Witte's monetary reform

The monetary reform of 1897, which is called the Witte reform, was the locomotive that pulled the industry of Russia, thereby accelerating the modernization of the state.

The need for monetary reform in Russia was dictated by the development of industry. It was necessary to ensure the stability of the Russian ruble. This would help to attract foreign investment, which was needed by the industry due to the lack of domestic capital. The monetary reform initiated by Witte was recognized as quite successful, although it had some drawbacks.

Prerequisites for the reform

Russian capitalism in the last quarter of the 19th - early 20th centuries. entered the imperialist stage, which was in line with global trends. In the 90s of the XIX century. in the Russian economy, monopoly associations - cartels and syndicates - become relevant, joint-stock commercial banks arise. But for the sustainable development of the economy, a stable currency was needed, which would prevent the depreciation of money capital. An attempt to strengthen the credit ruble by withdrawing "extra" paper money from circulation failed. And by the end of the XIX century. the necessity of transition to gold currency became more and more clear.

The first on this path was Great Britain, which introduced the gold standard in 1816. Then Sweden, Germany, Norway, Denmark, France, Holland, Italy, Greece and Belgium switched to gold circulation.

Russia was part of the world market, so there was a need to create the same monetary system as in other European countries. The ruble was a fully convertible currency, but the sale of foreign currency for rubles and the unlimited export of credit rubles abroad hindered the development of foreign trade and reduced budget revenues. This prevented the inflow of foreign capital into the country, as future profits in gold currency became uncertain, and investments became risky. Thus, the main reason for the monetary reform of 1895-97. became the interest of the government in the development of Russia's foreign economic relations.

Nikolaev ruble after Witte's monetary reform

What does the term "gold standard" mean?

This is such a monetary system when gold is recognized and used as the only monetary commodity and the universal equivalent of values. This standard is not subject to inflation. In the event of a decline in economic activity, gold coins went out of circulation and settled with the population, and when the need for money expanded, gold was put back into circulation. Gold money retained its face value. This simplified the payment of foreign economic transactions and contributed to the development of world trade.

Five rubles in gold. Obverse

Five rubles in gold. Reverse

How did society react to the new monetary system?

Differently. The nobility and landowners were especially opposed. If this was good for the new commercial and industrial bourgeoisie of Russia and foreign partners, then the instability of money made it possible for the domestic bourgeoisie to increase incomes, in particular, from the export of bread.

Preparing for reform

A lot of work has been done to prepare the reform since the 80s of the XIX century. Minister of Finance N.Kh. Bunge and his successor I.A. Vyshnegradsky. The purpose of the preparation is to replace the inflationary circulation of fiat money with the gold standard system. It was necessary not only to return to metallic circulation instead of paper money, but also to change the basis of the monetary system: to move from the silver standard to the gold one.

It was necessary to achieve a positive outcome of the balance of payments and the accumulation of gold reserves (by increasing exports, restricting imports, pursuing a protectionist policy, and concluding external loans). Eliminate the budget deficit. Stabilize the exchange rate.

Purposeful economic and financial policy led to the fact that on January 1, 1897 Russia's gold reserves reached 814 million rubles.

S.Yu. Witte stopped practicing under I.A. Vyshnegradsky speculative exchange game on the credit ruble. The State Bank at the expense of its own and treasury gold and foreign exchange reserves fully satisfied the demand for foreign currency. His predecessors in this post were financiers N.Kh. Bunge and I.A. Vyshnegradsky made attempts to streamline the monetary system, the main flaw of which was an excess of credit and paper stock, the devaluation of the ruble and its extreme instability.

As a result, it was possible to reduce the scale of speculation. Stabilization of the market rate of the credit ruble in 1893-1895. created the prerequisites for a monetary reform: fixing the exchange rate based on the exchange of the credit ruble for gold according to the actual ratio between them.

The prerequisites for the monetary reform were: gold reserves, a stabilized exchange rate, an active trade balance, a balanced budget, non-interference of the king and the State Council in the work of the Ministry of Finance and the State Bank.

Nicholas II

On May 8, 1895, Nicholas II approved a law according to which all legal transactions could be concluded in Russian gold currency and payment for such transactions could be made in gold coins or credit notes at the rate of gold on the day of payment.

But the gold coin very slowly became a priority means of payment. The State Bank even took the next step: on September 27, 1895, it announced that it would buy and accept a gold coin at a price not lower than 7 rubles. 40 kop. for a semi-imperial, and in 1896 the purchase rate was set at 7 rubles. 50 kop. These decisions led to the stabilization of the ratio between the gold ruble and the credit ruble at a ratio of 1:1.5. In January 1897, it was decided to introduce a metal circulation based on gold in the Russian Empire. On January 3, 1897, Nicholas II signed the law "On minting and issuing gold coins into circulation."

New monetary system

On January 3 (15), 1897, Russia switched to the gold standard. Gold coins of 5 and 10 rubles were minted and entered into circulation, as well as imperials (15 rubles) and semi-imperials (7.5 rubles). Credit notes of a new type were freely exchanged for gold.

