The split of the Russian Church occurred in the century. Split of the Russian Orthodox Church

The fall of the once powerful Byzantine Empire, the transformation of its capital Constantinople from a pillar of the Christian Orthodox Church into the center of a religion hostile to it, led to the fact that the Russian Orthodox Church had a real chance to lead Orthodox Christianity. Therefore, starting from the 15th century, after the adoption of the Union of Florence, Russia began to call itself the “third Rome”. In order to meet these stated standards, the Russian Orthodox Church was forced to carry out church reform in the 17th century.

Patriarch Nikon is considered to be the author of this church reform, which led to a split among the Orthodox Russian people. But without a doubt, the Russian tsars from the Romanov dynasty contributed to the church schism, which became a disaster for the entire Russian people for almost three centuries, and has not been completely overcome to this day.

Church reform of Patriarch Nikon

The church reform of Patriarch Nikon in the Russian state of the 17th century was a whole set of measures, which consisted of both canonical and administrative acts. They were simultaneously undertaken by the Russian Orthodox Church and the Moscow State. The essence of the church reform was changes in the liturgical tradition, which had been consistently observed since the adoption of Christianity. Learned Greek theologians, when visiting services of the Russian Orthodox Church, repeatedly pointed out the inconsistency of the church canons of the Moscow Church with Greek customs.

The most obvious disagreements were in the tradition of making the sign of the cross, saying hallelujah during prayer, and the order of the procession. The Russian Orthodox Church adhered to the tradition of making the sign of the cross with two fingers - the Greeks were baptized with three fingers. Russian priests carried out the procession according to the sun, and Greek priests - on the contrary. Greek theologians discovered many errors in Russian liturgical books. All these errors and disagreements were to be corrected as a result of the reform. They were corrected, but it did not happen painlessly and simply.

Schism in the Russian Orthodox Church

In 1652, the Council of the Hundred Heads was held, which approved new church rituals. From the moment the council was held, the priests had to conduct church services according to new books and using new rituals. The old holy books, according to which the entire Orthodox Russian people had prayed for several centuries, had to be confiscated. The usual icons depicting Christ and the Mother of God were also subject to confiscation, or destruction, since their hands were folded in two-fingered baptism. For ordinary Orthodox people, and not only others, this was wild and blasphemous! How could you throw away an icon that several generations had prayed for! What was it like to feel like atheists and heretics for those who considered themselves a truly believing Orthodox person and lived their entire lives according to the customary and necessary laws of God!

But by his special decree he indicated that everyone who does not obey the innovations will be considered heretics, excommunicated and anathematized. The rudeness, harshness, and intolerance of Patriarch Nikon led to the discontent of a significant part of the clergy and laity, who were ready for uprisings, going into the forests and self-immolations, just not to submit to reformist innovations.

In 1667, the Great Moscow Council was held, which condemned and deposed Patriarch Nikon for his unauthorized abandonment of the see in 1658, but approved all the reforms of the church and anathematized those who opposed its implementation. The state supported the church reform of the Russian Church as amended in 1667. All opponents of the reform began to be called Old Believers and schismatics, and were subject to persecution.

The 17th century was a turning point for Russia. It is noteworthy not only for its political, but also for its church reforms. As a result of this, “Bright Rus'” became a thing of the past, and it was replaced by a completely different power, in which there was no longer a unity of people’s worldview and behavior.

The spiritual basis of the state was the church. Even in the 15th and 16th centuries, there were conflicts between non-covetous people and the Josephites. In the 17th century, intellectual disagreements continued and resulted in a split in the Russian Orthodox Church. This was due to a number of reasons.

Origins of the schism

During the Time of Troubles, the church was unable to fulfill the role of “spiritual doctor” and guardian of the moral health of the Russian people. Therefore, after the end of the Time of Troubles, church reform became a pressing issue. The priests took charge of carrying it out. This is Archpriest Ivan Neronov, Stefan Vonifatiev, the confessor of the young Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, and Archpriest Avvakum.

