Money

Why did the church split in the 17th century. Church schism (17th century). The reaction of the people to the church schism

The career of the Moscow Patriarch Nikon developed very rapidly. In a fairly short period of time, the son of a peasant, who was tonsured a monk, did not become abbot of the local monastery. Then, having made friends with Alexei Mikhailovich, the ruling tsar, he became abbot of the already Moscow Novospassky monastery. After a two-year tenure as Metropolitan of Novgorod, he was elected Patriarch of Moscow.

His aspirations were aimed at turning the Russian Church into the center of Orthodoxy for the whole world. The reforms primarily concerned the unification of rituals and the establishment of the same church service in all churches. As a model, Nikon took the rites and rules of the Greek Church. Innovations were accompanied by mass discontent of the people. The result was the 17th century.

Nikon's opponents - the Old Believers - did not want to accept the new rules, they called for a return to the order adopted before the reform. Among the adherents of the former foundation, Archpriest Avvakum stood out in particular. The disagreements that resulted in the church schism of the 17th century consisted in a dispute about whether to unify service church books according to the Greek or Russian model. Also, they could not come to a consensus on whether to be baptized with three or two fingers, along the solar path, or against it to make a procession. But these are only external causes of the church schism. The main obstacle for Nikon was the intrigues of the Orthodox hierarchs and boyars, who were worried that the changes would entail a decline in the authority of the church among the population, and hence their authority and power. With passionate sermons, schismatic teachers carried away a considerable number of peasants. They fled to Siberia, the Urals, the North, and there they formed settlements of the Old Believers. The common people associated the deterioration of their lives with Nikon's transformations. Thus, the church schism of the 17th century also became a kind of popular protest.

Its most powerful wave swept in 1668-1676, when this monastery had thick walls and a large supply of food, which attracted opponents of the reforms. They flocked here from all over Russia. Razintsy also hid here. For eight years, 600 people held out in the fortress. And yet there was a traitor who let the king's troops into the monastery through a secret hole. As a result, only 50 defenders of the monastery survived.

Archpriest Avvakum and his associates were exiled to Pustozersk. There they spent 14 years in an earthen prison, and then were burned alive. Since then, the Old Believers began to set themselves on fire as a sign of disagreement with the reforms of the Antichrist, the new patriarch.

Nikon himself, through whose fault the church schism of the 17th century happened, had an equally tragic fate. And all because he took on too much, allowed himself too much. Nikon finally received the coveted title of "great sovereign" and, declaring that he wanted to be the patriarch of all Russia, and not Moscow, defiantly left the capital in 1658. Eight years later, in 1666, at a church council with the participation of the Patriarchs of Antioch and Alexandria, who also had all the powers from the patriarchs of Jerusalem and Constantinople, Patriarch Nikon was removed from his post. He was sent to what near Vologda, into exile. Nikon returned from there after the death of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich. The former patriarch died in 1681 near Yaroslavl, and was buried in the city of Istra in Voskresensky according to his own plan once built.

The religious crisis in the country, as well as the dissatisfaction of the people on other issues, required immediate changes in line with the challenge of the times. And the answer to these requirements began in the early 18th century.

During the Church Schism of the 17th century, the following key events can be distinguished:

1652 - Nikon's church reform

1654, 1656 - church councils, excommunication and exile of opponents of the reform

1658 - gap between Nikon and Alexei Mikhailovich

1666 - church council with the participation of the ecumenical patriarchs. The deprivation of Nikon of the patriarchal dignity, the curse of the schismatics.

1667-1676 - Solovetsky uprising.

Separation from the Russian Orthodox Church of part of the believers who did not recognize the church reform of Patriarch Nikon (1653 - 1656); religious and social movement that arose in Russia in the 17th century. (See the "Church Schism" chart) In 1653, wishing to strengthen the Russian Orthodox Church, Patriarch Nikon set about implementing a church reform designed to eliminate discrepancies in books and rituals that had accumulated over many centuries, and to unify the theological system throughout Russia. Part of the clergy, led by archpriests Avvakum and Daniel, suggested that the reform be based on ancient Russian theological books. Nikon, on the other hand, decided to use Greek samples, which, in his opinion, would facilitate the unification of all Orthodox churches in Europe and Asia under the auspices of the Moscow Patriarchate and thereby increase his influence on the tsar. The patriarch was supported by Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, and Nikon began to reform. The Printing House began issuing revised and newly translated books. Instead of the old Russian, Greek ritualism was introduced: the two-finger was replaced by the three-finger, the four-pointed cross instead of the eight-pointed was declared a symbol of faith, and so on. The innovations were secured by the Council of the Russian Clergy in 1654, and in 1655 they were approved by the Patriarch of Constantinople on behalf of all the Eastern Orthodox Churches. However, the reform, carried out hastily and forcibly, without preparing the Russian society for it, caused a strong confrontation among the Russian clergy and believers. In 1656, the defenders of the old rites, whose recognized leader was Archpriest Avvakum, were excommunicated from the church. But this measure did not help. There was a current of Old Believers who created their own church organizations. The schism acquired a massive character after the decision of the Church Council of 1666-1667. about executions and exiles of ideologues and opponents of the reform. The Old Believers, fleeing persecution, went to the distant forests of the Volga region, the European north, to Siberia, where they founded schismatic communities - sketes. The response to the persecution was also the actions of mass self-immolation, posting (starvation). The movement of the Old Believers also acquired a social character. The old faith became a sign in the struggle against the strengthening of serfdom. The most powerful protest against church reform manifested itself in the Solovetsky uprising. The rich and famous Solovetsky Monastery openly refused to recognize all the innovations introduced by Nikon, to obey the decisions of the Council. An army was sent to Solovki, but the monks shut themselves up in the monastery and put up armed resistance. The siege of the monastery began, which lasted about eight years (1668 - 1676). The monks' stand for the old faith served as an example for many. After the suppression of the Solovetsky uprising, the persecution of schismatics intensified. In 1682 Habakkuk and many of his supporters were burned. In 1684, a decree followed, according to which the Old Believers were to be tortured, and in case of not subjugation, they were to be burned. However, these repressive measures did not liquidate the movement of supporters of the old faith; their number in the 17th century constantly grew, many of them left the borders of Russia. In the XVIII century. there has been a weakening of the persecution of schismatics by the government and the official church. At the same time, several independent trends emerged in the Old Believers.

In the future, Alexei Mikhailovich saw the unification of the Orthodox peoples of Eastern Europe and the Balkans. But, as mentioned above, in Ukraine they were baptized with three fingers, in the Muscovite state - with two. Consequently, the tsar faced the problem of an ideological plan - to impose his own rites on the entire Orthodox world (which had long since accepted the innovations of the Greeks) or to submit to the dominant three-fingered sign. The Tsar and Nikon went the second way.

As a result, the root cause of Nikon's church reform, which split Russian society, was political - the power-hungry desire of Nikon and Alexei Mikhailovich for the idea of a world Orthodox kingdom based on the theory of "Moscow - the third Rome", which received a rebirth in this era. In addition, the eastern hierarchs (i.e., representatives of the higher clergy), who frequented Moscow, constantly cultivated in the minds of the tsar, the patriarch and their entourage the idea of the future supremacy of Russia over the entire Orthodox world. The seeds fell on fertile ground.

As a result, the "ecclesiastical" reasons for the reform (bringing into uniformity the practice of religious worship) occupied a secondary position.

The reasons for the reform were undoubtedly objective. The process of centralization of the Russian state - as one of the centralization processes in history - inevitably required the development of a single ideology capable of rallying the broad masses of the population around the center.