However, many preferred paper money: it was easier to store them.

The convertibility of the ruble strengthened credit and contributed to the inflow of foreign investment and the economic development of the country. The initiator and conductor of the monetary reform of 1897 was S. Yu Witte, the Minister of Finance of Russia in 1892-1903.

The study of their experience, sober calculation, unbending will, professional competence, knowledge of the mechanisms of power gave S.Yu. Witte the opportunity to develop a reform project and gain the support of Emperor Nicholas II. The reform was prepared in an atmosphere of secrecy, since it was assumed that it would not be supported by broad sections of society, especially the court circles and the local nobility: the stabilization of the rudder met the objectives of industrial development, but led to a fall in prices for agricultural products.

The Ministry of Finance and its head were subjected to sharp indignation, attacks, and accusations of wanting to impoverish the country. Critical articles, malicious feuilletons, pamphlets and caricatures appeared in the press.

Witte caricature

Most of the members of the State Council opposed the reform, which forced Witte to submit it to the discretion of the Finance Committee, where he had many associates. Under the chairmanship of Emperor Nicholas II, the decision to adopt the monetary reform was made by an expanded meeting of the Finance Committee.

Significance of the monetary reform of 1897

It stabilized the ruble exchange rate and streamlined monetary circulation, created a solid base for domestic entrepreneurship, and strengthened Russia's position in the international market.

Sergei Yulievich Witte (1849-1915)

S.Yu. Witte. Lithograph by A. Münster

Statesman. He served as Minister of Communications (1892), Minister of Finance (1892-1903), Chairman of the Committee of Ministers (1903-1906), Chairman of the Council of Ministers (1905-1906). Member of the State Council. Count (since 1905). Active Privy Councillor.

Origin - from the Baltic Germans. Mother - from the Russian princely family of Dolgorukov.

He graduated from the Faculty of Physics and Mathematics of the Novorossiysk University (Odessa) in 1870, received the degree of candidate of physical and mathematical sciences.

He gave up his scientific career and went to work in the office of the Odessa governor, then he was engaged in the commercial operation of the operation of railways and then constantly remains in this area, becoming in 1892 the Minister of Railways, and at the end of this year - the Minister of Finance. He held this post for 11 years. He accelerated the lengthy construction of the Trans-Siberian Railway, considering it an important stage in the country's economic progress.

Witte's undoubted merit is his monetary reform. As a result, Russia for the period up to 1914 received a stable currency backed by gold. This contributed to the strengthening of investment activity and an increase in the inflow of foreign capital.

He opposed the consolidation of the privileged position of the nobility, believing that Russia's prospects are connected with the development of industry.

With his participation, labor legislation was developed.

With his active participation, state reforms were carried out, including the creation of the State Duma, the transformation of the State Council, the introduction of electoral legislation and the editing of the Basic State Laws of the Russian Empire.

Assisted in the construction of the CER.

Developed a reform program, implemented by P. A. Stolypin.

He was a supporter of the accelerated development of industry and the development of capitalism. Carried out reform of the taxation of industry.

Contributed to the introduction of the state "wine monopoly" on alcohol.

He concluded a peace treaty with Japan, according to which half of Sakhalin Island passed to Japan.

He showed outstanding diplomatic skills (the Alliance Treaty with China, the conclusion of the Portsmouth Peace with Japan, the trade agreement with Germany).

He was buried at the Lazarevsky cemetery of the Alexander Nevsky Lavra.

The reforms of Nicholas 1 had a huge impact on the situation in the country in 1825-1855.

Trying to improve the situation in the country, Nicholas 1 carried out various reforms that had a variety of consequences.

Here are the main reforms carried out during his reign:

• Financial;
• Industrial;
• landownership;
• Peasant;
• educational;
• Reform in the field of censorship.

financial reform

The first reform that Nicholas 1 carried out was the financial reform, or the Kankrin reform, so called because of Kankrin, the Minister of Finance under Nicholas 1.

The essence of the financial reform was to replace depreciated banknotes with credit signs. The reform improved the country's economic situation and helped Russia avoid one of its biggest financial crises.

industrial reform

Russian industry during the reign of Nicholas 1 was already quite strong. The Manufactory Council under the Ministry of Finance, established in 1828, had the right to control the state of industry.

In 1829, the first industrial exhibition was held. And already in 1831, the St. Petersburg Institute of Technology was opened, which trained engineers. In 1835, the first joint-stock company of cotton production appeared, and in 1837 the railway opened.

landownership

The reforms on landownership included the improvement of the rights and obligations of landlords. One of the main consequences of the reform was the abolition of corporal punishment of landlords, as well as a reduction in the number of taxes.

