Салтыкова С.А. Принципы вероисповедной политики русского правительства и православной Церкви в X–XII вв.

Аннотация: The article states that the history of the Russian statehood, nation and culture is intimately associated with the history of the Orthodox Christian Church. Even during the “atheistic” statehood (the Soviet period) communication between the Russian society and the Orthodox Christian Church was never lost. It is underlined that for the Velikiy Knyaz of Kiev Vladimir Svyatoslavich and his successors as well as for the Byzantian Christian emperors struggle against pagandom, against the religious cults and customs dominating among the Slavs became one of the key governmental functions and Christian duties. But with regards to other confessions not traditional for Russia, demesneveche (Kiev) period of our history is characterized by tolerance (even in the “softest” model of the state tolerance) towards other confessions. The history of the Catholic Mission in Russia during the pre-Mongolian period must be divided into two stages, border between which is the final division of the eastern and western churches in 1054. After the division of churches, the rules of relations with non-Christians created by the Russian church pastors (theoretical model of religious intolerance) were taken from the Greeks: any dialogue with non-Christians is an insult of true belief, a sacrilege, a crime for an orthodox (true believer) Christian. As to the Knyaz power attitude towards the infidels (and non- Christians), it was expressed only in several rules of the church regulation of Yaroslav Mudriy and was based on the Nomokanon norms, opinion of the Greek polemists and Russian pastors (and regarding sanctions – on the rules of the Russian Truth). The Regulations articles mostly touch upon infidels (not baptized) and upon the cast-off persons: joint meal (for the infringer the only excuse may be ignorance of the messmate professing another religion), cohabitation (and certainly marriage) are prohibited. That is, not only religious (this is not even mentioned in the Regulations as an evident fact) but also everyday relations with the infidels. These violations of the rules of church discipline are transferred exclusively to the church court. But the interdiction originates not only from the church power but also from the secular one. There is not only church punishment provided (excommunication, penance, exile to a monastery for repentance and correction) but also secular one – the Russian tradition introduces penal sanctions in the field of activity of the church court. The utmost intolerance to the non-Christians in the old Russian society existed only in theory. For practical implementation of the intolerance to the Latins (and to the infidels) no corresponding religious feeling had been built yet. The Kievan Rus, unlike the Moscow Rus, was an absolutely open country: it was in permanent and most active trade relations almost with all countries and nationalities of Europe and Asia. And toleration was caused not only economically but also by the state interests. So, despite of the theoretical intolerance to the Catholics, the church law (the regulations of the Metropolitans) and the secular law prohibition, not only the prayer, marriage but also everyday relations with infidels, the Russian Knyazes made marital unions with the West-European sovereigns during the pre-Mongolian period. In parallel with the marriage relations, the Russian Knyazes maintained permanent political relations with Europe. The most democratic form of the state tolerance with the existence of one dominating religion in a state is the one where other religious societies have the right to free public cult. With regards to the Catholics, there information, though very incomplete, on churches and Latin clegery existing in the Russian trade centers. However, the religion tolerant Russian government remained as such until foreign visitors stack to their practical (trade, household, etc.) interests. And the government reaction was rapid as soon as such interests became of a religious and dangerous nature to the Orthodoxy.

Abstract: The article states that the history of the Russian statehood, nation and culture is intimately associated with the history of the Orthodox Christian Church. Even during the “atheistic” statehood (the Soviet period) communication between the Russian society and the Orthodox Christian Church was never lost. It is underlined that for the Velikiy Knyaz of Kiev Vladimir Svyatoslavich and his successors as well as for the Byzantian Christian emperors struggle against pagandom, against the religious cults and customs dominating among the Slavs became one of the key governmental functions and Christian duties. But with regards to other confessions not traditional for Russia, demesneveche (Kiev) period of our history is characterized by tolerance (even in the “softest” model of the state tolerance) towards other confessions. The history of the Catholic Mission in Russia during the pre-Mongolian period must be divided into two stages, border between which is the final division of the eastern and western churches in 1054. After the division of churches, the rules of relations with non-Christians created by the Russian church pastors (theoretical model of religious intolerance) were taken from the Greeks: any dialogue with non-Christians is an insult of true belief, a sacrilege, a crime for an orthodox (true believer) Christian. As to the Knyaz power attitude towards the infidels (and non- Christians), it was expressed only in several rules of the church regulation of Yaroslav Mudriy and was based on the Nomokanon norms, opinion of the Greek polemists and Russian pastors (and regarding sanctions – on the rules of the Russian Truth). The Regulations articles mostly touch upon infidels (not baptized) and upon the cast-off persons: joint meal (for the infringer the only excuse may be ignorance of the messmate professing another religion), cohabitation (and certainly marriage) are prohibited. That is, not only religious (this is not even mentioned in the Regulations as an evident fact) but also everyday relations with the infidels. These violations of the rules of church discipline are transferred exclusively to the church court. But the interdiction originates not only from the church power but also from the secular one. There is not only church punishment provided (excommunication, penance, exile to a monastery for repentance and correction) but also secular one – the Russian tradition introduces penal sanctions in the field of activity of the church court. The utmost intolerance to the non-Christians in the old Russian society existed only in theory. For practical implementation of the intolerance to the Latins (and to the infidels) no corresponding religious feeling had been built yet. The Kievan Rus, unlike the Moscow Rus, was an absolutely open country: it was in permanent and most active trade relations almost with all countries and nationalities of Europe and Asia. And toleration was caused not only economically but also by the state interests. So, despite of the theoretical intolerance to the Catholics, the church law (the regulations of the Metropolitans) and the secular law prohibition, not only the prayer, marriage but also everyday relations with infidels, the Russian Knyazes made marital unions with the West-European sovereigns during the pre-Mongolian period. In parallel with the marriage relations, the Russian Knyazes maintained permanent political relations with Europe. The most democratic form of the state tolerance with the existence of one dominating religion in a state is the one where other religious societies have the right to free public cult. With regards to the Catholics, there information, though very incomplete, on churches and Latin clegery existing in the Russian trade centers. However, the religion tolerant Russian government remained as such until foreign visitors stack to their practical (trade, household, etc.) interests. And the government reaction was rapid as soon as such interests became of a religious and dangerous nature to the Orthodoxy.