Why did Stalin revive the Church?

158
Why did Stalin revive the Church?


Opium for the people


It is worth noting that the Russian Church has been in deep crisis since the time of the Great Schism (Great split. Why did they destroy "Light Russia"; Part 2; Part 3). Since that time, the people and the government have been irrevocably moving away from each other. The best part of the Russian people is going into schism. Old Believers refuse lies, alcohol and tobacco, and create national capital based on work ethics.



There is a gradual loss of living faith and a decline in the authority of the church. Official Nikonian Orthodoxy is degenerating, becoming shallow, and becoming a semblance. The caricatured pop money-grubber, along with the corrupt official, becomes one of the most disliked images among the people. In the final we get the disaster of 1917-1920. Exploded and destroyed churches. And the complete indifference of the people.

The revolutionaries, destroying tsarism, autocracy, Orthodoxy, and “old Russia” in general, destroyed Russian civilization in general and its foundations. Russian culture, education and history. Together with the tsars, Lomonosov, Pushkin, Lermontov, Suvorov, Ushakov, Kutuzov, Skobelev and other “stranglers and holdovers” went “under the knife.”

As they sang in the International:

The whole world of violence we will destroy
To the ground, and then
We are ours, we will build a new world.

The new world was cosmopolitan, international. Another version of “Babylon”, but under the banner of Marxism. He did not envision the preservation of historical Russia and the Russian superethnos.

However, the internationalist revolutionaries, with their outright atheism and godlessness, almost at the level of Satanism, were also disgusting to the Russian people. The basis of the Russian code-matrix is ​​truth-justice, living according to conscience (ethics of conscience). And Russian Orthodoxy, which has absorbed the foundations of the pre-Christian Russian faith, stands on this.

Stalin and the church


Stalin was a Russian communist, that is, a spokesman for the interests of the people. Joseph was a seminarian, a poet with a certain gift. He went through a difficult and thorny path, got to know the people and their aspirations well. In addition, Russian communism (Bolshevism) in its origins had the same principles as original Christianity. Ethics of conscience and honest work. A call for justice: Jesus also expelled merchants and money-changers from the temple.

Therefore, the anti-Russian policy, which included persecution of Orthodoxy with the goal of completely destroying it as part of Russian history and culture, clearly did not suit Stalin. Already in the 1930s, on his initiative, the names of Russian commanders, heroes, the exploits of the Russian army, the names of princes and kings who worked for the strengthening of our state were returned to Soviet history and education. The “great purge” also began, when most of the Trotskyists, internationalist revolutionaries and a possible “fifth column” in a future world war were able to be neutralized (How Stalin defeated the "fifth column"; The riddle of the "great purge" of 1937 of the year).

Stalin consistently restored Russian traditions in culture, education, and foreign policy (the return of the Baltic states, Western Belarus and Ukraine, Bessarabia). Soon the time came for a radical change in the attitude of the state to the church.

During the Great Patriotic War, German propaganda, on the one hand, tried to play on the feelings of believers and the atheism of the Soviet regime. But without much success. Society in Russia, even before the creation of the USSR, treated religion formally. On the other hand, the Soviet government beat the enemy in the information war. Christians, Muslims, and other faiths actively joined the holy war against the Nazis. The Nazis with their misanthropic ideology were the enemies of all Soviet people. Religious communities actively raised funds to fight the Nazis. In total, during the war years, Orthodox believers and clergy collected more than 300 million rubles for the Defense Fund, not counting donated material assets.

Stalin's meeting with church hierarchs


On January 5, 1943, Metropolitan Sergius in a telegram asked Stalin to open a bank account for the Patriarchate for the centralized deposit of collected funds into the Defense Fund. The Supreme Commander-in-Chief agreed. The legalization process has begun. Since the spring of 1943, the country's leadership discussed options for pursuing a new course towards the church. The People's Commissariat of State Security (NKGB) collected materials on the state of affairs in the church, information about hierarchs, the patriotic activities of the clergy, etc. Stalin carefully familiarized himself with them, who was interested in the views of the clergy, their life and way of life during the war years.

On September 4, 1943, Stalin, in the presence of Vyacheslav Molotov and KGB officer Georgy Karpov, received Metropolitans Sergius (Stragorodsky), Alexy (Simansky) and Nikolai (Yarushevich) in the Kremlin. Stalin gave a positive assessment of the patriotic activities of the church during the war years and invited the hierarchs to speak out about pressing problems.

The metropolitans proposed reviving the institution of the patriarch; open new churches and religious educational institutions; to publish a monthly magazine; provide the clergy with the right to be elected to the executive bodies (church councils) of religious societies; ease the taxation of clergy; granting parish societies the right to donate funds to religious centers; allow you to organize your production. It was also intended to create a body for interaction between the Russian Orthodox Church and the government - the Council for the Affairs of the Russian Orthodox Church under the Council of People's Commissars. The council was headed by G. Karpov.

Sergius raised the issue of persecution of the clergy, the need to increase the number of parishes, the release of bishops and priests who were in exile, prisons, camps and the provision of the opportunity to unhindered worship, free movement around the country and registration in cities. Stalin promised to “study the issue.” The Supreme Commander suggested that Sergius prepare lists of priests in captivity.


Georgy Grigorievich Karpov (1898–1967). From September 1943 to February 1960 - Chairman of the Council for the Affairs of the Russian Orthodox Church under the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR (later - under the Council of Ministers of the USSR)

Bishops' Council


On September 8, 1943, a Council was held in the new building of the Patriarchate (the former residence of the German ambassador - Chisty Lane, building 5), which brought together 19 hierarchs (3 metropolitans, 11 archbishops and 5 bishops). The Council unanimously elected Metropolitan Sergius as Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus'.

The newly elected patriarch informed Stalin about the elections in a personal letter. The Council adopted:

1) a declaration on the condemnation of traitors to the faith and the Fatherland from among the clergy and believers who have stained themselves with betrayal and collaboration with the occupiers;

2) an appeal to the Soviet government, in which gratitude was expressed for attention to the “needs of the Russian Orthodox Church” and blessing for the works of the USSR government;

3) an appeal to all Christians of the world

“to unite amicably, brotherly, firmly and powerfully in the name of Christ for the final victory over the common enemy.”

The enthronement of the Moscow Patriarch with a huge crowd of believers took place on September 12 at the Epiphany Cathedral. In his first patriarchal message, Sergius called on believers to “work to cleanse the church fence of any disorder", arrange parish life according to church rules, protect the Orthodox faith, and participate in every possible way in the nationwide feat of resisting the invaders.


Bishops' Council of the Russian Orthodox Church September 8, 1943

As a result, over the next five years (1944-1948) on the territory of the Soviet Union, where at the beginning of the Great War there were, according to various sources, from 150 to 400 active parishes, hundreds of churches and even one monastery were opened - the Trinity Lavra of St. Sergius. Thousands of churches were registered, opened by the believers themselves in the territories occupied by the Germans. The number of Orthodox communities (including reunited Uniate ones) has grown, according to some sources, to 22 thousand. The repressed clergy were amnestied. The direct persecution of Christians by the “Union of Militant Atheists” stopped. The state stopped supporting schismatic renovationist structures, which were liquidated by 1946.

Thus, the state and the church began to coexist peacefully. Moreover, under Stalin the state supported Orthodoxy in one way or another. Under Khrushchev, who, in essence, was preparing the country for “perestroika” - collapse, Orthodoxy was again under attack. After the collapse of the USSR, the revival of the Russian Orthodox Church began. However, in the era of the dominance of Western materialism, it resulted in the commercialization of the church, which, forgetting about Russian national interests, became mired in the love of money. Again formalism and appearance, serving the interests of the “prince of this world.”