Peasant reform

The peasant question remained one of the main ones during the reign of Nicholas

To abolish serfdom, 10 secret committees were created, but nothing of the planned was realized. Despite this, several measures were taken that improved the situation of the peasants:

• Non-spread of serfdom to the extreme regions of Russia;
• The possibility of official release of part of the peasants;
• A peasant self-government was created;
• The softening of serfdom.

educational reform

Educational reform was less successful. Nicholas 1 introduced class education and divided schools into 3 types: parish, district and gymnasiums. Latin and Greek came to the fore, while the rest of the subjects were taught as additional ones.

Universities have also undergone a transformation. From now on, the rector, vice-rector and professor were chosen by the Ministry of Public Education. Education in higher educational institutions became paid, and church law, theology and church history were compulsory subjects at all faculties.

A positive consequence of the educational reform was an increase in the number of different educational institutions.

Censorship reform

Nicholas 1 was very afraid that his authority would decrease with the publication of any work, so severe censorship appeared. Many magazines were withdrawn from publication, writers and poets were banned, many works were subjected to cruel editing, as a result of which the meaning of the work could change.

Nicholas 1 carried out many reforms, not all of which were successful. But this only marked the beginning of the improvement of those areas that failed.

Carried out church reforms. Baptism with three fingers was introduced, waist bows instead of earthly ones, icons and church books were corrected according to Greek models. These changes provoked protests from large segments of the population. But Nikon acted harshly and without diplomatic tact, provoking a church schism as a result.

1666-1667: A Church Council was held. He supported church reform, deepening the schism in the Russian Orthodox Church.

The increasing centralization of the Muscovite state demanded a centralized church. Its unification was necessary - the introduction of the same text of prayer, the same type of worship, the same forms of magical rites and manipulations that make up the cult. To this end, during the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich, Patriarch Nikon carried out a reform that had a significant impact on the further development of Orthodoxy in Russia. The practice of worship in Byzantium was taken as the basis for the changes.

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

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

The procession around the church should be performed not according to the sun (from east to west, salting), but against the sun (from west to east);

Instead of bowing to the ground, bows should be made;

Hallelujah sing three times, not two and some others.

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

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

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

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

Patriarch Nikon tried to assert the priority of spiritual power over secular power, to put the patriarchate above autocracy. He expected that the tsar would not be able to do without him, and in 1658 defiantly renounced the patriarchate. The blackmail was not successful. The Local Council of 1666 condemned Nikon and defrocked him. The council, recognizing the independence of the patriarch in resolving spiritual issues, confirmed the need for the subordination of the church to royal authority. Nikon was exiled to the Belozersko-Ferapontov Monastery.

The results of the church reform:

1) Nikon's reform led to a split in the church into the dominant and the Old Believers; to the transformation of the church into a part of the state apparatus.

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

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

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

Church ritual reform (in particular, the correction of accumulated errors in liturgical books), undertaken with the aim of strengthening the church organization. The reform caused a split in the church.

NIKON

After the end of the Time of Troubles, under Mikhail and Alexei Romanov, foreign innovations began to penetrate into all external spheres of Russian life: blades were poured from Swedish metal, the Dutch set up ironworks, brave German soldiers marched near the Kremlin, a Scots officer taught Russian recruits the European system, friags played performances. Some Russians (even royal children), looking in Venetian mirrors, tried on foreign costumes, someone started the situation, as in the German Sloboda ...

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

Moscow in the 17th century the authorities increasingly called for "spiritual teachers" - the Greeks, but part of the society looked down on them: weren't the Greeks cowardly entered into a union with the Pope in 1439 in Florence? No, there is no other pure Orthodoxy, except Russian, and never will be.

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

In 1648, before the tsar’s wedding, they were worried: Alexei was “learned in German” and now he will force his beard to be shaved in German, drive him to pray in a German church - the end of piety and antiquity, the end of the world is coming.

The king got married. The salt riot of 1648 died down. Not all remained with their heads, but all with beards. However, the tension did not subside. A war broke out with Poland for the Orthodox Little Russian and Belarusian brothers. Victories inspired, the hardships of war irritated and ruined, the common people grumbled and fled. Tension, suspicion, expectation of something inevitable grew.

And at such a time, Alexei Mikhailovich's "friend" of Alexei Mikhailovich Nikon, whom the tsar called "the chosen and strong shepherd, mentor of souls and bodies, beloved favorite and friend, the sun shining in the whole universe ...", who became patriarch in 1652, conceived church reforms.

UNIVERSE CHURCH

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

1. The patriarch was convinced that the world was divided into two spheres: the universal (general), eternal, and the private, temporal.

2. Universal, eternal - more important than anything private and temporary.

3. The Muscovite state, like any state, is private.

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

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

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

When Nikon was reproached for papism, he answered: “Why not honor the pope for good?” Aleksey Mikhailovich was apparently partly fascinated by the reasoning of his imperious "friend". The tsar granted the patriarch the title of "great sovereign". It was a royal title, and of the patriarchs, only the grandfather of Alexei himself, Filaret Romanov, wore it.

