How did the Christian Church split

How did the Christian Church split

Pope Leo IX and the Patriarch of Constantinople Michael Kerularius.


The main event in the church life of Europe was the final split of the churches, eastern and western, into Eastern Orthodox and Western Catholic in 1054. This split completed nearly two centuries of church-political debate. The great schism has become the main cause of many wars and other conflicts.

Why did the Great schism occur?


Even before 1054, disputes occurred repeatedly between the two capitals of the Christian world, Rome and Constantinople. And not all of them were caused by the actions of the popes, who in the first millennium of the new era were considered the legitimate heirs of ancient Rome, the supreme apostle Peter. The Church hierarchs of Constantinople more than once fell into heresy (deviation from the norms and rules of the dominant religion). In particular, in Monophysitism - the recognition of Jesus Christ only by God and the non-recognition of the human principle in him. The author is considered to be the Archimandrite of Constantinople Eutyches (about 378–454). Or iconoclasm - a religious movement in Byzantium in the 726th - early 730th centuries, directed against the veneration of icons and other church images (mosaics, frescoes, statues of saints, etc.). Iconoclast heretics considered church images to be idols, and the cult of veneration of icons as idolatry, referring to the Old Testament. Iconoclasts actively smashed religious images. Emperor Leo III Isaur in 787 and 843 banned the worship of religious images. Iconoclasm was banned by the Second Council of Nicaea in XNUMX, resumed at the beginning of the XNUMXth century and finally banned in XNUMX.

Meanwhile, in Rome, the reasons for a future split were ripening. They were based on the "papal primacy", which put the popes almost on a divine level. The popes were considered the direct heirs of the Apostle Peter and were not "first among equals." They were the “governors of Christ” and considered themselves the head of the whole church. The Roman throne strove for undivided not only ecclesiastical-ideological, but also political power. In Rome, in particular, they relied on a fake gift act - the Konstantinov Gift, made in the XNUMXth or XNUMXth century. The gift of Constantine spoke of the transfer by the Roman emperor Constantine the Great (XNUMXth century) of supreme power over the Roman Empire to the head of the Roman church, Sylvester. This act served as one of the main grounds for the claims of the popes to supreme authority both in the church and the highest authority in Europe.

In addition to papism, exorbitant thirst for power, there were religious reasons. So, in Rome they changed the Creed (the so-called question of the filioque). Even at the IV Ecumenical Council in 451 in the doctrine of the Holy Spirit, it was said that it comes only from God the Father. The Romans arbitrarily added, "and from the Son." Finally in Rome they adopted this formula in 1014. In the East they did not accept this and accused Rome of heresy. Later, Rome will add other innovations that Constantinople will not accept: the dogma of the “Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary”, the dogma of “purgatory”, the infallibility (infallibility) of the pope in matters of faith (continuation of the idea of ​​“papal primacy”), etc. All this will increase the strife.

Fotieva feud


The first split between the Western and Eastern churches occurred as early as 863–867. This is the so-called. Fotiev schism. The conflict occurred between Pope Nicholas and the Patriarch of Constantinople Photius. Formally, both hierarchs were equal - they headed two Local Churches. However, the pope tried to extend his power to the dioceses of the Balkan Peninsula, which were traditionally subordinate to the Church of Constantinople. As a result, both sides excommunicated each other from the church.

It all started as an internal conflict in the ruling elite and church of Constantinople. There was a struggle between conservatives and liberals. In the struggle for power between Emperor Michael III and his mother Theodora, Patriarch Ignatius, representing the Conservatives, sided with the Empress and was deposed. The scientist Photius was elected in his place. He was supported by liberal circles. Supporters of Ignatius declared Photius an illegal patriarch and turned to the Pope for help. Rome used the situation to reinforce the doctrine of the “papal primacy", trying to become the top arbiter in the dispute. Pope Nicholas refused to recognize Photius as patriarch. Photius raised the question of the heresy of the Romans (the question of the filioque). Both sides exchanged curses.

In 867, the Byzantine Basileus Michael, who supported Photius, was killed. The throne was captured by Vasily the Great (co-regent of Michael), the founder of the Macedonian dynasty. Basil deposed Photius and restored Ignatius to the patriarchal throne. Thus, Vasily wanted to gain a foothold on the seized throne: to receive the support of the pope and the people in which Ignatius was popular. Emperor Vasily and Patriarch Ignatius in their letters to the pope recognized the strength and influence of the latter on the affairs of the Eastern Church. The patriarch even called on the Roman vicars (assistant to the bishop) to "kindly and properly arrange a church with them." It seemed that this was the complete victory of Rome over Constantinople. At the cathedrals in Rome and then, in the presence of papal envoys, in Constantinople (869), Photius was deposed and, together with his supporters, was put to a curse.

However, while in the affairs of the Byzantine church life, Constantinople ceded to Rome, in matters of control over the dioceses the situation was different. Under Michael, the Latin clergy began to dominate in Bulgaria. Under Basil, despite the protests of the Romans, Latin priests were removed from Bulgaria. Bulgarian Tsar Boris again joined the Eastern Church. In addition, Tsar Vasily soon changed his attitude towards the faithful disgrace to Photius. He returned him from captivity, settled in the palace and entrusted him with the education of his children. And when Ignatius passed away, Photius again took the patriarchal throne (877-886). In 879, a cathedral was convened in Constantinople, which surpassed some Ecumenical Councils in the number of hierarchs gathered and the magnificence of the situation. The Roman legates had to not only agree to withdraw the conviction from Photius, listen to the Nicene-Constantinople Creed (without the filioque added in the West), but also glorify it.

Pope John VIII, angered by the decisions of the Council of Constantinople, sent his legate to the East, who was to insist on destroying the decisions of the cathedral that were objectionable to Rome and make concessions on Bulgaria. Emperor Vasily and Patriarch Photius did not yield to Rome. As a result, the relationship between the Byzantine Empire and Rome became cold. Then both sides tried to reconcile and made a number of mutual concessions.

The split of the Christian church


In the X century, the status quo remained, but in general, a gap became inevitable. Byzantine emperors gained complete control over the Eastern Church. In the meantime, the question arose again of control over the dioceses (that is, the issue of property and income). Emperor Nicephorus II Foca (963–969) strengthened Byzantine church organizations in southern Italy (Apulia and Calabria), where papal and generally Western influence began to penetrate strongly - the German sovereign Otton received the imperial Roman crown, plus the pressure of the Normans. Nicephorus Foka forbade the Latin rite in southern Italy and ordered to adhere to the Greek. This was a new reason for cooling relations between Rome and Constantinople. In addition, the pope began to call Nicephorus the emperor of the Greeks, and transferred the title of emperor of the Romans (Romans), as the Byzantine Vasileus were officially called, to the German emperor Otton.

Gradually, contradictions grew, both ideological and political. So, after Nicephorus Foki, the Romans resumed expansion in southern Italy. In the middle of XI, Leo IX sat on the papal throne, who was not only a religious hierarch, but also a politician. He supported the Cluny movement - his supporters advocated the reform of monastic life in the Western Church. The center of the movement was Cluny Abbey in Burgundy. Reformers demanded the restoration of fallen morals and discipline, the elimination of secular customs rooted in the church, the prohibition of the sale of church posts, the marriage of priests, etc. This movement was very popular in southern Italy, which caused dissatisfaction with the Eastern Church. Pope Leo planned to establish himself in southern Italy.

The Patriarch of Constantinople Michael Kerulariy, annoyed by the increasing influence of the Romans in the western possessions of the Eastern Church, closed all Latin monasteries and churches in Byzantium. In particular, churches argued about communion: the Latins used unleavened bread (unleavened bread) for the Eucharist, and the Greeks leavened bread. An exchange of messages took place between Pope Leo and Patriarch Michael. Michael criticized the claims of the Roman high priests to full power in the Christian world. The pope in his epistle referred to the Gift of Constantine. Roman envoys arrived in the capital of the Byzantine Empire, among whom was Cardinal Humbert, famous for his arrogant disposition. The Roman legates behaved proudly and arrogantly, did not compromise. Patriarch Michael also took a tough stance. Then in the summer of 1054, the Romans laid on the altar of the church of St. Sofia excommunication letter. Michael and his supporters were anathematized. For such an insult, the people wanted to break the Romans, but Emperor Konstantin Monomakh stood up for them. In response, Michael Kerularius gathered the cathedral and cursed the Roman legates and those close to them.

Thus, the final split of the Western and Eastern churches took place. Three other eastern patriarchs (Antioch, Jerusalem, and Alexandria) supported Constantinople. The Patriarchate of Constantinople became independent from Rome. Byzantium confirmed the position of civilization independent of the West. On the other hand, Constantinople lost the political support of Rome (the West as a whole). During the Crusades, the Western Knights took and plundered the capital of Byzantium. Subsequently, the West did not support Constantinople when it was attacked by the Turks, and then fell under the pressure of the Ottoman Turks.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

153 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Ross xnumx 19 May 2020 05: 08 New
    • 12
    • 3
    +9
    It is clear that through the depth of centuries it is impossible to understand either the sources or the causes of certain phenomena, but here two points are clear.
    The first is that God is in the soul of every person. And the presence of a divine essence in the soul of every person is determined by his ACTION, and not by the number of prayers and bows bowed daily.
    Second:
    In the X century, the status quo remained, but in general, a gap became inevitable. Byzantine emperors gained complete control over the Eastern Church. In the meantime, the question arose again of control over the dioceses (that is, the issue of ownership and income).

