The great Russian writer is often called among the most famous people whom the Russian Orthodox Church anathematized. So or is it really?

It would seem that we asked a strange question about the well -known fact. However, often On the Internet You can meet the opinion that Leo Tolstoy was not anathematized in reality and we are talking about popular error. Where did this opinion come from? It’s clear where - from the text of the “definition of the Holy Synod”.

In itself textpublished on February 24, 1901, it is indicated: “All this is preached by the Count Tolstoy continuously, in a word and scripture, to the temptation and horror of the entire Orthodox world, and thereby restlessly, but obviously, consciously and intentionally rejecting himself from all communication with the Orthodox Church. <...> The Church does not consider it its member and cannot consider it, he will not repent and will not restore his communication with it. Now we testify to the whole Church for the assertion of the lawfulness and the reasoning of the mistaken, especially to the new enlightenment of Count Tolstoy himself. ”

As we see, nothing about the anathema and even excommunication - instead of this, the Metropolitans who have taken the definition say that Tolstoy himself “reject” themselves from the Church and that is why the hierarchs do not see him among Christians.

From Tolstoy's diaries It can be seen that for many years he reflected on religion and formed his own understanding of Christianity, which was noticeably different from the official church proposed. The essence of this concept is that Christianity has ceased to be ethical teaching, concentrated on the form to the detriment of the content. Tolstoy hoped to develop a new religion, which did not promise happiness in the afterlife, but helps to achieve it on Earth, which does not answer the question “what to believe in?”, But to the question “what and how to do?”.

Of course, attempts to rethink the dogmas caused the discontent of the church. At the same time, for a long time, the criticism of Tolstoy and his views was not official - the writer could be condemned in sermons or theological works, but not in official print media or decisions of the Holy Synod. Everything changed after the release in 1899 Roman "Resurrection", in which Tolstoy showed in the far from the best light of the ministers of the church. Separately, Konstantin Pobedonostsev, the chief prosecutor of the Synod and one of the most influential statesmen of that time, was bred in the image of an official of Toporov:

The position that Toporov occupied was, according to his purpose, was an internal contradiction, which only a man of stupid and deprived of a moral feeling could not see. Toporov had both of these negative properties. <...> He himself, deep down, did not believe in anything and found such a state very convenient and pleasant, but was afraid, no matter how the people would come to the same state, and believed, as he said, sacred by his duty to save the people from this.

No matter how indignant the church dignitaries were outraged, they could not react very sharply and decisively, because their “enemy” was one of the main public intellectuals around the world. Therefore, the synod did everything in order, on the one hand, to demonstrate indignation, and on the other, to prevent a scandal. The Synod even managed to shift responsibility to the writer in a sense. By the way, Lev Nikolaevich himself in Rescue I agreed to this decision with the wording:

The fact that I renounced the church calling myself Orthodox is completely fair. But I rejected from her not because I rebelled at the Lord, but, on the contrary, only because I wanted to serve Him with all my might.

Is it possible to assume that in its decision, the Synod reports on the "legend of the anathema" Tolstoy? To do this, let's deal with the terms. In the "Orthodox Encyclopedia" We read:

Anathema (Greek. ἀνάθεμα - excommunication), the excommunication of a Christian from communication with faithful and from holy sacraments, used as the highest church punishment for heavy sins (primarily for treason of Orthodoxy and evasion or split) and cathedrally proclaimed. The church anathema (or great excommunication) should not be mixed with “excommunication”, which is the temporary exclusion of the individual from the church community with a ban on participating in the sacraments and (for clergy) to occupy church positions. It is sometimes also called “small excommunication”, it, unlike anathema, serves as a punishment for less misconduct ... does not require a cathedral decision and does not need a cathedral proclamation for entry into force.

On the one hand, the temporary nature of the gap with Tolstoy (“the church does not consider it its member and cannot consider it, Top up He does not repent ”) makes it possible to talk more about excommunication than about the anathema. At the same time, the Tolstoye religious concept can hardly be considered a “smaller misconduct”, although the tone of the synodal decree against the writer cannot be compared with The words of Patriarch Tikhon, anathematized "atheists" in 1918:

Complete, madmen, stop your bloody reprisals. After all, the fact that you are doing, not only a cruel business, is truly a Satanic business, for which you are subject to a Geena fire in the life of the future - the afterlife and terrible curse of the offspring in the life of the real - earthly one.

The authorities, given to us from God, forbid you to proceed with the secrets of Christ, anathematize you, if only you wear Christian names and although by your birth belong to the Orthodox Church.

In 1901, the Synod formulated its definition in such a way as to condemn Tolstoy’s ideas and minimize the indignation of intellectuals. Although the second failed (for example, Chekhov He wrotethat “the audience reacted with a laugh”), the decision made leaves opportunities for interpretations to this day. It is possible that it was the word “anathema” by Alexander Kuprin, who released the story of the same name in 1913 connected with Tolstoy. In it, the protodiacon, on the name of Olympia, reads the story “Cossacks”, and the next day, instead of betraying Tolstoy, it proclaims the writer “many summer”.