“Orthodox extremism” around “Matilda”. Why is there no official position of the Russian Orthodox Church? Victims of Orthodox extremists ask for help from the FSB

And those who considered Our signs to be lies,
We will bring it down so that they will not know.
And I will give them a reprieve: after all, my idea is strong.
Koran 7:182-183

On the evening of November 19, 2009 in Moscow, an unknown criminal shot and killed the rector of the Church of St. Thomas on Kantemirovskaya Street, the famous priest Daniil Sysoev. Sysoev was only 35 years old. His assistant and choir director of the temple, 41-year-old Vladimir Strelbitsky, was wounded in the chest and survived.
In connection with the murder, various media began vying with each other to report the details of this incident and the testimony of “eyewitnesses”:
“The criminal managed to escape. According to one version, he disappeared to the nearby Kantemirovskaya metro station. It is known that the shooter is a strong young man between 20 and 30 years old with a heavy build. According to eyewitnesses, killer - native of the Caucasus» ( “Komsomolskaya Pravda” dated November 20, 2009, “ Orthodox priest killed in Moscow by Islamists or sectarians" ).
“The wounded Vladimir Strelbitsky reported that shooter, presumably Caucasian, fled the crime scene on foot" ( News agency “Rosbalt” dated November 20, 2009, “Popov: The murder of Sysoev is religious extremism” ).

Electronic media reported that “according to the main version of the investigation, crime was committed on religious grounds, noted the head of the capital's Investigative Department of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation, Bagmet. Meanwhile parishioners temple reported to the police that most likely it was native of the Caucasus. “All possible versions of this crime are now being considered. But the main one is that it was committed on religious grounds.”,” Anatoly Bagmet emphasized.”
Other media reported that the perpetrator was dressed all in black and had a gauze bandage on his face, so it remains a mystery how witnesses could determine that the killer was a native of the Caucasus.
“There is an opinion that the clergyman who died the day before in Moscow could have become a victim radical Islamists or some sectarians, For example, " pagans».
“One of the main versions of the murder is religious hatred related to missionary activity deceased."

“Four years ago the priest began to receive threats against him. IN emails some radical representatives of Islam promised cut off to him head and “let the guts out.” They wrote that he had already been sentenced to death. In October, a Muslim called the temple publishing house and said that If still a missionary at least once will speak out about Islam "same as before", he will be killed. Daniil Sysoev twice turned to the FSB for help in connection with the threats.
In addition to disputes with Muslims, Daniil Sysoev fought against sectarians. Since August 1996, he, in his own words, conducted missionary conversations with people who had suffered from the activities of sects and occultists. The priest was an employee of a rehabilitation center for victims of totalitarian cults and pseudo-religious movements. “He preached among people who considered themselves to be radical movements and even among extremists”, - a close friend told the Life News website deceased father Vitaly."

Daniil Sysoev could have been killed by “pagans,” the so-called “Rodnovers,” a source in the operational investigative group told Interfax. This version is supported by the fact that the criminal didn't drop the weapon at the crime scene. “Rodnovers” are not professional killers, so they count every gun,” said the source.” Yes, the logic is ironclad. Let us recall that earlier young people who considered themselves to be “Rodnovers” staged an explosion in one of the churches in Moscow. In fact, these criminals have nothing to do with the Rodnover Slavs. Moreover, their terrorist attack was carried out specifically to cast a shadow on the Slavic Rodnover movement and discredit it.

The Bible says: “Judge him according to his deeds...”, so we will evaluate the activities of the murdered father Daniil Sysoev in his affairs. Daniil Sysoev is the author of the book “The Chronicle of the Beginning,” which is dedicated to the defense of the “patristic teaching” about the creation of the world. He was the secretary of the missionary and educational center “Shestodnev”, edited the collection “Shestodnev against evolution”. “Evolutionism is not a science, but a very dishonest (not to say deceitful) ideology, incompatible with Christianity in any form.”, - said Sysoev.
Daniil Sysoev's last book was called “Instructions for immortals: what to do if you do die”.

For his “pastoral activities”, Daniil Sysoev received death threats 14 times.
The Old Believers complained about him to Patriarch Kirill. And at the beginning of last year, Moscow journalist Khalida Khamidullina filed a complaint against Daniil Sysoev with the prosecutor's office.

Cause of action was due to the fact that the priest, according to Khamidullina, insulted feelings Muslim believers. The application, as reported, was accepted for processing. Observers noted that this was not the first time that the vigorous activity of a priest caused protests representatives of other denominations.
Daniil Sysoev was well known not only in church circles. He was considered one of the most active Orthodox missionaries, however talked also that his missionary purpose is not by proselytizing with words of love and a good example, but in insulting non-believers».

Sysoev spoke about the prospects for Orthodox-Islamic dialogue as follows: « Peaceful coexistence these religions it was possible only with a strong Christian or at least secular power… Today, Islamic society is being destroyed by the Providence of God. As a result, for the first time in many centuries there was an opportunity for a wide mission among Muslims. If We let's neglect this opportunity, whether out of tolerance or fear, then God won't forgive us this".
Speaking about God, the priest clearly did not mean the Almighty, the merciful and merciful, loving God, but the evil biblical “god” who demands worship and hates Muslims.
And this is not the first time that Sysoev’s statements outraged believers. So in October 2007 co-chairman of the Council of Muftis Russia Nafigulla Ashirov stated, What ready to sue with a priest - the author of the book “Marriage with a Muslim.”
By the way, not only Muslims were dissatisfied with the priest. In the spring of 2007, the head of the Russian Orthodox Old Believers Church, Metropolitan Korniliy, asked the then chairman of the Department for External Church Relations of the Moscow Patriarchate, Metropolitan Kirill, to comment on an article by priest Daniil Sysoev about the Old Believers, as well as offensive assessments and conclusions contained in it.

Exactly That's why, first and main version- This religious murder. Let us repeat once again, some Islamic extremists have threatened Sysoev 14 times over the past 5 years for his offensive statements against those professing Islam. To find out what could have aroused the anger of Muslims, let us turn to the articles of the former priest, his books and statements regarding other religious denominations.

On the website www.site, the material contained several quotes from Daniil Sysoev’s book “Walking with a Protestant”; let us quote them again:
“Muslims are forced to fight the word of God with fire, terror and executions to maintain their error.”(p. 90, paragraph 2);
“Mohammad’s institutions correspond to the ideas of the contemporaries of the false prophet Mohammad and his whims”(p. 91, paragraph 2);
“We have before us a false prophecy inspired by the eternal enemy of the human race.”(p. 93, paragraph 2);
“The Koran does not give a person the strength to do good and is therefore useless”(p. 92, paragraph 1);
“Mohammad refused to perform miracles, and therefore your work is insignificant, says the True God.”(p. 94, paragraph 1);
“Current Muslims in the Caucasus are the descendants of those cowards who renounced the faith of their ancestors, and those who accept Orthodoxy not only show courage, but also return to the best that their people had.”(p. 105, paragraph 4). "
Such were the views on the Koran and Muslims that Father Daniel had!
Daniil Sysoev has a certificate of gratitude from the Department of Religious Education and Catechesis (2000). Apparently, for “missionary” services.
In 2009, the priest of the Russian Orthodox Church Daniil Sysoev spoke out against Dharmic religions:
«... cannot be called a Christian that writer who writes about reincarnation, evolution <...>anathema may fall on any writer who opposes the sacred dogmas.".

Based on the dogmas preached by all Christian hierarchies, we can conclude that all the ideas of the hierarchs of pseudo-Christianity come down to one thing: “There cannot be a Kingdom of God on earth, it is only in Heaven, so you are the Servant of God, repent, come to terms with everything and only then will you go to heaven.” "All the will of God…".
But all these dogmas go against the Creator’s plan.

The Wisdom of the Ancestors has been preserved in Russian culture, confirming this: “Trust in God, but don’t make a mistake yourself,” “God is God, and don’t be bad yourself,” “Carry manure—don’t be lazy, even though you don’t pray to God,” “Whoever hopes in Heaven sits without bread ", "Holy God, plowing won't help" etc.

And in Koranic culture:
"100. And let there be among you a community that calls for good, commands what is approved and restrains from what is disapproved. These are happy.
101. And do not be like those who divided and began to disagree after clear signs came to them; For these there is a great punishment."(Quran sura 3).

God, the Creator of the Universe, does not need intermediaries between Himself and Man, therefore all the mediation activities of the Christian church, and also for money, are directed against His Providence.