One of the areas of this crisis was the situation with the Orthodox Church in Russian Ukraine, where schismatics openly sided with the new Ukrainian Nazis - Bandera.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

158 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +15
    4 September 2023
    in the era of the dominance of Western materialism, it resulted in the commercialization of the church
    Which is very unfortunate....The Church and the State must exist separately, without interfering in each other's affairs.
    1. -4
      4 September 2023
      Must? Where and when was this? The state will not let go of such a huge financial institution. And it is right.
      1. +23
        4 September 2023
        Quote: Andrey Moskvin
        financial institution the state will not let go

        Oh well ! Churches were given so many preferences, from the sale of alcohol without excises, to tax breaks. And the state has no income from the church. The Church is a state within a state. And still climbs into secular life!
        1. 0
          4 September 2023
          Yeltsin allowed alcohol and tobacco without excise duty. Is this still going on?!
        2. +11
          4 September 2023
          ROC is the most successful commercial enterprise in the Russian Federation!
        3. +2
          4 September 2023
          Quote: Uncle Lee
          Quote: Andrey Moskvin
          financial institution the state will not let go

          Oh well ! Churches were given so many preferences, from the sale of alcohol without excises, to tax breaks. And the state has no income from the church. The Church is a state within a state. And still climbs into secular life!

          Climbs and serves the interests of the authorities, not believers.
          The Russian Orthodox Church has ALWAYS served the authorities.
        4. +6
          4 September 2023
          Quote from Uncle Lee
          Churches were given so many preferences from the sale of alcohol without excise taxes

          For a long time there are no excise tax benefits on cigarettes and alcohol
          1. 0
            4 September 2023
            I thought so too. At least three are vehemently opposed. sad
          2. 0
            4 September 2023
            Quote: your1970
            Quote from Uncle Lee
            Churches were given so many preferences from the sale of alcohol without excise taxes

            For a long time there are no excise tax benefits on cigarettes and alcohol

            They have other perks. The president himself patronizes them.
        5. +2
          4 September 2023
          Quote from Uncle Lee
          Churches were given so many preferences, from the sale of alcohol without excises, to tax breaks.
          Well, what did you want? Non-possessors were declared heresy and crushed under Ivan 3 (it seems). And this despite all vows of poverty.
        6. -3
          4 September 2023
          Dear Uncle Lee! The Russian Orthodox Church never "climbs into secular life" .... This is secular life, in the person of Statesmen it climbs into it ... Please note: all the leaders of the state, on the days of patronal holidays with candles, in cathedrals - every single one - is " one side of the coin "... And the other" side "- the state has one hope for the church (religion) - to create at least some kind of ideological platform (clamp) for the population of the country, instead of the destroyed one - the Soviet one. In capitalist Russia, for 30 years of "brainwashing" the population of the country, they brought up generations of "indifferent" - egoists, "sharpened" for the dollar and personal well-being, pacifism ... And war requires other people, with a different ideology - Soviet (Christian): patriots devoted to their Motherland, people, the idea of ​​building a just anti-fascist society ... The state, over 30 years of its capitalist development, "lost" everything that strengthened, "cemented" the nation, raised and mobilized it for exploits on the battlefields and in the rear .... We need ideological "bonds", but they are not there, they are even deleted from the Constitution ....
    2. +7
      4 September 2023
      The Church and the State cannot exist separately from each other, since both are a system of laws and rules. Moreover, the system of worldly laws and rules, which is the state, basically has a system of spiritual laws and rules, laws and rules of human morality, which is the church. Ultimately, all government laws and regulations are based on God's Ten Commandments.
    3. +10
      4 September 2023
      The church is a tool in the hands of the ruling exploiting class, and therefore no one will allow the church to exist separately, this is a utopia, they will not let go of the tool.
      1. +13
        4 September 2023
        In fact, the participation of the Church in public affairs and politics is contrary to the very essence of Christianity. Jesus Christ Himself said, "My kingdom is not of this world..." John 18:36
        1. +11
          4 September 2023
          And if a statesman, before making an important decision, seeks advice from a confessor, how is that? Participation of the Church in state affairs or not?
          1. +10
            4 September 2023
            There is no single answer here, since we are already moving into the realm of faith. I believe that a confessor cannot directly tell a statesman what exactly to do, otherwise it will be interference in state affairs. However, he can always pray for him. This is my answer as I believe.
            1. +12
              4 September 2023
              In South Korea, the confessor told the president what to do.
              As a result, both went to prison.
              1. +2
                4 September 2023
                Giving advice is a risky business. First of all, it belittles the role of the other person in decision making. In this case, one can raise the question of the incompetence of a statesman. Even if a person asks for advice, he may have already made a decision himself, but he wants to see how others think.
              2. -7
                4 September 2023
                Alexander 1971, There is no Orthodoxy in South Korea, your example is unsuccessful, there is 98% Catholicism, learn mate. Part.
                1. +1
                  4 September 2023
                  there is 98% Catholicism, learn mate. Part.

                  I would like to clarify with a specialist in South Korea - 98 percent of what?
          2. +9
            4 September 2023
            Quote: Pavel73
            And if a statesman, before making an important decision, seeks advice from a confessor, how is that? Participation of the Church in state affairs or not?

            In fact, he should turn to specialists.
        2. +1
          4 September 2023
          You tell the authorities about it, otherwise they don’t know about it
        3. 0
          4 September 2023
          Quote: Glock-17
          In fact, the participation of the Church in public affairs and politics is contrary to the very essence of Christianity. Jesus Christ Himself said, "My kingdom is not of this world..." John 18:36

          And who then do you think is Sergius of Radonezh, who not only blessed Dmitry Donskoy during the Battle of Kulikovo, but also gave him two monks to help him - Peresvet and Oslyabya?
          1. -1
            5 September 2023
            Those monks were strange: lovers of cutting and cutting, killing people in battle. Which put with the device on the 5th commandment "Thou shalt not kill" and did the right thing - for the reality of that Rus' was much more complicated than the abstract Bible with Hebrew stories. Among predators, one must be a predator.

            Those. they are not monks, but simply fighters, professional wars - maybe their prince simply sent them to the monastery to guard the preacher Sergius of Radozhensky he needed? Many historians are inclined to believe that Dmitry Donskoy simply pushed Sergius upstairs of the church so that she would work for him. And he really did not need Sergius to be suddenly "removed" - that's why he gave him two bodyguards disguised as monks. But before the battle, modest Sergius returned them to the prince ...

            Sergius was far from fighting for ranks, he liked to live in the wilderness, and in the end he simply refused to become a metropolitan. And the prince could not persuade him.

            Donskoy then appointed the poorly educated Mityai as metropolitan, but Mityai suddenly died on the way to Constantinople (for approval of the candidacy there) - the priests poisoned ... and instead they brought a new metropolitan, Pimen, to Moscow.

            https://cyrillitsa.ru/history/58273-kak-possorilis-dmitriy-donskoy-i-ser.html

            Just wild medieval intrigues, nothing to do with the leaf picture of holiness, spirituality, morality...

            People who go out to fight and fight there to the death, as our ancestors did on the Kulikovo field, are simply 1000 times better than priests who don’t go out to fight, don’t take risks and bring ancient Hebrew tales to the people for money ... and cling to any battle won . They did not win the battle, do not fasten them to it. Sergius is head and shoulders above them all, but he also simply returned two bodyguards to their prince, for he did not see the point in wasting their lives to protect his life when the Motherland was in danger. That's all, without any zaum, spirituality, morality ...
      2. +11
        4 September 2023
        Quote: Quiet Don
        The Church is a tool in the hands of the ruling exploiting class
      3. +2
        4 September 2023
        Quote: Quiet Don
        no one will allow the church to exist separately
        The Church preaches faith in God, and the state of the USSR - faith in "scientific" atheism. Do you see any separate existence here?
      4. 0
        4 September 2023
        And in those days what exploitative class dominated?
      5. +1
        7 September 2023
        Your comment would have been correct before 1905, when you had to go to communion once a year, get a certificate and submit it to the required place. Now truly believing Orthodox Christians in the Russian Orthodox Church make up only 3-4% of the population. There are probably 10 percent sympathizers. The rest are either neutral (that is, don’t care at all) or negative. What tool?! Now the Russian Orthodox Church is rather a “toxic asset” for the state, since there are many more neutral and “negative” people than believers and sympathizers.
        1. 0
          10 September 2023
          The percentage of citizens of our country who wish their country to be defeated is much higher than that of believers
          By your logic, they are a “non-toxic asset”.
          Should the state focus on them?
          Among the believers, the overwhelming majority take a patriotic position, help is constantly collected, is this a "toxic asset" in your opinion?
          If Orthodoxy were as the author of this “brilliant” work describes it, why so much effort to destroy it in Ukraine?
    4. +2
      4 September 2023
      Quote: Uncle Lee
      in the era of the dominance of Western materialism, it resulted in the commercialization of the church
      Which is very unfortunate....The Church and the State must exist separately, without interfering in each other's affairs.

