And God said let there be light. The creation of the world by God is a biblical story. St. Ambrose of Milan

1. The Baptism of Rus' and the opinions of some domestic historians on the reasons for the adoption of Christianity in Rus'.

In order to understand what Rus' was like before the adoption of Christianity, and what were the reasons and consequences of the adoption of Orthodoxy in Rus', we need to turn to the works of some domestic historians, such as S.F. Platonov, N.M. Karamzin, S.I. Soloviev, as well as some modern historians who sometimes held different points of view on this issue.

Undoubtedly, the adoption of Orthodoxy for Rus' determined its entire subsequent history, the development of statehood, original culture, features national character Russian people.

The lands and peoples united under the name of Rus' learned Christianity long before 988, when it was adopted by the Grand Duke of Kiev Vladimir Svyatoslavovich (980-1015). There is evidence that one of the Russian princes and his soldiers was baptized back in the 9th century. There is also an assumption according to which it was the Rus, who were under the rule of the Khazars, who were baptized by the Slavic enlighteners Cyril and Methodius during their trip to Khazaria in 858. The road to Christianity to the very heart of the Kyiv reign was paved by Princess Olga, the widow of Prince Igor. Around 955 she was baptized in Constantinople. From there the princess brought Greek priests to Rus'. However, her son Svyatoslav did not see the need for Christianity and honored the old gods. The merit of establishing Orthodoxy in Rus' belongs to Prince Vladimir, the son of Svyatoslav.

For example, what does N.M. write? Karamzin about the adoption of Orthodoxy and the reasons for its adoption in Rus': “Soon the signs of the Christian faith, accepted by the sovereign (Vladimir), his children, nobles and people, appeared on the ruins of dark paganism in Russia, and the altars of the true God took the place of idolatry. Grand Duke built a wooden church of St. in Kyiv. Vasily, in the place where Perun stood, and called skilled architects from Constantinople to build a stone temple in the name of the Mother of God, where the pious Varangian and his son suffered in 983. Meanwhile, zealous altar servers, priests, preached Christ in various areas states. Many people were baptized, reasoning, no doubt, in the same way as the citizens of Kyiv; others, attached to the ancient law, rejected the new one: for paganism dominated in some countries of Russia until the 12th century. Vladimir did not want to force his conscience, it seems; but he took the best, most reliable measures to exterminate pagan errors: HE TRIED TO ENLIGHTEN THE RUSSIANS. To establish faith on the knowledge of divine books, back in the 9th century. translated into Slavic language Cyril and Methodius and, no doubt, already known to Kyiv Christians for a long time, the Grand Duke started a school for the youths, former first the foundation of public education in Russia. This benefit seemed terrible news at the time, and famous wives, whose children were unwillingly taken into science, mourned them as if they were dead, because they considered literacy a dangerous sorcery.”

From this excerpt from the “History of the Russian State” we see that Karamzin focuses our attention on the insufficient enlightenment of Rus' before the adoption of Orthodoxy. In his opinion, this main reason acceptance of Christianity. Political and economic reasons he does not consider or considers them, but considers them less important. This is understandable, because N.M. Karamzin presents us with the development of history as the efforts of individuals, heads of state with their strong state power(autocracy). D.I. shares the same point of view on this issue. Ilovaisky in his “Essays” national history"and many other historians, admirers and followers of Karamzin, who associated the adoption of Christianity with historical legends(the so-called “Test of Faith”).

Yes, undoubtedly, Christianity brought enlightenment to Rus' in the form of literacy and a higher level of development of writing in government agencies and among local authorities, but such a state as Ancient Rus', which subjugated almost the entire Russian Plain under Vladimir’s predecessors, albeit within conditional borders, could not exist before this event by force alone, especially since it was already multinational in those days . For the correct management of the state economy (taxation, trade) literate people were required, writing and literacy were required and they existed, although to a small extent, on top level states. This is where the maximum strengthening of the role of the state and its shaky unity was required. And Christianity, as the main and universal unifying force in those days, helped this process. But it is impossible to assert that Rus' before the adoption of Christianity by Vladimir was a completely barbaric and dark country.