From the speeches of Daniil Sysoev, it is clear that he considers only “Christianity” to be the “highest true”, and all other religions are lies, and people who do not agree with this are “sectarians”. Attacks on Islam- This the main direction of his activity. The Koran for him is not a Revelation from Above, but a false teaching. The Bible is “the ultimate truth.” And since the Bible is the Truth, then everything that is spoken against it is both a lie and slander for Sysoev.

This attitude towards Islam also arose because Father Daniel does not distinguish Quranic Islam from historically established Islam, he also does not distinguish the true teaching of Jesus Christ from historically established Christianity. IN today's form Christianity and Islam are the two most common varieties idealistic atheism.
Based on the materials of the KOB, this is how we can formulate the main difference between the first type of atheism and the second:

· among Christian branches(Orthodox, Catholic, Protestant, Lutheran, etc.) the intellect is blocked, since the dogma of the Trinity: 3=1 is an equality incomprehensible to people with common sense. In addition, in many ways, the logical inconsistency of the texts of the Bible, elevated to the rank of revealed truth, also blocks the activity of the human intellect. This can be seen in the example Sysoev's statements, which are a consequence zombification his psyche biblical dogma.
Muslims have their own will blocked, because the “if everything is the will of Allah and each person has his own destiny,” How can a person decide to do something himself? And this is regardless of whether they belong to Shiites, Sunnis or Wahhabis. Wherein primary blockadewill in some situations has the consequence secondary blockade – intelligence.
The only question is the extent to which people are subordinated to the deadening dogmatization of one tradition or another.

Also in idealistic atheism, the existence of God is recognized, but instead of the God who exists, in fact, people are given “gods” who do not exist in reality.
The most striking example of such a replacement and tragic for the history of both our country and all humanity was the replacement God A, which is, the man Jesus Christ. A good man, a righteous man, a prophet, but... still a man.

The activities of the murdered priest are reminiscent of the long-known principle of immoral government “divide, pit and conquer.” Not understanding the meaning of the Koran, he propagated gag church hierarchy attributed to God. In addition, the murdered priest did not understand the basics and methods of government.

And with the recognition of the sacredness of the Bible and the conviction of the non-perversion of Revelations from Above in it, the racial “elite” doctrine of “Deuteronomy-Isaiah”, proclaimed in the Old Testament in the name of God, becomes the dominant political doctrine in the culture of biblical civilization, and New Testament programs the psyche of the flock of churches named after Christ to submit to the “world behind the scenes” - the bosses of the biblical project of enslaving everyone:
“...do not resist evil. But who will hit you in right cheek yours, turn the other one to him; and whoever wants to sue you and take your shirt, give him your outer clothing too.”, - Matthew, ch. 5:39, 40. "Judge not lest ye be judged"(i.e., you do not have the right to decide what is Good and what is Evil in the specifics of life, and therefore do not resist anything and endure) - Matthew 7:1.

That is, this is the buying up of the world with all its inhabitants and their property on the basis of a racial usurious monopoly - this is the specific meaning of the Bible, expressing which in life and which governs the entire biblical civilization - the so-called “West” and partly Russia. That is, the Old Testament “Deuteronomy of Isaiah” is the ideological foundation of the 4th economic priority of the OSU, described in the COB. Everything else in the Bible is trifles and accompanying circumstances aimed at disordering the mind and enslaving the will of people.

The Koran, on the other hand, allows the exchange of only equal amounts and, on the 4th economic priority, the OSU directly opposes the Bible, regarding the provision of money at interest as the most serious sin. The biblical doctrine of usury is written as follows:
“Those who give money in interest will be deprived of peace of mind and tranquility in work, in actions, etc., like someone who was driven into madness by the shaitan with his touch. They say that trade and usury are one and the same, since in both transactions there is exchange and profit, and therefore it should be allowed. God declared what is permitted and what is forbidden is none of their business, and the similarities they talk about do not exist. God allowed trade, but forbade usury. He who obeys the commandments of God and refrains from usury will be forgiven for what happened in the past before the prohibition of usury: his work belongs to God and His forgiveness. Those who repeat this abomination are the inhabitants of the fire, they will remain in it forever!” (276): “God forbids usury and destroys the profit from growth. He increases the property from which alms are given and repays for them. God does not love those who insist on allowing what is forbidden by Him (like usury), and He does not love those who continue to engage in growth. Verily, God does not love the wicked!” Surah 2 (Al-Baqarah), verse (275)

If Daniil Sysoev did not insult people professing other religions and did not divide people, but would look for differences in the understanding of God and the “scriptures” of different faiths. AND helped unite people, Then everything would have happened differently, he would continue to live and enjoy real authority among both Christians and Muslims.

But in the media, the “arrows” were transferred not only to the unknown “native of the Caucasus,” but also to the “Rodnovers” (the Russian Orthodox Church calls them “pagans,” although there is no reason for this) classified by the Christian Church as a “sect.” About Rodnoveria - the Native Slavic Faith, see the material “On the state of affairs in Rodnoveria” on our website.

And “the State Duma associates the murder of Moscow priest Daniil Sysoev with the decision of the Constitutional Court to abolish the death penalty in Russia, reports a Rosbalt correspondent.” Speaking on Friday during a plenary session of the State Duma, A Just Russia deputy Vera Lekareva noted that the murder of the priest occurred on the day when the Constitutional Court decided to abolish the death penalty. “The Council of Europe dictates its terms to us, but offers nothing in return,”- Lekareva was indignant. Meanwhile, exactly from Europe in Russia « poured in sectarian religious organizations, which promote the denial of constitutional norms, put the moral and physical health of Russian citizens at risk,”- said Lekareva. In this regard, she proposed to instruct the Duma Committee on the Affairs of Religious Organizations to request information on measures taken by the Russian government in connection with the spread of religious sects in Russia" ( News agency "Rosbalt" ).

The hierarchy of the Russian Orthodox Church decides which organizations to classify as “sects” according to its own moral arbitrariness. Although the churchmen have not yet given an unambiguous definition of the concept of “sect”. In the Concept of Public Security, the concept of “sect” is defined by five characteristic features, namely:

1. The presence of esoteric and exoteric teaching. In Russian this means: in a sect there is always a teaching for the crowd and a teaching for the chosen ones - the dedicated hierarchs.
2. The presence of certain tenets of the doctrine, which are not subject to discussion and must be accepted by adherents of the doctrine as true without any doubts or reasoning.
3. The presence of a ritual that accompanies every meeting of representatives of the sect and is actually a means of zombifying their psyche.
4. The existence of an arbitrarily branched hierarchy, entering into a dispute with which according to the basic tenets of the teachings of the sect is strictly prohibited.
5. Since the teaching of the sect is based on dogmas that are not subject to discussion, there is no place in it for the formation of a personal culture of mastering new knowledge (there is no method of mastering it) and a meaningful attitude towards Life according to conscience.

Based on this, the Russian Orthodox Church itself falls under the concept of a sect without any reservations. This was stated by the great Russian writer L.N. back in 1901. Tolstoy, for which he was excommunicated by the hierarchs of the Russian Orthodox Church and anathematized.

The media also started talking about “religious extremism”, of which Sysoev became a victim. “Head of the State Duma Committee on Affairs of Public Associations and Religious Organizations Sergei Popov believes, What murder Moscow priest Daniil Sysoev committed on grounds of religious extremism». “This is a terrible, blasphemous crime, which is similar to the attack in the synagogue committed two years ago - both then and now, these crimes are based on religious extremism,”- said Sergei Popov. Killing a priest in a church is not just a challenge, but a “serious extremist crime,” the head of the committee emphasized.

In this regard, the question arises: “Isn’t all the activities of D. Sysoev, his statements addressed to representatives of other faiths, extremism in its most vivid manifestation?”. The answer is obvious. Moreover, these statements are unconstitutional (contradict Chapter 2 “Rights and Freedoms of Man and Citizen”, Article 28 “Freedom of Conscience, Freedom of Religion” of the Constitution of the Russian Federation) and are aimed at undermining the statehood of Russia. And yet, no one talks about this! But in vain! Such activities cannot remain unpunished for long, which was confirmed by the reprisal against Daniil Sysoev.

Russian Minister of Internal Affairs Nurgaliev, at the State Council held in Kazan during the celebration of its 1000th anniversary, told the country about the growing threat “ religious extremism" There is no point in explaining how important and fateful such a “formulation” is for millions of people. However speak about it, without clear And clear answers to a whole range of questions ( “Is there a God or not?”, “What is religion?”, “What are religious denominations?”, “Which of them are “right” and which are “wrong” (extremist)?” and so on.), there is no point. It is necessary to give a clear definition of these phenomena in the life of society. In KOB All these concepts are revealed quite complete.