Essence

Church schism and its consequences. The growing Russian autocracy, especially in the era of the formation of absolutism, demanded further subordination of the church to the state. By the middle of the XVII century. it turned out that in the Russian liturgical books, which were copied from century to century, many clerical errors, distortions, and changes had accumulated. The same thing happened in church ceremonies. In Moscow, there were two different opinions on the issue of correcting church books. Supporters of one, to which the government was also attached, considered it necessary to correct the books according to the Greek originals. They were opposed by "zealots of ancient piety." The circle of zealots was headed by Stefan Vonifatiev, the tsar's confessor. The work of carrying out church reform was entrusted to Nikon. Power-hungry, with a strong will and vigorous energy, the new patriarch soon dealt the first blow to "ancient piety." By his decree, the correction of liturgical books began to be made according to the Greek originals. Some ceremonies were also unified: the sign of the cross was replaced with a three-finger, the structure of the church service was changed, etc. Initially, opposition to Nikon arose in the spiritual circles of the capital, mainly from the side of "zealots of piety." Archpriests Avvakum and Daniel wrote objections to the king. Not having reached the goal, they began to spread their views among the lower and middle strata of the rural and urban population. Church Cathedral 1666-1667 declared a curse on all opponents of the reform, brought them to trial by the "city authorities", who were to be guided by the article of the Code of 1649, which provided for the burning at the stake of anyone "who lays blasphemy on the Lord God." In different parts of the country, bonfires blazed, on which zealots of antiquity died. After the council of 1666-1667. disputes between supporters and opponents of the reform gradually acquired a social connotation and marked the beginning of a split in the Russian Orthodox Church, the emergence of religious opposition (Old Believers or Old Believers). The Old Believers are a complex movement, both in terms of the composition of the participants and in essence. The general slogan was a return to antiquity, a protest against all innovations. Sometimes in the actions of the Old Believers, who evaded the census and the performance of duties in favor of the feudal state, one can unravel social motives. An example of the development of a religious struggle into a social one is the Solovetsky uprising of 1668-1676. The uprising began as a purely religious one. The local monks refused to accept the newly printed "Nikonian" books. Monastery Cathedral 1674 issued a decree: "stand and fight against government people" to death. Only with the help of a defector monk, who showed the besiegers a secret passage, the archers managed to break into the monastery and break the resistance of the rebels. Of the 500 defenders of the monastery, only 50 survived. The crisis of the church also manifested itself in the case of Patriarch Nikon. Implementing the reform, Nikon defended the ideas of Caesaropapism, i.e. superiority of spiritual authority over secular. As a result of Nikon's power-hungry habits, in 1658 there was a gap between the tsar and the patriarch. If the reform of the church carried out by the patriarch met the interests of the Russian autocracy, then Nikon's theocracy clearly contradicted the tendencies of growing absolutism. When Nikon was informed of the tsar's anger at him, he publicly resigned from his rank in the Assumption Cathedral and left for the Resurrection Monastery.

Consequences

The result of the split was a certain confusion in the people's worldview. The Old Believers perceived history as "eternity in the present", that is, as a stream of time in which everyone has his own clearly marked place and is responsible for everything he has done. The idea of the Last Judgment for the Old Believers had not a mythological, but a deeply moral meaning. For the New Believers, the idea of the Last Judgment ceased to be taken into account in historical forecasts and became the subject of rhetorical exercises. The attitude of the New Believers was less connected with eternity, more with earthly needs. They were emancipated to a certain extent, they accepted the motive of the transience of time, they had more material practicality, a desire to cope with time in order to achieve quick practical results.

In the struggle against the Old Believers, the official church was forced to turn to the state for assistance, willy-nilly taking steps towards subordination to secular power. Alexey Mikhailovich took advantage of this, and his son Peter finally dealt with the independence of the Orthodox Church. Petrovsky absolutism was built on the fact that he freed state power from all religious and moral norms.

The state persecuted the Old Believers. Repressions against them expanded after the death of Alexei, during the reign of Fyodor Alekseevich and Princess Sophia. In 1681, any distribution of ancient books and writings of the Old Believers was prohibited. In 1682, on the orders of Tsar Fedor, the most prominent leader of the schism, Avvakum, was burned. Under Sophia, a law was issued that finally banned any activity of schismatics. They showed exceptional spiritual stamina, responded to repressions with actions of mass self-immolation, when people burned entire clans and communities.

The remaining Old Believers brought a kind of stream into Russian spiritual and cultural thought, did a lot to preserve antiquity. They were more literate than the Nikonians. The Old Believers continued the ancient Russian spiritual tradition, which prescribes a constant search for truth and a tense moral tone. The schism hit this tradition when, after the fall of the prestige of the official church, secular authorities took control of the education system. There has been a change in the main goals of education: instead of a person - the bearer of a higher spiritual principle, they began to train a person who performs a narrow circle of certain functions.

During the Church Schism of the 17th century, the following key events can be distinguished:
1652 - Nikon's church reform
1654, 1656 - church councils, excommunication and exile of opponents of the reform
1658 - gap between Nikon and Alexei Mikhailovich
1666 - church council with the participation of the ecumenical patriarchs. The deprivation of Nikon of the patriarchal dignity, the curse of the schismatics.
1667-1676 - Solovetsky uprising.

And the following key figures who directly or indirectly influenced the development of events and the denouement:
Alexey Mikhailovich,
Patriarch Nikon,
Archpriest Avvakum,
noblewoman Morozova
We will begin our review of the events of those distant times with the personality of Patriarch Nikon himself, the main "culprit" of the Church schism.