Well-known specialist in Russian chronicles A.A. Shakhmatov generally believed that the baptism of Rus' occurred even before the reign of Vladimir. After all, even before him they appeared here Church Slavonic language and Bulgarian writing, which was reflected in treaties with the Greeks. Divine services in the Church of St. Elias were also performed in the Bulgarian language by clergy from Bulgaria. Rus' already knew Christianity through preachers Christian teaching, both from Byzantium, Bulgaria, and from Rome. There was no sharp division of Churches at that time.

S.F. Platonov pointed more to the economic reasons for the adoption of Christianity.

Most historians emphasize the violent nature of the baptism of Rus'. Many people who did not want to be baptized fled into the forests and killed both the priests and their own relatives who accepted the new religion. However, it would be a mistake to reduce the entire process of Christianization to state violence. The introduction of Christianity in Rus' was fundamentally different from the forced baptism of the pagans of the New World by the Spaniards or the Baltic states by the crusaders. The spread of a new religion in Rus' was not a persistent implantation of a foreign culture from outside; it was a natural and natural process. But it is worth remembering that the old and outdated are in in this case paganism always stubbornly resists the new. According to some scientists, the baptism of Rus' by Prince Vladimir was the completion of a major real reform in the spiritual sphere, comparable in its political consequences and the general significance for Russian history with the transformations of Peter the Great. Firstly, Vladimir firmly established himself, unlike his predecessors, in Kyiv and made it the cultural, spiritual and political capital of the state. Secondly, the prince sought to politically unite all allied Slavic tribes with the help of a religion common to all. It is characteristic that the basics new faith established themselves in Rus' in about 100 years. It took Norway and Sweden 150 and 250 years, respectively, although they adopted Christianity at the same time.

The state reform of Vladimir awakened the enormous spiritual potential of the people and gave impetus to the rapid development of the country. Along with Christianity, writing and book education in the Slavic language, accessible to all, came to Rus'. IN Western Europe at the same time, divine services and readings in Latin were established, which were owned by a very small part of society. With the adoption of the new faith, civil and family life changed, new moral concepts and rules of behavior in society appeared. The Church and its ministers sought to strengthen the political authority of the princes and give their power a sacred “sacred” character. This also contributed to the unification of the country and its further development.

Most historians are of the opinion that baptism played a positive role in state development Rus'. However, there are others unconventional opinions, expressed, in particular, by the historian I. Froyanov, whose views have always been distinguished by originality and even paradoxicality. He believes that Vladimir introduced Christianity in order to preserve the already collapsing East Slavic tribal union and maintain the dominant position of the strong Polyan tribe, primarily the Kyiv elite. This reform of Vladimir, according to Froyanov, cannot be called progressive, since it was introduced to preserve the old tribal orders. Meanwhile, paganism has not lost its Ancient Rus' his social and political perspective, and Froyanov considers the worldview of ancient Russian Christians to be largely pagan. Rus' became Christian only formally. The creation of an Orthodox state was still far away. Froyanov’s views are to a certain extent consonant with the latest conclusions of Russian specialists in the history of languages ​​and culture, pointing to a peculiar fusion and displacement of pagan and Christian ideas in the worldview of the ancient Russian population. However, this view is not generally accepted.

Scientists from a materialistic point of view are exploring the prerequisites for the introduction of Christianity in Rus'. Drawing on a wide range of publications, including ancient Russian chronicles and literary monuments, they expose church cliches and tendentious explanations of the causes, circumstances and consequences of this phenomenon. Many books highlight little-explored aspects public life Old Russian state, shows the inconsistency of theological concepts of the role of the Russian Orthodox Church in the destinies of our people.

Many historians and philosophers were quite skeptical about the baptism of Rus' and Christianity in general. These include Celsus and Porphyry - the first significant opponents of Christianity. The works of these philosophers were, as is almost self-evident, destroyed by the first Christian emperors, but they can be partially reconstructed from the treatises of their opponents; first of all, Origen, who in 248 wrote an answer in books, and the most influential Christian theologian finds it difficult to object to Celsus, and even more so when the latter’s arguments convince him. Origen, however, one of the most respected Christians in general, resorts to all sorts of tricks, truncates the essential, silences it completely - despite repeated assurances to the contrary! He gives Celsus, who, of course, wrote tendentiously, but always relied on facts, with his own fiction and calls him as often as possible a confusion of the first rank, although his own remark provides “the best counterargument” (Heffken).