      According to the Constitution, it is. However, the current ROC actively interferes in the affairs of the state.
      1. +1
        4 September 2023
        Quote: Ulan.1812
        According to the Constitution, it is. However, the current ROC actively interferes in the affairs of the state.

        Examples of "active intervention in the affairs of the state" please give.
    5. -1
      4 September 2023
      Quote from Uncle Lee
      Which is very unfortunate....The Church and the State must exist separately, without interfering in each other's affairs.
      Yes, you, my friend, are a heretic! Familiarize yourself with what "symphony" is in the ecclesiastical sense. The priests really want to merge with the authorities in ecstasy, they have such a doctrine.
    6. -1
      10 September 2023
      Yes, Stalin is a Russian patriot...Although he was the illegitimate son of the Armenian merchant Alikhanov from Gori...Nostradamus wrote in quatrains: ""The Armenian Prince reigns in the northern country...."".
  2. +6
    4 September 2023
    Why did Stalin revive the Church?

    The church is the same instrument of government as the secular power. And where worldly power ends, spiritual power begins, which completely submits to worldly power...
    1. -2
      4 September 2023
      Quote: Luminman
      Why did Stalin revive the Church?

      The church is the same instrument of government as the secular power. And where worldly power ends, spiritual power begins, which completely submits to worldly power...
      No. Stalin revived the church to receive Lend-Lease.
      1. -2
        6 September 2023
        Quote: bk0010
        Quote: Luminman
        Why did Stalin revive the Church?

        The church is the same instrument of government as the secular power. And where worldly power ends, spiritual power begins, which completely submits to worldly power...
        No. Stalin revived the church to receive Lend-Lease.

        I have never read more nonsense
        1. -1
          6 September 2023
          Quote: Andrey VOV
          I have never read more nonsense
          Facts cannot be nonsense. Enlighten yourself: https://ruskline.ru/opp/2018/sentyabr/03/s_pervyh_dnej_vojny_ruzvelt_uvyazyval_lendliz_s_prekraweniem_gonenij_na_cerkov/
  3. +11
    4 September 2023
    It would be strange if Khrushchev, having come to power, as regards religion and the Church, did not act in the opposite way to how Stalin acted on the same issues during and after the Second World War. By the way, Khrushchev and his lackeys brazenly and shamelessly turned the Ten Commandments of God into the Moral Code of the Builders of Communism.
    As for the fact that the people of Russia, who believed in the Orthodox Church for a thousand years, did not betray Stalin for the churches destroyed by the Bolsheviks at the beginning of Soviet power, this is evidence that at the end of the reign of the Romanovs, the Orthodox Church did not justify people’s faith in this institution, as
    mediator between God in Heaven and man on Earth. But this did not mean that people suddenly became atheists. No. People stopped trusting the priests of that time.
    But the most dangerous were and are not the explosions of Church cathedrals by the Bolsheviks, but today former Soviet communists breaking themselves at the altars and on the porch, crossing themselves on their foreheads. Especially how they and how many of them suddenly became believers in God in the nineties. No, well, just yesterday a political officer or an instructor of the party committee, or even some kind of KGB colonel, cursed both the Orthodox Church and the Orthodox Faith, and today they are already hurting their foreheads by crossing themselves and bowing in the front rows at the altars in Churches! Ask where they got this from? And they have all this from the fake Moral Code of the Builder of Communism, which Khrushchev simply stole from the Christian religion, persecuting and humiliating this religion with his actions and deeds. As Vasily Shukshin’s hero said, this is stolen
    1. +10
      4 September 2023
      Have you tried to compare these commandments yourself?
    2. 0
      4 September 2023
      Sever2, your indignation would be appropriate in the early 90s, but not 30 years later, most of the "repainted" communists lie in the ground, this is the first, and second, you do not admit that while gaining life experience, people simply come to God, regardless of whether they were communists or atheists before, the same thing is happening now in the NWO.
      1. +4
        4 September 2023
        Quote: okean969
        Sever2, your indignation would be appropriate in the early 90s, but not 30 years later, most of the "repainted" communists lie in the ground, this is the first, and second, you do not admit that while gaining life experience, people simply come to God, regardless of whether they were communists or atheists before, the same thing is happening now in the NWO.

        Officials? I don't allow
        They are just pretending to win the favor of the boss.
        Under Yeltsin, they played tennis indiscriminately, under the current one they threw them into the church in order to comply and without exception became "believers."
        Even Zyuganov. Hypocrites and opportunists.
        1. +1
          4 September 2023
          It also doesn't fit. yesterday vofka Dimon Rogozin bawlers communists atheists and today they are grimacing in front of the TV. It's disgusting. hypocrites
          I was taught at school if you are not sure about something, if you are weak, then work on yourself. Work on your education, health and rely only on yourself.
          People begin to believe in the Almighty if they are not morally drawn out in a war or in prison
          Religion is beneficial for the state itself to keep the cattle in humility
    3. +3
      4 September 2023
      Quote: north 2
      By the way, Khrushchev and his lackeys brazenly and shamelessly turned the Ten Commandments of God into the Moral Code of the Builders of Communism.
      Seriously? Let's compare. Let me remind you of the 10 commandments:
      1. Honor God and serve Him alone
      2. Do not make yourself an idol
      3. Do not take the name of the Lord your God in vain
      4. Remember the Sabbath
      5. Honor thy father and mother
      6. Don't kill
      7. Do not commit adultery
      8. Don't steal
      9. Do not bear false witness against your neighbor
      10. Do not desire anything that your neighbor has
      The code of ethics of the builder of communism:
      1. Devotion to the cause of communism, love for the socialist motherland, for the countries of socialism;
      2. Conscientious work for the benefit of society: who does not work, he does not eat;
      3. Everyone's concern for the preservation and multiplication of the public domain;
      4. High consciousness of public duty, intolerance to violations of public interests;
      5. Collectivism and comradely mutual assistance: each for all, all for one;
      6. Humane relations and mutual respect between people: man is friend to man, comrade and brother;
      7. Honesty and truthfulness, moral purity, simplicity and modesty in public and private life;
      8. Mutual respect in the family, concern for the upbringing of children;
      9. Irreconcilability to injustice, parasitism, dishonesty, careerism, money-grubbing;
      10. Friendship and brotherhood of all peoples of the USSR, intolerance towards national and racial hostility;
      11. Intolerance towards the enemies of communism, the cause of peace and the freedom of peoples;
      12. Fraternal solidarity with the working people of all countries, with all peoples.
      Well, do they overlap?
  4. +8
    4 September 2023
    Under Khrushchev, who, in essence, was preparing the country for "perestroika" - collapse, Orthodoxy was again under attack.


    All the achievements of Stalin ..... Khrushchev (by the way, he demolished an order of magnitude more churches), but for priests he is so-so, not bad, but Stalin is simply a fiend. Or maybe under Stalin they simply had no place, or rather, less and less believed, and the trend was depressing for them.
    1. -4
      4 September 2023
      It is a myth. Under Khrushchev, about 7000 churches were closed, and only in 1936-38 about 12.000. Most importantly, under Khrushchev, they were not shot for the mere fact of belonging to church ministers. Of course, Khrushchev's persecution caused serious damage to the Russian Orthodox Church, but compared to Stalin's, it was not so terrible. Temples were closed, but people remained alive and well.
      After 1948, Stalin became very cold towards the Church and no new churches were opened.
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. +3
        4 September 2023
        Quote: Reader
        . Of course, Khrushchev’s persecutions caused serious damage to the Russian Orthodox Church, but compared to Stalin’s, it was not so terrible. Temples were closed, but people remained alive and well.

        If the goal of a person’s life is just to stay alive and healthy, then the church is not needed at all and is even harmful.
        1. -5
          4 September 2023
          It's good to talk about someone's life on the sofa.
  5. +11
    4 September 2023
    As they sang in the International:
    The whole world of violence we will destroy
    To the ground, and then
    We are ours, we will build a new world.