    There ends divine morality (commandments), where the loot penetrates the relations of the laity and servants of God.
    1. Deniska999 19 May 2020 07: 49 New
      • 7
      • 1
      +6
      The only thing that surprises is how much time people killed in disputes about such abstract things as the divine or human principle of Christ, about all dogmas and so on. After all, this energy could really be directed into a productive channel.
      1. Mikhail m 19 May 2020 10: 32 New
        • 6
        • 0
        +6
        Now science has gone so far as to study these disputes at the Department of Theology, Moscow Engineering Physics Institute.
        1. Jünger 19 May 2020 22: 24 New
          • 3
          • 2
          +1
          Quote: Michael m
          Now science has gone so far as to study these disputes at the Department of Theology, Moscow Engineering Physics Institute.

          Well, this is no worse than tales about the origin of a person from a monkey or the Big Bang. Nobody will check one hell. So it's a matter of taste.
      2. IGOR GORDEEV 19 May 2020 14: 10 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: Deniska999
        After all, this energy could really be directed into a productive channel.

        It’s possible to arrange paradise on Earth. But in our world, no matter how they dress up and what they do not believe in, there are quite a few people with a destructive personality type. Therefore, alas, a productive channel on a global scale is utopia. With high probability, regular wars, famines and other misfortunes will continue.
      3. Akuzenka 20 May 2020 10: 38 New
        • 5
        • 0
        +5
        In a dispute between a beaver and a donkey, BABLO always wins. So it defeated the Christian church. And this is money-grubbing, so "censured" by the Christian church ..
        1. Jünger 20 May 2020 10: 48 New
          • 5
          • 1
          +4
          Quote: AKuzenka
          So it defeated the Christian church

          The church is not a house with a cross and not only the Patriarch with bishops. The church is any baptized person who is basically no different from the Patriarch. And if you won money-grubbing, then to yourself and broadcast. I was not defeated, but I am also the Church. Everything is as simple as possible.
          Therefore you are lying.
      4. Evgenijus 20 May 2020 10: 59 New
        • 3
        • 1
        +2
        Yeah, develop the production of tobacco, vodka "Stolichnaya" .... The profit is what, already breathtaking! Very productive ...
        My dear, you yourself then realized that you uttered?
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Fat
      Fat 24 May 2020 23: 41 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: ROSS 42
      There divine morality (commandments) ends, where the loot penetrates into the relations of the laity and

      Great resume to a good article. thank
  2. Mavrikiy 19 May 2020 05: 18 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    They were “governors of Christ” and considered themselves the head of the whole church
    The head is baked. repeat It’s just that they no longer had arguments in the argument to prove their case. request
    1. Grandfather 19 May 2020 05: 23 New
      • 14
      • 12
      +2
      any religion is absolute evil.
      1. Mavrikiy 19 May 2020 05: 32 New
        • 19
        • 17
        +2
        Quote: Dead Day
        any religion is absolute evil.

        You write nonsense. fool Mankind has lived almost its entire history with God in its soul. 2000 years lived alone fool and then the smart nihilists flouted.
        A person just needs FAITH, HOPE, LOVE. There is no Christ, give Lenin or the Fuhrer. Freedom, Equality, Fraternity or Communism. request Something like this. hi
        1. Grandfather 19 May 2020 05: 41 New
          • 11
          • 9
          +2
          Quote: Mavrikiy
          Mankind has lived almost its entire history with God in its soul

          from his darkness ... "who believes in Mohammed, who is in Allah, who is in Jesus ..." V.S. Vysotsky
          1. Mavrikiy 19 May 2020 05: 51 New
            • 9
            • 11
            -2
            Quote: Dead Day
            from my darkness ...

            Judge not lest ye be judged. repeat hi
          2. Pravodel 19 May 2020 07: 15 New
            • 15
            • 18
            -3
            Dear, "not from the darkness," but from God ... Only the ascent to God has isolated man from primates. Without this ascent, you would still be sitting on a palm tree and eating only bananas and, in any case, you would not be either an old grandfather or a young grandmother. What turns out when they give up God was perfectly demonstrated by the 20th century. Look back and look at the corpses with which it is strewn - a consequence of the departure, the denial of God. God forbid, repeat this in the 21st century ...
            1. Kote Pan Kokhanka 19 May 2020 08: 07 New
              • 24
              • 9
              +15
              Quote: The Truth
              Dear, "not from the darkness," but from God ... Only the ascent to God has isolated man from primates. Without this ascent, you would still be sitting on a palm tree and eating only bananas and, in any case, you would not be either an old grandfather or a young grandmother. What turns out when they give up God was perfectly demonstrated by the 20th century. Look back and look at the corpses with which it is strewn - a consequence of the departure, the denial of God. God forbid, repeat this in the 21st century ...

              The first thing that came to mind was the Bartholomew Massacre! Prior to this, the Qatari war, crusades, etc. All in the name of God and for his glory !!! As it does not fit with your concept of ascent of man!
              Although I think some leader of the Yumba-Yumba tribe also had the idea that the Great God Tumba-Tumba advised him to cut the Momoba-Namba tribe !!!
              Now seriously. Religion is an instrument (road, path). Orthodoxy, Catholicism, Lutheranism, Buddhism, Islam - these are the vehicles! Faith is a subjective product of the human perception of objective reality! From instinctive faith to parents, to the inexplicable ecumenical !!!
              R.S. The soldiers of the Wehrmacht also modestly did horror with buckles on their belts “God be with us” !!!
              Regards, Kote!
              1. neri73-r 19 May 2020 08: 29 New
                • 5
                • 5
                0
                Quote: Kote Pan Kokhanka
                R.S. The soldiers of the Wehrmacht also modestly did horror with buckles on their belts “God be with us” !!!

                That's why they lost! Zaravili, stating that God is with them. Who are they for God to be with them? And we always said that - we are with God! With God they conquered, built, lived.
                1. Simargl 21 May 2020 19: 40 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Quote: neri73-r
                  That's why they lost!
                  It was necessary to write on the Reichsmark, as the Americans? Those, so far, do not lose ...
                  And then they lost to atheists tongue
                  1. neri73-r 21 May 2020 19: 43 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Quote: Simargl
                    Those, so far, do not lose ...

                    Are you sure?
                    1. Simargl 21 May 2020 20: 16 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      Quote: neri73-r
                      Are you sure?
                      Is there alternative data? As soon as pressure begins on a piece of paper with the inscription "we believe in God" - I will believe wassat
                      In the meantime, they at least do not lose.
              2. Pravodel 19 May 2020 08: 54 New
                • 12
                • 5
                +7
                Dear Kote, in addition to the one you quoted in the note, you can still list many, many, many things here that were done as if in the name of God, but in reality they had nothing to do with God. All these and similar acts from the devil, it does not matter at all what form he is dressed in: the righteous, protecting Catholics from heresy, crusaders, destroying Orthodox, robbing Orthodox churches in the name of protecting the Holy Sepulcher, Muslims carving infidels ... All these are acts of the devil. Understanding this just gives man the strength to be a man - a child of God, and not cattle trampling all the foundations of civilization.
                About religion. You correctly write that faith is formed by the environment of a person, by the morality, ethics, aesthetics in which a person is immersed from the moment of his birth, but not only by this, but also by the fact that, being already in the developmental stage, not a child, but a husband himself a person feels in himself the need for Divine Communion, the understanding that he is not just the offspring of his parents, but also a child of God, carrying in himself this Divine light. If this is not the case, then we just have subjects forgetting who they are, those who can spit everything holy that God has given us.
                In conclusion, the subjectivity of each person’s perception of God is a consequence of the objectivity of God in relation to each person. If this objectivity did not exist, then, believe me, there is no subjective Divine principle, which is precisely what the moral ones that you mention in your note are.
                1. ee2100 19 May 2020 09: 39 New
                  • 3
                  • 2
                  +1
                  From your comment, it turns out that the world rules the devil, and all religions fulfill his desire. About a man, somehow forgotten. In your opinion, the idea of ​​a person (subjectivity) is more important than the fact that objectively we live in the real material world? Do you want to live in dreams? No one bothers you. And the assertion that objectivity confirms subjectivity is not true, but rather the exact opposite.
                  1. Pravodel 19 May 2020 10: 07 New
                    • 7
                    • 4
                    +3
                    It certainly does not follow that the world is ruled by devils, although this happens. You don’t have to go far for an example, remember the 3rd Reich. This, for sure, is a devilish trick. It is not angels that rule the world, but people with all their passions, emotions, etc. If the angels ruled, then, I assure you, we would not have devilish antics in a world like the one that was revealed above.
                    Read carefully what I wrote: a person is subjective precisely because outside of him, objectively there is something that a person must obey and obey - serves. If he serves God, then he lives according to the commandments of the Lord, if he serves the devil, then you yourself can supplement the objective series of possible devilish acts.
                    1. ee2100 19 May 2020 11: 01 New
                      • 1
                      • 2
                      -1
                      Flag (banner) in your hands!
                2. Mikhail m 19 May 2020 10: 41 New
                  • 11
                  • 2
                  +9
                  Quote: The Truth
                  you can still list many, many, many things that were done as if in the name of God, but in reality they had nothing to do with God. All these and similar acts from the devil, it does not matter at all what form he is dressed in: the righteous, protecting Catholics from heresy, crusaders, destroying Orthodox, robbing Orthodox churches in the name of protecting the Holy Sepulcher, Muslims carving infidels ... All these are acts of the devil.