The lack of clear and distinct concepts in the life of society allows the “puppeteers” to control countries and peoples with the help of religious ideologies, pitting Christians against Muslims, Muslims against Jews, etc., thereby implementing the principle of immoral management “divide and conquer.”

Therefore the question arises: « What god- really God?» .

For Russia (as for all humanity) this is now a question of questions! After all Russia is a multinational and multi-religious country.
This begs another question: “Is it possible, on the basis of any of the currently existing religious denominations, to unite all believers of other religious denominations and cults?” The answer is obvious; it will not be possible to do this on the basis of existing world religions.

What to do then? What's the solution?

And the way out is to “ reach the sub-confessional level"and revive Pravera, the Proto-Religion, from which all currently existing world religions originate.
The original, unified Faith to God for all of humanity was the Slavic Faith. This Faith in God was the same for all the first people who took the self-name “Rus”.
Such A sub-confessional approach will make it easier to overcome confrontation between different religious faiths. And that means prevent murders committed on religious grounds.
This is a very serious and huge topic that requires scrupulous consideration. The first such work has already been carried out and presented in the books of the course “Comparative Theology”.

This approach to resolving the issue is not expressed by any party, not a single politician, and indeed none of the “authoritative” people of our time, except COB And KPI!
KPI not only “offers”, but actively began to implement the “unifying idea” in practice.

The issues of “church sociology” are considered in more detail in the materials of the Concept of Public Safety in the works: «

Yakov Krotov: This episode of the program is dedicated to the film “Added Piety”, also known as the film “Added Piety”. Why is the emphasis placed differently here? We will talk about this. I think the film is a historical phenomenon. And I wanted to make a program about Orthodox extremism. The fact is that, during which the head of the Portal-Credo agency, Orthodox man Alexander Valerievich Soldatov was found guilty of distributing extremist materials. That’s why we have a unique lineup of guests today. Our guest is an employee of this Internet agency "Portal-Credo", he is also a Buddhist monk. Our guest is the author of the film “Added (aka attached) piety,” who himself prefers to say “added.” And among the two “strong halves” - the strongest, a university professor, linguist, philologist.

Elena Ivanovna, attached or attached? What's the difference?

I am no longer a university professor (for 3 years now) or a linguist, but a philologist and cultural scientist.

Yakov Krotov: Okay, you are a professor, like the Pope - emeritus, retired. But you have some kind of restless professorship. (Laughter in the studio) So “attached” or “attached”?

This is a neologism, we only have the adjective “additional” in the sense of attaching to something, from the verb “addition”. But we don’t have an adjective for “bailiff,” as in this film. Therefore, perhaps “added” would be more correct. There are three options, three syllables, and all three can be stressed. I think that the language itself will choose in the future what is most harmonious. Maybe he will choose the already familiar accent “added” - from “attach”. But in general, this is from the “bailiff”, so “Bailiff” piety is more correct.

Yakov Krotov : Mikhail Anatolyevich, explain why this name? What is the point of the film? Why did you do it?

​ This is an event genre in the form of a chronicle, when you are present at some events with a camera and point it at what is happening, at some kind of action. In this case it was the space of the temple. The ideal situation for the paparazzi, for the cameraman, is when even those who are present stop noticing him. And so the second cameraman of this film, Anna Dombrovskaya, filmed Vasily Nikolaevich Oros, the deputy head of the bailiffs of the Vladimir region, who forgot himself and, in a fit of emotion, began to utter, in principle, good, righteous, even Orthodox constructs. There the woman then says: “Maybe someday you will give sermons.” But then we, as journalists, decided to call him, of course, recorded it on audio without any permission and asked him to simply interpret why on another day they came along with LDPR picketers to the Synodal House, without notifying at all that they were coming to confiscate the relics ? Maybe the pickets will help break through? And then Vasily Nikolaevich advised (the film shows what kind of society we live in) - if someone is guilty, then punch him in the face. This is how the idea for the name was born. I am sometimes accused of poor quality, of primitiveness. But we solved many problems. For example, “Portal-Credo”, the video that is on it, is very popular both among the Moscow Patriarchate and in various churches in the provinces. The site's engine is old, but it opens easily. For example, this film has very large titles for the size of the frame. This still allowed people to download and watch the video, albeit in poor resolution.

Piety and "mordo-honor". The way this is combined in people's heads is very sad

“Mordo-honor” – that’s what I wanted to call it. Then this word floats and appears through the yellow effect of holiness, a halo. "Piety and face-honor." As it turned out, the way this combines in people's heads is very sad. And even as bearers of Orthodox consciousness, we see that this leviathan, which is now being discussed (Zvyagintsev’s “Leviathan”), was already crawling when all 11 churches in the Suzdal region were taken away from the Suzdal residents. Most of they are now under lock and key, because the Patriarchate was unable to establish some kind of minimal liturgical parish life in them. We can say that in a sense, it really was a news video designed to eliminate the illiteracy of the parishioners of Suzdal themselves, these believers who unwittingly participated in all this. It only had 1000 views. And now, being banned, it has some mega PR. I could not resist and gave everyone the opportunity to continue litigation or extremist proceedings about how it really was. I made a detailed version - it is already on the Internet. It's called "Added Piety-2" and runs for 4.5 hours. And it will be simply wonderful if volumes of examinations are written about it and reviewed in court.

Who owns the bones of the dead? How can you determine the authenticity of relics? What legislation regulates all this? It's all up in the air

​Yakov Krotov: Let me remind listeners that those Suzdal Orthodox are part of the Orthodox believers in Suzdal who, at the very beginning of the 90s, separated from the Moscow Patriarchate and first became members of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad. And when it began to drift towards the Moscow Patriarchate (the drift ended with joining the Moscow Patriarchate in 2007), the Suzdal believers formed the Free Church. That's what it's called - the Orthodox Free Church. They were persecuted for many years and finally 11 temples were taken away. What remains is a small temple, built independently, at our own expense. Then they began to try to take away the remains of the saints who were in this temple. And here, as I understand it, there is a huge legal conflict. Who owns the bones of the dead? How can you determine the authenticity of relics? What legislation regulates all this? All this is up in the air.

I would like to hear the voice of the Portal-Credo journalist. Felix, I know there are many schools of thought in Buddhism. Sometime in the 13th century XIV centuries they were quite actively at enmity with each other - in Japan, for example, they fought for the favor of the emperor. In the 14th century, real battles took place. But this is a thing of the past. What is your view: on the one hand, a journalist of a secular publication, and on the other, still a believer, on this collision? Is this a conflict between two faiths within Orthodoxy, a conflict between the state and faiths, or what?

Buddhism also has relics, they are called sharira. There the issue is easily resolved - the sharira is divided. At the very beginning, when Buddha went into nirvana, his body was burned. And 8 Indian principalities wanted to go to war against each other - who would get the relics of Buddha. But the wise disciple of Buddha Ananda simply took and divided the relics into 8 parts - they erected 8 stupas. And then this division occurred into as many as 84 thousand parts. So the conflict associated with the relics seems strange to us.

I see behind this a conflict with the Church, which has merged with the state, which wants it not to have any spiritual competition

As far as I know, in the same Suzdal there are particles of the relics of the same saints of the Moscow Patriarchate, but they want to get all the relics in their entirety. I see behind this, of course, a conflict with the Church, which has merged with the state, which wants it not to have any spiritual competition. On the other hand, the state wants to use the Church in order to ultimately put pressure on our portal, because the portal criticizes and reveals issues related to the persecution of believers, of those denominations, communities that do not support the line of the state, the line of the party and government, which, Thus, they challenge the right of the Moscow Patriarchate to be something like the CPSU in Soviet times. I see this as a tool of pressure on our portal. The same role is played by the case brought against the film made by Father Grigory, Mikhail Baranov (these are the same person). This is a way of putting pressure, first of all, on the editor-in-chief of Portal-Credo, Alexander Soldatov, since the state does not need such a portal on which a person of any religion, as well as an atheist, can freely express his point of view that differs from that accepted at the top.