    Who was nothing will become everything.
    And the verse takes on a completely different meaning.
    1. +5
      4 September 2023
      I agree with you, the author did not bother to work out the issue, he revealed the topic superficially, more like slandering the Church than covering a rather complex and voluminous issue.
  6. 0
    4 September 2023
    "The twentieth century is cruel and terrible.
    Two wars, autocracy of slaves,
    And science is in a bloody fire
    Out of unbelief he will raise gods."
    It seems to be from Nostradamus... I remember it by heart. What was clear before, but what is now happening in the churches (Orthodox and Catholic)... does not lend itself. And it is impossible to restore order; moral values ​​and shrines are essentially destroyed. This organization turned into a closed joint stock company and an analogue of the Communist Party. It’s clear that there’s nowhere without a church, but where with such a church! It’s enough to go to the temple in Patriot Park to understand this, and in our region and in the city it’s no better!
  7. +12
    4 September 2023
    Why did Stalin revive the Church

    What nonsense! The Russian Orthodox Church was before Stalin, under Stalin and after Stalin. Stalin revived in 1943 the Patriarchate of the Russian Orthodox Church.
    In 1721, Peter I abolished the patriarchate and created a state body called the "Holy Governing Synod" headed by the "Chief Procurator" to manage the ROC. "Members of the Holy Governing Synod were appointed by the emperor." After the revolution of 1917, the priests "sort of" restored the patriarchate, but after the arrest of Patriarch Tikhon in 1922, the church was left without officially recognized leadership.
    After the arrest of the patriarch in 1922, the Russian Orthodox Church found itself in an "illegal position" for five years. Its partial "legalization" was achieved by the Deputy Patriarchal Locum Tenens, Metropolitan Sergius of Nizhny Novgorod, who organized "with him, with the permission of the authorities" the Provisional Patriarchal Holy Synod. In May 1935, it was officially dissolved (“self-liquidated”)[15]. At the same time, Metropolitan Sergius, who retained his personal “legalization” and the right to have an office, renamed the administrator of the Provisional Patriarchal Holy Synod into “the administrator of the Moscow Patriarchate.”
    (Wikipedia)


    This structure of the Russian Orthodox Church, headed by the "Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia" - (the title of the head of the Russian Orthodox Church) exists today.
  8. +8
    4 September 2023
    Quote: Uncle Lee
    in the era of the dominance of Western materialism, it resulted in the commercialization of the church
    Which is very unfortunate....The Church and the State must exist separately, without interfering in each other's affairs.

    You are not right. I am an atheist, but let me object.
    Everything here depends on the historical moment. The state, in the interests of the people, should use the possibilities of the church (Orthodox, Baha'i, Mithraic, etc., etc.), provided that the costs of using it turn out to be less than the benefit. By costs, I mean not only financial or human, but also ideological, psychological.
    That moment of the Second World War, the help of the Russian Orthodox Church was needed.
  9. +5
    4 September 2023
    Quote: Luminman
    Why did Stalin revive the Church?

    The church is the same instrument of government as the secular power. And where worldly power ends, spiritual power begins, which completely submits to worldly power...

    You are not right.
    The Church is an instrument of governance not of the state, but of society.
    Moreover, the management of the church society is carried out:
    1) only in those aspects of life that are not controlled by the state (for example, taxes, defense, state security, medicine, etc.);
    2) only in relation to believers (who are actually not 50-60%, as the hierarchs lie, but 05-06% of the population), and even then only those believers who do not mind being ruled by the church. Personally, I do not know such believers.
    1. +1
      4 September 2023
      Quote: Alexander1971
      Quote: Luminman
      Why did Stalin revive the Church?

      The church is the same instrument of government as the secular power. And where worldly power ends, spiritual power begins, which completely submits to worldly power...

      You are not right.
      The Church is an instrument of governance not of the state, but of society.
      Moreover, the management of the church society is carried out:
      1) only in those aspects of life that are not controlled by the state (for example, taxes, defense, state security, medicine, etc.);
      2) only in relation to believers (who are actually not 50-60%, as the hierarchs lie, but 05-06% of the population), and even then only those believers who do not mind being ruled by the church. Personally, I do not know such believers.

      You are right, there are no more true believers. Those who read the Gospel, who observe all church canons - holidays, take communion, confess, fast, etc.
      It is not correct to consider believers who visited the church a couple of times and lit a candle.
  10. The comment was deleted.
  11. The comment was deleted.
    1. 0
      4 September 2023
      The fact that you are not a Christian is immediately noticeable, well, yes, Life is not a fast thing, everything is possible in it.
      1. +3
        4 September 2023
        I won't be a Christian when I'm old. My parents, my grandfathers and grandmothers did not become Christians in their old age. I can’t say anything about great-grandfathers with confidence about religion. I only know that one of my great-grandfathers was a communist. About my great-great-grandfathers on my Korean line (on my father's side), I will assume that they were most likely Buddhists. On the Russian line, most likely they were Orthodox, since they were peasants.
        But is religion inherited?
        1. +1
          4 September 2023
          Quote: Alexander1971
          But is religion inherited?

          No, it is not transmitted, but the Church respects the freedom of choice of a person - God gives him the right to free choice.
  12. +1
    4 September 2023
    Quote: Andrey Moskvin
    Must? Where and when was this? The state will not let go of such a huge financial institution. And it is right.

    You are right.
    When the church gets rich, the state needs to rob it.
    So did Henry VIII in England, so did the revolutionaries during the French Revolution, so did the Bolsheviks in Russia, so did the Protestant princes in Germany in the 16th and 17th centuries.
    1. 0
      10 September 2023
      Also Peter 1 and Catherine 2. And they robbed and tried to destroy
  13. Eug
    +5
    4 September 2023
    Stalin revived the church primarily because he saw the unwillingness of many to accept the ideas of communism. Well, it is impossible to completely remake the psychology of the people, which has been formed over the centuries, in a matter of years by historical standards. But spiritual guidelines (10 commandments) are still very necessary ....
    1. +3
      4 September 2023
      The Church is for love of one's neighbor, and communism is against the exploitation of one's neighbor; this is their closeness. The early Christian community in Jerusalem was a real commune: the community of property and the universal obligation to work. The church exists on voluntary donations, and the CPSU, in addition to mandatory contributions from its members, put its hand deep into the state pocket (buildings, member trucks, mass propaganda, etc.)
    2. -1
      6 September 2023
      Quote: Eug
      Stalin revived the church primarily because he saw the unwillingness of so many to accept the ideas of communism.

      Communist ideology could say nothing to console the widow and mother who lost her husband and son in the war. That is, the war showed the incompleteness or even defectiveness of communist ideology. That's why Stalin called on the church to console the widows. It seems to me that this is the main reason that Stalin stopped persecuting the church during the war.
  14. +1
    4 September 2023
    Quote: Eug
    Stalin revived the church primarily because he saw the unwillingness of many to accept the ideas of communism. Well, it is impossible to completely remake the psychology of the people, which has been formed over the centuries, in a matter of years by historical standards. But spiritual guidelines (10 commandments) are still very necessary ....

    You may need 10 commandments, but I don't
  15. +5
    4 September 2023
    Stalin had many reasons for the revival of the Church:
    - he was a kind of Bolshevik conservative, advocated traditional family relations and morality, unlike his possessed party comrades (Down with shame, a commune instead of a family, and the like)
    - according to the encrypted data of the 1937 census, one third of the urban and two thirds of the rural population answered yes to the question "Do you believe in God?" And, Stalin could not ignore this state of affairs.
    - the meeting with the hierarchs itself took place on the eve of the Tehran Conference, Stalin counted on the support of the West, which put forward conditions for assistance, with the cessation of repression against the Church
    - Stalin understood that the consolidation of people was necessary, that the path of Lenin and Trotsky was a dead end.
    1. +1
      4 September 2023
      Quote: bober1982
      according to classified data from the 1937 census, a third of the urban and two-thirds of the rural population answered affirmatively to the question “Do you believe in God?”
      If the supreme apostle Peter renounced, what can be demanded of a simple believer, for whom confession of his faith also did not look safe at that time.
      1. +1
        4 September 2023
        Quote: Stanislav_Shishkin
        for whom confessing his faith also did not seem safe at the time.