These people acted in two directions. The first is oral preaching and work among the flock, that is, closing taverns, organizing orphanages and creating almshouses. The second is the correction of rituals and liturgical books.

There was a very pressing question about polyphony. In church churches, in order to save time, simultaneous services to various holidays and saints were practiced. For centuries, no one criticized this. But after troubled times, they began to look at polyphony differently. It was named among the main reasons for the spiritual degradation of society. This negative thing needed to be corrected, and it was corrected. triumphed in all the temples unanimity.

But the conflict situation did not disappear after that, but only worsened. The essence of the problem was the difference between the Moscow and Greek rites. And this concerned, first of all, digitized. The Greeks were baptized with three fingers, and the Great Russians - with two. This difference resulted in a dispute about historical correctness.

The question was raised about the legality of the Russian church rite. It included: two fingers, worship on seven prosphoras, an eight-pointed cross, walking in the sun (in the sun), a special “hallelujah,” etc. Some clergy began to argue that the liturgical books were distorted as a result of ignorant copyists.

Subsequently, the most authoritative historian of the Russian Orthodox Church, Evgeniy Evsigneevich Golubinsky (1834-1912), proved that the Russians did not distort the ritual at all. Under Prince Vladimir in Kyiv they were baptized with two fingers. That is, exactly the same as in Moscow until the middle of the 17th century.

The point was that when Rus' adopted Christianity, there were two charters in Byzantium: Jerusalem And Studio. In terms of ritual, they differed. The Eastern Slavs accepted and observed the Jerusalem Charter. As for the Greeks and other Orthodox peoples, as well as the Little Russians, they observed the Studite Charter.

However, it should be noted here that rituals are not dogmas at all. Those are holy and indestructible, but rituals can change. And in Rus' this happened several times, and there were no shocks. For example, in 1551, under Metropolitan Cyprian, the Council of the Hundred Heads obliged the residents of Pskov, who practiced three-fingered, to return to two-fingered. This did not lead to any conflicts.

But you need to understand that the middle of the 17th century was radically different from the middle of the 16th century. People who went through the oprichnina and the Time of Troubles became different. The country faced three choices. The path of Habakkuk is isolationism. Nikon's path is the creation of a theocratic Orthodox empire. Peter's path was to join the European powers with the subordination of the church to the state.

The problem was aggravated by the annexation of Ukraine to Russia. Now we had to think about the uniformity of church rites. Kyiv monks appeared in Moscow. The most notable of them was Epiphany Slavinetsky. Ukrainian guests began to insist on correcting church books and services in accordance with their ideas.

Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich and Patriarch Nikon
The schism of the Russian Orthodox Church is inextricably linked with these two people

Patriarch Nikon and Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich

The fundamental role in the schism of the Russian Orthodox Church was played by Patriarch Nikon (1605-1681) and Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich (1629-1676). As for Nikon, he was an extremely vain and power-hungry person. He came from Mordovian peasants, and in the world he bore the name Nikita Minich. He made a dizzying career, and became famous for his strong character and excessive severity. It was more characteristic of a secular ruler than a church hierarch.

Nikon was not satisfied with his enormous influence on the Tsar and the boyars. He was guided by the principle that "God's things are higher than the king's." Therefore, he aimed at undivided dominance and power equal to that of the king. The situation was favorable to him. Patriarch Joseph died in 1652. The question of electing a new patriarch arose urgently, because without the patriarchal blessing it was impossible to hold any state or church event in Moscow.

Sovereign Alexei Mikhailovich was an extremely pious and pious man, so he was primarily interested in the speedy election of a new patriarch. He precisely wanted to see Metropolitan Nikon of Novgorod in this position, since he valued and respected him extremely.

The king's desire was supported by many boyars, as well as the Patriarchs of Constantinople, Jerusalem, Alexandria and Antioch. All this was well known to Nikon, but he strived for absolute power, and therefore resorted to pressure.