The independent “Portal-Credo” needs to be defended in the face of this repressive machine, so that people feel solidarity, feel that they have defenders, like-minded people

​ Yes. This, of course, is a completely legally unfounded law and does not correspond to any legal norms. The law itself is false and unjustified. I had no hope. And my attitude was that it was necessary to protect the innocent people with whom life brought me together many years ago, who for me are like-minded people. And the independent “Portal-Credo” needs to be protected, to do what you can, so that people feel solidarity, feel that they have defenders, like-minded people. To protect in the face of this repressive machine, so that she, too, can see that the portal has not been abandoned, that Mikhail Baranov, Alexander Soldatov, Anya Dombrovskaya are not the people from whom everyone immediately turned their backs, fled, and they have no defenders. For me it was such an act of solidarity, although I perfectly understood that the process itself would end in a guilty verdict... I created a support group, called it “Credo-club” - the “Portal-Credo” support society. Some people in this group had hopes that this was some kind of local, local, Vladimir initiative. Even in an article in Novaya Gazeta there was such an idea - that there is some kind of plan for extremism. There are no Wahhabis, no Islamic extremism in the Vladimir region. So they decided to open a case of extremism in relation to this film, in order to somehow report to their superiors that they, too, have cases of extremism, that they are not such provincials, but that they are all like people. I do not believe in this. I think that, after all, the initiative came from above, because the diocese clearly took part in this. And the matter was set in motion after Patriarch Kirill visited Vladimir. He visited the city on September 3, and on the 18th the case had already begun - despite the fact that before that, the case had practically not moved for more than a year. The examinations were written in February 2013, but nothing moved until September. The film was also made a long time ago. Obviously, somewhere this was all dragging on - or there was a decree, but they resisted on the spot, did not want to carry it out. And then they gave an impetus and things sped up. But even in the film, representatives of the clergy of the Moscow Patriarchate speak, and it is obvious that they say approximately the same thing. Firstly, they agree that through the courts they can win something, that is, they do not know any of the Gospel commandments “do not go to court” or “make peace with your brother if you are called to court.” They are confident that the court is on their side and that since the court ordered the return of the relics, they must return it. They are appealing to the court. It seems to me that this was an order from above.

There were many examinations. Moreover, it is interesting that local, Vladimir examinations, it seems to me, to a certain extent even resisted the indictment order. Only one religious examination concluded that the film incites religious hatred, and this conclusion in no way corresponds to the rest of the content of the examination. It is clearly imposed or somehow included from the outside.

Yakov Krotov: Mikhail Anatolyevich, if the film is not aimed at inciting hatred, then what is it aimed at?

It is still painful and offensive to see how my former leading and directing Church of Patriarch Kirill acts in such a way - quite vile

​ Your program is called "From a Christian Perspective." And this adjective “Christian”... Month after month, year after year, I understand the meaning of this word worse and worse, not to mention my experience of serving in the patriarchate (which is 13 years in a monastery) and 16 years of experience as a parishioner. I left Christianity for myself only as a defense of the oppressed and a seeker of truth. And it is still painful and offensive to watch how my former leading and directing Church of Patriarch Kirill acts in such a way - quite vile.

How it all started - just a letter from the dean. Its essence: “I’m afraid that the ROAC (Russian Orthodox Autonomous Church) will move these relics somewhere, transport them to another state.” All. This piece of paper alone was enough to stir the whole system, so that two handfuls of dead bones (from a secular point of view)... Our audience is not only Orthodox. There are Protestants who, looking at all this, perhaps grin or wonder. But because of this, disputes arise - these two handfuls of dead bones, transferred in the 90s, like all the relics from the Vladimir-Suzdal Museum-Reserve, to the community of the Tsar Constantine Cathedral, suddenly turn out to be so necessary for the Federal Property Management Agency, which fights for them with such zeal and zeal!

Yakov Krotov: Provocative questions. I had to give lectures about Cyril and Methodius, about the baptism of the Slavs, and so on. In your film, Patriarch Kirill appears as such a quote: he says that the Slavs were wild - barbarians, animals. Cyril and Methodius addressed them and so on. You present this as an anti-Slavic attack. When I reached this place in the film, I was dumbfounded, because, in my opinion, Patriarch Kirill in this case reproduced the general topos of Christian, missionary rhetoric.

Yakov Krotov: And "The Tale of Bygone Years" - kidnapping of girls, blood feud, and so on. But this, indeed, is not even a question of Byzantine psychology (anyone who did not speak Greek was perceived as a barbarian, a beast in this sense, cattle). This is a matter of rhetoric.

Firstly, the patriarch said this in an interview in the Far East.

Following the visit.

Patriarch Kirill, without hesitation, reproduced the medieval model - the Christian view of unenlightened peoples as barbaric

​ Yes, according to the results. And he was asked about the attitude of the Patriarchate towards the small peoples of the North. And Patriarch Kirill, without hesitation, reproduced the paradigm of the missionaries’ relationship to barbarian peoples, that is, the medieval model of relationship - the Christian view of unenlightened peoples as barbarians. And he apparently wanted to develop this. He began with the fact that we (that is, the Moscow Patriarchate), in his understanding, are the heirs of the great tradition of Cyril and Methodius, who saw the Slavs as barbarians and beasts. The result is: since we are the heirs of a great tradition, then this is how we treat small nations. The question was - how do you feel about small nations?

Yakov Krotov: As for those who need to be enlightened.

Like barbarians, beasts, second-class people! He practically gives a couple of phrases from “The Tale of Bygone Years,” thereby transferring this attitude to small nations, and he himself understands that he is at a dead end.

Yakov Krotov: Why is it at a dead end? The Christian gospel transforms barbarian and beast into man.

​ He says this already in a post-Nazi culture, which has gone through contempt, arrogance and the hierarchy of peoples. This is the medieval Christian hierarchy of nations. In the modern situation, especially in post-Nazi culture, it cannot be transferred to modern times just like that, without comments, without references to the fact that this relates to the Middle Ages. This is already politically incorrect, inhumane, inhumane, and immediately gives a reference to the Third Reich. And this association arose in 2010, immediately after this interview with the patriarch - an association with this attitude of Christian missionaries towards barbarians, unenlightened people, with the ideology of the Third Reich. A lot of comparisons with various statements of Goebbels appeared on the Internet. And Mikhail in 2013 simply used a media cliche. He does not draw this analogy himself, but uses a media cliché, that is, essentially, a fact of public consciousness. I looked and you can find several million results on Google. This has already become part of the public consciousness that he broadcast (this is related to the question of what is in the film).

In our time, this medieval Christian hierarchy cannot be directly transferred to modern culture. It is necessary to refer to, talk about the text in which this is said, that this was a medieval attitude. Then the patriarch really felt the impasse and realized that he faced the threat of being accused of contempt for the small peoples of the North. He said something needs to be done. He no longer even used the words “enlighten” and “missionary” in his speech; he spoke somehow softer: taking into account their language, taking into account their traditions... And then he moved on to issues of wages, fishing, economic support. He left the topic. If you read carefully, you can see that he clearly felt that he had reached a dead end - you will say: rhetorically, but I will say: morally. This is a question that Patriarch Kirill took the quote out of context, and the principles of the hierarchical structure of nations - for a Christian to look down on an unenlightened barbarian.

It was his mistake. And it was this mistake of his that gave such a resonance, such an acute, scandalous association, caused an explosion on the Internet and comparison with the ideology of the Third Reich. But here’s the paradox: it was Mikhail Baranov who began to be accused of taking the patriarch’s words out of context. But it was the patriarch who first took this out of the context of The Tale of Bygone Years, from the medieval context - this is the attitude towards the unenlightened, towards the barbarians.

Yakov Krotov: You are a pure, naive soul, Elena Ivanovna.

Thank you.

Yakov Krotov: You believe that there is a post-Nazi society. And there may be doubts...

No, it is, of course, neo-Nazi. I even gave my dissertation student such a topic - about modern neo-Nazism, about the connection between neo-Nazism and classical German Nazism (by the way, this topic was stopped after I left Moscow State University). But I deliberately used the word “post-Nazi”. This does not deny neo-Nazism, but any contempt for another people evokes very strong associations specifically with the Nazi ideology of the Third Reich.

Probably, Elena Ivanovna had in mind the post-Nazi world community.

Yes, postmodernism is also not a negation of modernism.

Humanity seemed to have overcome Nazism as a whole.

In any case, it condemned him.

Yakov Krotov: Alexander Valerievich Soldatov, if, God forbid, something significant happens to him, he will be able to console himself with the fact that “humanity as a whole has overcome, but I am sitting behind bars in a damp dungeon.”