        The fact of the matter is that people were not afraid, the very results of such a survey for the authorities, and the same Stalin, were, to put it mildly, unexpected.
        1. +2
          4 September 2023
          Quote: bober1982
          people weren't afraid
          I would say that many were not afraid. Others repented of their cowardice and repented of their sin of renunciation.
  16. +6
    4 September 2023
    The church is now a business, especially in large cities. It has a mediocre relationship with Vera.
  17. +7
    4 September 2023
    1. I am a fourth-generation atheist (maybe more, I'm talking about what I heard from my grandfather).
    2. My grandfathers and great-grandfathers were never communists.
    3. It is possible and necessary to live in conscience and honor without even believing in a higher power.
    1. +4
      4 September 2023
      Quote: Ady66
      1. I am a fourth-generation atheist (maybe more, I'm talking about what I heard from my grandfather).
      2. My grandfathers and great-grandfathers were never communists.
      3. It is possible and necessary to live in conscience and honor without even believing in a higher power.

      Exactly. It all depends on upbringing. This is how my parents raised me.
      The difference between the Bolsheviks and the church is that the church is patient and obey and you will be rewarded in the next world, and the Bolsheviks wanted to build a just society here and now.
      You can argue about how they succeeded, but to some extent, yes.
    2. 0
      4 September 2023
      Quote: Ady66
      I'm an atheist
      Maybe that’s why you present yourself as a model of conscience and honor. They forgot to add intelligence. Believers consider themselves sinners, and the sin of pride is a mortal sin. This is a fundamental difference, and it is not in your favor.
  18. -4
    4 September 2023
    Interestingly, from the article, Stalin revived the country and Khrushchev prepared for collapse. How many were shot and exiled under Khrushchev? Maybe ask them with someone better?
    1. +11
      4 September 2023
      Khrushchev is one of the most active signers of the execution lists. In addition, remember the case of currency traders - the use of capital punishment at that time was not provided for under this article. Received retroactively. The cunningly invented Khrushchev is still a tyrant, and all indulgences were used for contrast. That's what Stalin is a tyrant, and I'm done.
      1. -4
        4 September 2023
        Naturally, I signed, try not to sign - I would go next. But he was not the initiator of the fact that they put under the knife so many people who were at least something
    2. +2
      4 September 2023
      Quote: Igor1915
      Interestingly, from the article, Stalin revived the country and Khrushchev prepared for collapse. How many were shot and exiled under Khrushchev? Maybe ask them with someone better?

      Novocherkassk execution. This blockhead has done a lot of things. I got that time.
      1. -4
        4 September 2023
        Read the historian Spitsyn. He doesn’t like Khrushchev for anything, but he doesn’t support the version of his guilt, and of other leaders, in the events in Novocherkassk.
        1. 0
          4 September 2023
          Quote: Sergej1972
          Read the historian Spitsyn. He doesn’t like Khrushchev for anything, but he doesn’t support the version of his guilt, and of other leaders, in the events in Novocherkassk.

          Yeah ... they shot themselves. But nothing that Khrushchev’s closest accomplice Mikoyan commanded on the spot?
          Did he act without Khrushchev's consent?
      2. -2
        4 September 2023
        Yes, that's right, but it's impossible for me to compare the suppression of protests in a single city with hundreds of thousands
      3. +1
        6 September 2023
        Quote: Ulan.1812
        Novocherkassk execution. This blockhead has done a lot of things. I got that time.

        Under Yeltsin, there was the shooting of parliament defenders in 1993, extrajudicial executions of, for example, Barkashovites and National Bolsheviks. I think that in October 1993, Yeltsin and Korzhakov killed more people than Khrushchev and Mikoyan.
  19. +4
    4 September 2023
    Quote: Luminman
    Why did Stalin revive the Church?

    The church is the same instrument of government as the secular power. And where worldly power ends, spiritual power begins, which completely submits to worldly power...

    Do you want the Orthodox Church to rule Russia? Including non-believers and people of other religions?
  20. +1
    4 September 2023
    Quote: Pavel73
    And if a statesman, before making an important decision, seeks advice from a confessor, how is that? Participation of the Church in state affairs or not?

    If a statesman turns to his confessor, then such a figure must be urgently expelled from politics, and maybe even put in prison. A good example of this is former South Korean President Park Geun-hye. She constantly consulted with her confessor, who whispered all sorts of religious nonsense to her.
    Every reasonable person knows that religion is nonsense for the weak-minded.
    So Park Geun-hye and her confessor went to prison, and for a long time.
    The guilt of the confessor is money-grubbing.
    And the fault of the former president is that she believed the fraudster and made government decisions on the advice of the fraudster.
    All confessors are scammers or crazy.
    1. +5
      4 September 2023
      All confessors are scammers or crazy.

      More precisely, you can’t say. Classic divorce, be patient now, but then everything will be fine.
      But like, my father survived in the Second World War because he went with a piece of paper where there was such and such a prayer.
      But how much they didn’t squeeze out with such a piece of paper, and most importantly, they can’t tell anything
      1. +6
        4 September 2023
        Quote: bya965
        All confessors are scammers or crazy.

        More precisely, you can’t say. Classic divorce, be patient now, but then everything will be fine.
        But like, my father survived in the Second World War because he went with a piece of paper where there was such and such a prayer.
        But how much they didn’t squeeze out with such a piece of paper, and most importantly, they can’t tell anything

        With the priests, Russia lost the Russian-Japanese and the first World War.
        With political tuition won the Great Patriotic War.
        The priests are not the first to attack, like political officers.
        1. -3
          4 September 2023
          Quote: Ulan.1812
          With the priests, Russia lost the Russian-Japanese and the first World War.
          Russia lost the First World War not without the help of the Bolsheviks. Look at the territory of the Republic of Ingushetia in 1917.
          This is not the Russian Federation that the communists left behind, but it is larger than the entire USSR was.
          1. +2
            6 September 2023
            Quote: Stanislav_Shishkin
            Russia lost the First World War not without the help of the Bolsheviks. Look at the territory of the Republic of Ingushetia in 1917.

            At the time of the overthrow of the Tsar, the Bolsheviks were a very weak party compared to the Socialist Revolutionaries. And in the overthrow of the tsar, a large role belonged to the army, statesmen and industry leaders.
    2. 0
      4 September 2023
      Tell it to Israel or Arabs)
      1. +1
        4 September 2023
        Quote from: Lelechka
        Tell it to Israel or Arabs)

        Israel fought in the Russian-Japanese? Cool.
    3. -1
      4 September 2023
      Quote: Alexander1971
      All confessors are scammers or crazy.
      Judge to the extent of your lack of spirituality.
  21. +6
    4 September 2023
    In Khrushchev's times, they produced a bunch of anti-religious, well-made films “about priests” with good actors.

    As a child, I especially remember the creepy films:
    1) “Miracle-working” - the misadventures of a rural pioneer (pictured below), who accidentally found an Orthodox icon considered miraculous. The local “obscurantists”, led by his own grandmother, immediately declared the pioneer boy a saint, capable of... healing women from infertility (!?), etc. etc. After everything, the pioneer ran to drown himself... All this was composed by the then popular writer Tendryakov.
    2) “Clouds over Borsk” - here they have already taken on the sectarians. who at the end of the film gathered... to crucify a girl on the cross. She was saved only by the intervention of the indignant Soviet public.

    In all these films, the clergy of the 50s and 60s are shown as cunning hypocrites, smooth-talking and very dangerous. As far as I know, for some reason this was not filmed under Stalin (films specifically only on this topic), although the church in the films of the 30s and 40s was sometimes pinched in the context of its struggle with Soviet power.

    In fairness, I note that some pluralism under Khrushchev was observed in this matter.
    In 1957, the film “Eaglet,” which was very popular at that time, was shot - in the German occupation, an Orthodox priest heroically helps partisans and underground fighters; weapons are hidden in the church.
    "Queen of the Gas Station" (1962) is a popular film comedy. The episode features a colorful pop binge - "I'm two hundred and one glass!" and it's okay.