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

And what? Newness in the rites and customs of the Moscow Church, which considered itself the only true Christian church, was everywhere. The Muscovites wrote “Jesus”, not “Jesus”, served liturgies on seven, and not on five, like the Greeks, prosphora, were baptized with 2 fingers, personifying God the Father and God the Son, and all other Eastern Christians crossed themselves with 3 fingers ("pinch"), personifying God the father, son and Holy Spirit. On Mount Athos, one Russian pilgrim monk, by the way, was almost killed as a heretic for double-faced baptism. And the patriarch found many more discrepancies. In various areas, local features of the service have developed. The Sacred Council of 1551 recognized some of the local differences as all-Russian. With the beginning of printing in the second half of the XVI century. they have become widespread.

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

1. In 1653, Nikon sent out a decree ordering to be baptized with a "pinch", as well as informing how many prostrations to the earth should be made correctly before reading the famous prayer of St. Ephraim.

2. Then the patriarch attacked the icon painters, who began to use Western European methods of painting.

3. New books were ordered to print "Jesus", Greek liturgical rites and chants according to the "Kyiv canons" were introduced.

4. Following the example of the Eastern clergy, the priests began to read sermons of their own composition, and the patriarch himself set the tone here.

5. Russian handwritten and printed books on worship were ordered to be taken to Moscow for viewing. If they found discrepancies with the Greek ones, then the books were destroyed, and new ones were sent out instead.

The Holy Council of 1654, with the participation of the tsar and the Boyar Duma, approved all Nikon's undertakings. All those who tried to argue, the patriarch "demolished" astray. Thus, Bishop Pavel of Kolomna, who objected at the Council of 1654, was defrocked without a council court, severely beaten, exiled. He went mad from the humiliation and soon died.

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

SPLIT

Nikon fought innovations, thinking that they could cause discord among the people. However, it was his reforms that caused a split, since part of the Moscow people perceived them as innovations that encroached on faith. The Church split into "Nikonians" (the church hierarchy and most of the believers who are accustomed to obey) and "Old Believers".

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

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

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

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

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

Did Nikon regret what he had done? May be. At the end of his patriarchate, in a conversation with Ivan Neronov, the former leader of the schismatics, Nikon threw: “both old and new books are good; no matter what you want, you serve for those ... "

But the church could no longer yield to the recalcitrant rebels, and they could no longer forgive the church that encroached on the "holy faith and antiquity."

OPAL

And what was the fate of Nikon himself?

The great sovereign Patriarch Nikon sincerely believed that his power was higher than that of the tsar. Relations with the soft and compliant - but to a certain limit! - Alexei Mikhailovich became tense, until, finally, insults and mutual claims ended in a quarrel. Nikon retired to New Jerusalem (Resurrection Monastery), hoping that Alexei would beg him to return. Time passed... The king was silent. The Patriarch sent him an irritated letter, in which he reported how bad everything was in the Muscovite kingdom. The patience of the Quietest King was not unlimited, and no one could subdue him to his influence to the end.

Did the patriarch expect to be begged to return? But Nikon is not and not the sovereign of Moscow. Cathedral 1666-1667 with the participation of two Eastern patriarchs, he anathematized (cursed) the Old Believers and at the same time deprived Nikon of his dignity for unauthorized resignation from the patriarchate. Nikon was exiled north to the Ferapontov Monastery.

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

Nikon's health was undermined. “Now I am sick, naked and barefoot,” the former patriarch wrote to the tsar. - From every need ... otsynzhal, hands are sick, the left one does not rise, before the eyes there is a thorn from the child and smoke, blood comes from the teeth stinking ... The legs swell ... ”Alexei Mikhailovich ordered several times to ease the maintenance of Nikon. The tsar died before Nikon, and before his death he unsuccessfully asked Nikon for forgiveness.

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

KLYUCHEVSKY ON NIKON'S REFORM

“Nikon did not rebuild the church order in any new spirit and direction, but only replaced one church form with another. He understood the very idea of ​​an ecumenical church, in the name of which this noisy deed was undertaken, too narrowly, in a schismatic way, from the external ceremonial side, and he was unable to bring into the consciousness of the Russian church society a broader view of the ecumenical church, nor to consolidate it in any way. or by an ecumenical conciliar resolution and completed the whole matter by scolding the eastern patriarchs who judged him to the face with the sultan's slaves, vagabonds and thieves: jealous of the unity of the universal church, he split his local one. The main string of the mood of the Russian church society, the inertia of religious feeling, pulled too tightly by Nikon, broke off and painfully whipped both himself and the ruling Russian hierarchy, which approved of his cause.<…>The ecclesiastical storm raised by Nikon was far from capturing the entire Russian ecclesiastical community. A split began among the Russian clergy, and the struggle at first went on between the Russian ruling hierarchy itself and that part of church society that was carried away by the opposition against Nikon's ritual innovations, led by agitators from the subordinate white and black clergy.<…>A suspicious attitude towards the West was widespread throughout Russian society, and even in its leading circles, which were especially easily influenced by Western influences, the native antiquity had not yet lost its charm. This slowed down the transformational movement and weakened the energy of the innovators. The schism lowered the authority of antiquity, raising in its name a rebellion against the church, and in connection with it, against the state. The greater part of Russian ecclesiastical society has now seen what bad feelings and inclinations this antiquity can foster, and what dangers blind attachment to it threatens. The leaders of the reform movement, who still hesitated between their native antiquity and the West, now, with a relieved conscience, went their own way more decisively and boldly.