Nikon's personality

The fate of Nikon is unusual and cannot be compared with anything. He rapidly ascended from the very bottom of the social ladder to its top. Nikita Minov (that was the name of the future patriarch in the world) was born in 1605 in the village of Veldemanovo near Nizhny Novgorod "from simple but pious parents, a father named Mina and mother Mariama." His father was a peasant, according to some sources - a Mordvin by nationality.
Nikita's childhood was not easy, his own mother died, and his stepmother was evil and cruel. The boy was distinguished by his abilities, quickly learned to read and write, and this opened the way for him to the clergy. He was ordained a priest, married, had children. It would seem that the life of a poor rural priest was forever predetermined and destined. But suddenly three of his children die of illness, and this tragedy caused such a spiritual shock to the spouses that they decided to leave and take the veil in the monastery.
Nikita's wife went to the Alekseevsky convent, and he himself went to the Solovetsky Islands to the Anzersky Skete and was tonsured a monk under the name Nikon. He became a monk in his prime. In his appearance, a strong peasant sourdough was guessed. He was tall, powerfully built, and possessed incredible stamina. His character was quick-tempered, he did not tolerate objections. There was not a drop of monastic humility in him. Three years later, having quarreled with the founder of the monastery and all the brethren, Nikon fled from the island in a storm in a fishing boat. By the way, many years later, it was the Solovetsky Monastery that became a stronghold of resistance to Nikonian innovations. Nikon went to the Novgorod diocese, he was accepted into the Kozheozersk hermitage, taking instead of a contribution the books he had copied. Nikon spent some time in a secluded cell, but after a few years the brethren chose him as their abbot. In 1646 he went to Moscow on business of the monastery. There, the abbot of a seedy monastery attracted the attention of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich. By his nature, Alexei Mikhailovich was generally subject to outside influence, and at the age of seventeen, having reigned for less than a year, he needed spiritual guidance. Nikon made such a strong impression on the young tsar that he made him archimandrite of the Novospassky Monastery, the ancestral tomb of the Romanovs. Here, every Friday, matins were served in the presence of Alexei Mikhailovich, and after matins, the archimandrite led long moralizing conversations with the sovereign. Nikon witnessed the "salt riot" in Moscow and participated in the Zemsky Sobor, which adopted the Cathedral Code. His signature was under this set of laws, but later Nikon called the Code "a cursed book", expressing dissatisfaction with the restrictions on the privileges of monasteries.
In March 1649, Nikon became Metropolitan of Novgorod and Velikolutsk. It happened at the insistence of the tsar, and Nikon was ordained a metropolitan while Metropolitan Avfoniy of Novgorod was still alive. Nikon showed himself to be an energetic lord. By royal order, he ruled the court on criminal cases in the Sofia courtyard. In 1650 Novgorod was seized by popular unrest, the power in the city passed from the governor to the elected government, which met in the Zemstvo hut. Nikon cursed the new rulers by name, but the Novgorodians did not want to listen to him. He himself wrote about this: “I went out and began to persuade them, but they grabbed me with all sorts of outrage, hit me with a dagger in the chest and bruised my chest, beat me on the sides with fists and stones, holding them in their hands ...”. When the unrest was suppressed, Nikon took an active part in the search for the rebellious Novgorodians.
Nikon proposed to transfer to the Assumption Cathedral of the Kremlin the coffin of Patriarch Hermogenes from the Chudov Monastery, the coffin of Patriarch Job from Staritsa and the relics of Metropolitan Philip from Solovki. For the relics of Philip, Nikon went personally. S. M. Solovyov emphasized that this was a far-reaching political action: “This celebration had more than one religious significance: Philip died as a result of a clash between secular and church authorities; he was overthrown by Tsar John for bold exhortations, he was put to death by guardsman Malyuta Skuratov. God glorified the martyr holiness, but the secular authorities have not yet brought solemn repentance for their sin, and by this repentance they have not given up the opportunity to ever repeat such an act regarding church authority. Nikon, taking advantage of the religiosity and gentleness of the young tsar, forced the secular authorities to bring this solemn repentance. "
While Nikon was in Solovki, Patriarch Joseph, who was famous for his exorbitant covetousness, died in Moscow. The tsar wrote in a letter to the metropolitan that he had to come to rewrite the silver treasury of the deceased - “and if he didn’t go himself, I think that there would be nothing to find even half,” however, the tsar himself admitted: “A little and I did not encroach on other vessels, but by the grace of God I refrained from your holy prayers; to her, to her, holy lord, I did not touch anything ... ". Alexei Mikhailovich urged the metropolitan to return as soon as possible for the election of the patriarch: "and without you we will by no means undertake anything."
The Metropolitan of Novgorod was the main contender for the patriarchal throne, but he had serious opponents. The boyars were frightened by the imperious manners of the peasant son, who humbled the noblest princes. They whispered in the palace: “There has never been such a dishonor, the tsar betrayed us to the metropolitans.” Nikon's relationship with his former friends in the circle of zealots of piety was not easy. They filed a petition to the tsar and tsarina, offering the tsar's confessor Stefan Vonifatyev as patriarch. Explaining their act, the church historian Metropolitan Macarius (M.P. Bulgakov) noted: “These people, especially Vonifatiev and Neronov, who were accustomed under the weak Patriarch Joseph to run affairs in church administration and court, wished now to retain all power over the Church and not without reason they feared Nikon, having sufficiently familiarized themselves with his character. Nevertheless, the favor of the king decided the matter. On July 22, 1652, the church council informed the tsar, who was waiting in the Golden Chamber, that one "reverent and reverend man" named Nikon had been chosen out of twelve candidates.
It was not enough for the imperious Nikon to be elected to the patriarchal throne. He refused this honor for a long time, and only after Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich prostrated before him in the Assumption Cathedral, he had mercy and put forward the following condition: "If you promise to obey me as your chief archpastor and father in everything that I will proclaim to you about the dogmas of God and about the rules, in that case, at your request and request, I will no longer renounce the great bishopric. Then the tsar, the boyars and the whole consecrated Cathedral made a vow before the Gospel to fulfill everything that Nikon offered. Thus, at the age of forty-seven, Nikon became the seventh Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia.

Reasons for the split.