    During the years of Brezhnev's stagnation, they tried not to touch the clergy of that time in films at all, sometimes they showed them sporadically with good-natured humor.
    examples:
    The comedy film “Royal Regatta” (1966) - the young athlete’s grandfather comes to visit him, who turns out to be a sexton in a cassock. A harmless, funny old man (pictured below).
    "7 Brides of Corporal Zbruev" (1970) - again a comedy. A short casual conversation between a former corporal and a cunning priest (Kuravlev).

    Some films about the Civil War, about collectivization, etc. had a sharply anti-religious content. Examples:
    “The Mysterious Monk” (1968) - the liquidation by security officers of a gang of whites who were hiding in a monastery.
    the series "Born of the Revolution" (one of the episodes, 1974-1977) - collectivization, and in the village there is a gang of kulaks under the leadership of a local very cunning and cruel priest of the local church.


    1. +4
      4 September 2023
      Quote: Timofey Charuta
      As a child, I especially remember creepy films.

      In 1958, the Decree of the Central Committee of the CPSU was issued on the shortcomings of scientific (?) - atheistic propaganda, and then there was an order for such film masterpieces, which, as a rule, were performed by second-rate filmmakers.
      Khrushchev thus returned to the "Leninist norms", as he understood it, and already with his dismissal, there was no need for such a cinema, the new leadership regarded all this cinema as voluntarism.
      In the Brezhnev period, representatives of the Church in the same cinema began to be ridiculed, or even films for intellectuals were released, something like ..... an Orthodox priest got into a conversation with an atheist scientist and lost faith in God, and the like.
      1. +1
        4 September 2023
        In the film about the detachment of Colonel Mlynsky, the father is also shown helping the underground.
  22. +7
    4 September 2023
    The article is a C minus.
    The author in the paragraph “Opium for the People” is completely off topic. If only I had read a little and then learned that it would be correct - “Religion is the opium of the people.”
    That's right.
    Half of the text is about Comrade. Stalin is simply made up.
    In general, the impression is that a high school student wrote the article.
    1. +3
      4 September 2023
      The author quoted "12 chairs", not Marx
  23. -2
    4 September 2023
    Quote: Million
    Church today is a business, especially in large cities

    Unprofitable "business", Orthodox 1-2℅, most women, retirement age. It’s much more profitable to come up with articles on the Internet and leave “Soar and unwind” comments on forums, here the audience is many times larger!
  24. +6
    4 September 2023
    Alexander, thank you very important and interesting material! The position of Stalin and the harm that Khrushchev caused, especially the Church, are clearly indicated
  25. -7
    4 September 2023
    Quote: Alexander1971
    you want the Orthodox Church to rule Russia

    The church is translated as "assembly", and it would be nice if the church had more influence on the people, but the Russian people are more dear to the "Eastern Caliphate" ... Therefore, the story of the Babylonian captivity will repeat itself, only without the hope of liberation
  26. -3
    4 September 2023
    Quote: Alexander1971
    You may need 10 commandments, but I don't

    Congratulations, you are a real modern man!!! You set the rules of life for yourself, "man - it sounds proud!"
  27. -5
    4 September 2023
    Since that time, the people and the government irrevocably move away from each other. The best part of the Russian people goes into schism. The Old Believers renounce lies, alcohol and tobacco, and create national capital on the basis of work ethics.

    The author probably had a five in political economy and the history of Marxism, in the 20s he would have made a career on anti-religious propaganda!
    1. -1
      4 September 2023
      Quote: Vladimir80
      in Political Economy and the History of Marxism
      Clarification: the political economy of socialism, about which Stalin said that it did not exist under him, and without it we would die (3 times), and after him someone wrote it, as it were (there must be work more abruptly than Capital), and the history of the CPSU (that another story). There were books and academic subjects of political economy, but there was no political economy of socialism, and there is not, so the end came in the early 90s. And Zyuganov, perhaps, realized that the stone that the builders of communism rejected should be put at the forefront.
  28. -6
    4 September 2023
    Quote: Alexander1971
    the people of Russia (Rus) believed not one thousand, but five or ten thousand years in Perun, Veles, Dazhd-god, Stri-god, etc.

    Yeah, for sure it was written in books of the 90s, by authors with non-Russian surnames (under Russian pseudonyms) ...
    1. 0
      4 September 2023
      But the Old and New Testaments, in your opinion, were written by Russians. Hehehe.... .
      Why believe in a Jewish god when Rus' created its own national gods?
      Moreover, modern, and not very modern Jews (with a few exceptions like Posner) are generally hostile to Russia.
  29. +1
    4 September 2023
    The author, an ardent anti-Soviet and anti-communist, discusses the relationship between the church and the socialist state. Anti-Sovietism and anti-communism no longer presuppose objectivity. Religion is the opium of the people. The longer I live, the more I understand the genius of this phrase.
    1. 0
      10 September 2023
      Read the entire quote from K. Marx, in meaning it differs significantly from how it was presented in Soviet times.
      During the time of Karl Marx, opium was used as a medicine.
      A perfect example of manipulation and those who fall for it.
  30. -2
    4 September 2023
    Quote: oleg Pesotsky
    Author, ardent anti-Soviet and anti-communist


    But it seems to me, on the contrary, it is difficult to find a greater Marxist than Comrade Samsonov!
    1. +1
      4 September 2023
      "Sasha Samsonov" is like a group of high school students with different beliefs and views on the history and structure of society. It is interesting to read such school presentations at VO, which is very old in composition, with established beliefs of people. Much more attractive than Staver's agitation.
  31. -3
    4 September 2023
    Quote: Quiet Don
    The Church is an instrument in the hands of the ruling exploiting class, and therefore no one will allow the Church to exist separately.

    And in Soviet times? A tool in the hands of the Commissioner for Religious Affairs?
  32. +10
    4 September 2023
    The initiative to confront the Russian Orthodox Church and the Bolsheviks came from the hierarchs of the church, and not from the authorities.
    And at the core were property issues.
    The Russian Orthodox Church in the Republic of Ingushetia was the largest landowner and this was a significant part of their income.
    The Bolsheviks, having nationalized the landlords and church lands, deprived the ROC of these incomes.
    This could not but cause indignation and hatred towards the Bolsheviks.
    The Russian Orthodox Church immediately and unequivocally took the side of the enemies of the Soviet regime and began to help them, including financially, and not just by agitation.
    And what kind of government will tolerate it? Naturally, there was a response from the authorities.
    By the way, not priests and monks worked on church lands, but land-poor and landless peasants.
    In fact, the church was an exploiter.
    Hence the attitude of the peasants towards the priests.
    Already after February, the peasants themselves began to actively divide the church lands.
    By the way, one of the reasons for desertion.
    When the church stopped resisting the authorities, the persecution stopped.
    Already Beria released thousands of priests arrested under Yezhov.
    And yet, about "to the foundation, and then" ... Those who cite this phrase throw out the main word - the whole world of VIOLENCE, we will destroy ... The Bolsheviks were not going to destroy everything, but only the world of violence.
    I don't think many people like this world. Only for rapists. Of course, at first they went too far, not everyone understood this correctly and, as they say, they almost threw out the child with the water.
    Stalin had the will, strength and intelligence to stop this and start returning to the roots.
    It was noticeable in culture... theatre, cinema, literature, and textbooks.
    Although calling for the destruction of the world of violence, the Bolsheviks themselves used violence.
    The state is generally an instrument of coercion and violence, and there is no getting away from it.
    1. 0
      4 September 2023
      Stalin needed a population that was as loyal to the government as possible, some were embraced by socialist ideology, but there were also believers in God, and the involvement of the church was an additional incentive for the loyalty of the masses to power. The Church has always been an instrument of power, like Marxism (in the understanding of the authorities), because Marxism in the USSR, in fact, is the same religion.
      1. 0
        4 September 2023
        Marxism has nothing to do with the blind faith in the Jewish idol, the desire for a just life, without the power of the backbone and the golden calf. This is ideal, because it was stupid dogmatism, with mumbling political officers, that ruined the USSR. Instead of illustrative examples of what a hard worker would receive if the bourgeois returned, they monotonously (all listeners fell asleep) read out the castrated works of Lenin. Another duty, like a trip to the potatoes. And when it came time to make a choice, the majority turned out to be just the same and politically "not savvy."
    2. +2
      4 September 2023
      The Russian Orthodox Church in the Republic of Ingushetia was the largest landowner and this was a significant part of their income.


