows not on the earth, but on the waist, to honor the cross not only eight-pointed and six-pointed, but also four-pointed, to serve the liturgy not over seven prosphora, but over five yu, instead of the old spelling of the name of Christ - Jesus - write: Jesus.
The first step of the new patriarch on the path of reform was his sole order regarding the new rule to bow and make a sign of the cross. On March 14, 1653, a memory was sent to the churches, in which it was said that it was necessary to be baptized with three fingers and "make" bows to the belt. Immediately, some members of the circle of zealots of piety came forward with sharp protests against these innovations. Archpriest Ivan Neronov became their leader, and other prominent "lovers of God" joined him - archpriests Avvakum, Daniel, deacon Fyodor Ivanov. After Ivan Peronov’s exile to the Spaso-Kamensky Monastery on Kubinskoye Lake, Avvakum Petrov continued his work, as a sign of protest, he openly began to read sermons in the hayloft of Peronov’s house (after being expelled from the Kazan Cathedral, where he tried to take his place). It was a challenge to the authorities, and Avvakum was punished much more severely than his teacher - he was exiled to Siberia, to the wild Daurian region. He stayed there for 10 years and 8 months. During the years of exile in Siberia, Avvakum's family suffered severe hardships, and two of his sons died. But at the same time, the glory of an unbroken archpriest was born, suffering for his "true" faith.
Only in 1666, Ivan Neronov and Avvakum Petrov were brought to Moscow to the Ecumenical Church Council (a council with the participation of the ecumenical patriarchs), where they removed the dignity from Nikon, who had quarreled with Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich. The Moscow authorities believed that the removal of the main enemy of the Old Believers would create the basis for their reconciliation with the official church. In part, these expectations were justified, and Ivan Neronov repented, but Avvakum was not like that. Then he and several other Old Believers were cut short. In response to this, Habakkuk cursed the entire Council and the two ecumenical patriarchs who were present at it - Macarius of Antioch and Paisius of Alexandria. Not limited to this, he also blasphemed the tsar and publicly shouted that Alexei Mikhailovich would be eaten by worms in hell. Avvakum was handed over to the secular authorities and, together with other like-minded people, was exiled to Pustozersk, where he was burned 14 years later.
The speeches of the defenders of the "old faith" were supported by people from various strata of Russian society. It was then that the movement of Old Believers-schismatics arose, among which old handwritten books were preserved and copied and the rites changed by Nikon were observed.
Carried away by the preaching of their leaders (in the language of the official church - "schismatic teachers", "heresiarchs"), the Old Believers went to the forests, founded their sketes and communities there. The Old Believers strove to preserve the old way of life, among them drunkenness, smoking, fun, "demonic games" were condemned in every possible way.
There were fanatical fanatics among the schismatics, who called on their followers to self-immolation as a means of a new fiery baptism, cleansing from sin and filth.
- Kapterev N. F. Patriarch Nikon and Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich. Sergiev Posad, 1912. T. 2. S. 529.
- The Studian Charter is a collection of rules and guidelines that determines the order of services and regulates the use of the main liturgical books in the Byzantine liturgical tradition. It was based on the rules developed by the Monk Theodore the Studite (759-826) and recorded by an unknown person after his death. It was introduced into Rus' by the Monk Theodosius of the Caves around 1070.
Patriarch Nikon began to introduce new rites, new liturgical books and other “improvements” into the Russian Church without the approval of the council, without the consent of the council. He ascended the Moscow patriarchal throne in 1652. Even before being elevated to the patriarchate, he became close to Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich. Together they decided to remake the Russian Church in a new way: to introduce new rites, rituals, books into it, so that it would resemble in everything the Greek Church of their time, which had long ceased to be completely pious.
In the entourage of Patriarch Nikon, the international adventurer Arseniy Grek began to play the greatest role, a man, among other things, of a very dubious faith. He received his upbringing and education from the Jesuits, upon arrival in the East he converted to Islam, then again joined Orthodoxy, and then deviated into Catholicism. When he appeared in Moscow, he was sent to the Solovetsky Monastery as a dangerous heretic. From here, Nikon took him to himself and made him the main assistant in church affairs. This caused a murmur among the Russian people. But they were afraid to object to Nikon, since the tsar granted him unlimited rights in the affairs of the church. Relying on friendship and royal power, Nikon set about church reform decisively and boldly.