At the beginning of the XVII century. - "rebellious age" - after the Time of Troubles, in February 1613, Mikhail Fedorovich Romanov took the throne of the Russian state, initiating the 300-year rule of the Romanov dynasty. In 1645, Mikhail Fedorovich was succeeded by his son, Alexei Mikhailovich, who received the nickname "The Quietest" in history.
By the middle of the XVII century. the restoration of the economy destroyed by the Time of Troubles led to positive results (although it proceeded at a slow pace) - domestic production is gradually revived, the first manufactories appear, and there is an increase in the growth of foreign trade turnover. At the same time, state power and autocracy are being strengthened, serfdom is being legally formalized, which caused strong dissatisfaction among the peasantry and became the cause of many unrest in the future. Suffice it to name the largest explosion of popular discontent - the uprising of Stepan Razin in 1670-1671.
The rulers of Russia under Mikhail Fedorovich and his father Filaret pursued a cautious foreign policy, which is not surprising - the consequences of the Time of Troubles made themselves felt. So, in 1634, Russia stopped the war for the return of Smolensk, in the Thirty Years' War (1618-1648), which broke out in Europe, they practically did not take any part.
A striking and truly historic event in the 50s. In the 17th century, during the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich, the son and successor of Mikhail Fedorovich, the Left-Bank Ukraine joined Russia, which fought against the Commonwealth led by B. Khmelnitsky. In 1653, the Zemsky Sobor decided to accept Ukraine under its protection, and on January 8, 1654, the Ukrainian Rada in Pereyaslav approved this decision and took an oath of allegiance to the tsar.
In the future, Alexei Mikhailovich saw the unification of the Orthodox peoples of Eastern Europe and the Balkans. But, as mentioned above, in Ukraine they were baptized with three fingers, in the Muscovite state - with two. Consequently, the tsar faced the problem of an ideological plan - to impose his own rites on the entire Orthodox world (which had long since accepted the innovations of the Greeks) or to submit to the dominant three-fingered sign. The Tsar and Nikon went the second way.
As a result, the root cause of Nikon's church reform, which split Russian society, was political - the power-hungry desire of Nikon and Alexei Mikhailovich for the idea of a world Orthodox kingdom based on the theory of "Moscow - the third Rome", which received a rebirth in this era. In addition, the eastern hierarchs (i.e., representatives of the higher clergy), who frequented Moscow, constantly cultivated in the minds of the tsar, the patriarch and their entourage the idea of the future supremacy of Russia over the entire Orthodox world. The seeds fell on fertile ground.
As a result, the "ecclesiastical" reasons for the reform (bringing into uniformity the practice of religious worship) occupied a secondary position.
The reasons for the reform were undoubtedly objective. The process of centralization of the Russian state - as one of the centralization processes in history - inevitably required the development of a single ideology capable of rallying the broad masses of the population around the center.
Religious forerunners of Nikon's church reform.
Nikon's reforms did not start from scratch. During the era of feudal fragmentation, the political unity of the Russian lands was lost, while the church remained the last all-Russian organization, and sought to mitigate the anarchy within the disintegrating state. Political fragmentation led to the disintegration of a single church organization, and in various lands the development of religious thought and rituals went its own way.
Big problems in the Russian state caused the need for a census of sacred books. As is known, book printing did not exist in Russia almost until the end of the 16th century. (it appeared in the West a century earlier), so the sacred books were copied by hand. Of course, mistakes were inevitably made during rewriting, the original meaning of the sacred books was distorted, therefore, discrepancies arose in the interpretation of the rites and the meaning of their performance.
At the beginning of the XVI century. not only spiritual authorities, but also secular ones, spoke about the need to correct books. Maxim the Greek (in the world - Mikhail Trivolis), a learned monk from the Athos monastery, who arrived in Russia in 1518, was chosen as an authoritative translator.
Having familiarized himself with Russian Orthodox books, Maxim said that they needed to be brought into uniformity, corrected radically according to the Greek and Old Slavonic originals. Otherwise, Orthodoxy in Russia can not even be considered as such. Thus, it was said about Jesus Christ: “two know Me [me].” Or: about God the Father it was said that He was “unmothered to the Son.”
Maxim Grek set to work as a translator and philologist, highlighting different ways of interpreting the Holy Scriptures - literal, allegorical and spiritual (sacred). The principles of philological science used by Maxim were the most advanced for that era. In the person of Maxim Grek, Russia for the first time encountered an encyclopedic scientist who had deep knowledge in the field of theology and secular sciences. Therefore, perhaps, his further fate turned out to be somewhere natural.
With such an attitude towards Orthodox books, Maxim caused distrust in himself (and in the Greeks in general), since the Russian people considered themselves the guardians and pillars of Orthodoxy, and he - quite rightly - made them doubt their own messianism. In addition, after the conclusion of the Florentine Union, the Greeks in the eyes of Russian society lost their former authority in matters of faith. Only a few clergymen and secular persons recognized the correctness of Maxim: "We knew God with Maxim, according to the old books we only blasphemed God, and did not glorify." Unfortunately, Maxim allowed himself to be drawn into strife at the Grand Duke's court and was put on trial, eventually finding himself imprisoned in a monastery, where he died.
However, the problem with the revision of books remained unresolved, and "surfaced" during the reign of Ivan IV the Terrible. In February 1551, at the initiative of Metropolitan Macarius, a council was convened, which began the "church dispensation", the development of a single pantheon of Russian saints, the introduction of uniformity into church life, which received the name Stoglavy.
Metropolitan Macarius, who previously headed the Novgorod church (Novgorod was an older religious center than Moscow), quite definitely adhered to the Jerusalem Rule, i.e. was baptized with three fingers (as in Pskov, Kyiv). However, when he became Metropolitan of Moscow, Macarius accepted the sign of the cross with two fingers.
At the Stoglavy Cathedral, the proponents of antiquity prevailed, and under fear of a curse, Stoglav banned “required [i.e. uttered three times] hallelujah ”and the sign of the three fingers, recognized shaving the beard and mustache as a crime against the tenets of the faith. If Macarius had just as furiously begun to introduce the sign of the three fingers, as Nikon did later, the split would certainly have happened earlier.
However, the council decided to rewrite the sacred books. All scribes were recommended to write books “from good translations”, then carefully edit them to prevent distortions and errors when copying sacred texts. However, due to further political events - the struggle for Kazan, the Livonian War (especially the Time of Troubles) - the case for the correspondence of books died out.
Although Macarius showed a fair amount of indifference to the outward side of ritualism, the problem remained. The Greeks who lived in Moscow, the monks from the Kiev Theological Academy, were of the opinion that the rites performed in the churches of the Russian state should be brought to a “common denominator”. The Moscow "guardians of antiquity" answered that the Greeks and Kievans should not be listened to, since they live and study "in Latin" under the Mohammedan yoke, and "whoever learned Latin has perverted from the right path."
During the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich and Patriarch Joseph, after many years of the Time of Troubles and the beginning of the restoration of the Russian state, the problem with the introduction of triplets and the correspondence of books again became the “topic of the day”. A commission of "spravschiki" was organized from the most famous archpriests and priests, both Moscow and nonresident. They took up the matter zealously, but ... not everyone knew the Greek language, many were ardent opponents of the "modern Greek" rites. Therefore, the main focus was on ancient Slavic translations, which suffered from errors, from Greek books.
So, when publishing the book of John of the Ladder in 1647, the afterword said that the book printers had many copies of this book at their disposal, “but all disagree with each other’s friends in no small measure: even in this ahead, then to friends back and in the transfer of the utterance of words and not in a row and not exactly the same, but in real speeches and those who interpreted much do not converge.
The “referencers” were smart people and could quote sacred books by chapters, but they could not judge the paramount importance of the Gospel, the Lives of the Saints, the Old Testament, the teachings of the Church Fathers and the laws of the Greek emperors. Moreover, the “spravschiki” left the performance of church rites intact, since this went beyond their powers - this could only happen by decision of the council of church hierarchs.
Naturally, the dilemma occupies special attention in the church reform - how reasonable is it to be baptized with three (two) fingers? This issue is very complex and partly controversial - Nikonians and Old Believers interpret it differently, of course, defending their own point of view. Let's go to some details.
Firstly, Russia accepted Orthodoxy when the Byzantine church followed the Studian Rule, which became the basis of the Russian one (Vladimir the Red Sun, who baptized Russia, introduced the sign of the cross with two fingers). However, in the XII - XIII centuries. in Byzantium, another, more perfect, Jerusalem Typikon was widely used, which was a step forward in theology (since not enough space was given to theology in the Studite Typikon), in which the three-fingered sign was proclaimed, “threatened hallelujah”, bows on their knees were canceled when those who prayed beat forehead on the ground, etc.
Secondly, strictly in the ancient Eastern church it is not established anywhere how to be baptized - with two or three fingers. Therefore, they were baptized with two, and three, and even with one finger (for example, during the time of the Patriarch of Constantinople John Chrysostom at the end of the 4th century AD)! From the 11th century in Byzantium they were baptized with two fingers, after the XII century. - three; both options were considered correct (in Catholicism, for example, the sign of the cross is carried out with the whole hand).

Reform.