FROM THE NAME HIGHEST DECREE OF NICHOLAS II

In constant, according to the precepts of the Ancestors, communion with the Holy Orthodox Church, invariably drawing joy and renewal of spiritual strength for Ourself, We have always had a heartfelt desire to provide each of Our subjects with freedom of belief and prayer according to the dictates of his conscience. Concerned about the fulfillment of such intentions, among the reforms outlined in the Decree of December 12, We included the adoption of real measures to eliminate restrictions in the field of religion.

Now, having considered the provisions drawn up, in pursuance of this, in the Committee of Ministers and finding them consistent with Our cherished desire to strengthen the principle of religious tolerance outlined in the Basic Laws of the Empire of the Russian, We recognized it as a blessing to approve such.

Recognize that falling away from the Orthodox faith into another Christian confession or creed is not subject to persecution and should not entail any disadvantageous consequences in terms of personal or civil rights, moreover, a person who has fallen away from Orthodoxy upon reaching the age of majority is recognized as belonging to that creed or creed, which it has chosen for itself.<…>

Allow Christians of all confessions to baptize unbaptized foundlings and children of unknown parents who they accept for upbringing according to the rites of their faith.<…>

Establish in law a distinction between creeds now encompassed by the name "schism", dividing them into three groups: a) Old Believer consents, b) sectarianism and c) followers of savage teachings, the very belonging to which is punishable under criminal law.

Recognize that the provisions of the law, granting the right to perform public prayers and determining the position of the schism in civil relations, embrace the followers of both the Old Believer concords and sectarian persuasions; the perpetration of violations of laws from religious motives exposes those responsible for this to the responsibility established by law.

Assign the name of Old Believers, instead of the currently used name of schismatics, to all followers of interpretations and agreements who accept the basic dogmas of the Orthodox Church, but do not recognize some of the rites adopted by it and send their worship according to old printed books.

Assign to the clergy elected by the communities of Old Believers and sectarians for the administration of spiritual requirements the title of "abbots and mentors", and these persons, upon approval of their positions by the proper government authority, are subject to exclusion from the philistines or rural inhabitants, if they belonged to these states, and exemption from conscription for active military service, and naming, with the permission of the same civil authority, the name adopted at the tonsure, as well as allowing the designation in the passports issued to them, in the column indicating the occupation of the position belonging to them among this clergy, without using, however , Orthodox hierarchical names.

1 Comment

Gorbunova Marina/ honorary worker of education

In addition to the creation of the Universal Church and the restriction of "innovations", there were other reasons that not only caused the reforms, but also united around them (for a while!) significant personalities whose interests temporarily coincided.
Both the tsar, and Nikon, and Avvakum were interested in restoring the moral authority of the church, in strengthening its spiritual influence on the parishioners. This authority gradually lost its significance both because of the polyphony during the service, and because of the gradual "weaning" from the church Old Slavonic language in which they were conducted, and because of the remaining "immorality", which Stoglav unsuccessfully tried to fight against under Ivan Grozny (superstition, drunkenness, divination, foul language, etc.). It was these problems that the priests were going to solve as part of the circle of "zealots of piety." For Alexei Mikhailovich, it was very important that the reforms contribute to the rallying of the church and its uniformity, since this was in the interests of the state in a period of increased centralization. To solve this problem, an effective technical tool appeared that the previous rulers did not have, namely, printing. The corrected printed samples had no discrepancies, and they could be mass-produced in a short time. And initially nothing foreshadowed a split.
In the future, the return to the original source (the Byzantine "charate" lists), according to which corrections were made, played a cruel joke on the reformers: it was the ritual side of the church service that underwent the most profound changes since the time of St. Vladimir, and turned out to be "unrecognized" by the population. The fact that many Byzantine books were brought from the “Latins” after the fall of Constantinople strengthened the conviction that true Orthodoxy was being destroyed, the fall of the Third Rome and the onset of the kingdom of Antichrist were coming. The negative consequences of the passion primarily for ritualism during the ref is perfectly reflected in the attached text of the lecture by V.O. Klyuchevsky. It should also be added that unfavorable changes took place in the lives of many segments of the population during this period (the abolition of "lesson years", the elimination of "white settlements", the restriction of boyar influence and parochial traditions), which were directly associated with the "rejection of the old faith." In short, there was something to be afraid of the common people.
As for the confrontation between the tsar and the patriarch, this fact was not decisive for the implementation of reforms (they continued even after Nikon's imprisonment), but influenced the position of the church in the future. Having lost to the secular authorities, the church paid for forgetting its paramount role as a spiritual mentor by subsequently turning into a part of the state machine: first, the patriarchate was liquidated and the Spiritual Regulations became the guide to ministry, and then, in the process of secularization, the economic independence of the church was also liquidated.