The day of the procedure for becoming a patriarch has arrived. The Tsar was also present. But at the very last moment Nikon announced that he refused to accept signs of patriarchal dignity. This caused a commotion among everyone present. The tsar himself knelt down and with tears in his eyes began to ask the wayward clergyman not to renounce his rank.

Then Nikon set the conditions. He demanded that they honor him as a father and archpastor and let him organize the Church at his own discretion. The king gave his word and consent. All the boyars supported him. Only then did the newly-crowned patriarch pick up the symbol of patriarchal power - the staff of the Russian Metropolitan Peter, who was the first to live in Moscow.

Alexei Mikhailovich fulfilled all his promises, and Nikon concentrated enormous power in his hands. In 1652 he even received the title of "Great Sovereign". The new patriarch began to rule harshly. This forced the king to ask him in letters to be softer and more tolerant towards people.

Church reform and its main reason

With the coming to power of a new Orthodox ruler in the church rite, at first everything remained as before. Vladyka himself crossed himself with two fingers and was a supporter of unanimity. But he began to often talk with Epiphany Slavinetsky. After a very short time, he managed to convince Nikon that it was still necessary to change the church ritual.

During Lent of 1653 a special “memory” was published, in which the flock was attributed to adopt triplicate. Supporters of Neronov and Vonifatiev opposed this and were exiled. The rest were warned that if they crossed themselves with two fingers during prayers, they would be subjected to church damnation. In 1556, a church council officially confirmed this order. After this, the paths of the patriarch and his former comrades diverged completely and irrevocably.

This is how a split occurred in the Russian Orthodox Church. Supporters of the “ancient piety” found themselves in opposition to official church policy, while the church reform itself was entrusted to the Ukrainian by nationality Epiphanius Slavinetsky and the Greek Arseniy.

Why did Nikon follow the lead of the Ukrainian monks? But it is much more interesting why the king, the cathedral and many parishioners also supported the innovations? The answers to these questions are relatively simple.

The Old Believers, as the opponents of innovation came to be called, advocated the superiority of local Orthodoxy. It developed and prevailed in North-Eastern Rus' over the traditions of universal Greek Orthodoxy. In essence, “ancient piety” was a platform for narrow Moscow nationalism.

Among the Old Believers, the prevailing opinion was that the Orthodoxy of Serbs, Greeks and Ukrainians was inferior. These peoples were seen as victims of error. And God punished them for this, placing them under the rule of the Gentiles.

But this worldview did not inspire sympathy among anyone and discouraged any desire to unite with Moscow. That is why Nikon and Alexei Mikhailovich, seeking to expand their power, sided with the Greek version of Orthodoxy. That is, Russian Orthodoxy took on a universal character, which contributed to the expansion of state borders and the strengthening of power.

Decline of the career of Patriarch Nikon

The excessive lust for power of the Orthodox ruler was the reason for his downfall. Nikon had many enemies among the boyars. They tried with all their might to turn the king against him. In the end, they succeeded. And it all started with little things.

In 1658, during one of the holidays, the tsar's guard hit the patriarch's man with a stick, paving the way for the tsar through a crowd of people. The one who received the blow was indignant and called himself “the patriarch’s boyar son.” But then he received another blow to the forehead with a stick.

Nikon was informed about what had happened, and he became indignant. He wrote an angry letter to the king, in which he demanded a thorough investigation of this incident and punishment of the guilty boyar. However, no one started an investigation, and the culprit was never punished. It became clear to everyone that the king’s attitude towards the ruler had changed for the worse.

Then the patriarch decided to resort to a proven method. After mass in the Assumption Cathedral, he took off his patriarchal vestments and announced that he was leaving the patriarchal place and going to live permanently in the Resurrection Monastery. It was located near Moscow and was called New Jerusalem. The people tried to dissuade the bishop, but he was adamant. Then they unharnessed the horses from the carriage, but Nikon did not change his decision and left Moscow on foot.