The turmoil shook the authority of the church, and disputes about faith and rituals became a prologue to a church schism. On the one hand, Moscow’s high opinion of its own purity of Orthodoxy, on the other hand, the Greeks, as representatives of ancient Orthodoxy, did not understand the rites of the Russian Church and followed Moscow handwritten books, which could not be the primary source of Orthodoxy (Orthodoxy came to Russia from Byzantium, and not vice versa).
Nikon (who became the sixth Russian patriarch in 1652), in accordance with the firm but stubborn nature of a man who does not have a broad outlook, decided to take the direct path - by force. Initially, he ordered to be baptized with three fingers (“with these three fingers it is fitting for every Orthodox Christian to depict the sign of the cross on his face; and whoever is baptized with two fingers is cursed!”), repeat the exclamation “Hallelujah” three times, serve the liturgy on five prosphora, write the name Jesus, not Jesus, etc.
The Council of 1654 (after the adoption of Ukraine under the rule of Alexei Mikhailovich) turned out to be a "radical revolution" in Russian Orthodox life - it approved innovations and made changes to worship. The Patriarch of Constantinople and other Eastern Orthodox patriarchs (Jerusalem, Alexandria, Antioch) blessed Nikon's undertakings.
Having the support of the tsar, who granted him the title of "great sovereign", Nikon conducted the business hastily, autocratically and abruptly, demanding an immediate rejection of the old rites and the exact execution of the new ones. Old Russian rituals were ridiculed with inappropriate vehemence and harshness; Nikon's Greekophilia knew no bounds. But it was based not on admiration for the Hellenistic culture and the Byzantine heritage, but on the provincialism of the patriarch, who emerged from the common people and claimed to be the head of the universal Greek church.
Moreover, Nikon rejected scientific knowledge, hated "Hellish wisdom." Thus, the patriarch writes to the tsar: “Christ did not teach us dialectics or eloquence, because a rhetorician and philosopher cannot be a Christian. Unless a Christian exhausts all outward wisdom and all the memory of Greek philosophers from his thinking, he cannot be saved. Wisdom is the Hellenic mother of all crafty dogmas.
The broad masses of the people did not accept such a sharp transition to new customs. The books that their fathers and grandfathers lived by were always considered sacred, and now they are cursed?! The consciousness of the Russian people was not prepared for such changes, and did not understand the essence and root causes of the ongoing church reform, and, of course, no one bothered to explain anything to them. And was there any possible explanation when the priests in the villages did not have great literacy, being flesh and blood from the blood of the same peasants (recall the words of the Novgorod Metropolitan Gennady, said by him back in the 15th century), and the purposeful propaganda of new no ideas?
Therefore, the lower classes met the innovations with hostility. Often they did not give away old books, they hid them, or the peasants fled with their families, hiding in the forests from Nikon's "news". Sometimes local parishioners did not give old books, so in some places they used force, there were fights that ended not only in injuries or bruises, but also in murders.
The aggravation of the situation was facilitated by the scientists "spravshchiki", who sometimes knew the Greek language perfectly, but did not speak Russian well enough. Instead of grammatically correcting the old text, they gave new translations from the Greek language, slightly different from the old ones, increasing the already strong irritation among the peasant masses.
For example, instead of “children”, “young people” were now printed; the word "temple" was replaced by the word "church", and vice versa; instead of "walking" - "walking". Previously they said: “It is forbidden to you, devil, our Lord Jesus Christ, who came into the world and dwelled in people”; in a new version: "The Lord forbids you, the devil, who came into the world and settled in people."
Opposition to Nikon was also formed at the court, among the "fierce people" (but very insignificant, since more than the overwhelming majority of the Old Believers were "staffed" from the common people). So, to some extent, the noblewoman F.P. became the personification of the Old Believers. Morozova (largely thanks to the famous painting by V.I. Surikov), one of the richest and noblest women in the Russian nobility, and her sister, Princess E.P. Urusova. They said about Tsarina Maria Miloslavskaya that she saved Archpriest Avvakum (according to the apt expression of the Russian historian S.M. Solovyov, “hero-archpriest”) - one of the most “ideological oppositionists” to Nikona. Even when almost everyone came “with confession” to Nikon, Avvakum remained true to himself and resolutely defended the old days, for which he paid with his life - in 1682, together with his “allies”, they burned him alive in a log house (June 5, 1991 in his native village archpriest, in Grigorovo, the opening of the monument to Avvakum took place).
Patriarch Paisios of Constantinople addressed Nikon with a special message, where, approving the reform carried out in Russia, he called on the Moscow Patriarch to soften measures in relation to people who do not want to accept “novina” now. Paisius agreed to the existence of local peculiarities in some areas and regions: “But if it happens that some church will differ from another in orders that are unimportant and insignificant for faith; or those that do not concern the main members of the faith, but only minor details, for example, the time of the celebration of the liturgy or: with what fingers the priest should bless, etc. This should not produce any division, as long as one and the same faith remains unchanged.
However, in Constantinople they did not understand one of the characteristic features of the Russian people: if you forbid (or allow) - everything and everyone is sure; The rulers of destinies in the history of our country found the principle of the "golden mean" very, very rarely ...
The organizer of the reform, Nikon, did not stay long on the patriarchal throne - in December 1666 he was deprived of the highest spiritual dignity (instead of him they put the "quiet and insignificant" Joasaph II, who was under the control of the king, i.e. secular power). The reason for this was Nikon's extreme ambition: “You see, sir,” those dissatisfied with the autocracy of the patriarch turned to Alexei Mikhailovich, “that he loved to stand high and ride widely. This patriarch manages instead of the Gospel with reeds, instead of the cross - with axes. The secular power won over the spiritual.
The Old Believers thought that their time was returning, but they were deeply mistaken - since the reform was fully in the interests of the state, it began to be carried out further, under the leadership of the king.
Cathedral 1666-1667 completed the triumph of Nikonians and Grecophiles. The council canceled the decisions of the Stoglavy Council, recognizing that Macarius, along with other Moscow hierarchs, "was wise with his ignorance recklessly." It was the cathedral of 1666-1667. marked the beginning of the Russian split. From now on, all those who disagreed with the introduction of new details of the performance of rituals were subject to excommunication from the church. The anathematized zealots of the old Moscow piety were called schismatics, or Old Believers, and were subjected to severe repression by the authorities.

Opal Nikon.