1937, terror, repression, lawlessness and so on - this is really what we live in now

​ A lot of them are now behind bars, because we have a remake of repression. Therefore, many of those who are now behind bars say (and this has become a template, a cliché): 1937, terror, repression, lawlessness, and so on. This is truly where we live now.

The man said the word - he was sent to prison. In France, people drew caricatures - they were killed

​ We discuss words all the time - the words of Patriarch Kirill and the words of Goebbels, which were placed side by side. These are all words. They want to give me an article for words. By the way, it is no coincidence that lawyer Damir Gainutdinov, who defends Alexander Soldatov in this court, also defended Boris Stomakhin. I want to make an analogy. Boris Stomakhin is also in prison, and for the second time for the same words. The man said the word - he was sent to prison. In France, people drew caricatures and they were killed. I want to emphasize the obvious disproportionality and inadequacy of the response.

Moreover, I believe that this film is a product of creative labor. This is not artistic, but documentary, reporting, but this is creativity.

Yakov Krotov: Journalistic.

​ Yes. And as a journalistic text, video text, including verbal, it should be considered as a work, a product of creative labor. There is grotesquery in this film, there are refrains, there are artistic devices, so it cannot be considered as a direct statement at all. But even if we consider it as a direct statement, even if we judge it by its words, then there are no calls for violence. This is the main point - whether there is a call to violence or not. Moreover, violence is condemned there. There they condemn the persecution of the small, defenseless Church. This is a highly humane film in defense of the persecuted, the weak, against whom the repressive machine has already been turned on: the taking of churches, expulsion from churches, and now this completely absurd situation with the removal of relics.

Apart from shots from Mikhail Rom’s film “Ordinary Fascism,” I personally didn’t remember anything

​ The subtitle of your program is “Orthodox Extremism.” And in this space, I myself ask myself: what thoughts are in the head of a person who talks about missionary work, about the baptism of barbarians, and at the same time cites the phrase “second-class people”? Apart from shots from Mikhail Rom’s film “Ordinary Fascism,” I personally didn’t remember anything. I am a person belonging to Gorbachev’s tribe: I was born in 1974, I lived through all that time. My grandfather went through the entire war - he almost reached Berlin. I calmed down, because in the film “Added Piety-2” I showed this 5-minute excerpt in full - an interview with Orthodox fascists who, in the examination of the film... The expert who wrote this thought - well, how to indicate who these people are who raise their hands in a Roman salute at the Russian March? He wrote "Orthodox banner bearers." But Simonovic-Niksic's people will not do that. This is too much. At the “Russian March” in 2012 there was a group of Orthodox fascists, which attracted me with these zigs.

Yakov Krotov: Attracted as an artist?

As a reporter for Portal-Credo. They invited me to their rally. These rallies of Orthodox fascists quietly take place twice a year on the day of St. Sergius near the Trinity-Sergius Lavra.

These shots are in the film.

Rallies of Orthodox fascists quietly take place twice a year on the day of St. Sergius near the Trinity-Sergius Lavra

​ When all the celebrations end, Patriarch Kirill leaves, at about 11 or 12 o’clock on Krasnogorskaya Square near the monument to St. Sergius - an agreed meeting and procession through the city, accompanied by four traffic police cars with police officers on the sides - God forbid that something happened.

Yakov Krotov: Is DPS the Road Orthodox Service?

All these Orthodox brigades, stormtroopers and Orthodox patrols, Orthodox fascists, are all the hands of our ruling Church - the Russian Orthodox Church

​ Yes, because they cross many intersections. And behind - it looks very comical - a repair team of signalmen and electricians is riding, because the banners are very tall, and in some years they clung to the wires. And after I showed them in my film, which already has an average of half a million views under different titles, various mixes about Orthodox fascism in Russia were made from it. In the film “Orthodoxy in Law” I showed everything in full - their speech about how they need to go liberate the Kremlin, what they think about the Jews. All this is said publicly in the squares, filmed on cameras by the same police, the same special services. They probably think that they are monitoring it, that they are all in their pocket, that they are in the palm of everyone’s hands. But in fact, I think, all these Orthodox brigades, stormtroopers and Orthodox patrols, Orthodox fascists, are all the hands of our ruling Church - the Russian Orthodox Church, the MP - free, ideological hands, which, if anything happens, will come to the defense of the seemingly offended the feelings of believers, like shrines, like temples under construction, of which there are 200 in Moscow according to the program. Here is one of the faces of Orthodox extremism, which I decided already then, 2 years ago, to begin to present as such a seed, to show what real horror is . People write in the comments - is this really possible, especially now, when this is pouring out from the Putin-TV channels? They write - how do Russians after this have the right to call Ukrainians fascists?

Yakov Krotov: Let me return to the question of the patriarch’s words. Today in Russia Tyutchev is often quoted: “It is not possible for us to predict how our word will respond,” and I always remember Huberman: “It’s high time, honest mother”... In general, you need to predict and you can predict. This is what an educated, intelligent person stands for And Tyutchev did not at all have in mind a cynical position: sculpt what you want, all this is hardly predictable.

Here is the Gospel. It begins with the words that “the ax lies at the root of the tree, and soon it will be cut down and cast into the fire.”

Extremism!

Yakov Krotov: And it ends with the words of the Savior: “Destroy this temple (Temple of Solomon)”...

Calls for violent actions based on religious hatred.

Yakov Krotov: Elena Ivanovna, you are like Ilf and Petrov’s Panikovsky, who ran after officials and shouted to them: under what article...

Either a saint, or Panikovsky...

And if you now go into the Cathedral of Christ the Savior with a whip - to the counters?

This is extremism, these are generally violent actions with a threat state power. This is already a threat to overthrow state power.

Yakov Krotov: We understand that in the Gospel this is a figure of speech. Why do we approach the Gospel with credit of trust, understanding and with an open heart, and to the speech of the patriarch - excuse me, I will state the position that I saw on the Internet: why are you clinging, why are you exaggerating? He realized that he had made a mistake, he slowed down - why then drag it out and show it?

Felix said very well that we talk about words all the time, about words, and you can’t judge for words. But, I thought that there would be a continuation, that we needed to talk more about business. It is very important here what deeds are behind the words. If there had been no backstory with the apartment, with the clock, with Pussy Riot, with the exposure of the “blue lobby” and so on... If there had been no backstory with a colossal number of scandals, with the revelation of luxury, outrage, immorality in connection with the Moscow Patriarchate, then, maybe there wouldn’t be such a keen attitude towards words. Here it is also very important - who says what deeds are behind this person. This is the first.

The film was the occasion, and the main object was Alexander Soldatov and “Portal-Credo”

Second. Mikhail spoke very well about these Orthodox fascists. And when Goebbels appears in his film, this Goebbels is a bit of a puppet. It’s from “Seventeen Moments of Spring,” although it seems to contain documentary footage, but still, indirectly, it’s such a clichéd version of Goebbels. These words of Goebbels resonate not only with the words of the Patriarch - to which the public is attached, they also resonate with these Orthodox fascists, with these zigs at the monument to Sergius of Radonezh and with the words of Zhirinovsky, who said that there is no one to talk to, in Moscow and St. Petersburg there are still more or less smart people, and then everyone is stupid. From Perm to the Urals - everyone is stupid, and there is no one to talk to. So this is a much wider field of the fascist atmosphere, contempt of one for others, of the authorities for the people, of Russians for the other peoples of Russia. This film immediately brings up many issues, which is why it has such an explosive character.

In this case, of course, the film was the occasion, and the main object was Alexander Soldatov and “Portal-Credo”. But it’s very interesting to talk about why this particular film became the occasion, because it also had such an explosive charge.

Yakov Krotov: I don't remember a lot of films. In this sense, Mikhail Anatolyevich walked...

There were different publications, one could find fault. In our country they find fault with posts on social networks and imprison people. So you could find fault with any...

Yakov Krotov: A full-fledged documentary-journalistic film. I would say that you have few competitors. Felix, are you for freedom of speech for this, this and this: for the Orthodox and for the fascists, Nazis too?

As long as they do not call for specific reprisals, they have the right to express their views. Why not? We should not shut people's mouths a priori simply because they are fascists.

Yakov Krotov: The question of the court is always a question of drawing the line. Why can’t the court be punched on a punched card, run the computer, and it will judge? Why do you need a living, albeit scary, judge? Where is the border drawn? If a person said that Jews are an inferior nation, they are poisonous and dangerous to others, is this still within the framework or no longer?

I think not, because behind this are the concentration camps, behind this is the Shoah catastrophe, behind this are many centuries of persecution of the Jews.