New Jerusalem Monastery
Patriarch Nikon spent several years there until the patriarchal court, at which he was deposed

The throne of the patriarch remained empty. The Bishop believed that the sovereign would be afraid, but he did not appear in New Jerusalem. On the contrary, Alexey Mikhailovich tried to get the wayward ruler to finally renounce patriarchal power and return all regalia so that a new spiritual leader could be legally elected. And Nikon told everyone that he could return to the patriarchal throne at any moment. This confrontation continued for several years.

The situation was absolutely unacceptable, and Alexey Mikhailovich turned to the ecumenical patriarchs. However, they had to wait a long time for their arrival. Only in 1666 did two of the four patriarchs arrive in the capital. These are Alexandrian and Antiochian, but they had powers from their other two colleagues.

Nikon really did not want to appear before the patriarchal court. But still he was forced to do it. As a result, the wayward ruler was deprived of his high rank. But the long conflict did not change the situation with the split of the Russian Orthodox Church. The same council of 1666-1667 officially approved all church reforms that were carried out under the leadership of Nikon. True, he himself turned into a simple monk. They exiled him to a distant northern monastery, from where the man of God watched the triumph of his politics.

The church schism became one of the main events in Russia in the 17th century. This process seriously influenced the subsequent formation of the worldview of the Russian people. Scientists cite the political situation that emerged in the 17th century as the main reason for the church schism. And church disagreements are attributed to a number of secondary reasons.

Tsar Michael, the founder of the Romanov dynasty, and his son Alexei were engaged in restoring the country's economy, which had been devastated during the Time of Troubles. State power was strengthened, the first manufactories appeared, and foreign trade was restored. During the same period, the legalization of serfdom took place.

Despite the fact that at the beginning the Romanovs pursued a rather cautious policy, the plans of Alexei, nicknamed the Quietest, included the unification of the Orthodox peoples living in the Balkans and the territory of Eastern Europe. This is what led the patriarch and the tsar to a rather difficult ideological problem. According to tradition in Russia, people were baptized with two fingers. And the vast majority of Orthodox peoples, in accordance with Greek innovations, are three. There were only two possible options: obey the canon or impose your own traditions on others. Alexey and Patriarch Nikon began to act on the second option. A unified ideology was necessary due to the centralization of power and the concept of the “Third Rome” going on at that time. All this became a prerequisite for a reform that split Russian society for a very long time. A large number of discrepancies in church books, different interpretations of rituals - all this had to be brought to uniformity. It is worth noting that the need to correct church books was spoken of along with ecclesiastical and secular authorities.

The name of Patriarch Nikon and the church schism are closely connected. Nikon possessed not only intelligence, but also a love of luxury and power. He became the head of the church only after a personal request from the Russian Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich.

The church reform of 1652 marked the beginning of a schism in the church. All proposed changes were approved at the church council in 1654 (for example, triplets). However, too abrupt a transition to new customs led to the emergence of a considerable number of opponents of innovation. Opposition also formed at court. The patriarch, who overestimated his influence on the tsar, fell into disgrace in 1658. Nikon's departure was demonstrative.

Having retained his wealth and honors, Nikon nevertheless was deprived of any power. In 1666, at the Council, with the participation of the Patriarchs of Antioch and Alexandria, Nikon’s hood was removed. After that, the former patriarch was exiled to White Lake, to the Ferapontov Monastery. I must say that there Nikon led a far from poor life. The deposition of Nikon was an important stage in the church schism of the 17th century.

The same council in 1666 once again approved all the changes introduced, declaring them the work of the church. All those who did not comply were declared heretics. During the church schism in Russia, another significant event took place - the Solovetsky Uprising of 1667-76. All the rebels were eventually either exiled or executed. In conclusion, it should be noted that after Nikon, not a single patriarch laid claim to the highest power in the country.