Opala overtook Nikon gradually, almost imperceptibly. At first they offended a nobleman from the patriarchal service people, and the offender went unpunished, which was impossible to imagine before. Then the tsar ceased to appear in the Assumption Cathedral, where the patriarch served. On July 9, 1658, Prince Yuri Romodanovsky came to Nikon and said: "The Royal Majesty is angry with you, you write as a great sovereign, and we have one great sovereign - the king." Nikon objected that this title was bestowed on him by the tsar himself, as evidenced by letters written by his hand. "The royal majesty," Romodanovsky continued, "honored you as a father and a shepherd, but you did not understand this; now the royal majesty ordered me to tell you that you should not be written in advance and not be called a great sovereign, and you will not be honored in advance." After this conversation, Nikon decided to take a desperate step. He addressed the people with the words that he no longer wanted to be a patriarch, took off his patriarchal klobuk, put on a simple monastic robe and walked to New Jerusalem. In a letter to the Tsar, Nikona abdicated the patriarchal throne and humbly asked for a cell where he could spend the rest of his days. Obviously, Nikon expected that Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, frightened by his defiant departure, would reconcile with him. But, as it turned out, Nikon made a mistake by overestimating the degree of his influence on the king. Alexei Mikhailovich refused to personally talk with his recent teacher and, through his messengers, rather coldly asked him to remain patriarch, and when Nikon became stubborn, he did not insist. At the royal court, they frankly rejoiced at the fall of the all-powerful ruler. Subsequently, Nikon complained that the boyar S.L., close to the royal family. Streshnev named his dog Nikon and taught her to sit and bless with her front paws, and despite the patriarchal curse, he was still honored by the tsar.
Nikon found himself in a very strange position. He enjoyed the former honors and lived in luxury, but was deprived of power and was engaged in outbuildings and gardening. The Dutchman Nicholas Witzen, the future mayor of Amsterdam and friend of Peter the Great, who visited Russia as part of the embassy of the States General, described his meeting with the disgraced patriarch in New Jerusalem: staff and secretly left Moscow. Now he lives far from Moscow in voluntary exile. It is too long to talk about all this. But in view of the fact that Nikon is such a sacred and high person, the tsar cannot or does not want to punish him and for the time being leaves him all church After talking with us, he went upstairs, where he took off his robe: a hat with a cross of pearls, a valuable staff and a brocade striped chasuble, put on a similar, but simpler one. on the cross; in it he keeps the sign of his dignity. When he left his church, he was accompanied by many priests and monks, all were wearing Greek hoods, like himself , all were in black. Everyone he passed hit his head on the ground until he passed. Many filed petitions; petitions; He ordered some to be accepted, others to be rejected... Then Nikon asked us to plant the brought seeds and seedlings; this is what started. I also set to work with him, and he himself participated in the landing and expressed his approval. Their ineptitude and ignorance were ridiculous to us; we told them so much about the benefits of these seeds and plants that radish and parsley got the best places. His garden was ill-kept, and the land clumsily prepared, with such ignorance of the matter, hardly better than that of the natives; his gardeners knew no more, so we seemed to be wise farmers, ordered and commanded in the presence of the patriarch ... This man has bad manners, he is reckless and hasty, he is used to often making ugly gestures, leaning on his cross [a cross on a staff]. He is of strong build, rather tall, has a red and pimply face, and is 64 years old. Likes Spanish wine. By the way or not, often repeats the words: "Our good deeds." He rarely gets sick, but before a thunderstorm or a downpour he feels lethargic, and during a storm or rain he feels better. Since he left Moscow, now 7-8 years ago, neither comb nor scissors have touched his head. His head is like that of a jellyfish, all in thick, heavy tresses, and so is his beard. "
But the ambitious Nikon was not like the Roman emperor Diocletian, who voluntarily retired to his estate and answered the patricians who persuaded him to return to power: "If you saw what kind of cabbage I grew, you would not ask me for anything." Nikon did not want to limit himself to the role of a gardener and gardener. He said: “I left the holy throne in Moscow by my own will, I am not called Moscow and will never be called; but I did not leave the patriarchate, and the grace of the holy spirit was not taken away from me. On the night of Christmas 1664, Nikon unexpectedly appeared in Moscow in Cathedral of the Assumption, took the patriarchal staff and announced: "I left the throne without being persecuted by anyone, now I have come to the throne without being called by anyone ..." However, on behalf of the king, he was ordered to return to the monastery. Nikon was forced to obey. It was not yet dawn and a tailed comet shone in the dark sky. “May the Lord God sweep you with this divine broom, which appears for many days!” Nikon cursed everyone.
Large church cathedral.
In order to stop the attempts of the former patriarch to return to power, it was decided to convene a church council, to which the patriarchs of all Orthodox churches were invited. Only the Patriarchs of Alexandria and Antioch, Paisios and Macarius, were able to come, although they also had powers from the patriarchs of Jerusalem and Constantinople. They traveled for a long time from the East, but finally arrived in Moscow. The council with their participation began its meetings in December 1666 and was continued in 1667. The first issue was Nikon's case. He was ordered to appear at the cathedral with "a peaceful custom", but the former patriarch entered the dining room, where the meetings of the council were held, with his retinue, and a cross was carried in front of him. Twelve years before, Nikon himself, cracking down on his opponents, appealed to the authority of the Eastern patriarchs. Now that weapon was turned against him. The patriarchs were summoned to judge him, and the verdict was predetermined. Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich listed the faults of the former "common friend". Everything was remembered to Nikon - both self-will, and despotic control of the church, and a passion for expanding the patriarchal possessions. Nikon's attacks on the Cathedral Code were not forgotten either. “Patriarch Joseph and the entire consecrated cathedral put their hands on this book,” the king denounced him, “and your hand is attached ...” “I unwittingly put my hand,” answered Nikon. The defendant tried to defend himself, but his excuses were not taken into account.
The eastern patriarchs pronounced the verdict: "From now on, if you don't become a patriarch and a saint, don't act, but you will be like a simple monk." On December 12, 1666, the hood and panagia were removed from Nikon, and they ordered him to live in peace and quiet, and to pray to the all-merciful God for his sins. “I know how to live even without your teaching,” Nikon snapped and added caustically, addressing the Patriarchs of Alexandria and Antioch. - "And that you took off the hood and panagia from me, then divide the pearls from them for yourself, you will get the pearls of gold pieces, but five and six each, and ten gold each. You are the Sultan's slaves, vagabonds, go everywhere for alms so that you have something to pay tribute to the sultan... When they put him in a sleigh by force, he said to himself: “Nikon! why did all this happen to you? Don’t tell the truth, don’t lose friendship!
The place of Nikon's exile was the Ferapontov Monastery on the White Lake. Deprived of the patriarchal dignity, he lived by no means like a simple monk. Instead of a cell, he had extensive chambers, he was still served by many servants. Nevertheless, for Nikon, who had long forgotten his peasant origins and was accustomed to luxury, the living conditions seemed unbearable. In general, in exile, this energetic and power-hungry man showed cowardice and pettiness. In front of the brethren, he continued to proudly call himself a patriarch, in letters to the tsar he humiliatedly called himself a humble monk. Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich showed concern for the disgraced lord, and he constantly complained about imaginary oppression and deprivation. He told the tsar's envoys: "I never have anything but cabbage soup and bad kvass, they starve me," and when checking it turned out that live sterlets were prepared in the cages for the exile. But Nikon argued that the fish could not be eaten - it was old, and he himself supposedly had to carry firewood and water. They sent him beluga, sturgeon, salmon, but this was not enough for Nikon and he wrote to the tsar: “And I was expecting your sovereign grace and vegetables, grapes in molasses, apples, plums, cherries, only the Lord God did not inform you about this, but here we never see this grace, and if I find grace before you, sirs, send, for the Lord's sake, to a poor old man. From Tsarevich Peter, sables were sent as a gift, but Nikon, instead of gratitude, answered that a fur coat would not come out of this fur, one must also add: "Do it, for the Lord's sake, mercy, order your salary to be fulfilled." And again generous gifts were sent to the Ferapontov Monastery: furs, food, and money, and again Nikon complained about the lack of the most essential.
The case of Patriarch Nikon demonstrated that the balance of power between the secular and spiritual authorities was developing in favor of the secular authorities, although it was still far from the complete subordination of the church to the state. Even after the fall of Nikon, the Church continued to maintain both its internal independence and land holdings. But after Nikon, none of the highest church hierarchs dared to claim the leading role in the state.
Church Cathedral 1666-1667 condemned and deposed Nikon, the main initiator of church reforms, but at the same time approved the reforms themselves. Meanwhile, before the council, the conflict between the tsar and the patriarch instilled certain hopes in the opponents of innovations, especially since after the abdication of Nikon, the fate of his ardent enemies was alleviated. Archpriest Avvakum was returned from a ten-year exile in Siberia. He recalled that in Moscow he was greeted with open arms: “The Sovereign immediately ordered me to be placed by the hand and said gracious words: “Is it great, archpriest, do you live? yet God commanded to see!" And I kissed and shook his hand against him, and I myself say: the Lord lives, and my soul lives, the king-sovereign; and henceforth, what God wills!" He, dear, sighed, and went where he needed. Avvakum was vied with enviable positions: "They gave me a place where I wanted, and they called me to be confessors so that I could unite with them in faith."
But Avvakum did not change his convictions and submitted an extensive petition to Alexei Mikhailovich, demanding that the old faith be restored. The former persecutions immediately fell upon the archpriest: “And from those places the tsar became a tough one on me: it didn’t please me, as I began to speak again; me…" Avvakum was sent to a new exile on the Mezen, and two years later he was again brought to Moscow, along with other leaders of the schism, for a final trial. In the Assumption Cathedral, the archpriest was defrocked: “then they cursed; and I cursed them with resistance; it was very rebellious at that mass here.”
In 1666, the main leaders of the schism were brought from various places of detention to Moscow to be brought before the court of the Eastern and Russian Orthodox hierarchs. At the council, the leaders of the schismatics behaved differently. John Nero, who was once the first to start a fight against Nikon, could not stand the persecution, repented and accepted the reforms, for which he was forgiven and made archimandrite of the monastery in Pereslavl-Zalessky. But Avvakum and his associates Lazar and Fedor were inflexible. If you believe the biased description of the cathedral, made by Archpriest Avvakum himself, he easily shamed the ecumenical patriarchs, reproaching them with the fact that their Orthodoxy “became motley” under the Turkish yoke and advising them to continue to come to Russia to learn the true faith, which was professed by Russian saints. "And the patriarchs thought; and ours, that the wolf cubs, jumping up, howled and began to vomit at their fathers, saying:" Our Russian saints were stupid and did not understand, they were not learned people, - what should they believe?" Avvakum used the method of presenting debates, which is usual for medieval literature, when obviously helpless objections are put into the mouths of the opposite side, but even through stereotypical literary devices a tragicomic note breaks through. I'll lie down," I tell them. So they laugh: "Fool de archpriest! and does not honor the patriarchs!" The end of this scene was quite ordinary: "and they led me to the chain."
The church council anathematized and cursed as heretics and recalcitrants all those who did not accept the reforms. Thus, it was officially proclaimed that church reforms were not a personal whim of Nikon, but the work of the church.

"Solovki seat".