                  Absolutely win-win position. All the abominations committed by believers in God for the glory of God turn out to be acts of the devil. Logically, it follows that all good created by atheists is the deeds of God. You either take off the cross or put on your pants.
                  1. Pravodel 19 May 2020 11: 03 New
                    • 6
                    • 5
                    +1
                    Dear Mikhail, you first carefully and correctly read what I wrote, and only then come up with obscene tips about the cross and trousers. It would be possible not to answer your boorish remark, but I will answer.
                    Man is a child of God, and everything that he does is done either for the glory of God or for the veneration of the devil. There is no other and cannot be. There is nothing between God and the devil and the choice can be either in the name of God or to the devil, even if the atheist makes this choice. I dare to remind you that in the trenches of the Second World War there were no atheists under shells, there were all believers .... To God, as to love, everyone comes in his own way, it’s good if he comes and begins to understand and feel the grace of God but may not come. This is not given to everyone. The main thing is that he did not come to the devil and, even remaining an atheist, lived according to the laws of God.
                    1. Mikhail m 19 May 2020 11: 37 New
                      • 7
                      • 4
                      +3
                      Quote: The Truth
                      Man is a child of God, and everything he does, does either to the glory of God, or to the veneration of the devil. There is no other and cannot be.
                      Reason entangled in dogma. In a latrine man goes to glory, or to worship? What about the war?
                      1. Pravodel 19 May 2020 14: 11 New
                        • 7
                        • 4
                        +3
                        When in an argument, an opponent who claims to have some “scholarship” resorts to the arguments presented by you, then I have already pointed out to you that rudeness is not proof.
                        Concluding our conversation with you, I note that the natural needs of living beings, which also include the defecating person, do not fall under the criterion of divine - not divine action. Man stood out from wildlife and managed to rise above nature precisely because all his actions are actions directed to God. If he descends to the level of animal existence, then God is not there, but there are natural needs inherent in every living being.
                        This is the last thing I can tell you.
                      2. The comment was deleted.
                      3. Hantengri 19 May 2020 14: 41 New
                        • 5
                        • 3
                        +2
                        Quote: The Truth
                        Man stood out from wildlife and managed to rise above nature precisely because all his actions are actions directed towards God.

                        Well, what an advanced believer! lol Are you definitely an Orthodox Christian?
                        But what about:
                        7 And the Lord God made man out of the dust of the earth, and breathed in his face the breath of life, and man became a living soul.
                        .
                        15 And the Lord God took the man [whom he had made] and settled him in the garden of Eden to cultivate it and keep it.
                        .
                        18 And the Lord God said: It is not good for a man to be alone; let us make him an assistant according to him.
                        19 The Lord God made all the animals of the field and all the birds of the air out of the earth, and brought [them] to a man, to see how he would call them, and that, as a man calls every living soul, so was his name.
                        20 And the man called the names of all the cattle and birds of the air and all the animals of the field; but for the man there was no helper like him.
                        21 And the Lord God brought a deep sleep upon man; and when he fell asleep, took one of his ribs, and covered that place with flesh.
                        22 And the Lord God made a wife from a rib taken from a man, and brought her to a man.
                        23 And the man said: Behold, it is bone from my bones and flesh from my flesh; she will be called a wife, for she has been taken from her [her] husband.
                        24 Therefore a man will leave his father and his mother, and be cleaved to his wife; and there will be [two] one flesh.
                        25 And they were both naked, Adam and his wife, and were not ashamed.
                        ??
                        If you believe in Christ, then you simply must believe in this, without doubt and mental speculation.
                        Otherwise, you’re never a damn Orthodox, but some godless heretic (and perhaps even a latent atheist) who doubts the veracity of Scripture dictated by the Lord himself!
                      4. Pravodel 19 May 2020 15: 02 New
                        • 6
                        • 4
                        +2
                        Dear, if you are quoting the Bible to make it easier for you, it is better for you to begin with John 1: 1-5
                        "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. It was in the beginning with God. Everything through Him began to be, and without Him nothing began to be, that started to be. In Him was life, and life was the light of men. And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it. "John 1: 1-5. .
                        This is exactly what I was talking about.
                        Faith in God is not superstition, but the belief that in addition to man himself, there is God above man, following which makes man human and not live defecated cattle, as one said above.
                        Due to insults, I stop communicating with you. It’s better to unsubscribe, somewhere in VK or Instagram, where the turns and curses you use are the norm.
                      5. Hantengri 19 May 2020 15: 43 New
                        • 5
                        • 3
                        +2
                        Quote: The Truth

                        Dear, if you are quoting the Bible to make it easier for you, it is better for you to begin with John 1: 1-5
                        "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. It was in the beginning with God. Everything through Him began to be, and without Him nothing began to be, that started to be. In Him was life, and life was the light of men. And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it. "John 1: 1-5. .
                        This is exactly what I was talking about.

                        So what? Does this quote (John 1: 1-5) somehow make your cross between Creationism and Evolutionary Theory acceptable to the Church?
                        Quote: The Truth
                        Due to insults, I stop communicating with you.

                        You can be offended as much as you like. From this, your views, from the point of view of materialism, will not cease to be stupidity, but from the point of view of Orthodoxy, and indeed Christianity, in general - heresy. So, decide for yourself what is closer to your vulnerable soul. hi
                    2. Pessimist22 20 May 2020 05: 41 New
                      • 2
                      • 1
                      +1
                      Even atheists broke through the glass dome of the sky with their rockets, and now religious workers conduct their rituals so that penetrations would be legalized. smile
                  2. Mikhail m 19 May 2020 20: 42 New
                    • 4
                    • 1
                    +3
                    Quote: The Truth
                    all his actions are actions directed to God.

                    The Inquisition, the split of the church, pedophilia of priests sent to God? We really have nothing to talk about. It is faith that overshadows the mind. request
              3. would 20 May 2020 11: 05 New
                • 3
                • 0
                +3
                I dare to remind you that in the trenches of the Second World War under bombs, shells there were no atheists, there were all believers ...


                Nothing more than a common phrase repeatedly refuted by those who were in the trenches themselves or worse. I immediately recall the inscription in the Mauthausen concentration camp "If God exists, he will have to beg me for forgiveness." Well, I also remember the number of Communists in these same trenches.

                As for God or the Devil, here we have a wonderful example of how a believer compares reality with his faith. If a person did something unambiguously good, then to the glory of God, if bad, then to the glory of the Devil. Moreover, the assessment can always be changed. Well, if the situation is more complicated, then you can always say "the ways of the Lord are inscrutable." And that’s all, and no contradictions.
      2. Kronos 19 May 2020 12: 27 New
        • 3
        • 3
        0
        All countries developed modern countries are not religious
        1. Jünger 20 May 2020 09: 22 New
          • 1
          • 3
          -2
          Quote: Kronos
          All countries developed modern countries are not religious

          Are you probably only North Korea ranked among the developed?
          In the United States, according to statistics, 40 percent of the population attends church service every Sunday. The Japanese are very religious. In Germany, everyone pays church tax - this of course does not mean religiosity, but it reflects a general trend in society.
          By the way, I would have been in favor of introducing such a tax, at least for the sake of fun)) I can imagine how our citizens will be screaming - there will be more laughing
      3. Hantengri 19 May 2020 12: 28 New
        • 7
        • 4
        +3
        Quote: The Truth
        Only the ascent to God isolated from the primates of man. Without this ascent, you would still be sitting on a palm tree and eating only bananas and, in any case, you would not be either an old grandfather or a young grandmother.

        Right! Everything was so! Sat somehow Australopithecus и Paranthropus under the tree, Paranthropus

        continuously eating a banana and did not steam, but Australopithecus

        I constantly read the Bible and prayed to God to send him smart descendants.
        As a result, one wentbbled up and died out (gluttony sin!).
        And another spiritually exalted and his descendants became human! Checkmate to you, atheists! : tongue laughing
        1. Pravodel 19 May 2020 14: 33 New
          • 3
          • 4
          -1
          It is nice to meet an intelligent person who has reached the point of knowledge and recommends reading the Bible as a remedy for dementia and gluttony. How would mankind advance in its development, if instead of gluttony it would read spiritual food and, of course, the Bible.
      4. Sklendarka 19 May 2020 16: 36 New
        • 7
        • 2
        +5
        But from this place in more detail ...
        You want to say that when children were thrown into the furnace, he had a day off?
        When he burned people in sheds, was he on a business trip, that is, a plaque with the inscription, “God with us” allows us to do such things with impunity? Or, all the same, Nürberg put everything in its place. Please note, not God's punishment, but the court ... , and the apostles did not throw a rope around their neck ...
        1. Jurec 23 May 2020 13: 36 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Did God do this personally ???
          Have you personally seen ???
          This was done by people like you and me.
          God gives man the right to choose what to do and how to act.
          Good and evil, this is our sophisticated choice !!!
          And what is happening in the world now is not God's whim.
          Eto mine, yours, ours, decisions !!!
      5. Beringovsky 19 May 2020 23: 01 New
        • 4
        • 2
        +2
        Quote: The Truth
        ... Only the ascent to God isolated from the primates of man. Without this ascent, you would still be sitting on a palm tree and eating only bananas ...

        In fact, God (or gods) is an invention of the human mind not so distant from us.
        Before that, there was a cult of nature, ancestral spirits, etc. If you could ask a question about gods to people of that distant era, then they would not even understand what you are talking about. They did not have such a concept, approximately as a person of the 15th century did not have a concept of, say, "electronics" or "genetics".
        Even at the dawn of mankind, in ancient Sumer or Egypt, and even in Greece and Rome, the gods are more likely not omnipotent and omniscient entities, but something like superhumans with superpowers (even very super))))
        But otherwise they are the same as the people who invented them. They also quarrel, reconcile, deceive each other or vice versa. In general, they do everything the same as ordinary people who thought up how much imagination they had.
        So at first people appeared, and only after they invented the gods when they needed them.
    2. knn54 19 May 2020 07: 55 New
      • 5
      • 1
      +4
      "There are many faiths, and all are dissimilar,
      What does heresy, sin, Islam mean?
      I have chosen love for you, God!
      Everything else is worthless trash! "
      Omar Khayyam
      Wars began when Faith divided into religions, its outward manifestation.
  3. Konstantin Shevchenko 19 May 2020 09: 32 New
    • 7
    • 1
    +6
    And to send a curse on each other, is it divine? It seems that sorcerers, fortunetellers are engaged in this)) Religion is an instrument of control, manipulation of man. Honed in knowledge of the psychology of a person asking the same questions, they easily convince themselves of their truth. And then the question arises of what, does a person believe more? In God or "in a strong and correct religion" for which he is ready to go on a campaign.
  4. IGOR GORDEEV 19 May 2020 14: 12 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    Quote: Mavrikiy
    There is no Christ, give Lenin or the Fuhrer. Freedom, Equality, Fraternity or Communism

    In my opinion, Buddhism would be a good compromise.
  • Kote Pan Kokhanka 19 May 2020 06: 30 New
    • 9
    • 3
    +6
    Quote: Dead Day
    any religion is absolute evil.