The Great Scam of Patriarch Nikon, or Whom Orthodoxy Hindered in Russia

The 17th century was marked for the Russian people by yet another difficult and treacherous reform. This is a well-known church reform carried out by Patriarch Nikon.

~~~~~~~~~~~

Many modern historians admit that this reform, apart from strife and disaster, brought nothing to Russia. Nikon is scolded not only by historians, but also by some churchmen for the fact that, allegedly, at the behest of Patriarch Nikon, the church split, and two appeared in its place: the first is the church renewed by reforms, the brainchild of Nikon (the prototype of the modern Russian Orthodox Church), and the second is that old church that existed before Nikon, which later received the name of the Old Believer Church.

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

Nikon, in the world Nikita Minin (1605-1681), the sixth Moscow Patriarch, was born into an ordinary peasant family, by 1652 he rose to the rank of patriarch, and somewhere from that time began "his" transformations. Moreover, upon entering into his patriarchal duties, he enlisted the support of the king not to interfere in the affairs of the Church. The tsar and the people undertook to fulfill this testament, and it was fulfilled. Only now the people were not really asked, the opinion of the people was expressed by the tsar (Aleksey Mikhailovich Romanov) and the court boyars. And almost everyone knows what the notorious church reform of the 1650s-1660s resulted in, but the version of the reforms that is presented to the masses does not reflect its entire essence. The true goals of the reform are hidden from the unenlightened minds of the Russian people. The people, who have been robbed of the true memory of their great past, trampled upon all their heritage, have no choice but to believe in what they are presented on a silver platter. Only it's time to remove rotten apples from this saucer, and open people's eyes to what really happened.

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

And what is even more interesting, despite the fact that some churchmen blaspheme Nikon as a reformer, the changes that he made continue to operate until now in the same church! Those are double standards!

Let's now see what kind of reform it was.

The main reformatory innovations, according to the official version of historians: The so-called "book right", which consisted in rewriting liturgical books. Many textual changes were made to the liturgical books, for example, the word "Jesus" was changed to "Jesus". The double-fingered sign of the cross has been replaced by a three-fingered one. Prostrations have been cancelled. Religious processions began to be carried out in the opposite direction (not salting, but anti-salting, i.e. against the sun). He tried to introduce a 4-pointed cross and for a short period of time he succeeded.

Researchers cite a lot of reformist changes, but the above are especially emphasized by everyone who studies the topic of reforms and transformations during the reign of Patriarch Nikon.

As for the "book right". During the baptism of Russia at the end of the tenth century. the Greeks had two charters: Studian and Jerusalem. In Constantinople, the Studian Rule was first spread, which passed to Russia. But the Jerusalem statute began to become more widespread in Byzantium, which by the beginning of the 14th century had become universal. ubiquitous there. In this regard, the liturgical books have been imperceptibly changed there for three centuries. This was one of the reasons for the difference in the liturgical practice of Russians and Greeks. In the 14th century, the difference between the Russian and Greek church rites was already quite noticeable, although the Russian liturgical books fully corresponded to the Greek books of the 10th-11th centuries. Those. there was no need to rewrite books at all! In addition, Nikon decided to rewrite books from Greek and ancient charate Russians. How did it really turn out?

But in fact, the cellar of the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, Arseniy Sukhanov, is sent by Nikon to the East specifically for sources for the “right”, and instead of these sources he brings mainly manuscripts that “have nothing to do with correcting liturgical books” (books for home reading, for example , the words and conversations of John Chrysostom, the conversations of Macarius of Egypt, the ascetic words of Basil the Great, the creations of John of the Ladder, patericons, etc.). Among these 498 manuscripts there were also about 50 manuscripts of even non-church writing, for example, the works of Hellenic philosophers - Troy, Afilistratus, Focleus "on sea animals", Stavron the philosopher "on earthquakes, etc.). Doesn't this mean that Arseniy Sukhanov was sent by Nikon for "sources" to avert his eyes? Sukhanov traveled from October 1653 to February 22, 1655, that is, almost a year and a half, and brought only seven manuscripts for editing church books - a serious expedition with frivolous results. The "Systematic Description of the Greek Manuscripts of the Moscow Synodal Library" fully confirms the information about only seven manuscripts brought by Arseny Sukhanov. Finally, Sukhanov, of course, could not, at his own peril and risk, procure the works of pagan philosophers, manuscripts on earthquakes and marine animals far away, instead of the necessary sources for correcting liturgical books. Therefore, he had Nikon's instructions for this...

But, in the end, it turned out even more “interesting” - the books were copied according to new Greek books that were printed in the Jesuit Parisian, Venetian printing houses. The question why Nikon needed the books of "pagans" (although it would be more correct to say Slavic Vedic books, not pagan ones) and ancient Russian charate books remains open. But it was with the church reform of Patriarch Nikon that the Great Book Burn in Russia began, when entire carts of books were dumped into huge fires, doused with tar and set on fire. And those who resisted the “book rights” and the reform in general were sent there too! The Inquisition, carried out in Russia by Nikon, did not spare anyone: boyars, peasants, and church dignitaries went to the fires. Well, during the time of Peter I, the impostor, the Great Book Gar gained such power that at the moment the Russian people have almost no original document, annals, manuscripts, books left. Peter I continued Nikon's work on a wide scale in erasing the memory of the Russian people. There is a legend among Siberian Old Believers that under Peter I, so many old printed books were burned at the same time that after that 40 pounds (which is equal to 655 kg!) Of molten copper fasteners were removed from the fires.