Celsus's Alethes Logos, which appeared at the end of the 2nd century, was the first pamphlet against Christianity. As a diatribe of Platonic philosophy, he is for the most part relatively skillful, nuanced, sometimes soberly demonstrative, sometimes ironic, not completely irreconcilable. Its author shows himself to be knowledgeable in Old Testament, in the Gospels, well acquainted with the development of Christian communities; an author about whom we personally know very little, but whose work does not show him to be frivolous.

Celsus shrewdly discovered the sensitive areas. For example, a mixture of Christian teachings, on the one hand, from Judaism, on the other - from elements of Stoicism, Platonism, Persian, Egyptian teachings, mystical beliefs. He finds, however, that "these things are best expressed by the Greeks... and without arrogant noise and declarations, as if they were revealed by God or the son of God." Celsus is ironic about the self-confidence of Jews and Christians, their pathetic claims to being chosen: “First there is God, then immediately we, created by him and similar to him in everything; Everything is subordinate to us, earth, water, air, stars, by our will it is all there to serve us.” In contrast, Celsus compares “the race of Jews and Christians” with “a flock of bats, or with ants that have come out of their structure, or with frogs that have settled around a swamp, or with earthworms ...” and believes that man has no essential advantages over the beast and is part of the cosmos, whose creator put everything at stake.

Celsus is already asking himself the question of why, in fact, God came. “For example, to get to know the situation among people? So how does he not know everything? So, he knows everything, but does not improve anything...” And if God came, then why so late? And why should only a part be saved, but “the rest of the human race must be burned up”? How can a completely destroyed body be restored and return to its original state? “Since they do not know anything in response here, they help themselves with the tasteless trick that with God everything is possible.”

An authoritative researcher of the culture of Ancient Rus', Academician D.S. Likhachev, revealing the values ​​of ancient Russian culture, declared in the West as the “culture of great silence,” notes: “We are standing on the threshold of... an opening, we are trying to break the silence, and this silence, although not yet broken, becomes more and more eloquent.”

Many pages of the history of our country still keep their secrets. There are many reasons for this. And one of them is that many historical milestones of the past of our people were subject to tendentious interpretation by church ideologists, due to which the historical event itself often, over the centuries, appears in a distorted, unrealistic light.

A striking example of this is the legend about the “baptism of Rus'” that appeared in the 11th century, which not only does not correspond to the facts, but also distorts real process Christianization of the Russian state. Having studied it in detail, even church historian E.E. Golubinsky is forced to admit: “Whoever loves entertaining and intricate stories, without caring about anything else, for whom a fairy tale is preferable to any real story, as long as it has the indicated quality, then... the story of Vladimir’s baptism should completely satisfy, for the dignity of intricacy belongs to it indisputably.” .

The idea of ​​the introduction of Christianity in Rus' as a one-time act of “baptism of Rus'” is deeply incorrect. prince of Kyiv Vladimir. As the accumulated material shows, the time has come not only to reconsider the details, but also on this basis to take a fresh look at the entire history of the introduction of Christianity in Rus' as a whole. Church historians associate the rapid civilization of ancient Russian society with the “baptism of Rus'.” It turns out that civilization in Rus' owes its development to Christianization, that the cultural and historical heritage of the peoples of our country is a religious heritage. The emigrant press, in particular the magazine “Russian Revival,” vigorously exaggerates the idea of ​​​​introducing a certain Orthodox culture into the wild Slavic lands, from which Russian national culture supposedly developed.