    You explain this to your ancestor, who, years ago, relying on his sincere fallacy, believed that he had failed the mammoth only thanks to the clan stump, transmitted from father to son for 10 generations !!! am
    Faith is not a matter of subtle matters, but an objectively broader concept. Religion is one of its tools! So the choice is yours to believe in God through religion, on your own in the kitchen or not to believe anyone, but “knock on the tree and spit over the shoulder of a black cat crossing the road”!
    Regards, Kote!
  • Vadim Golubkov 19 May 2020 07: 25 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    Religion is already a part of culture and tradition for so many centuries, one must at least take this calmly.
    1. Kote Pan Kokhanka 19 May 2020 08: 21 New
      • 3
      • 3
      0
      Quote: Vadim Golubkov
      Religion is already a part of culture and tradition for so many centuries, one must at least take this calmly.

      Dear Vadim - I agree! Except for two points “already” - if not “always”. The thesis is “calm” - just smiled !!! Customs (in your concept of “tradition”) tend to be formed into legal norms of behavior, which does not prevent part of society from violating them !!!
      In fact, “Faith in God” is the oldest civilization strife and, sadly even today, it is the most demanded for the purpose of waging wars!
      For example, a "test tube with white powder"! Believe !!! Sadam executed !!!!! Received "Modern Jihad" in the Middle East !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
      Probably the oldest is only vendetta (blood feud), but when it is implemented, they mainly pour the blood of individuals, not peoples !!!
      hi
      1. Vadim Golubkov 19 May 2020 09: 57 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        Part of society does not honor and observe a lot of things, this is their business. I personally like, for example, painting eggs myself, buying, or baking Easter cake. Regarding the "test tube" ... I agree ... it's just a different form of pretext to attack, bomb, seize another state and it probably went from the 17-18 century, well, from 19 for sure. My regards hi
        1. Kote Pan Kokhanka 19 May 2020 11: 07 New
          • 0
          • 2
          -2
          . Regarding the "test tube" ... I agree ... it's just a different form of pretext to attack, bomb, seize another state and it probably went from the 17-18 century, well, from 19 for sure.

          Alas before! If I am not mistaken, the Trojan Wars began because of the beautiful Elena! Which was stolen! According to Homer, she is 10 years old, the Greeks who believed in it returned !!! Troy was burned, Elena was returned, the heroes were put in packs in graves!
          1. Andobor 19 May 2020 12: 58 New
            • 4
            • 0
            +4
            Quote: Kote Pan Kokhanka
            Trojan wars began because of the beautiful Elena!

            These are all fairy tales for suckers, a myth - a religion, in real life they determined whose system is better and will continue to exist on tapering resources in anticipation of the collapse of the bronze world, for one they were reduced.
      2. Simargl 21 May 2020 19: 51 New
        • 0
        • 1
        -1
        Quote: Kote Pan Kokhanka
        Probably the oldest is only vendetta (blood feud), but when it is implemented, they mainly pour the blood of individuals, not peoples !!!
        Not true. Often lasted decades and affected hundreds of people.
  • Sklendarka 19 May 2020 16: 02 New
    • 1
    • 2
    -1
    Sorry, I, as a violent attest, really like to celebrate both Catholic and Orthodox religious holidays ...
  • Evgenijus 20 May 2020 11: 00 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    Do you read F.M.Dostoevsky? If not, there are no questions for you ...
  • Question: Does communist teaching differ from religion in anything? Here is the second question: was the USSR in its essence a clerical state?
  • 7,62h54 19 May 2020 05: 26 New
    • 15
    • 6
    +9
    While the lazy priests argued over what kind of bread to receive communion, fresh or leavened, the people still bent their backs in the fields, sowed and harvested grain, paid tithing.
    1. Grandfather 19 May 2020 05: 29 New
      • 14
      • 7
      +7
      Quote: 7,62x54
      people still bent their backs in the fields, sowed and harvested grain, paid tithing.

      1. Catfish 19 May 2020 05: 39 New
        • 11
        • 5
        +6
        Yes, looking at the current priests with “Rolexes” on their wrists, you will inevitably think about how high pensions are from grandmothers in our Russia. laughing
        1. Moskovit 19 May 2020 09: 01 New
          • 6
          • 7
          -1
          Have you seen at least one priest with a rolex on your wrist? Yes, even in the plural? Of course, in the Russian Orthodox Church there are crooks, and even criminals. Because the church is made up of people, not angels. But repeating cliches about priests, at least learn about the gigantic charitable and educational work that the church is conducting. Especially in unsightly areas that a smart layman does not particularly like, the fight against drug addiction, drunkenness, work with former and current prisoners, dysfunctional families, homeless people and more.
          1. Slavs 19 May 2020 09: 31 New
            • 5
            • 3
            +2
            Quote: Moskovit
            Because the church is made up of people, not angels

            This is the only thing that is true in your comment.
            1. Moskovit 19 May 2020 09: 45 New
              • 4
              • 5
              -1
              Can you somehow reasonably confirm your thesis? Tell us that the church does nothing except buying up rollexes?
              1. Slavs 19 May 2020 11: 14 New
                • 6
                • 2
                +4
                This is from my comments for 2013.
                I have experience with these comrades in everyday life. Disappointed. Moreover, I worked with their children; upbringing confused me very much. I clarify - faith in my God has not been shaken, but there is no faith in the servants ... Your examples have a place to be, but against the general background they are lost, unfortunately ...
                And urns for donations should be placed in the offices of top managers, and not in pharmacies ...
                For two years I watched the ministers of the church in a theological seminary. I never heard any talk about the problems of the flock ... But cars, clothes and rest were discussed very actively. )
                Remember the sensational accidents?
                ... "As a rule, commenting on such incidents, the Russian Orthodox Church emphasizes that the perpetrators of traffic accidents in the holy dignity are not in the service at the time of the accident, which means that the church cannot take any punitive measures without serious consequences" ...
                And I thought that God is not being served according to the schedule, but no, at the time of the accident - not at the service ...
                My opinion, it may not coincide with yours ...
                My friend, already a former employee, after an accident in a state of intoxication was fired due to the loss of confidence .. This is for comparison.
                In my daughter’s class, the father’s dad, a clergyman, suggested that the teacher give 4 50 rubles for graduation (grade 000 !!) Literally - "Thank God I can afford it, tea is not 1917 ..."
                What product does the church produce to afford? Consecrated oil and gas?
                Let everyone remain in their own opinion.
                I repeat once again: your examples have a place to be, but against the general background they are lost, unfortunately ...
                1. Jünger 20 May 2020 11: 41 New
                  • 1
                  • 3
                  -2
                  Quote: Slavs
                  I have never heard of flock problems ...

                  The flock, she is in the parishes, and in the seminary doing other things, not the flock.
                  Quote: Slavs
                  In my daughter’s class, the father’s dad, a clergyman, suggested that the teacher give 4 50 rubles for graduation (grade 000 !!) Literally - "Thank God I can afford it, tea is not 1917 ..."

                  What is the problem - are you envious? This is bad and you need to work on yourself, and not discuss the income of others.
                  Quote: Slavs
                  What product does the church produce to afford? Consecrated oil and gas?

                  She produces a product that you do not need. But I need him, for example, I and I pay for him.
                  For example, I don’t need a product that is produced at the conservatory, but I understand that someone needs it. And I don’t have the audacity to discuss the income of Hvorostovsky or anyone else there. Because it’s not my business and I don’t understand anything about it.
                  In general, reasonable and decent people don’t take into someone else’s pocket, and besides, if there are deep reasons to believe that what is located there has nothing to do with them.
          2. Pravodel 19 May 2020 11: 36 New
            • 5
            • 8
            -3
            You understand, those who talk about the church, I note, the Orthodox Church, about Rolexes, Maybachs, Maseratis - this is the result of that company that was unleashed 10-15 years ago against the Orthodox Church, aimed at separating our people from the church. Did not work out! Our people go to church more and more, because sees in it a temple in which the soul of the people unites with God. And so it will continue. Therefore, from our "dearest friends," who so much care about the welfare of the Russian people, we should expect more and more abominations, poured on our Orthodox Church. Photos with rolexes, maserati, gold toilets, diamonds and necklaces in all visible and invisible places, bowel movements, etc. - these are just flowers, berries are yet to come. And the stronger Russia will be, the more united the people will be, the more nasty and vile the attacks on the church will be. Do not get away from this. The task of the Orthodox is to understand this and see behind the abomination the deeds of the enemies of Russia.
          3. Catfish 19 May 2020 12: 21 New
            • 4
            • 1
            +3
            Have you seen at least one priest with a rolex on your wrist?