He began by strengthening his own power. Nikon had a cruel and stubborn character, kept himself proud and inaccessible, calling himself, following the example of the Pope, "extreme saint", was titled "great sovereign" and was one of the richest people in Russia. He treated the bishops arrogantly, did not want to call them his brothers, terribly humiliated and persecuted the rest of the clergy. Everyone was afraid and trembled before Nikon. The historian Klyuchevsky called Nikon a church dictator.
The reform began with the destruction of books. In the old days there were no printing houses, books were copied in monasteries and at episcopal courts by special masters. This skill, like icon painting, was considered sacred and was performed diligently and with reverence. The Russian people loved the book and knew how to take care of it as a shrine. The slightest description in a book, oversight or mistake was considered a great sin. That is why the numerous manuscripts of the old time that have survived to us are distinguished by the purity and beauty of writing, the correctness and accuracy of the text. It is difficult to find blots or strikethroughs in ancient manuscripts. There were fewer typos in them than in modern books of typos. Significant errors noted in previous books were eliminated even before Nikon, when the Printing House began to operate in Moscow. The correction of the books was carried out with great care and discretion.
It became different under Patriarch Nikon. At the council in 1654, it was decided to correct the liturgical books in ancient Greek and ancient Slavic, but in fact the correction was made according to new Greek books printed in the Jesuit printing houses of Venice and Paris. Even the Greeks themselves spoke of these books as distorted and erroneous.
Other ecclesiastical innovations followed the change in the books. The most notable innovations were the following:
- -instead of the two-fingered sign of the cross, which was adopted in Rus' from the Greek Orthodox Church along with Christianity and which is part of the Holy Apostolic tradition, three-fingeredness was introduced.
- - in old books, in accordance with the spirit of the Slavic language, the name of the Savior “Jesus” was always written and pronounced, in new books this name was changed to the Greek “Jesus”.
- - in old books it is established during baptism, wedding and consecration of the temple to make a walk around the sun as a sign that we are following the Sun-Christ. In the new books, circumvention against the sun is introduced.
- - in old books, in the Creed (8th member), it reads: “And in the Holy Spirit of the True and Life-Giving Lord”, but after the corrections, the word “True” was excluded.
- -instead of the special, i.e., double hallelujah, which the Russian church has been doing since ancient times, the trilabial (that is, triple) hallelujah was introduced.
- -divine liturgy in Byzantium, and then in Ancient Rus' performed on seven prosphora; new "spravschiki" introduced five prosphora, i.e., two prosphora were excluded.
Nikon and his assistants boldly encroached on changing church institutions, customs, and even apostolic traditions of the Russian Orthodox Church adopted at the Baptism of Rus'. These changes in church laws, traditions and rituals could not but cause a sharp rebuff from the Russian people, who sacredly kept the ancient holy books and traditions. In addition to the very damage to books and church customs, the violent measures by which Nikon and the tsar who supported him planted these innovations provoked sharp resistance among the people. Russian people were subjected to cruel persecutions and executions, whose conscience could not agree with church innovations and distortions. Many preferred to die than to betray the faith of their fathers and grandfathers.
Just one example of how church reform was done.
Since the most famous example of Nikon's reforms is the change in the composition of the fingers, let us dwell on this issue a little. The entire Russian Church then made the sign of the cross with two fingers: three fingers (the thumb and the last two) were folded in the name of the Holy Trinity, and two (index and great middle) in the name of the two natures in Christ - divine and human. This is how the ancient Greek Church taught to fold fingers to express the main truths of the Orthodox faith. Double-fingered comes from apostolic times. His image is contained in the mosaics of the 4th century. The Holy Fathers testify that Christ Himself blessed the disciples with just such a sign. Nikon canceled it. He did it arbitrarily, without a conciliar decision, without the consent of the Church, and even without the advice of any bishop. In return, he ordered to be marked with three fingers: to fold the first three fingers in the name of St. Trinity, and the last two “have idle”, that is, they do not depict anything. Christians said: the new patriarch abolished Christ.