From time immemorial, with their “much verbiage,” theologians have sought to veil the truth about the events of the past and consolidate ideological cliches useful to the church in the minds of the masses. In the process of planting such cliches, how many documents theologians destroyed, how much documentary evidence they suppressed or distorted! Or they even invented things that didn’t exist. Leading Soviet historians came to the conclusion that the destruction of some historical evidence by church leaders and the fabrication of others completely “closed” from us the most important aspects of the past cultural life our people.

During the period of its centuries-long dominance, the Russian Orthodox Church created its own history of the spread of Christianity in Rus', which does not always adequately reflect the actual course of events. Church historians created a large number of tales, legends, lives of fictional and historically reliable persons, which were beneficial not only to church ideology in general, but also to this or that movement within the church, to this or that state or church figure. Over time, the once invented “facts” turned into walking cliches and acquired the force of real historical events. The history of the “baptism of Rus'” - shining example falsification activities of the church, which began from the first centuries of its appearance in Rus'.

Since when did the spread of Christianity begin in our country? “Orthodox church calendar” for 1982 gives a clear answer - from the first century AD. It was brought to our lands by a direct disciple of Christ, who was the first to respond to his call - Andrew the First-Called. What are the reasons and origins of the appearance of Christianity in Rus'? And the answer is ready: the apostles, bishops, saints, great martyrs and other sufferers for a just cause brought the light of Christ’s teaching to the Slavic lands vegetating in ignorance.

Firstly, the Christianization of Rus' is a long and controversial process that took place over a number of centuries. Secondly, the adoption of Christianity by Russia was not the subjective expression of the will of one or another state or church leader. It was socio-economically, politically and spiritually determined. Thirdly, the struggle for primacy in the baptism of Rus' between the main religious trends is not just a vainglorious desire of individual religious or government figures to glorify themselves in the eyes of their co-religionists or contemporaries. Attempts to ascribe to oneself primacy in this matter reflected the desire of one or another state or religious movement to subjugate, neutralize or acquire a friend or at least a peaceful neighbor in the person of the powerful, freedom-loving and proud people of Ancient Rus'. Fourthly, the elevation by the Orthodox Church to the rank of baptizers of Rus' of the mythical Apostle Andrew and a prominent political and statesman, although a “sinful” pagan, Prince Vladimir reflects Rus'’s desire for independence and independence in solving all problems, including the choice of one religion or another. Fifthly, the adoption of the Russian version of Christianity testifies to the strength and power of Ancient Rus' and its enormous political, economic and cultural role on the world stage.

Analysis of the available data allows us to assert that the “baptism of Rus'” was proclaimed neither Eastern nor Western Christianity, but Russian, spontaneous, different from both. Can we say that this was some special version of Christianity with a detailed system of doctrine and cult? Most likely no.

“On the one hand,” wrote B.A. Rybakov, - there is no doubt the benefit of the church as an organization that helped strengthen the young Russian statehood in the era of the rapid progressive development of feudalism. There is no doubt about its role in the development of Russian culture, in introducing the cultural riches of Byzantium, in the spread of education and the creation of literary and artistic values.

But the Russian people paid a dear price for this positive side activities of the church: the subtle poison of religious ideology penetrated (deeper than in pagan times) into all sections of people's life, it dulled class struggle, revived in new form primitive views and for many centuries cemented in people’s minds the ideas of the other world, the divine origin of power and providentialism, i.e., the idea that all destinies of people are always controlled by the divine will.”1

Church and theological activity unleashed abroad and intensifying in our country in connection with the 1000th anniversary of the introduction of Christianity in Kievan Rus again revived the refuted, forgotten and newly fabricated church falsifications of the history of the Russian state and church. We examined some of them in more detail, others only briefly. But no matter how contradictory the statements of church apologists may be, they all boil down to exaggerating the role of the Russian Orthodox Church in the past and present and justify the need for its existence in the future.

Some spiritual phenomena have a positive or negative impact on other phenomena, favor or hinder the creation of spiritual values. But they are not in themselves the basis and source of culture. “People,” wrote A.M. Gorky is not only the force that creates everything material values, he is the only and inexhaustible source of spiritual values, the first philosopher and poet in terms of time, beauty and genius of creativity, who created all the great poems, all the tragedies of the earth and the greatest of them - the history of world culture.”