            I saw it at the Novodevichy Convent, not once, not twice, because I had been there regularly at one time.
            But on the field of the fight against drug addiction and alcoholism, I'm sorry, I have not met any of them. I won’t say anything about the zone, I didn’t sit, thank God.
      2. Mavrikiy 19 May 2020 05: 40 New
        • 4
        • 3
        +1
        Well, mourn looking at these smug ..... rascals, I'm waiting for their cleaning to begin there. No way without her.
        1. Grandfather 19 May 2020 05: 45 New
          • 12
          • 8
          +4
          Quote: Mavrikiy
          I'm waiting for their cleaning to begin there. No way without her.

          1. Mavrikiy 19 May 2020 05: 47 New
            • 2
            • 1
            +1
            This is their salary for the fact that the ROC surrendered to the Vatican. recourse
          2. bober1982 19 May 2020 07: 46 New
            • 6
            • 4
            +2
            ....... he should not eat sweeter
            You, mislead, A.S. Pushkin has nothing to do with these lines.
            The author of the poems is a man by the name of Agranovich
            1. Simargl 21 May 2020 19: 56 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Quote: bober1982
              The author of the poems is a man by the name of Agranovich
              Do you disagree with them?
              1. bober1982 21 May 2020 20: 02 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Quote: Simargl
                Do you disagree with them?

                No, I do not agree.
                A Jew Agranovich wrote these lines, "devoting" them to the Jew A.Menu, for accepting Orthodoxy and serving as a priest.
                1. Simargl 21 May 2020 20: 14 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  Quote: bober1982
                  No, I do not agree.
                  Those. "fed up hungry comrade"?
                  Famously.
                  Yes, to whom he devoted it to spit! There is a statement, I asked about it, not the context.
                  1. bober1982 21 May 2020 20: 25 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Quote: Simargl
                    Those. "fed up hungry comrade"?
                    Famously.

                    I do not understand, if you mean the text of the "poem", then it is obscene.
                    By the way, Agranovich is a brilliant songwriter.
                    I drank birch sap in the spring forest ...., performance M. Nozhkin
                    From the heroes of bygone days ......, from the movie Officers
                    But, see how it happened with these poems.
                    1. Simargl 21 May 2020 21: 44 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      Quote: bober1982
                      I do not understand, if you mean the text of the "poem", then it is obscene.
                      Text quotes from a poem. Is it hard to understand?
                      1. bober1982 21 May 2020 23: 24 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Quote: Simargl
                        Text quotes from a poem.

                        A.S. Pushkin?
                        On this quote, they say, "highpanuli"
                      2. Simargl 25 May 2020 17: 25 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Quote: bober1982
                        A.S. Pushkin?
                        Without reference to the author.

                        Quote: bober1982
                        On this quote, they say, "highpanuli"
                        1 - who?
                        2 - Do you agree with the statement or not? Without reference to the author and the text (verse) in which it is contained.
                        3 - Are you trying to chat me? I will be consistent: I have already indicated that ...
                        Quote: Simargl
                        Do you disagree with them?
                        This question for your statement (amendment) can be regarded in two ways (do you agree with Agranovich / do you agree with the statement), but not as my attempt to link authorship to Pushkin.

                        PS
                        I repeat the question: do you agree that anyone who wants to read a sermon should not eat sweeter than they are?

                        ZYY
                        Quote: bober1982
                        I do not understand, if you mean the text of the "poem", then it is obscene.
                        You do not understand him, it seems.
                      3. bober1982 25 May 2020 17: 47 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Quote: Simargl
                        I repeat the question: do you agree that anyone who wants to read a sermon should not eat sweeter than they are?

                        No, I do not agree with this, and I did speak of this.
                        So you can agree to the point that you need to preach, barefoot and in rags.
                      4. Simargl 26 May 2020 08: 18 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Quote: bober1982
                        So you can agree to the point that you need to preach, barefoot and in rags.
                        Until faith became a religion, Christian preachers went about this way. What's wrong?
                        It turns out that you think ...
                        Quote: Simargl
                        Quote: bober1982
                        No, I do not agree.
                        "fed up hungry comrade"?
                        This can be applied to our deputies, if that.
                        And the word "they" can be considered as an average indicator.
                        So what is the answer?
                        Have you read that verse? What did you understand from him?
                      5. bober1982 26 May 2020 08: 34 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        You need to go to the Church on an empty stomach, you can also go hungry, so the material is better absorbed. If you are full, you will be pulled into a dream, you will begin to dream.
                        Hungry or well-fed, a beggar or a rich, everyone in the temple is equal.
                        Therefore, the verse did not understand.
                      6. Simargl 26 May 2020 09: 11 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Quote: bober1982
                        Therefore, the verse did not understand.
                        Yes, you do not even understand your statement. Because you copy stupidly.
                      7. bober1982 26 May 2020 09: 30 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        The poem is vile, even swearing viciously.
                        So the king persecuted me for faith
                      8. Simargl 26 May 2020 09: 32 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Quote: bober1982
                        The poem is vile, even swearing viciously.
                        So the king persecuted me for faith
                        This is a fact: the Pale of Settlement - what kind of concept?
                      9. bober1982 26 May 2020 09: 35 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Quote: Simargl
                        Pale of Settlement - what kind of concept?

                        Further than the limit line - do not climb out.
                      10. Simargl 26 May 2020 19: 29 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Quote: bober1982
                        Further than the limit line - do not climb out.
                        Neighing wassat
                      11. bober1982 26 May 2020 19: 33 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        What do you want me to give a definition from the Great Soviet Encyclopedia.
  • Akuzenka 20 May 2020 10: 52 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    I agree. Faced in reality with these scammers. Unless the ranks are a little lower. At the Athos Compound. We signed all the papers on the work performed and threw it with payment. We went to court ... but there are such Worshipers there that the court rejected all claims and advised us to forget about the money if we did not want to lose our office. Since then, he began to believe any abomination about church hierarchs. I understand that a lot of lies. But having experienced in their own skin their relationship .... there will be no disappointments in the future.
  • Nehist 19 May 2020 05: 33 New
    • 10
    • 2
    +8
    Power!!! That's the whole reason for the split !!! The usual showdown ... As the lads in 90 !!! Therefore, the tale of the baptism of Russia is generally funny !!! Since the separation of Orthodoxy and Catholicism occurred 200 years after the events described
    1. Kote Pan Kokhanka 19 May 2020 08: 42 New
      • 8
      • 3
      +5
      Based on history, these 90s fellows studied with religious bonzes!
      I’ll share it, in the 99th I watched, and later drew up a protocol for two priests who did not divide the parish !!! “Vlases were tearing, the devil was remembered, demons were enticing each other .......,!” On the whole, it seemed that they were not taught to defend their interests in symmetry - there is no need to hook with the right one and you boo the losing opponent in the queens !!! And so they climbed onto a petty hooligan, dragged each other by the beards, pulled by the crosses and that’s all! The point was set by the kotorya, which the censer trimmed both his own and that of another's father! She called the frightened fathers “okhalniki” and told me “draw up a protocol on both, on mine - too!” Well, what was left for me to do as a junior lieutenant, I picked up my jaw from the floor and drew up a “protocol on an administrative offense on both”! The prosecutor neighing like a horse, especially over the phrase in the report "at the request of the spouse of citizen" M ", to citizen" M ".
      By the way, in the evening both priests raked from the butt again, for the excessive use of "strong" drinks for "acquaintance" !!!
      Funny and sinful, but people in cassocks too !!! By the way, the last priest has 6 children, try to shoe them all, dress and educate !!! Do you want, do not want, but treat him with respect !!!
      1. bober1982 19 May 2020 14: 32 New
        • 2
        • 2
        0
        Quote: Kote Pan Kokhanka
        “Protocol on an administrative offense on both”

        Quote: Kote Pan Kokhanka
        The prosecutor neighing like a horse, especially over the phrase in the report

        Is an administrative offense reported to the prosecutor?
        1. Jünger 19 May 2020 15: 53 New
          • 4
          • 3
          +1
          Yes, a citizen made up the whole story. One moment only about the censer shows that the patient is lying.
  • Olgovich 19 May 2020 06: 01 New
    • 6
    • 6
    0
    On the other hand, Constantinople lost the political support of Rome (the West as a whole). Subsequently, the West did not support Constantinople when it was attacked by the Turks, and then fell under the pressure of the Ottoman Turks.


    lost support?
    Yes, the West could not really defend itself, remember Muslim Spain, the Turkish invasion of Central Europe ..
    1. Deniska999 19 May 2020 08: 02 New
      • 2
      • 3
      -1
      Just the same Arabs were stopped even under Poitiers. Even Spain was not completely captured. Yes, for some time they owned the Narbonne region, even alpine passes, but in general, European states managed to survive.
      1. Olgovich 19 May 2020 08: 43 New
        • 3
        • 4
        -1
        Quote: Deniska999
        Just the same Arabs were stopped even under Poitiers. Even Spain was not completely captured.

        Poitiers is the CENTER of France, by the way.
        Quote: Deniska999
        but in general, European states managed to survive.

        Yeah, this is VIENNA:

        16 century (Byzantium has not existed for a long time), and European states are still "standing in general." under .... VIENNA yes
        1. Deniska999 19 May 2020 08: 48 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          I spoke about the Arabs by the way. And apart from the Visigoth kingdom, not a single European state fell.
          And if you think that you have not survived, then answer the question: Has the Holy Roman Empire lost sovereignty? No. France? No. Italy? No. As a result, the Turks did not go further than the Danube. And how did the battle of Vienna end? The Turks lost.
          1. fuxila 20 May 2020 09: 30 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            And if you think that you have not survived, then answer the question: Has the Holy Roman Empire lost sovereignty? No. France? No. Italy? No. As a result, the Turks did not go further than the Danube. And how did the battle of Vienna end? The Turks lost.