Orthodoxy is a monastery prison

​Yakov Krotov: But again - a question of borders. How many people, atheists, told me that Orthodoxy is the burning of Archpriest Avvakum, the extermination of Muslims and the forced implantation of Christianity in the Kazan kingdom in the 17th century. Orthodoxy is monastic prisons.

Of course, and much more.

Yakov Krotov: And as a result - well, according to your logic, it turns out that if today I say “Christ is Risen,” then in the context of the anathema against Leo Tolstoy, the Inquisition, and so on, this is an extremist cry?

No, this is not an extremist cry. But if you position yourself as Orthodox, then you must formulate your attitude towards what your tradition is accused of and either bring repentance, or think critically about it, or stand up for the defense of the same Old Believers, Leo Tolstoy, the innocent prisoners of the Spaso-Efimievsky Monastery Prison and so on. You must conduct a critical analysis of this tradition and separate out what you consider to be incorrect, false, violent and irrelevant in your understanding to the preaching of Christ. And what I was doing Catholic Church at the Second Vatican Council, Orthodoxy did not deal with this. This means that we, each individually, must hold our own Second Vatican Council, personal - according to our own understanding, repentance, critical renunciation or rejection of what we consider false, inhumane, inhumane, distorting the preaching of Christ. This is what Islam should now be doing even more actively than Christianity.

This personal journey person.

Certainly!

The state should not interfere and dictate: repent and so on.

The state has nothing to do with this at all.

The question is whether it is necessary to judge, whether it is necessary to shut up.

In no case!

Our portal is sometimes criticized for publishing a very wide range of opinions. Yes, indeed, it happens: Orthodox extremists were also interviewed. In this case, the general position of the portal is visible. But we don’t shut their mouths, we let them speak.

You can let them speak. We had a dispute with Mikhail about Inteo when Mikhail was conducting a dialogue on Gogol-TV. This is after Inteo participated in an attack on people in the Moo Moo restaurant during the Pussy Riot trial, after they shouted various offensive slogans, including calls for violence and carried out violence.

Yakov Krotov: With impunity!

: Yes! They are already criminals.

Such people, of course, need to be stopped.

People like this need to be stopped. In addition to Law 114, we have a lot of normal laws on assault, on seizing someone else’s premises, on private property, on causing physical harm, and so on.

Yakov Krotov: About 30 minutes ago you said that there is no need to sue, a Christian should not report a Christian to court.

Undoubtedly. He must try to reconcile before he is brought to court. Of course, we need to try to reconcile. And I devoted many years to somehow establishing a dialogue with representatives of the patriarchy, with priests. But this turned out to be a completely empty exercise; it leads to nothing, because people simply speak the language of demagoguery and deny the facts. I am not in animosity. Criticism is not hostility! I believe: whoever reproaches gives. This is a manifestation of the natural state of the human mind, because a person’s mind is critical, analytical. He was given this way by nature, by God.

The process is purely custom-made. It was made by order of the Vladimir FSB and pursued a specific goal

​ By the way, this is the main defense argument for “False Piety” - that this is criticism, not hatred.

Certainly! This is not hatred. This is analysis. And this criticism is for the benefit of the Moscow Patriarchate.

Yakov Krotov: It is possible that this is criticism for the benefit of the Moscow Patriarchate. But then I will refer to your words about what is important - who speaks. “I will destroy this temple,” says the Lord Jesus Christ or who? "There is no God" - words from Holy Scripture, where the psalm mentions: “the wicked says in his heart: there is no God.”

But then, Mikhail Anatolyevich, another question arises. There is criticism from within, and there is criticism from without. I read reviews of your film. And many reviews say that this film was shot “from the outside.” For the first Christians, this was a fundamental border - here are our own, here are strangers. The principle of the Apostle Paul - do not go to court to sue a brother - applies to his own people. Your film was shot as if you were already outside not only the Moscow Patriarchate, but also outside Christianity, that is, this is such a secular view. And the traditional question arises - the film was shot to lead people out of the Moscow Patriarchate, which appears to be a breeding ground for wickedness, wickedness, bad faith, and wickedness? Or in order to cleanse it, revive it, and so on? As far as I understand, your biography is a biography of drift.

But still in one direction. I am now a non-religious person. When the filming of this film was going on, despite the fact that I lived in this synodal house for many months that winter, I was ready to reach out to the camera and run to the first floor if the bailiffs came, or to go to court when these proceedings were taking place. It’s just that there is such a gap (or difference) between you and us... For myself, I left (and I can’t help myself and don’t consider it important) that Christianity is just a protest. And I like Christ only as a protest leader. “The Holy Spirit breathes where he wants,” to use your terminology.

Yakov Krotov: But not in the Moscow Patriarchate.

In this case, obviously not. I spent this Easter in Suzdal. There was no continuation of this case then. At that time they were not active.

I am probably the only person who communicated with Metropolitan Fedor, a participant in these events. I went to photograph the temples, which are located 100 meters from the pilgrimage route in the city of Suzdal. They are destroyed, with a collapsed roof, no one needs them. I shot like this for Easter. The temple of the Synodal House - and 200 meters away is the temple of Father George - it seems who continued it, and from this the process of relics began. I managed to film the Procession of the ROAC believers. And I see this harmony as a former regent of a monastery (“a wicked man in his heart: there is no God”): all people harmoniously sing along with “Christ is Risen from the Dead.” And, running to the square of the Patriarchs, as they are called in the ROAC (Moscow Patriarchate), I see what kind of parishioners they are - this is one priest, and only two aunties echo him, and not in tune. And it’s clear that all these people - yes, they will walk around with candles, but then they will disperse. And even if we find out where it is, the true, real Orthodoxy, where there are more real believers - so from this picture, from these videos... Why did I choose this method of recording? The viewer is free to draw his own conclusions about where to drift, where to go out, where to go.

Why didn't they come to the trial? There were practically no ROAC parishioners there, only one. Why didn't they come to protect you?

In the second film - “Bailiff Piety-2” - I showed such planning meetings - I was allowed to film when the lawyer came... And before the bailiffs came...

It's already the second coming!

They may still continue. There, in this Church, there is a party - that’s what I call it - “the party of the action of God himself,” that is, those who believe that “there is no need to resist legally and defend all this in the courts.” Do what you want, bailiffs, but now the Lord himself or the saints will rise from these cancers and strike you in an invisible way.

As Metropolitan Fedor says: “We are martyrs. We accept our martyr’s crown.”

Yes. In principle, I even feel a little sorry for these believers. To be honest (and this can be seen from the footage), there are very few young parishioners in the church. Mostly - grandmothers crying about their shrines.

Yakov Krotov: Felix, the faith may be different, but as a journalist, don’t you consider such a bias towards criticism destructive for a believer, for a seeking person? Isn’t this a log that will prevent you from coming to God?

I am against going too deep into criticism.

Yakov Krotov: But is this film within limits?

This is my personal position. I am simply against the persecution of the authors of this film and those who posted it. ROAC – Russian Orthodox Autonomous Church – the same one that you called “Free Church in Suzdal”. Of course, this is not so typical for Buddhism. But as a journalist, I agree that we must criticize, castigate, show some vices and ulcers. And at the same time - more light! I would wish Mikhail to show some positivity in his films. But this is my personal wish, it has nothing to do with this process. The process is purely custom-made. It was made by order of the Vladimir FSB and pursued a specific goal.

One of our brothers is being checked by the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation for the presence of extremism. But the situation is such that it is hardly worth hushing it up any further.

I don’t think that specifically Father Sergius (Rybko) can be suspected, much less accused of extremist inclinations. However, the problem is that I think so, his parishioners, and in general many believers think so - it’s hard not to be indignant when you imagine, like your own, a temple built or restored with great difficulty will be desecrated by some “crusader.” So you will say here in your hearts what you didn’t even want, and then you will regret it.

But here competent authorities and even more so, journalists and all kinds of “human rights activists” can judge completely differently. And the trouble is not only that an extra problem or another informational occasion will arise - a new pain point will be found. Not so much new, of course, as painful. And the further, the more.

Personally, for many years now I have been concerned about the activities of various kinds of zealots, who from the statement “good (Orthodoxy) must be with fists” move on to the implementation of this non-disputable postulate in practice. I even decided to speak about this several times - first in one publication, then in another, which invariably brought upon myself accusations and almost threats. It’s not that I don’t understand or don’t share the indignation of these zealots, no, I myself am often extremely indignant at many of what is happening in Russia today. But, either because I am a priest, or because I read the Gospel and the Holy Fathers quite thoughtfully, I do not have the desire to resort to eradicating evil by force. Including because the immediate consequences of such actions are extremely clear to me.