      Learn the story!
      All church lands were confiscated by Catherine II during the secularization reform of 2 (manifesto of February 1764). Together with the monastery peasants and in general with all the estates.
      She also closed most of the monasteries (822) and left only 452 monasteries.

      In return for the confiscated lands, she determined the content from the treasury for diocesan sees, monasteries and parish churches.

      ROC to 1917 had no land. All the priests were on state salaries, and the whole church was led by a civil state official, the head of the Synod.
  33. AB
    +1
    4 September 2023
    The revolutionaries, destroying tsarism, autocracy, Orthodoxy, in general "old Russia", destroyed Russian civilization in general, its foundations. Russian culture, education and history. Together with the tsars, Lomonosov, Pushkin, Lermontov, Suvorov, Ushakov, Kutuzov, Skobelev and other "stranglers and gimmicks" went "under the knife".


    After that, I didn't want to read any further. And the revolutionaries did not destroy the planet for an hour? How could Russian culture and civilization be destroyed if there were none in fact? Culture is born and develops among the people when there is prosperity, and first of all in food. It seems to me that people were not up to culture when every three to five years hunger takes away several million people. In principle, Russian culture could not be at the top: the top worshiped Europe, European culture and blindly copied it. Education? How many percent of the population there had a normal education? The story, as we are now being told from all the irons, was destroyed by Peter, so there is no need to muddy the waters here. And then the designated personalities became known to the people only after the introduction of normal education. Many say that Pushkin, for example, thanks to Stalin, Russia learned that.

    However, the revolutionary internationalists, with their outright atheism and godlessness, are practically at the level of Satanism...

    And here, about Satanism, can you elaborate? I still really want to laugh) As for me, atheism and godlessness, when mentioned together, already imply any absence of both faith and religion, and the need for them, both in general and in part. Unless, of course, the revolutionaries staged performances for the unenlightened people, where they sacrificed people. For what? And FIG knows. Maybe the author can enlighten us?
    And in principle, there is enough such nonsense under the article.
    1. -3
      4 September 2023
      "How could Russian culture and civilization be destroyed if there were none?" What is it???))) Where were you trained?))
  34. 0
    4 September 2023
    Why did Stalin revive the Church?
    Stalin did not revive anything, since the decree on the separation of church from state and school from church of January 20 (February 2), 1918 and which entered into force on January 23 (February 5) of the same year, on the day of official publication in the "Rabochiy Gazeta i Nobody canceled the Peasant Government. By this time, in the occupied territory of the USSR, the emigrant ROC, the so-called ROC Abroad, which actively cooperated with the occupiers, stepped up its work. In order to counter its influence, the Soviet government made contact with the ROC. Orthodox Church. ROCOR, carried out active anti-Soviet work in its time, until the very collapse of the USSR.
  35. -1
    4 September 2023
    Quote: Ulan.1812
    The initiative to confront the Russian Orthodox Church and the Bolsheviks came from the hierarchs of the church, and not from the authorities.

    Patriarch Tikhon recognized Soviet power in 1923, but the persecution of priests and lay believers continued until 1943.
    PS I recommend to both believers and non-believers to read "The happiest day", a collection of stories by archim. Pavel Gruzdev (this is literature on history, not on religious studies)
  36. -2
    4 September 2023
    Quote from A.B.
    Culture is born and develops among the people when there is prosperity, and first of all in food

    Exactly!!!!
    What are we seeing today!
    laughing
  37. +5
    4 September 2023
    The Russian Church has been in a deep crisis since the time of the Great Schism. Since that time, the people and the government irrevocably move away from each other.

    It is not clear where the logic is in this statement? This statement of the author is meaningless and similar, for example, to the statement "a brick is crawling along the wall. Fomich is sitting under the wall. Tomorrow is the artilleryman's day, I didn't take your slippers."
    1. From the statement about the crisis of the church, the statement about the alienation of the people and power does not follow at all.
    2. It is not at all clear from everything written
    Why did Stalin revive the Church?
    . The article, in fact, is about how the church was revived during the Second World War, but not a word was said about the reasons why I.V. Stalin went to revive the church in the USSR and stop the persecution of church ministers.
    3. Schism in the 17th century Russian Orthodox Church is really a big problem, which is only now beginning to drag on. But the thesis, according to the author, about the separation of the people and power, does not follow at all from the split of the Russian Orthodox Church. Moreover, out of the total population of Russia up to 182 AD - 83 million people, there were XNUMX million Orthodox. Hence, it is obvious that there could not even be any talk of any opposition between the people and the authorities on the basis of Orthodoxy.
    4. The split of the Russian Orthodox Church in the XVII century. really influenced the future fate of Russia, but not at all in the way the author describes it here. To take into account the impact of the split on the fate of Russia, it is enough to look at the list of persons who carried out a coup d'etat and removed the sovereign from power in February 1917. The main conspirators are the Old Believers.
    PS
    Wish to the author.
    Be more attentive to the theses that you cite at the beginning of your essays, so that it doesn’t turn out like in this case: the topic is one, and the disclosure of the topic is completely different.
    1. 0
      4 September 2023
      What? The vast majority of the population of RI, 100 million non-Christs? Where did the figure come from and who are they, what kind of huge nationalities?
  38. -4
    4 September 2023
    Quote: Ulan.1812

    With the priests, Russia lost the Russian-Japanese and the first World War.
    With political tuition won the Great Patriotic War.

    With political officers, the Soviet army left Afghanistan and East Germany, with the priests, the Russian army drove Napoleon away and entered Paris. Could it be something else??? Maybe it's for the purposes of these wars?
    1. +1
      4 September 2023
      They left Afghanistan and Germany because it was not the political instructors, the communists, but quite the new bourgeoisie. And to the victories over Napoleon, the priests are generally not in any way. The serf peasant decided that his master was a familiar and lesser evil than a European one. The priests are here, the spokesmen for the will of the ruling class, the slave owners of the feudal lords.
      1. -4
        4 September 2023
        Quote: Essex62
        Afghanistan and Germany left because it’s not the political officers who are communists, but quite new bourgeois

        And why did the political commissars allow the bourgeoisie to be in power?
        P.S. Maybe it's time to move away from the logic of fairy tales about the boy kibalchish? The USSR was destroyed, and we blame all the mythical bourgeois, the CIA and other conspiracy theories ...
        1. +1
          4 September 2023
          I don’t know your age, maybe you didn’t even have time for the product of the 30-year dominance of the feudal bourgeois system, but they collapsed like that. And the bourgeoisie are not at all mythical and not foreign, their own home-grown guild workers, foreign exchange workers, thieving storekeepers and traders, along with a worthless, loud-mouthed antiligence . Moreover, under the guidance of those who were supposed to stop all this and bring those who lost their core, in a consumer frenzy, to their senses. Simply put, remember the class struggle. And no fairy tales. Shot, the Supreme Council, which adopted anti-bourgeois laws, is a reality. And the recruited agent of the Freemasons labeled is a reality.