Church Cathedral 1666-1667 became a turning point in the history of the split. As a result of the council's decisions, the gap between the ruling church and the schismatics became final and irreversible. After the council, the movement of schism acquired a mass character. It is far from accidental that this stage coincided with mass popular uprisings on the Don, in the Volga region and in the North. The question of whether the schism had an anti-feudal orientation is difficult to resolve unambiguously. On the side of the split, mostly people from the lower clergy, hard-working townspeople and peasants stood up. For these segments of the population, the official church was the embodiment of an unjust social order, and "ancient piety" was the banner of struggle. It is no coincidence that the leaders of the split gradually moved to the position of justifying their actions against the tsarist government. Raskolnikov could also be found in the army of Stepan Razin in 1670-71. and among the rebellious archers in 1682.
At the same time, the element of conservatism and inertia was strong in the Old Believers. "It has been laid down before us: lie it like this forever and ever!" Archpriest Avvakum taught, "God bless: suffer for folding your fingers, do not argue too much!" Part of the conservative nobility also joined the schism. The spiritual daughters of Archpriest Avvakum were the boyars Theodosya Morozova and Princess Evdokia Urusova. They were sisters. Feodosya Morozova, having become a widow, became the owner of the richest estates. Avvakum wrote about the noblewoman with admiration and surprise: “How so! There were about 10,000 Christians, there were more than 200 thousand brownies in the factory…” Theodosya Morozova was close to the court, she performed the duties of a “visiting noblewoman” to the queen. But her house became a haven for the Old Believers. After Theodosia took secret tonsure and became the nun Theodora, she openly began to confess the old faith. She defiantly refused to appear at the wedding of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich and Natalya Naryshkina, despite the fact that the tsar sent his carriage for her. Morozova and Urusova were taken into custody. The patriarch interceded for the noblewoman, asking her to release her, but Alexei Mikhailovich answered, “I would have done this for a long time, but you don’t know the ferocity of this woman. How can I tell you how much Morozova quarreled and now swears! if you don’t believe my words, feel free to test it yourself; call her to you, ask, and you yourself will recognize her firmness, you will start torturing her and taste her pleasantness.
The sisters were admonished by the highest church hierarchs, but Morozova answered the demand to take communion according to the new service books: "The enemy of God Nikon vomited with his heresies, and now you are licking that desecration of him; it is obvious that you are like him." Theodosya Morozova and Evdokia Urusova were tortured, but they could not get the renunciation of the old faith. Then they were sent to Borovsk, where they were put in a dungeon. Avvakum encouraged the women as much as he could, but their fate was sad - the sisters were starved to death.
Some of the monasteries took the side of the Old Believers, in particular, one of the most revered Orthodox monasteries - the Solovetsky Monastery. The monks of the monastery, in which Nikon could not get along when he was a simple monk, did not accept church reforms when he was a patriarch. When newly printed books were sent to the monastery, they were hidden, without binding, in the treasury chamber, and then at a general meeting it was decided not to accept the current service books at all. The then Archimandrite Elijah spoke with tears to the pilgrims who made a pilgrimage to the famous monastery: “You see, brothers, lately: new teachers have risen, they turn us away from the Orthodox faith and patristic tradition and order us to serve on the Lyatsk roofs according to new service books.” Several monks hesitated and did not want to sign the verdict on the rejection of the newly printed missals - "so the archimandrite shouted at us with his advisers, like wild animals: "Do you want to serve a heretical Latin service! We will not let the living out of the meal!" We got scared and put our hands on it."
N. M. Nikolsky, the author of The History of the Russian Church, believed that the reluctance to accept new service books was explained by the fact that the majority of the clergy simply could not relearn: “The rural clergy, illiterate, who studied services by ear, had to either refuse new books, or give way to new priests, for it was unthinkable to retrain him. The majority of the city clergy and even monasteries were in the same position. The monks of the Solovetsky Monastery expressed this in their verdict bluntly, without any reservations: which we first studied and got used to, but now we, old priests, will not be able to keep our weekly queues from those service books, and we will not be able to learn from the new service books for our old age ... ". And again and again the refrain repeated in this sentence the words : "we are priests and deacons of little power and unaccustomed to literacy, and inert in teaching," according to new books, "we are inert and intransigent chernets, no matter how much you teach tza, and not get used to it ... "
At the church council of 1666-1667. one of the leaders of the Solovetsky schismatics, Nikandr, chose a line of conduct other than Avvakum. He pretended to agree with the decisions of the council and received permission to return to the monastery, but upon his return he threw off the Greek hood, put on the Russian one again and became the head of the monastery brethren. The famous "Solovki Petition" was sent to the tsar, outlining the credo of the old faith. In another petition, the monks threw down a direct challenge to the secular authorities: "Command, sovereign, to send us your royal sword and from this rebellious life, relocate us to this serene and eternal life." S. M. Solovyov wrote: “The monks challenged the worldly authorities to a difficult struggle, presenting themselves as defenseless victims, bowing their heads under the royal sword without resistance. under the sword was met with shots. Such an insignificant detachment as Volokhov had could not overcome the besieged, who had strong walls, plenty of supplies, 90 guns. "
The siege - "Solovki seat" dragged on for eight years from 1668 to 1676. At first, the authorities could not send large forces to the White Sea because of the movement of Stenka Razin. After the rebellion was suppressed, a large detachment of archers appeared under the walls of the Solovetsky Monastery, and the shelling of the monastery began. The besieged responded with well-aimed shots, and Abbot Nikandr sprinkled the cannons with holy water and said: “My mother Galanochki! We have hope for you, you will defend us!” But in the besieged monastery, disagreements began between moderates and supporters of decisive action. Most of the monks hoped for reconciliation with the royal power,
The minority, led by Nikandr, and the laity - "Baltsy", led by centurions Voronin and Samko, demanded "for the great sovereign to put aside piety", and such words were said about the tsar himself that "not only to write, but also to think is terrible." In the monastery they stopped confessing, taking communion, they refused to recognize priests. These disagreements predetermined the fall of the Solovetsky Monastery. The archers could not manage to take it by storm, but the defector monk Theoktist showed them a hole in the wall, blocked with stones. On the night of January 22, 1676, in a heavy snowstorm, the archers dismantled the stones and entered the monastery. The defenders of the monastery died in an unequal battle. Some instigators of the uprising were executed, others were sent into exile.
This is how the events of those distant times appeared before us, this is how today's historians and historiographers see them, but, of course, there are still many mysteries and white spots, and therefore interest neither in Patriarch Nikon, nor in his reforms does not dry out.

Literature.

1. History of the Russian state. Reader. Evidence.
2. Bushuev S.V., History of the Russian state. Historical and bibliographic essays, book. 2. XVII-XVIII centuries., M., 1994;
3. Lappo-Danilevsky A.S., History of Russian social thought and culture of the XVII-XVIII centuries, M., 1990;
4. History of the Russian state. Biographies. XVII century., M., 1997;
5. Demidova N.F., Morozova L.E., Preobrazhensky A.A., The first Romanovs on the Russian throne, M., 1996;

One of the most significant events of the 17th century. there was a schism in the church. He seriously influenced the formation of cultural values and worldview of the Russian people. Among the prerequisites and causes of the church schism, one can distinguish both political factors, formed as a result of the turbulent events of the beginning of the century, and church factors, which, however, are of secondary importance.

At the beginning of the century, the first representative of the Romanov dynasty, Mikhail, ascended the throne. He and, later, his son, Alexei, nicknamed "The Quietest", gradually restored the internal economy, devastated during the Time of Troubles. Foreign trade was restored, the first manufactories appeared, and state power was strengthened. But, at the same time, serfdom took shape legislatively, which could not but cause mass discontent among the people. Initially, the foreign policy of the first Romanovs was cautious. But already in the plans of Alexei Mikhailovich there is a desire to unite the Orthodox peoples who lived outside the territory of Eastern Europe and the Balkans.