During Nikon's reforms, not only books were burning, but also people. The Inquisition marched not only across the expanses of Europe, and Russia, unfortunately, affected no less. Russian people were subjected to cruel persecutions and executions, whose conscience could not agree with church innovations and distortions. Many preferred to die than to betray the faith of their fathers and grandfathers. Faith Orthodox, not Christian. The word Orthodox has nothing to do with the church! Orthodoxy means Glory Rule. Rule - the world of the Gods, or the worldview taught by the Gods (Gods used to be called people who had reached certain abilities and reached the level of creation. In other words, they were just highly developed people). The Russian Orthodox Church got its name after the reforms of Nikon, who realized that it was not possible to defeat the native faith of the Rus, it remained to try to assimilate it with Christianity. The correct name of the ROC MP in the outside world is "Orthodox autocephalous church of the Byzantine persuasion."

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

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

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

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

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

Regarding the fact that earlier the Greeks had two fingers, the historian N. Kapterev cites indisputable historical evidence in his book “Patriarch Nikon and His Opponents in Correcting Church Books”. For this book and other materials on the topic of the reform, Nikon Kapterev even tried to be expelled from the academy and tried in every possible way to impose a ban on the printing of his materials. Now, modern historians say that Kapterev was right about the fact that the two-fingeredness of the Slavs has always existed. But despite this, the rite of three-toed baptism has not yet been canceled in the church.

The fact that two-fingeredness has long existed in Russia can be seen at least from the message of the Moscow Patriarch Job to the Georgian Metropolitan Nikolai: “Prayers, be baptized with two fingers ...”.

But two-fingered baptism is an ancient Slavic rite, which the Christian church originally borrowed from the Slavs, modifying it somewhat.

Here is what Svetlana Levashova writes in her book Revelation on this subject:

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

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

Patriarch Nikon, understanding the special attitude of the Russian people to the ancient rites, which could not be eradicated not only among the ordinary population, but also among the aristocracy, the boyars, decided to completely erase them from memory by simply replacing one rite with another! And he succeeded like no other before. This was possible for the simple reason that after the forced baptism of Russia into the Greek religion (Christianity), 2/3 of the population was exterminated. And over time, after only a few centuries, very few people remained who would remember and could pass on true knowledge about the past to their descendants. The memory of the past lived only in rituals, traditions and holidays. Real Slavic holidays! But they also had a hard time to take into account.

Despite the baptism of Russia into a new religion, the people both celebrated and continue to celebrate their ancient Slavic holidays. Still! Probably everyone loves to eat pancakes on Maslenitsa and ride ice slides. Only few people know that this holiday used to be called Komoyeditsa. And it was celebrated at a completely different time. Only when Nikon tied the holidays of the Slavs to the lunar cult, there were slight shifts in some holidays. And Maslenitsa (Komoeditsa) is a real Slavic holiday in its essence. This holiday is so loved by the Russian people that the clergy are still struggling with it, but to no avail. The Slavs had many holidays, on which their beloved and dear Gods were revered.

The scientist and academician Nikolai Levashov, at one of his meetings with readers, told what meanness Patriarch Nikon committed:

It turns out that all that was necessary was to impose Christian holidays on the Slavic holidays, on the Gods - saints, and "it's in the bag," as they say.

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

So vilely, by the hands of Nikon, the transformation of a Russian man, free by nature and worldview, into a real slave, into "Ivan, who does not remember his kinship," continued.

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

the date
Russian holiday
Christian holiday

06.01
Feast of the god Veles
Christmas Eve

07.01
Kolyada
Nativity

24.02
Day of the god Veles (patron of cattle)
St. Day Vlasia (patron of animals)

02.03
Madder Day
St. Day Marianne

07.04
Maslenitsa (celebrated 50 days before Easter)
Annunciation

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

15.05
Day of Boris the Khlebnik (the holiday of the first sprouts)
Transfer of the relics of Saints Boris and Gleb

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

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

06.07
Mermaid week
Agrafena Bathing Day (with obligatory bathing)

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

02.08
Day of the god Perun (god of thunder)
St. Day Elijah the Prophet (Thunderer)

19.08
Feast of First Fruits
Feast of the consecration of fruits

21.08
Day of the god Stribog (god of the winds)
Day of Miron Vetrogon (bringing the wind)

14.09
Day of Volkh Zmeevich
Saint Simon the Stylite Day

21.09
Holiday of women in childbirth
Nativity of the Virgin

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

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

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