Traditions that are deeply woven into the life of the people are especially difficult to eradicate. The Russian people took the split very intensely, and if it were not for the political will of the leaders of that time, we would still be crossing ourselves with two fingers. For the sake of formal, seemingly trifles, high-ranking people went to their death. Thus they paid with the lives of Theodosius Morozov and Some people still do not accept Nikon’s changes, which caused a split in the Orthodox Church. Such people lead a special way of life and are called Old Believers. What did religious leader Nikon decide to change?

The Russian split was created in the minds of its ideologists long before it actually happened. By the end of the 17th century, the Russian state had strengthened, and the horrors of the Time of Troubles began to be forgotten. In the 15th century, Constantinople fell. turned out to be a prophet. He wrote that Moscow should become the “third Rome.” It would seem that the prophecy was coming true. The minds of the highest religious leaders were captivated by the idea of theocracy. In imitation of Byzantium, they wanted to make the state subordinate to the Church. However, in Russia, as always, this did not happen without extremes. If in Byzantium the state was not formally dependent on the Church, then in Russia Nikon was granted the title of “great sovereign,” which had previously only been given to tsars. The Patriarch sought to create a model characteristic of Catholicism, in which the religious leader would be more important than the secular one. In Byzantium, the authorities simply expressed their subordination to the interests of faith and its ideals.

At a time when the schism of the Russian Church was just beginning, religion was in very great strength. were very magnificent and solemn. However, Nikon planned to change many things in services and prayers according to the model of the Eastern churches. The problem was that the experts were people of different beliefs. Therefore, the result was very serious discrepancies about how to pray and correct old books. The second problem was that it was not ancient Greek books that were used, but relatively new ones.

The most significant changes were in the ritual side. In Rus', people were accustomed to the two-fingered sign, which symbolically reflected the human and divine natures of Christ. The three-fingered sign was just as ancient, but more characteristic of worship in the Eastern churches. It testified to the importance of the Trinity. Before the reform it was considered just an option, after the reform it became mandatory for everyone.

However, Nikon did not stop with this change. Previously, the religious procession was carried out in the direction of the sun, but after the reform the norm became the opposite, that is, it was necessary to walk against the sun. The number of prosphoras on which the liturgy was served changed: instead of seven, they began to use five. The text was also changed. Some words were excluded from there because they were absent in the Greek version.

Some compare Nikon, who provoked a schism in the Russian Orthodox Church, with Peter the Great. Only Peter took everything Western as a model, and Nikon - everything Greek. However, the common feature of both historical figures was uncompromisingness. However, the schism of the Russian Orthodox Church, like any revolution, destroyed its father. was accused of cruelty and arbitrariness, deprived of his rank, and then even sent into exile. However, the reforms themselves were approved in 1666-1667, when it was decided to defrock Nikon.

People who abandoned the reform began to leave their persecutors and live in separate communities, not allowing marriages with “Nikonians.” They lived very well materially, because they were against bad habits and entertainment. They are the most orthodox of all Orthodox Christians. Protest against the reforms was expressed not only by the laity, but also by the entire monastery - Solovetsky. As a result, the monastery was taken with the help of a traitor, and the rebels, for the most part, were physically destroyed.

The Old Believers began to be persecuted, and very cruelly. If an army was sent to their communities, people often locked themselves in churches - and the matter ended in self-immolation. Many, in order not to betray their faith, drowned themselves. Some starved themselves to death, considering themselves not suicide but martyrs. The scale of the persecution was reminiscent of the Western Inquisition.

Was it worth suffering for the immutability of the ritual? It was not only a matter of form, but also of essence. The schismatics defended a unique path of religious development in Russia, and therefore, at a minimum, are worthy of respect.

Mikhail Starikov

Black Cathedral. The uprising of the Solovetsky monastery against newly printed books in 1666 (S. Miloradovich, 1885)

Origins of the schism