            Most of Europe really survived, but the Balkan Peninsula (which is also Europe) was under Turkish rule and even today Constantinople and Adrianople (Edirne) remain Turkish. The lands north of the Danube were also captured - Wallachia and Hungary, i.e. lands to the Carpathians, including Slovakia. Also under the control of the Turks was the entire Northern Black Sea Region (also Europe), including part of Ukraine (Podolia). Italy as a state did not exist at that time, but Sicily and the southern part of Apenin were also at one time ruled by Muslims. In France they owned Septimania, and Spain, besides a tiny piece of land in Asturias, was completely under them.
    2. Edward Vashchenko 19 May 2020 08: 16 New
      • 8
      • 0
      +8
      I will support.
      The article is not bad, but the conclusions are strange.
      De jure, Rome and the Roman bishop were politically related to Constantinople, the friction was very long ago, but when in the XI century, once again, the pope felt independence, there was a "next" split, which became final.
      The latest recognition of the dependence of Rome on the Christian empire dates back to the 40s of the XNUMXth century.
      As for the "West", then he or his units are hostile to the Romans from the moment barbarian kingdoms began to form, which is an absolutely natural process.
      1. Kote Pan Kokhanka 19 May 2020 09: 04 New
        • 3
        • 1
        +2
        The venerable company good morning!
        Edward for criticism are not afraid to be persecuted by the authorities on the site of the "haves"? laughing
        Now on the topic.
        As for the "West", then he or his units are hostile to the Romans from the moment barbarian kingdoms began to form, which is an absolutely natural process.

        But after the fall of the Western Roman Empire, one of the barbarian kings sent imperial regalia to Constantinople! I forgot the name !!!
        Edward, as an example of your words, the struggle between the pope and the patriarch of Constantinople for the flock of Sicily is interesting! If there is a desire, I think a topic close to you. It would be interesting to read in your presentation !!! repeat
        Sincerely, Vlad !!!
        1. Edward Vashchenko 19 May 2020 14: 15 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          Vladislav,
          good day,
          But after the fall of the Western Roman Empire, one of the barbarian kings sent imperial regalia to Constantinople! I forgot the name !!!

          yes, it was Odoacer, the meaning, it seems to me, was that formally no one denied the power of New Rome - but did not want to have it at hand, by the way, the king is ready in Italy Theodoric, again, officially was the master of militum.
          Etc.
          And the topic is interesting, sometimes true, it is tempting to write, there is no temporary as usual, even the "Slavic" topic is skidding.
          hi
          1. Kote Pan Kokhanka 19 May 2020 14: 20 New
            • 2
            • 1
            +1
            Dear Edward, the main thing is that the soul lay on the topic! We voice our Wishlist, you choose to pamper us with your work or not to pamper !!!
            Sincerely, Vlad!
    3. Nehist 19 May 2020 08: 51 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      Greetings to Olgovich! That’s why I respect you for this reasoned position, although we disagree with you on some issues radically! I agree ... Europe at that time could not resist the east from the word Absolutely!
  • Undecim 19 May 2020 07: 22 New
    • 17
    • 4
    +13

    If we trace the history of Christianity, then at the heart of all church conflicts we will find exclusively financial interests, carefully hidden by theological differences.
    1. Pessimist22 19 May 2020 08: 25 New
      • 7
      • 2
      +5
      One sect, split into several sects, emphasizing their selfish interests. This is the essence of religion.
    2. Kote Pan Kokhanka 19 May 2020 08: 46 New
      • 4
      • 1
      +3
      My applause and tail shot !!!
      Regards, Vlad!
    3. dzvero 19 May 2020 11: 47 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      And everything reminds me of the genealogy of windows smile Here and DOS as the source, add-ons win3 and win95 / 98, the "new direction" winNT with its family, the "unity" winME, ryushechki and strange for the user policies seven, Vista and dozens ... smile
      1. Kote Pan Kokhanka 19 May 2020 14: 38 New
        • 7
        • 2
        +5
        At one time, my grandfather tried to unreasonably explain what the rake is made of! Yes, an ordinary wooden rake - to row hay in strada!
        The handle is made of birch, the lintel is linden, the stops (lateral struts) are ash or mountain ash, juniper teeth! 4 details - 4 species of wood !!! The question is, after half a century, one of our children and grandchildren will be able to make ordinary wooden rakes !!!
        By the way, their grandfather did them in the autumn with one ax and a hacksaw!
        To repeat his work, at least I need chisels, pliers, sandpaper, a hammer, wire and a pair of screws with a screwdriver! And to be honest, I wouldn’t refuse a Fraser, an electric fretsaw, a screwdriver and PVA glue!
        Funny and sinful, my father’s old hammer doesn’t crack, and I soak my new ones in the bathhouse or radically put them on mastic !!!
        So is religion, and DOS as well, the simpler the more clear !!!
        1. dzvero 19 May 2020 15: 57 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          Exactly. Peasant labor is much more complex and more intellectual than that of "office plankton." For example, I, too, will not be able to master this and probably would go your way smile
          As for religion - yes, the simpler the basics, the more understandable what people are talking about. But excessive simplification is unprofitable for clergy because it raises the question of their "need." What they strictly watched, plus the occupation of responsible "niches" - the formation of the lower classes and the "registry office" plus the most important thing - the support of the authorities and authorities.
  • bober1982 19 May 2020 07: 38 New
    • 5
    • 2
    +3
    Thank you for the article, not without errors, of course, although in such a compressed format, it probably will not work otherwise.
    The first signs of a split were identified not in 863-867, as the author indicated, but much earlier, in the IV-V centuries, primarily with the advent of the teachings of Bishop St. Augustine, which was alien to the teachings of non-Latin Churches.
    Further, disagreements only began to grow.
    1. Undecim 19 May 2020 09: 08 New
      • 9
      • 2
      +7
      Initially, Christianity was not absolutely monolithic; various trends were observed in it. Therefore, the first signs of a split were outlined in apostolic times.
      1. bober1982 19 May 2020 09: 16 New
        • 3
        • 3
        0
        Quote: Undecim
        Because the first signs of a split were outlined in apostolic times

        Heresies - yes, they started back in apostolic times, with which the Church began to fight from the moment of its appearance, but in no way signs of a split.
        It was the XNUMXthth centuries, the harbinger of a split.
  • kig
    kig 19 May 2020 07: 46 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    The Bolsheviks correctly spoke: religion is opium for the people.
    1. betta 19 May 2020 08: 50 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Unfortunately, the full quotation has a different meaning. On the other hand, it is easy to agree with such an interpretation.
    2. Kote Pan Kokhanka 19 May 2020 08: 51 New
      • 2
      • 2
      0
      Quote: kig
      The Bolsheviks correctly spoke: religion is opium for the people.

      Faith is a broader concept than religion !!! 9 centuries of Christianity played a cruel joke even on the stubborn Bolsheviks who baptized their children into the quiet !!! request
      As well as that, they tucked over his shoulder and knocked on a tree, as they scolded women with empty buckets, and cats with black tails !!!
      1. Nehist 19 May 2020 09: 06 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        And Faith and religion are generally different concepts! And not even compatible. We all believe in something or someone !!! And Religion is a set of actions, ceremonies invented by someone ...
        1. Kote Pan Kokhanka 19 May 2020 10: 55 New
          • 3
          • 3
          0
          Again, the "system administration" in the form of clergy simplifies the approach to God! Well, or guarantees the right approach.
          There is an interesting book “The Sacred Nativity Scene” about the popes, I advise you to count. Hard fiction.
          In fact, if it’s dry, religion is a set of rules about the right way to get a place in the afterlife !!! Moreover, all this is formed on the fact of understanding the inevitable end of the present.
          Our Orthodoxy is still a progressive project for the realization of the Divine. At least because the services are in their native language, and not in Latin!
          To be honest, only one thing infuriates me in the modern Russian Orthodox Church - bribery !!! For a person, his upbringing took place in the late Soviet Union, and his formation in the "holy nineties" is wild, which is essentially correct for the rules "do not kill", "do not steal", "do not cultivate your neighbor", etc. the price list is hidden for “wedding”, “baptism”, “funeral”, etc.
          Moreover, I have deep respect for individual members of the clergy. Some people deeply admire me, but when you see the “father” of a drunken man who has fallen out of Bentley and is trying to bless you with a cross-cell phone, you get sick.
          Yours!
          1. bober1982 19 May 2020 11: 25 New
            • 4
            • 4
            0
            Quote: Kote Pan Kokhanka
            In fact, if it’s dry, religion is a set of rules about the right way to get a place in the afterlife !!!