Here's an example. For several years we have been observing the development of the situation with the so-called “gay parades” in Moscow and other major cities. We observe with the same indignation, but also with pain and sorrow. Thank God, they are banned in Russia today. But! I will once again risk incurring the wrath of the “zealots” and still say: if they are ever allowed in our country, it will be thanks not to anyone else, but precisely to these very zealots. Why? Everything is very simple. What is the main message of these “parades”? It is known: the fight against “oppression”, “infringement of rights”, “discrimination” of sexual minorities in the territory Russian Federation. Hardly anyone will say what this infringement and oppression, coupled with discrimination, consists of. The corresponding article of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, unfortunately, was repealed (I’m not being sarcastic, I really feel this way - unfortunately) and today nothing prevents people with the most perverted ideas about “love” from doing what they please. And there is, perhaps, only one reason to say that “minorities” are being persecuted in our country. This is how an unauthorized gay pride parade goes every time.

More precisely, how it doesn’t work. A number of Orthodox citizens consider it their duty to go out into the streets on this day and take part in dispersing the illegal procession. At the same time, in some bizarre, and perhaps even absurd and blasphemous way, calls like “Holy Rus', preserve the Orthodox Faith” are combined with obscene language and banners with holy images - with sonorous blows that make noses crack and the blood of “minorities” flow. , abrasions and bruises appear.

I'm not even talking about the senselessness of these actions: the procession, as already said, is illegal, and its holding is being prevented by law enforcement forces (for now they are preventing it, and God grant that it remains so in the future). Why are there still Orthodox activists with banners and thick beards? An undesirable conclusion arises: scratch your fists, punch someone in the face, get some relief and... feel like you have fulfilled your Christian duty.

But the main thing for which all this is being done is, apparently, to get into the sights of dozens of television and photo lenses of domestic and foreign media. Then all this disgrace is shown on television, posted on the Internet, and spreads with enormous speed, becoming the property of the entire “civilized world.” And the world understands: “But in Russia the rights are indeed infringed - not only of the opposition, but also of minorities! Look at these broken noses, bruises under the eyes, at these thugs who beat the unfortunate gays, some with their fists and some with banner poles. No, something needs to be done about this!” And something is being done because the forces lobbying the LGBT movement in modern world, the most powerful. They only lacked help from our Orthodox brothers, but now they do not lack it.

And thanks to such actions and video recordings, it becomes clear: no matter what they say, there is religious extremism in Russia too! And if in other countries he more often has an Islamic face, here he is the most Orthodox!

We do not have any Orthodox extremism. No, simply because there is nothing Orthodox in all these “actions”, except uniforms, clothes, slogans and justification “from the Scriptures” of their own passions. But you can’t tell the whole world about this and you can’t prove anything - with such and such evidence.

With gay pride parades, the example is simply the most striking and widespread. And if you rummage through your memory and on the Internet, you can find so many apologists for “resisting evil by force” that even Ilyin, to whom they constantly refer, would be horrified. They also refer to St. John Chrysostom, who once said that one should not be afraid to “sanctify one’s hand” when stopping the mouth of a blasphemer. And the Venerable Joseph of Volotsk is referred to as his “Enlightener.” And for some reason they ignore the fact that neither Ilyin himself, nor Chrysostom, nor the Monk Joseph ran through the streets and beat anyone - although they deserved to be beaten, it’s true, many in their time, no less than in ours . And although it is precisely these “apologists” who are addressed by the Savior’s reproach: “You do not know what kind of spirit you are” (Luke 9:55), they point blank do not notice the reproach. And the spirit of a Christian, like the spirit of Christianity, is the spirit of meekness, humility and love, wise and knowing: evil does not destroy evil, as St. Pimen the Great said, it only multiplies it.

On the Internet, and in real life, real life There are many leaders who gather like-minded people around them precisely on the basis of such a community of interests. I don’t want to name anyone specifically, because I have no desire to personally “brand” anyone. If necessary, it is not difficult to become familiar with both theorists and practitioners of the “fist approach” via the Internet. What motivates them if they still consider themselves Orthodox people?

There are many specific reasons, but the common one is obvious: the insufficiency of one’s own genuine Christian life. I will argue: when a person lives such a life, he has no desire to fight with anyone, he doesn’t even think about it, he understands that some kind of global change in the world can only begin with a small thing - with him changing himself. That change for which one must “give blood” in order to “receive the spirit.” Your own blood, of course, and not someone else’s, and your own sweat, and your own labor. But there is no labor and no feat, but there is pride. And there is also a desire to “be someone” in the Church. And a person slips onto the path of “exploits” and “works” that are more than dubious. And he fights against the Taxpayer Identification Number until he loses his voice and reason, and he fights against passports, and if anything happens, he is ready to fight immediately, feeling like a real hero. If he has the gift of persuasion and the ability to influence people, so much the worse, because he will confuse many people and lead them astray from the right path.

Unfortunately, this problem - urgent in fact - has not yet received a single, reasoned assessment. And the times are such that balance and caution are required more than ever.

It’s our churches and icons that are being desecrated, our crosses are being sawed off... But in the end we will be accused of religious extremism if we oversleep and wait until they catch the “crusaders” somewhere and have their heads torn off, or the next dancers will be whipped with whips so that we can’t sit neither before nor after the wedding they will be able to. There are enough people who are morally prepared for this. And if they also refer to similar calls, voiced out of fervor by one of our shepherds, it will be a total disaster.

There is no need to bring this to disaster. It's time to cool down hot heads with a reasonable and, probably, powerful word. Because today the first (or the next?) “swallow” has arrived. If we hesitate, the rooster will peck...

With the beginning of the new political season in Russia, passions around Alexei Uchitel’s film “Matilda” have heated up to the limit. They completely crowded out all other topics from the church and public agenda, including understanding the lessons of the 100th anniversary of the revolution.

And if earlier these passions boiled only on paper (or on the Internet), then since the end of August they have burst into flames - in the literal sense of the word. First there was an unsuccessful attempt by Teacher “ROK” in St. Petersburg, then a relatively “successful” one in Yekaterinburg and, finally, at the Moscow office of Teacher’s lawyer. Each time, Matilda’s opponents took responsibility for these crimes.

“Business cards” scattered near the office of director Uchitel’s lawyers, next to the cars that were set on fire. Photo: Konstantin Dobrynin / VKontakte

Activists of the semi-anonymous “Christian State of Holy Rus'” (the name is clearly copied from the “Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant,” a terrorist organization banned in Russia) warned about the inevitability of the “fiery cleansing” of the Russian land from “Matildine’s filth.” But the law enforcement system, sensitive to any hints of extremism on social networks, point-blank “did not notice” such obvious calls for violence and warnings about impending crimes.

Such demonstrative inaction forces us to draw an unpleasant conclusion: we are witnessing a political technology aimed at “neutralizing the risks of 1917” and implemented by the method of “controlled chaos.”

The role of “the face of the campaign” is assigned to Natalia Poklonskaya, whom the Kremlin, at a “Bolshevik pace,” first made the prosecutor of Crimea, and then a federal politician. On the eve of moving to Moscow, Poklonskaya began to demonstrate some kind of hypertrophied love for the martyr Tsar Nicholas II.

“Sloppy” methods of work have already confronted the deputy with the leadership of the Moscow Patriarchate: the first time, when she was at the prosecutor’s office building in Simferopol, and the second time, when she announced the excommunication of the head of the presidential administration of the Russian Federation, the speaker of the State Duma and other officials who were present at the closed screening of “Matilda.” " At the beginning of June. According to the Patriarchate, there was no “myrrh-streaming,” much less excommunication.

Poklonskaya likes to emphasize her connection with her confessor-elder - one of the leaders of the “tsarist” movement in the Russian Orthodox Church, Schema-Archimandrite Sergius (in the world - Nikolai) Romanov from the Sredneuralsky monastery of the Yekaterinburg diocese (Novaya wrote about him in more detail on August 15).

Finding herself in this environment, the neophyte Poklonskaya, who was poorly acquainted with Orthodox doctrine, trustingly absorbed the basic tenets of “Tsarebozhiy”, which distinguishes it from traditional Orthodoxy: the doctrine that Nicholas II is “Christ of the Lord”, who atoned for the sins of the Russian people, that for this reason he had a special nature, pure from sin, and Russia is the Kingdom of God on earth, “keeping” the whole world from accepting the Antichrist and destruction. While traditional Orthodoxy is associated by most Russians with Patriarch Kirill and the hierarchy, mired in luxury, supporting the authorities in everything, it is the “Tsarebozhie” who appear as a healthy and very patriotic “folk faith”, opposing the hypocritical church officialdom.