This put the tsar and the patriarch, already in the period of the annexation of the Left-Bank Ukraine, before a rather difficult problem of an ideological nature. Most of the Orthodox peoples, having accepted the Greek innovations, were baptized with three fingers. According to the tradition of Moscow, two fingers were used for baptism. One could either impose one's own traditions, or submit to the canon accepted by the entire Orthodox world. Alexei Mikhailovich and Patriarch Nikon chose the second option. The centralization of power taking place at that time and the emerging idea of Moscow's future dominance in the Orthodox world, the "Third Rome", demanded a single ideology capable of uniting the people. The subsequent reform split Russian society for a long time. Discrepancies in the sacred books and the interpretation of the performance of rituals required changes and the restoration of uniformity. The need to correct church books was noted not only by spiritual authorities, but also by secular ones.

The name of Patriarch Nikon and the church schism are closely connected. The Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia was distinguished not only by his intelligence, but also by his tough character, determination, lust for power, love of luxury. He gave his consent to stand at the head of the church only after the request of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich. The beginning of the church schism of the 17th century was laid by the reform prepared by Nikon and carried out in 1652, which included such innovations as tripartite, serving the liturgy on 5 prosphora, and so on. All these changes were subsequently approved at the Council of 1654.

But, the transition to new customs was too abrupt. The situation in the church schism in Russia was aggravated by the cruel persecution of opponents of innovations. Many refused to accept the change in rites. The old sacred books, according to which the ancestors lived, refused to give, many families fled to the forests. An opposition movement formed at court. But in 1658 Nikon's position changed dramatically. The royal disgrace turned into a demonstrative departure of the patriarch. However, he overestimated his influence on Alexei. Nikon was completely deprived of power, but retained wealth and honors. At the council of 1666, in which the patriarchs of Alexandria and Antioch took part, the hood was removed from Nikon. And the former patriarch was sent into exile, to the Ferapontov Monastery on the White Lake. However, Nikon, who loved luxury, lived there far from being a simple monk.

The church council, which deposed the masterful patriarch and eased the fate of opponents of innovations, fully approved the reforms carried out, declaring them not a whim of Nikon, but a matter of the church. Those who did not obey the innovations were declared heretics.

The final stage of the split was the Solovetsky uprising of 1667 - 1676, which ended for the dissatisfied with death or exile. Heretics were persecuted even after the death of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich. After the fall of Nikon, the church retained its influence and strength, but not a single patriarch laid claim to supreme power.

21. Foreign policy in the 17th century.

The years of the Great Troubles turned into the loss of many lands for Russia. The most important task during the reign of Mikhail Fedorovich was to overcome the consequences of this difficult time for Russia. Of great importance was the renunciation of the Polish prince Vladislav from the rights to the throne of Moscow.

Lost during the Time of Troubles, Novgorod and Smolensk were not returned immediately. Russia, at that time, was seriously weakened and the wars with Poland and Sweden did not bring success. Novgorod was returned only in 1617 after the conclusion of the Pillar Peace with Sweden, but the coast of the Gulf of Finland was lost. Only in 1634, according to the Treaty of Polyana, Vladislav finally renounced his claim to the throne of Moscow. However, the Seversky lands and Smolensk remained in the power of the Commonwealth.

Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich directed his energy to solving problems left by the previous reign. At this time, most of Ukraine and Belarus belonged to the Polish Crown. The riots that began against the Poles in 1648 in Ukraine grew into a large-scale war of liberation that engulfed all Belarusian lands. At the head of this powerful movement was Bogdan Khmelnitsky. The rebels turned to Moscow for help. However, the decision to unite Russia and Ukraine was made only in 1654. This caused another war with the Commonwealth. The result of it was "Eternal Peace". Russia was finally able to regain Smolensk, and the Commonwealth was forced to recognize the reunification of Russia and Ukraine. Also, under the terms of this peace, Kyiv also departed Russia.

Russian-Turkish relations also remained difficult. The Crimean campaigns of Prince Golitsyn in 1687 and 1689 did not bring success. Russia never managed to get access to the Black Sea. However, it is worth noting the Azov campaigns of 1695 and 1676. But the capture of Azov was clearly not enough to ensure safe trade routes to the west. The Black Sea remained completely in the hands of the Ottoman Empire.

A striking success of Russian foreign policy in the 17th century was the annexation of the lands of Eastern Siberia to the territory of the country. Dezhnev and Poyarkov, famous Russian pioneers, were able to reach the shores of the Amur and the Pacific Ocean. The expansion of the territory of the Russian Empire at the expense of the Amur lands could not but arouse the concern of the rulers of China. Nevertheless, in 1689 the border along the Amur River (and its tributaries) was fixed by the Nerchinsk Treaty.

One of the most significant events of the 17th century. there was a schism in the church. He seriously influenced the formation of cultural values and worldview of the Russian people. Among the prerequisites and causes of the church schism, one can single out both political factors that were formed as a result of the turbulent events of the beginning of the century, and church ones, which, however, are of secondary importance.

At the beginning of the century, the first representative, Michael, ascended the throne. He and later his son Alexei, nicknamed the Quietest, gradually restored the domestic economy, ruined in. Foreign trade was restored, the first manufactories appeared, and state power was strengthened. But at the same time, serfdom was legally formed, which could not but cause mass discontent among the people.

Initially, the foreign policy of the first Romanovs was cautious. But already in the plans of Alexei Mikhailovich there is a desire to unite the Orthodox peoples who lived in Eastern Europe and the Balkans.

Alexei Mikhailovich and Patriarch Nikon chose the second option. The centralization of power taking place at that time and the emerging idea of Moscow's future dominance in the Orthodox world, the "Third Rome", demanded a single ideology capable of uniting the people. The subsequent reform split Russian society for a long time. Discrepancies in the sacred books and the interpretation of the performance of rituals required changes and the restoration of uniformity. The need to correct church books was noted by the authorities not only spiritual, but also secular.

The name of Patriarch Nikon and the church schism are closely connected. The Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia was distinguished not only by his intelligence, but also by his tough character, determination, lust for power, love of luxury. He gave his consent to stand at the head of the church only after the request of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich. The beginning of the church schism of the 17th century. put the reform prepared by Nikon and carried out in 1652, which included such innovations as tripartite, serving the liturgy on five prosphora, etc. All these changes were subsequently approved for 1654.

However, the transition to new customs was too abrupt. The church schism in Russia was aggravated by the cruel persecution of opponents of innovations. Many refused to accept changes in rituals, to give away the old sacred books, according to which their ancestors lived. Many families fled to the forests. An opposition movement formed at court. But in 1658 Nikon's position changed dramatically. The royal disgrace turned into a demonstrative departure of the patriarch. Nikon overestimated his influence on Alexei. He was completely deprived of power, but retained wealth and honors. At the council of 1666, in which the patriarchs of Alexandria and Antioch took part, the hood was removed from Nikon. The former patriarch was sent into exile in the Ferapontov Monastery on the White Lake. However, Nikon, who loved luxury, lived there far from being a simple monk.

The church council, which deposed the masterful patriarch and eased the fate of opponents of innovations, fully approved the reforms, declaring them not a whim of Nikon, but a matter of the church. All who did not obey the innovations were declared heretics.

The final stage of the church schism was the Solovetsky uprising of 1667-1676, which ended for the dissatisfied with death or exile. Heretics were persecuted even after the death of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich. After the fall of Nikon, the church retained its influence and strength, but not a single patriarch laid claim to supreme power.