            How did you decide that?
            The church teaches that any person should consider himself worse than anyone, that you are a stinky bug (me, you and all the others), which is true.
            Work on yourself (me, you and everyone else), uproot your passions, fall and get up. The monks and priests themselves also consider themselves sinful people.
            You can break your forehead in the temple in bows, but this is not a pass to heaven.
          2. bober1982 19 May 2020 13: 04 New
            • 4
            • 3
            +1
            Quote: Kote Pan Kokhanka
            Some I deeply admire

            Dear Vladislav, whether it would be difficult to name these persons, this is not idle curiosity, I was interested.
          3. Nehist 19 May 2020 14: 01 New
            • 4
            • 0
            +4
            You should study about the schism in the Orthodox Church itself. Even before the phenomenon of schism. This is me about money-grubbers and not money-grubbers. A lot of interesting things .. All this has been going on since the times of Ivan ll. Especially sharp struggle was at the time of Ivan lll. So I have a negative attitude to any religion! (specifically to religion and its rites)
      2. kig
        kig 20 May 2020 01: 42 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        So, people believed in something without a formal religion. Is an empty bucket and a black cat - is that Christianity?
  • parusnik 19 May 2020 08: 18 New
    • 7
    • 2
    +5
    Christ, nervously smoking ... the second thousand years, looking at impostors acting on his behalf ... and hiding behind his name ...
  • betta 19 May 2020 08: 46 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    And those who were given the commandment "love ..." did this. How far are they from what they preach.
  • Jurkovs 19 May 2020 08: 56 New
    • 5
    • 1
    +4
    More and more often I remember my grandfather. Wake up in the morning, read our Father and all! No icons, no churches. In the evening, our Father will read again and sleep peacefully until morning. And he had priests to one place.
  • Trilobite Master 19 May 2020 12: 01 New
    • 9
    • 2
    +7
    I opened the article, looked at the author, thought - well, well, once I opened it, I’ll read it. I read it, I wanted to close it, but I thought - well, well, since I read the article, I will read the comments. I read the comments, I decided to leave one of my own. smile
    So.
    The essence of any religious organization is mediation between fictional "higher forces" and people, carried out on a reimbursable basis. Roughly - we represent you before God, you pay us for it. This essence does not change from the most ancient prehistoric times, when the first shamans began to receive bribes for their dances, to our time. Therefore, the basis of all religious differences at all times and in all regions of the planet is one thing - the distribution of material goods received by worshipers for their "work". All canonical, dogmatic and other differences serve only one purpose - to direct the flows of material goods in the right direction for specific people.
    It is completely incomprehensible to me why the author is trying to address theological issues in the article, since these issues are of secondary importance for highlighting the causes of the Great Schism, because discrepancies in theological issues are only an occasion, but not a cause of conflict between the pope and the patriarch. It is all the more strange to read the discussion about the filioque here, since the author himself understands these issues, apparently, no better than the well-known non-ruminant artiodactyls in the varieties of citrus fruits.
    In general, I want to say that this article, despite the extremely simplified understanding and presentation by the author of the reasons and the course of the conflict between the churches, personally did not cause me a persistent gag reflex, which is an undoubted progress for this author. However, I still note that the author did not go beyond the content of the article on the separation of churches that is available on Wikipedia. If you want to familiarize yourself with the question much more deeply, I can recommend this article for review. smile
    1. Catfish 19 May 2020 12: 34 New
      • 5
      • 2
      +3
      Great, Michael! No, just Great! good drinks
      A small illustration:
      1. bober1982 19 May 2020 13: 50 New
        • 5
        • 5
        0
        Such pictures are from the time of Miney Izrailevich Gubelman, one of the many party nicknames of which is Marianne, a clumsy and crude level of propaganda.
        1. Catfish 19 May 2020 16: 03 New
          • 8
          • 3
          +5
          However, the essence of the matter does not change from this. request
          1. Jünger 19 May 2020 17: 46 New
            • 3
            • 7
            -4
            Quote: Sea Cat
            However, the essence of the matter does not change from this.

            It just shows that you and Miney Izrailevich and Lev Davydovich, if not of the same blood, then certainly of the same spirit. And not the fact that the same mind. It is always useful to know what rank a person is.
            1. Catfish 19 May 2020 17: 56 New
              • 6
              • 1
              +5
              I am not familiar with either one or the other, although I heard “something” about Lev Davydovich. By the way, it’s very symptomatic that what you mentioned about blood, like any anti-Semitic Black Hundred, you and people like you, immediately look everywhere for the intrigues of the Jewish-Masonic slander. I must disappoint you, I'm not a Jew, alas. As for the mind, I believe that the one who pounds his forehead into the church floor is unlikely to have more than a person who does not do this.
              So with your "discharge" the question is completely clear. laughing
              1. Jünger 19 May 2020 20: 56 New
                • 3
                • 5
                -2
                Quote: Sea Cat
                like any anti-Semitic Black Hundred, you and people like you immediately look everywhere for the machinations of the Zhid Masonic libels

                Somehow you sharply recorded me in the slender ranks of anti-Semitic Black Hundreds smile Any hasty and unverified conclusions again indicate the immaturity of the mind.
                Leftists, by the way, are very inclined to throw accusations of anti-Semitism right and left. This is the direct cornerstone for your fraternity. smile
                1. Catfish 19 May 2020 21: 08 New
                  • 4
                  • 3
                  +1
                  And not the fact that the same mind.

                  ... testify to the immaturity of the mind.

                  You see, all the narrow-minded people who suffer from a lack of vocabulary are always trying to somehow offend their opponent. You are also no exception, and therefore I have nothing to talk with you about, for you have no other arguments besides a banal attempt to humiliate me.
                  1. Jünger 19 May 2020 21: 14 New
                    • 3
                    • 6
                    -3
                    I did not try to humiliate you. It’s just that when a person writes nonsense about the Church — like Rolexes and Mercedes, without knowing anything about it, he characterizes and humiliates himself.
                    1. Catfish 19 May 2020 21: 28 New
                      • 3
                      • 4
                      -1
                      I did not try to humiliate you.

                      Well, of course, I didn’t try ... Church defenders like you, except for harm, do nothing to her. As for the "formulaic nonsense", then I have already explained where and how I had the pleasure of communicating closely with priests. Reread from top to bottom. And enough of that, I'm tired of it, and you are not an interlocutor of interest.
                      1. Jünger 19 May 2020 23: 33 New
                        • 2
                        • 4
                        -2
                        Quote: Sea Cat
                        And enough about that, I'm tired of it, and you are not an interlocutor of interest

                        Enough is enough. Fables just do not need to be written about priests who pulled each other's crosses and a priest, which, they say, beat the priest with a censer.
                        Such nonsense, even children do not make a difference.
                      2. Catfish 19 May 2020 23: 43 New
                        • 2
                        • 0
                        +2
                        Fables just do not need to be written about priests who pulled each other's crosses and a priest that supposedly beat the priest with a censer. Even children do not make such rubbish.

                        I didn’t say a word about it, you said it yourself. request hi
                      3. Jünger 19 May 2020 23: 44 New
                        • 3
                        • 2
                        +1
                        Sure, I offer my deepest apologies hi Confused
  • Kote Pan Kokhanka 19 May 2020 14: 56 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    Michael and Konstantin my respect!
    The second time I clap my hands with all four paws and beat my tail in a tambourine !!!
    Sincerely, Vlad !!!
    R.s. Just the case when comments are more valuable than the article itself !!!
  • ugrums1961 19 May 2020 12: 11 New
    • 7
    • 1
    +6
    As Mikhail Nikolayevich Zadornov said it all starts because of attendants, Rome first wanted to gather attendants in Bulgaria and then Byzantium in the south, apenine is contention, and everything else is secondary, and of course, someone should be the foreman here, and the popes shouted first that they’re the chiefs and now the same thing is already happening in proclamation, the poor Patriarch of Constantinople wants to collect money from Ukraine and papidos for papism are the same as you were at the Roman bishops 1000 years ago, everything is repeated to the grandmother.
  • Operator 19 May 2020 15: 13 New
    • 3
    • 3
    0
    Christianity is a religion (originated in the 1st century in the Roman province of Palestine, the first preacher John the Baptist), the Christian church is a religious organization (originated in the 1st century in the capital of the Roman Empire, the first primate is the apostle Peter).

    In the 4th century, the Roman emperor Constantine transferred the capital of the empire to New Rome (formerly Byzantium) and made Christianity the state religion. In this connection, two primates arose in the Christian church: Roman with the official title "pontiff" (translated from Latin as a bridge builder - inherited from the main pagan priest of Rome) and New Roman with the official title "patriarch" (translated from the Greek elder of the clan - inherited from the Gospel, in the original written in Greek).

    The split of the Christian church into two parts (Greek Catholic - universal and Orthodox - Orthodox) occurred after the conquest of Rome by the Germans, who stimulated the separatism of local pontiffs to break away from a single Christian church centered in the empire capital of New Rome.
    1. Jünger 19 May 2020 17: 52 New
      • 2
      • 3
      -1
      Quote: Operator
      Christianity is a religion (originated in the 1st century in the Roman province of Palestine, the first preacher John the Baptist), the Christian church is a religious organization (originated in the 1st century in the capital of the Roman Empire, the first primate is the apostle Peter).

      The Apostles would be greatly surprised at this, since they did not at all consider Christianity to be the religion that arose in the first century. Christianity is all the same Judaism, but with special desire it can be called reformed. Christians call themselves the new Israel.
      1. Operator 19 May 2020 19: 08 New
        • 3
        • 3
        0
        Teach the materiel: Judaism is historically the religion of exclusively Jews (in connection with which they call themselves God's chosen ones), Christianity is the religion of people of any ethnicity ("there is neither Greek nor Jewish"). This is their fundamental difference, despite the common basis - the Old Testament.

        Another thing is that Judaism itself contained a legend about the coming of the Messiah, the Savior, and the followers of the universal teaching of Christ just considered it to be such. Orthodox Jews opposed the spread of their religion to all of humanity and killed Christ, after which, from the point of view of Christians, they became god-damned (not to mention the canonical difference between Yahweh and the Holy Trinity, the composition of the Bible, etc.).

        In addition, according to the definition of the Russian Orthodox Church, to consider Christianity a reformed Judaism means to fall into so-called heresy. Judaizing.
        1. Jünger 19 May 2020 20: 49 New
          • 3
          • 5
          -2
          I, my dear friend, do not need to learn this equipment - I know it very well, it bounces from my teeth.
          Quote: Operator
          historically religion exclusively Jews

          In the general case, yes, but with many exceptions. Neither the harlot, nor the righteous Job, nor the wife of the prophet Moses, for example, were Jews by blood. Like many others. However, Judaism is present and professed in the Old Testament.
          Quote: Operator
          This is their fundamental difference, despite the common basis - the Old Testament.