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

It is quite clear and revealing: every Slavic holiday according to a Christian, every Slavic God according to a saint. It is impossible to forgive Nikon for such a forgery, as well as churches in general, which can be safely called criminals. This is a real crime against the Russian people and its culture. And such traitors are erected monuments and continue to be honored. In 2006 in the city of Saransk, a monument was erected and consecrated to Nikon, the patriarch who trampled on the memory of the Russian people.

The “church” reform of Patriarch Nikon, as we already see, did not affect the church, it was clearly carried out against the traditions and foundations of the Russian people, against Slavic rites, and not church ones.

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

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

Tent buildings (with a pyramidal top) are known in Russia even before the adoption of Christianity. This type of buildings is considered primordially Russian. That is why Nikon took care of such a “little thing” with his reforms, because it was a real “pagan” trace among the people. Under the threat of the death penalty, craftsmen, architects, as soon as they did not manage to keep the shape of a tent near temple buildings and worldly ones. Despite the fact that it was necessary to build domes with onion cupolas, the general shape of the structure was made pyramidal. But not everywhere it was possible to deceive the reformers. These were mainly the northern and remote regions of the country.

Since then, temples have been built with domes, now the hipped form of buildings through the efforts of Nikon is completely forgotten. But our distant ancestors perfectly understood the laws of physics and the influence of the shape of objects on space, and it was not without reason that they built it with a tent top.
This is how Nikon cut off the memory of the people.

Also in wooden churches, the role of the refectory is changing, turning from a room in its own way into a purely cult one. She finally loses her independence and becomes part of the church premises. The primary purpose of the refectory is reflected in its very name: public meals, feasts, “brotherhoods” were held here, timed to coincide with certain solemn events. This is an echo of the traditions of our ancestors. The refectory was a waiting area for arrivals from neighboring villages. Thus, in terms of its functionality, the refectory carried precisely the essence of the world. Patriarch Nikon made a church brainchild out of the refectory. This transformation was intended, first of all, for that part of the aristocracy that still remembered the ancient traditions and roots, the purpose of the refectory and the holidays that were celebrated in it.

But not only the refectory was taken over by the church, but also the bell towers with bells, which have nothing to do with Christian churches at all.
Praying Christian clergy convened blows on a metal plate or wooden board - a beat, which existed in Russia at least until the 19th century. Bells for monasteries were too expensive and were used only in rich monasteries. Sergius of Radonezh, when he called the brethren to a prayer service, beat it on the beater.

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

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

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

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

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

Replacing Slavic traditions with alien Greek ones, Nikon did not ignore such an element of Russian culture as buffoonery. The appearance of a puppet theater in Russia is connected with buffoon games. The first chronicle information about buffoons coincides in time with the appearance on the walls of the Kiev Sophia Cathedral of frescoes depicting buffoon performances. The monk-chronicler calls the buffoons servants of the devils, and the artist who painted the walls of the cathedral found it possible to include their image in church decorations along with icons. Buffoons were associated with the masses, and one of the types of their art was "gum", that is, satire. Buffoons are called "fools", that is, scoffers. Glum, mockery, satire will continue to be firmly associated with buffoons. First of all, the Christian clergy ridiculed buffoons, and when the Romanov dynasty came to power and supported church persecution of buffoons, they began to mock statesmen as well. The secular art of buffoons was hostile to the church and clerical ideology. The episodes of the fight against buffoonery are described in detail by Avvakum in his Life. The hatred that the churchmen had for the art of buffoons is evidenced by the records of the chroniclers (“The Tale of Bygone Years”). When the Amusing Closet (1571) and the Amusement Chamber (1613) were arranged at the Moscow Court, buffoons found themselves in the position of court jesters there. But it was during the time of Nikon that the persecution of buffoons reached its climax. They tried to impose on the Russian people that buffoons are servants of the devil. But for the people, the buffoon has always remained a “good fellow”, a daredevil. Attempts to present buffoons as jesters and servants of the devil failed, and buffoons were massively imprisoned, and subsequently subjected to torture and execution. In 1648 and 1657, Nikon sought the adoption of decrees from the tsar to ban buffoons. The persecution of buffoons was so massive that by the end of the 17th century they disappeared from the central regions. And already by the time of the reign of Peter I, they completely disappear, as a phenomenon of the Russian people.
Nikon did everything possible and impossible so that the true Slavic heritage disappeared from the expanses of Russia, and with it the Great Russian People.

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

To be continued…
***
Materials used:

B.P. Kutuzov."The Secret Mission of Patriarch Nikon", ed. "Algorithm", 2007.

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

"Bible Pictures, or What is God's Grace?", ed. Mitrakov, 2011 A.V. Opolovnikov.

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