Three-fingered was a clear innovation. Shortly before Nikon, it appeared among the Greeks, they also brought it to Russia. Not a single holy father and not a single ancient cathedral testifies to tripartite. Therefore, the Russian people did not want to accept it. Not only was the three fingers as a symbol a much less expressive and accurate depiction of what we believe in, it contained an obvious inaccuracy of confession, for when we make the sign of the cross on ourselves, it turns out that it is St. The Trinity was crucified on the cross, and not One of Her faces - Jesus Christ in his humanity.
But Nikon did not think to reckon with any arguments. He began his reforms not with the blessing of God, but with curses and anathemas. Taking advantage of the arrival in Moscow of Patriarch Macarius of Antioch and other hierarchs from the East, Nikon invited them to speak out in favor of a new signification. They wrote the following: “Tradition has been received from the beginning of the faith from the holy apostles and holy fathers, and the holy seven councils to create the sign of the honest cross with the first three fingers of the right hand. And whoever from Orthodox Christians does not create a taco cross, according to the tradition of the Eastern Church, holding a hedgehog from the beginning of faith even to this day, is a heretic and imitator of the Armenians. And for this reason, his imam was excommunicated from the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, and cursed.”
Such a terrible condemnation was first proclaimed in the presence of many people, then set out in writing and printed in the book “Table” published by Nikon. How thunder struck the Russian people with these reckless curses and excommunications. The Russian pious people, the entire Russian Church, could not agree with such an extremely unfair condemnation proclaimed by Nikon and his associates - the Greek bishops, especially since they spoke an obvious lie, as if both the apostles and St. fathers established tripartite. But Nikon did not stop there. He needed not only to destroy, but also to spit on the antiquities of Orthodoxy.
In the book "Table" he added new condemnations to those just given. He went so far as to blaspheme the double-fingeredness as supposedly containing the terrible “heresies and wickedness” of the ancient heretics condemned ecumenical councils(Arians and Nestorians). In the Tablet, Orthodox Christians are cursed and anathematized for confessing the Holy Spirit as True in the creed. In essence, Nikon and his assistants cursed the Russian Church for a completely Orthodox confession of faith and for ancient church traditions.
These actions of Nikon and his like-minded people made them apostates from the holy Church.
Nikon's activities met with strong opposition from a number of spiritual figures of that time: Bishop Pavel Kolomensky, Archpriests Avvakum Petrov, John Neronov, Daniel from Kostroma, Loggin from Murom and others. The leaders of the religious opposition enjoyed great respect among the people for their high personal qualities. They dared to speak the truth in the eyes of the powerful of this world, did not care at all about their personal benefits, served the Church and God with all devotion, sincere and ardent love. In oral sermons, in letters, they boldly denounced all the perpetrators of church misfortunes, not being afraid to name the first names of the patriarch and tsar. What is striking in them is their willingness to endure suffering and torment for the cause of Christ, for the truth of God.
Faithful and steadfast champions of church antiquity were soon subjected to cruel tortures and executions. The first martyrs for the right faith were the archpriests John Neronov, Loggin, Daniel, Avvakum and Bishop Pavel Kolomensky. They were expelled from Moscow in the very first year of Nikon's reform activity (1653-1654).
At the council of 1654, convened on the issue of book corrections, Bishop Pavel Kolomensky courageously declared to Nikon: “We will not accept the new faith,” for which he was deprived of the chair without a conciliar court. Right at the cathedral, Patriarch Nikon personally beat Bishop Paul, tore off his mantle and ordered him to be immediately sent into exile. In a distant northern monastery, Bishop Pavel was subjected to severe tortures and, finally, secretly killed.
The people said that an executioner and a murderer sat on the primatial throne. Everyone trembled before him, and none of the bishops dared to come forward with a courageous word of reproof. Timidly and silently they agreed with his demands and orders. Those who could not step over their conscience, but were not able to resist, tried to retire. So, the Bishop of Vyatka Alexander, while maintaining personal loyalty to the old faith, chose to leave his chair, retiring to one of the monasteries.
Unfortunately, among the Russian clergy of the mid-17th century. there turned out to be a significant number of cowardly people who did not dare to argue with the cruel authorities. Therefore, the main opponent of Nikon was the church people: simple monks and laity, the best, spiritually strong and devoted sons of Orthodoxy. There were many of them, perhaps even the majority. Old Believers from the very beginning was a folk faith.