          Therefore, there is no fundamental difference in this. And the only fundamental difference in relation to the person of Jesus Christ.
          Quote: Operator
          not to mention the canonical difference between Yahweh and the Holy Trinity

          We Christians believe in the same Old Testament Yahweh and honor the Old Testament Jewish prophets. Just, to some extent, revealed the structure of God.
          Quote: Operator
          In addition, according to the definition of the Russian Orthodox Church, to consider Christianity a reformed Judaism means to fall into so-called heresy. Judaizing

          You somehow strange understand the word "reformed". The heresy of the Judaizers consists in denying the divinity of Jesus. But they are different reforms and most of them are described in the New Testament.
          And nowhere and never did the apostle Paul say that he was the founder of a new religion. And he said, "Jesus Christ yesterday and this day, and forever."
          It seems to have stated everything very clearly.
  • Astra wild 19 May 2020 21: 47 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    “that is, the issue of property and income”, of course, we must be above the worldly, but the hierarchs decided that in heaven they would be above the worldly, and on earth we would compete for income
  • Operator 19 May 2020 23: 59 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    Quote: Junger
    Neither the harlot, nor the righteous Job, nor the wife of the prophet Moses, for example, were Jews by blood

    And what does blood origin have to do with it? Judaism (unlike Christianity) initially demanded that those who wish to convert to this religion must necessarily become Jewish, i.e. assimilate culturally and linguistically and break all ties with their relatives.

    For your information: the Jews (who were called Habiru in paganism) are full mestizos and consist of a quarter of southern Semites - relatives of Arabs from the Arabian Peninsula (line of Abraham), a quarter of northern Semites - relatives of Asia Minors from the Anatolian Peninsula and a quarter of Hamites - relatives of the Egyptians. A similar motley composition of the habiru was associated with the peculiarity of West Semitic paganism - the temple prostitution of its female adherents.
    1. Jünger 20 May 2020 08: 46 New
      • 2
      • 3
      -1
      Quote: Operator
      And what does the origin of blood

      When you wrote -
      historically, the religion is exclusively Jews (in connection with which they call themselves God's chosen), Christianity is the religion of any people ethnic background

      You mentioned ethnicity. In my opinion, this is precisely blood. You cannot become Russian, Jewish or German without being the same blood. As far as I remember, if a non-Jew became a "Jew" through the rite, then he was still struck by his rights.
      Quote: Operator
      and break all ties with your relatives.

      Well, Christians, too, are not so clear. If you read the rules of the Ecumenical Councils, then you cannot even sit alone at a table with a Gentile — weaning is possible. It’s just that it’s inconvenient to recall now, because we have a supposedly united tolerant international family of peoples. laughing
      Being a Christian and communicating with relatives of other faiths is extremely problematic. So the Jews here do not offer anything original.
      Quote: Operator
      Jews (in paganism called Habiru) are full mestizos and consist of a quarter of southern Semites - relatives of Arabs from the Arabian Peninsula (Abraham line), a quarter of northern Semites

      All that remains is to take off the hat. hi
  • Operator 20 May 2020 11: 44 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    Quote: Junger
    You cannot become Russian, Jewish or German without being the same blood. As far as I remember, if a non-Jew became a "Jew" through the rite, then he was still struck by his rights

    It is even possible - since an ethnos is characterized only by language and culture. For example, modern Russians only comprise 50% of the carriers of the dominant haplogroup R1a, the rest belong to the first settlers of the European subcontinent - Illyrians (about 20% of carriers of haplogroups I1 and I2), Asian migrants ugrofinns (15% N1c1) and erbins (6% R1b) , as well as other smaller in number immigrants from other ethnic groups (including 1% of Mongolian C2 carriers).

    The present mixed Ukrainians, Belarusians and other Slavs, Germans, Scandinavians, Turks, Syrians, Iraqis, Iranians, etc. have the same mixed composition by historical origin. Genetically homogeneous (80 or more percent of the carriers of the dominant haplogroup) are the few modern ethnic groups - the British, Irish, Spaniards, French, Chinese, Japanese, Mongols, Chechens and some others.

    Along with homogeneous ethnic groups, there are completely mixed breeds (without any dominant haplogroup) - Jews, Greeks, Bulgarians, Tatars, Central Asians, Kazakhs, residents of the West Indies and some other regions.

    PS Converts to Judaism do have some religious restrictions, but only in the first generation.
    1. Selevc 20 May 2020 13: 08 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      I want to note one point regarding the topic of the article - not very bright but super important ... After the division of the churches, the entire world political history was rewritten and nonsense terms such as the Byzantine Empire or the Orthodox Greek religion were inserted into it ...
      The name Byzantium is completely invented by historians and taken from the name of a small provincial city of the country ... It's like calling Britain Bristol and France Marcel ... This is inserted into history at the request of the West, which first required to call the East Roman Empire the Empire of Constantinople and then just took the name from the country ...
      In modern world history, there are the so-called Dark Ages - but they are really dark only for the states of Western Europe, and vice versa this is the heyday of the East Roman Empire .. This period is completely dirty, blackened and perverted for the sake of the dogmas of Catholicism ...
      1. Operator 20 May 2020 14: 05 New
        • 0
        • 2
        -2
        You are right - however, the distortion of the true names of the Roman Empire ("Byzantium") and New Rome ("Constantinople") occurred not only through the fault of Western historians, but also by domestic idolaters of the cargo cult, who are still following the former.

        At the same time, the meaning of establishing Moscow as the third Rome in the 15th century after the fall of the second Rome (aka New) and the founding of the Russian Kingdom in the 16th century as the successor to the Roman Empire is completely lost.

        T.N. The Holy Roman Empire of the German nation, established on an empty place in the 16th century and losing its ends in the 19th century, existed in the form of a loose confederation of European Catholic states of variable composition with an un-Roman capital, compared to the Third Rome - a dwarf with clay legs.
    2. Jünger 20 May 2020 14: 17 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Quote: Operator
      For example, modern Russians only comprise 50% of the carriers of the dominant haplogroup R1a, the rest belong to the first settlers of the European subcontinent

      In other words, you want to say that among the Russians there are a huge mass of people who, calling themselves Russian, in fact, are not. This is holy truth.
      No culture and language can make a Levite a Jew unless he is a descendant of Aaron.
      Those. it doesn’t matter what a person calls himself, if in fact this is not so.
      1. Operator 20 May 2020 15: 34 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quite the opposite: ethnic Russian, Jew, German, etc. any person can become a native of any haplogroup, but on one condition: he must abandon his language and culture and switch to Russian, Hebrew, German, etc. language and culture (undergo the so-called linguistic and cultural assimilation).

        In the case of the transition to the Russian or, for example, Jewish ethnic group, it is also necessary to change religion - respectively, to Orthodoxy or Judaism. For Germans professing Protestantism and Catholicism or, for example, for Ossetians professing Christianity and Islam, the latter condition is not necessary.
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. Jünger 20 May 2020 16: 15 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          Quote: Operator
          Quite the opposite: ethnic Russian, Jew, German, etc. any person can become a carrier of any haplogroup

          Well, yes, everything is as in the picture

          But in reality, Cannon does not become a fish, regardless of assimilation, religion and culture.
          1. Operator 20 May 2020 18: 35 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            The place of birth does not matter for attributing a person to one or another ethnic group - in your example, Hassan is clearly not at odds with the Scandinavian culture.

            To understand the issue, Leo Tolstoy was a carrier of the minor Illyrian haplogroup I1 (and not the dominant R1a, like 50% of Russians). At the same time, Alexander Pushkin was a purebred Russian (R1a) - from the point of view of male affinity, of course.
  • nnz226 20 May 2020 13: 40 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    "Money is blaming everything, money, money! All evil is from them ...!" And all this tinsel about heresies and other rites, symbols of faith, etc. - a smokescreen covering the sharing of income. And Christ drove the merchants out of the temple ...
    1. Doliva63 20 May 2020 17: 51 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      "Christ expelled merchants from the temple"
      Have you seen it yourself? laughing
  • Sergey Sfiedu 20 May 2020 18: 13 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The reason for the split is the weakness of the Eastern Roman Empire. Formally, Rome and the Papal region were the territory of the Romans, part of the Ravenna Exarchate. But the raven exarchs themselves could not defend themselves, not like Rome. After the fall of Ravenna and the lack of Rome’s troops in Rome and the general lack of any help from Constantinople, the pope turned out to be left to their own devices and became independent, in many respects against their will (to be left alone with bloodthirsty lombards is still a pleasure). And it should be noted - the popes managed to emerge victorious in the confrontation with the Lombards, and even with their new defenders - the Frankish emperors of the West. Well, why did they now need the basileus and the patriarch from Byzantium?
  • Shahno 23 May 2020 13: 45 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Beringovsky
    Quote: The Truth
    ... Only the ascent to God isolated from the primates of man. Without this ascent, you would still be sitting on a palm tree and eating only bananas ...

    In fact, God (or gods) is an invention of the human mind not so distant from us.
    Before that, there was a cult of nature, ancestral spirits, etc. If you could ask a question about gods to people of that distant era, then they would not even understand what you are talking about. They did not have such a concept, approximately as a person of the 15th century did not have a concept of, say, "electronics" or "genetics".
    Even at the dawn of mankind, in ancient Sumer or Egypt, and even in Greece and Rome, the gods are more likely not omnipotent and omniscient entities, but something like superhumans with superpowers (even very super))))
    But otherwise they are the same as the people who invented them. They also quarrel, reconcile, deceive each other or vice versa. In general, they do everything the same as ordinary people who thought up how much imagination they had.
    So at first people appeared, and only after they invented the gods when they needed them.

    Well, the problem is that neither your point of view, nor the opposite or intermediate has been proved .. Based on our axioms that our consciousness dictated to us, it is impossible to say “True” or “False”.