Of course, the spirit of aggression and xenophobia has always found a place in Russian Orthodoxy along with the spirit of love and mercy.

Protodeacon Andrei Kuraev, the main disgraced theologian of the Russian Orthodox Church, believes that it was Patriarch Kirill who relied on the spirit of aggression in 2012.

It was the patriarch who organized a mass campaign “in defense of the patriarch” against the Pussy riot, seeking the most severe punishment for “blasphemers”, the introduction of a criminal article “Insulting the feelings of believers,” inciting his flock to look out for these “insults” and persecute the perpetrators at every opportunity.

Many “Orthodox activists” have turned their “offended feelings” into a business. Militant Orthodox brotherhoods of the “Forty Forties” (SS) type appeared, chanting the cult of strength and ready to “beat for the glory of God” any “enemies of Orthodoxy”: for example, defenders of Moscow parks from "temple construction".

There has been a transformation of official Orthodoxy, which has become part of the new Russian ideology, from an evangelical religion of love and repentance into a “spiritual bond” that increases the degree of aggression in society and justifies repression against dissidents. “Tsarebozhie” has always been more radical than the official church ideology, and as the latter becomes radicalized, “Tsarebozhie” also changes. The more desperate blessings this or that elder gives, the higher his ratings among the “Orthodox public.”

Along the streets of Sergiev Posad, right under the walls of the Lavra, whose founder called to “overcome the hateful discord of this world,” Cossacks march, raising their right hands in a Nazi salute.

Among them are elders, for example, Korniliy (Radchenko). The recognized centers of “tsarebozhiy” are Diveevo and the Bogolyubsky monastery near Vladimir.

It would seem that no one is hiding, and it would be easy for the authorities to limit the “kingdoms” under the slogan of “fighting extremism.” They successfully apply a similar approach to Muslims: while harshly persecuting “Islamic fundamentalism,” the Kremlin strongly supports “traditional Islam,” whose leaders even help the authorities in the persecution of their Salafist brothers. Why can’t we declare the same incompatibility between “Orthodox radicalism” and “traditional Orthodoxy”?

The answer, in our opinion, is that the authorities benefit from “Orthodox radicals”: ​​their “jealousy beyond reason” and scandalous actions the best way switch public attention from serious questions about the relevance of the revolutionary experience of 1917 to fake ones - about the romance of Nicholas II with Matilda Kshesinskaya.

An argument in favor of this version is the silence of the patriarch, who cannot sympathize with the “kings” who are fervently rocking his throne, but also does not dare to condemn them, knowing about the high patronage that they have.

The “controlled chaos” technique is extremely dangerous. At the slightest weakening of power control, chaos breaks free and absorbs its creators - such is its nature. The coming year 2018, which will mark the 100th anniversary of the “ritual murder” royal family, threatens to become the apogee of “Tsarebozhiy” as a new Russian “folk faith.”

Supporters of Alexei Uchitel, clearly not as well organized as their opponents, are showing signs of weakness: the premiere screening of “Matilda” in Moscow has been cancelled, their intentions have been announced not to show the film at all in the Sverdlovsk region... The film, of course, will be released. They say that Putin himself insists on this, having spoken negatively about Nicholas II many times. But, obviously, the Tsarebozhniks will have more than one occasion to demonstrate their growing strength.

You can be sure that this movement will not slow down in activity even after the Matilda episode is over. The shadow of the “Orthodox caliphate” hangs over Russia...

Political scientist Konstantin Simonov commented to Business FM on the situation surrounding the film directed by Uchitel. In his opinion, the state in various forms itself somewhat encourages “Orthodox extremism,” and a statement by the Russian Orthodox Church in this situation would be a serious argument

The story around “Matilda” is taking unpleasant forms, said presidential press secretary Dmitry Peskov. He added that extremism and pressure on cinemas is absolutely unacceptable. Answering the question whether State Duma deputy Natalya Poklonskaya was responsible for what was happening, the Kremlin representative noted that in this case he would not talk about someone’s personal responsibility. “Discussions are one thing, but manifestations of extremism are something else entirely,” he explained.

State Duma deputies Oksana Pushkina and Irina Rodnina appealed to the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the FSB with a request to check the “orgy of hooligans and extremists” radically opposing “Matilda.” The Minister of Culture also made a tough statement. He also spoke about the possible role of Mrs. Poklonskaya, who, according to Medinsky, “starts and supports this hubbub.” But State Duma Speaker Vyacheslav Volodin stood up for Poklonskaya. Today he said: “Without significant evidence, one cannot discern a direct connection between the position of deputy Natalya Poklonskaya and the actions of opponents of Alexei Uchitel’s film “Matilda.” This is a very serious charge."

Why did a reaction at this level occur only after extremists really scared business? Business FM talked about this with general director National Energy Security Fund by Konstantin Simonov:

Konstantin Simonov: This problem is more complicated than we think. Why? Because, on the one hand, the state in various forms itself somewhat encourages this kind of Orthodox extremism. And it turns out that this has a certain meaning, from the point of view of the organizers of the “Russian world” and so on. And we see quite significant stories. Take the same Saint Isaac's Cathedral, the case is decided in favor of the Russian Orthodox Church and also causes quite a serious public debate. Like Isaac, the film certainly provoked discussion. And the state still takes the side of the Russian Orthodox Church, and all this also provokes rather aggressive behavior of the most radical supporters of the Russian Orthodox Church. I say this because in some cases the state still sees a certain meaning in this, but this same process needs to be controlled, because when extremism gets out of control, it doesn’t matter whether it’s Orthodox or Muslim, it creates a serious threat for the system. It is clear. And now, I think that when it seemed that this story was manageable, there was not such attention and such excitement to it. And then, when this story had already acquired serious proportions and Poklonskaya, unwittingly, became a kind of symbol of this Orthodox radicalism, they began to think about it. The question is: didn’t all this happen too late? And the fact that Medinsky reacted this way, we see that the state realized that, after all, the process was no longer entirely manageable. But if it becomes completely uncontrollable, this will already be a problem for the state.

If the Church, in the person of the patriarch or an official representative, had said something, spoken out, perhaps this would have resolved the situation? Why is there no such statement then?

Konstantin Simonov: You rightly note that perhaps if official representatives of the Church made some kind of conciliatory statement, of course, I think this would be a serious argument. But you understand what's the matter. After all, when I said that when the Orthodox theme itself begins to develop in such a grotesque form, in some ways this story is beneficial for the Russian Orthodox Church, because the Russian Orthodox Church thereby becomes a rather serious and significant player. The Church makes quite serious demands on the state. And we see that Isaac is only one of these stories. There are many more such stories. The Russian Orthodox Church has quite serious ambitions. All this manifests itself in such forms, therefore, if the Russian Orthodox Church distances itself from its most radical adherents, I do not rule out that this will raise questions among other individuals who consider themselves part of the Russian Orthodox Church. Therefore, I think that the question here is also not to overdo it and not to look in such a way that you are abandoning your supporters, although they bring you some benefit.

There is also an interesting situation around Poklonskaya and Volodin. After all, many say that supposedly Poklonskaya as a deputy is his project. And here he almost has to take the rap for her.

Konstantin Simonov: Well, listen, do you seriously think that Volodin selected all 450 deputies? And these are all his projects? I think that Volodin still feels responsible as a new speaker. Not all of these are people he gathered. And in this regard, he simply feels - this is my point of view - a certain responsibility in general for the deputy corps and he is ready to defend any deputy. But this is not his project, of course. Not his project by any means.

Regional cinemas continue to receive threatening letters over the upcoming screening. The Siberian network Arts Science Cinema Distribution received a similar letter, but they do not intend to abandon plans to show the film, Dmitry Kim, the network’s advertising director, told RIA Novosti.

The Yekaterinburg company Continent Cinema also received a letter demanding not to show the film. In the “Interesting Yekaterinburg” group on the social network “VKontakte” they write that two letters were allegedly sent there, which talk about the “harm” of the upcoming premiere and about some “radical measures” that will be taken if the show does take place. What exactly the authors of the messages will do is not reported. The box office of the Yekaterinburg cinema said that they do not plan to cancel the show.