Nikon stayed on the patriarchal throne for seven years. With his lust for power and pride, he managed to push everyone away from him. He also broke with the king. The patriarch interfered in the affairs of the state, even dreamed of becoming higher than the king and completely subordinating him to his will. Aleksei Mikhailovich began to be weary of his "sobin's friend" and lost interest in him.
Then Nikon decided to influence the king with a threat, which he had previously succeeded in doing. He decided to publicly renounce the patriarchate, counting on the fact that the tsar would be touched by his abdication and would beg him not to leave the primatial throne. This would be a good opportunity to restore and strengthen their influence on the king.
At a solemn liturgy in the Assumption Cathedral in the Kremlin on July 10, 1658, he announced from the pulpit, addressing the clergy and people: “From laziness I have become horny, and you have become hoarse from me. From now on I will not be your patriarch; but if I think of becoming a patriarch, I will be anathema.” Immediately on the pulpit, Nikon took off his bishop's vestments, put on a black mantle and a monastic hood, took a simple crutch and left the cathedral.
However, Nikon was cruelly mistaken in his calculations. The king, having learned about the departure of the patriarch, did not stop him. Nikon, hiding in the Resurrection Monastery, nicknamed by him “New Jerusalem”, began to wait for the reaction of the king. He still behaved authoritatively and arbitrarily: he performed ordinations, condemned and cursed the bishops. But the vain expectation hardened him so much that he even cursed the king and his entire family.
Of course, he could not come to terms with his new position as only a monastic inhabitant. Nikon tried to return to patriarchal power again. One night, he suddenly arrived in Moscow at the Assumption Cathedral during a service and sent to notify the tsar of his arrival. But the king did not come to him. Frustrated, Nikon returned to the monastery.
Nikon's flight from the patriarchal throne introduced a new disorder in church life. On this occasion, in 1660, the tsar convened a council in Moscow. The council decided to elect a new patriarch. But Nikon at this cathedral burst into abuse, called him "demonic host". The tsar and the bishops did not know what to do with Nikon.
At that time, a secret Jesuit Greek “Metropolitan” Paisius Ligarid arrived in Moscow with forged letters. Then reliable reports were received that Paisius Ligarides was in the service of the Roman pope and that the eastern patriarchs had deposed and cursed him for this. But in Moscow they turned a blind eye to this, probably because Paisius Ligarides could be very useful to the tsar. This clever and resourceful person was entrusted with the work of Nikon. Paisius immediately became the head of Russian church affairs. He declared that Nikon “should be damned as a heretic,” and that for this it was necessary to convene a large council in Moscow with the participation of the Eastern patriarchs. In response, Nikon helplessly scolded the Greek “thief”, “non-Christ”, “dog”, “self-appointed”, “muzhik”.
For the trial of Nikon and the consideration of other church matters, Tsar Alexei convened a council in 1666, which was continued in the following year, 1667. The eastern patriarchates, Paisius of Alexandria and Macarius of Antioch, arrived at the council. The invitation of these patriarchs was unsuccessful. As it turned out later, they themselves were deposed from their thrones by a council of eastern hierarchs, and therefore did not have the canonical right to decide any church affairs.
The trial of Nikon began. The council found Nikon guilty of unauthorized flight from the pulpit and other crimes. The patriarchs called him "liar", "deceiver", "tormentor", "murderer", compared with Satan, said that he “even worse than satan”, recognized him as a heretic because he ordered not to confess thieves and robbers before his death. Nikon did not remain in debt and called names of the patriarchs “imposters”, “Turkish slaves”, “tramps”, “venal people” etc. In the end, the cathedral deprived Nikon of his holy dignity and made him a simple monk.
After changing his fate, Nikon himself changed in relation to his reforms. While still on the patriarchal throne, he sometimes said that “old servants are kind” and by them “you can serve the service of God”. Having left the throne, he began to publish books in the monastery that agreed with the old printed ones. With this return to the old text, Nikon, as it were, passed judgment on his own book reform, recognizing it as unnecessary and useless.
Nikon died in 1681, not reconciled either with the tsar, or with the bishops, or with the Church.