          And yet the goal of restoring the French to the throne of the Bourbons, on Russian bayonets, is not a very progressive goal.
  39. +3
    4 September 2023
    The beginning of the article is a standard cliché, saying that the Marxist communists wanted to ruin everything, which they say is confirmed by lines from the International. But the Russian Bolsheviks are exactly the opposite. Author! Well eptyt, dear, how is it? A Bolshevik is a communist, a Marxist, a member of the faction that in the majority supported Lenin during the split of the RSDLP. Fie on you, with such crumb in your head...
    1. 0
      4 September 2023
      Certainly! And those who attempted on Hitler are also the Wehrmacht. What is there to understand!
    2. +1
      4 September 2023
      the majority supported Lenin during the split of the RSDLP.
      Yes, it somehow didn’t split especially, until 1912, two factions formed, the factions acted together within the framework of one party.
  40. 0
    4 September 2023
    The only successful "national project" in the bourgeois-capitalist RF.
  41. -1
    4 September 2023
    And the Spas Now channel: "Historical data testify: Stalin destroyed the Church until the end of his days and held back any sprouts of church life before the war, and during the war, and after."
  42. 0
    4 September 2023
    Maybe I'm wrong, but for some reason it was in Russia that the Orthodox Christian Church interfered with someone. I don’t remember such a persecution of my faith in Islamic countries or in Israel (where even the sale of an apartment is consulted with a rabbi)
    1. +2
      4 September 2023
      This was due to the fact that the Orthodox Church with Peter 1 became the state. department. It was the church that had to reckon with the opinion of the state. figures, and not vice versa, as it happens in Muslim countries (well, one must also take into account that in Islam it is the theocratic state that is the ideal form of government).
  43. +3
    4 September 2023
    church, which, forgetting about Russian national interests


    The Christian church simply cannot have "national" interests.
    This is actually not some kind of "tribal" teaching, like Judaism, it is a universal religion.

    Again formalism and appearance, serving the interests of the "prince of this world."


    What kind of dirty hints?
    Who are you calling the devil (this is the “prince of this world” in the Bible)?!
  44. -1
    4 September 2023
    I.V. Stalin had a church education, and the church was the richest organization and the largest owner of the productive forces, wealth that could not be compared with any of the richest capitalists of the empire.
    The revolution and the threat of loss of property made the church an active opponent of the Soviet government, which predetermined the struggle of the Soviet government with the church.
    Stalin got a country devastated by the First World War and the Civil War, and the NEP gave rise to rampant corruption and the merging of party and economic activists with the new Russians - Nepmen, and what V.V. Putin failed in more than 20 years, J.V. Stalin did 10 years of industrialization.
    The invasion of the fascist Germans and the resulting general threat to the Soviet government and the church became a factor not only for their reconciliation, but also for cooperation, despite previous mutual grievances.
    1. +2
      4 September 2023
      I.V. Stalin had a church education, and the church was the richest organization and the largest owner of the productive forces, wealth that could not be compared with any of the richest capitalists of the empire.


      1. Joseph Dzhugashvili did not have a church education, he studied at the seminary, but was expelled for absenteeism in the 4th year of study (and in total he studied at the seminary for 6 years).
      2. The church did not have its own property after the secularization reform of 1764 (manifesto of Catherine 2 of February 28). There was only maintenance from the treasury for diocesan pulpits, monasteries and parish churches. That is, all bishops, monks and priests sat on a fixed state salary, and the entire church was led by a civil state official, the head of the Synod.
      1. +2
        4 September 2023
        It is commanded to give 1/10 of everything you have for the needs of the church. Faith in those days was strong and the state and the majority of the population followed the commandments. This merged church and state, making the church the largest owner of property in the empire, which she defended in the civil war. After the victory of the revolution, this predetermined the separation of the church from the state, the privatization of church property and its transfer to self-financing. After the coup d'état, the collapse of the Soviet Union and the restoration of capitalism, the church was again funded by the state, strengthened its positions and pursued a policy of rehabilitating the opponents of Soviet power, and canonized the tsar, who was overthrown by the revolution, nicknamed Nikolashka by the people, whose hands were up to the elbows in blood.
  45. +1
    4 September 2023
    The war was such that even he remembered the Almighty. Yes
  46. 0
    4 September 2023
    I read somewhere that the condition for lend-lease supplies from the American side was the restoration of the rights of the church.
  47. +2
    4 September 2023
    Flirting with religion is fraught with persecution of atheists.
  48. -1
    4 September 2023

    Quote: Pavel57
    Flirting with religion is fraught with persecution of atheists

    Nonsense, atheists throughout history have never been “oppressed”, because with an atheist belief there is nothing stopping you from saying what they want to hear from you...
  49. _6
    +1
    4 September 2023
    The question posed in the title of the article was never answered. Remained unanswered. Just a brief historical retelling with many distortions, and as rightly pointed out in the comments. But the main thing is that the role of the Church is reduced to the level of the material, political, worldly. There are many good things from the Church: patriotism, moral guidelines, and so on. A lot of bad things from our sinful nature: a bad example of greed, drunkenness, stupidity and unwillingness to do what people expect from clergy. But for some reason, not a word is said about many examples of holiness, about eternity for every human soul, about God, about why God founded this social and spiritual institution in this world. In general, it is pointless to talk about the Church without mentioning the God who created it. I understand that there are many religions, deviations and sects even more, up to the spaghetti god or your own faith in the soul. But whoever wants to know the truth will eventually figure out where the truth is where the lie is. And who wants to express their opinion - well, here's the article. In general, now there is such a trend, to speak your opinion without even trying to understand the issue.
  50. +1
    4 September 2023
    Stalin revived church institutions (not the Church) because it was profitable. He acted solely in line with expediency. And the church did not coexist peacefully, it again became part of the state. apparatus
  51. +2
    4 September 2023
    Quote: okean969
    Alexander 1971, There is no Orthodoxy in South Korea, your example is unsuccessful, there is 98% Catholicism, learn mate. Part.

    Learn the mat part yourself.
    I'm half Korean. I have been to both the DPRK and South Korea many times.
    I believe that an Orthodox confessor will slurp the camp gruel with the same appetite as a Catholic one.
    1. -1
      5 September 2023
      In South Korea, no one cares what religion you belong to, have you definitely been there?
  52. -2
    4 September 2023
    Quote: lithium17
    The twentieth century is cruel and terrible.
    Two wars, autocracy of slaves,
    And science is in a bloody fire
    Out of unbelief he will raise gods."
    It seems to be from Nostradamus... I remember it by heart.

    This is where the real obscurantism lies - some poems, written by someone unknown after the fact, are passed off as “prophecies” of a medieval dreamer...
  53. +1
    4 September 2023
    Quote: Arzt
    The war was such that even he remembered the Almighty. Yes

    You are not right.
    The improvement in the position of Orthodoxy occurred not in the crisis-ridden first months and years of the war, but after a radical turning point in the Second World War.
    Stalin remembered not about God, but about how to regain favor with people who had lived under German occupation for several years, as well as ideologically to win over the Christian population that Stalin planned to introduce into the socialist community being created.
  54. +1
    4 September 2023
    The revolutionaries, destroying tsarism, autocracy, Orthodoxy, in general "old Russia", destroyed Russian civilization in general, its foundations. Russian culture, education and history. Together with the tsars, Lomonosov, Pushkin, Lermontov, Suvorov, Ushakov, Kutuzov, Skobelev and other "stranglers and gimmicks" went "under the knife".

    However, the internationalist revolutionaries, with their outright atheism and godlessness, almost at the level of Satanism, were also disgusting to the Russian people. The basis of the Russian code-matrix is ​​truth-justice, living according to conscience (ethics of conscience).


    Is the author an idiot? He denied everything. Especially in terms of justice - what, in fact, the communists came up with - social justice.
    1. +1
      January 10 2024
      What kind of social justice is there under commies? The fact that everyone lived in poverty, and the party leadership in communism is social justice? Only scoops with rotten brains still believe in commie nonsense about social justice.
  55. 0
    4 September 2023
    Written “at a gallop across Europe,” in fact, a set of sharp theses, many of which are controversial. “The best part of the Russian people is going into schism”—by what criteria is “the best”? “Old Believers renounce lies” - theoretically all Christians renounce it, and where, again, are the criteria that all Old Believers renounced lies 100%? “Old Believers refuse... alcohol” - this was not in all “agreements”, and again - who investigated how it really was? It would be more correct to say that the observance of a number of prohibitions among the Old Believers was more strict. Etc. and so on.
  56. -2
    5 September 2023
    Perhaps Stalin should definitely say thank you for one thing, for the fact that in the struggle for power he cut out the so-called. Lenin's guard. As for the rest, he was an ordinary skilled opportunist, as soon as he smelled something fried, he restored his shoulder straps, and the guard, and stopped the persecution of the church.
    1. 0
      12 September 2023
      Opportunist? He tried for the good of the country, and not for himself personally.
  57. +2
    5 September 2023
    Stalin did a good job. Religious support was very necessary
  58. The comment was deleted.
  59. 0
    5 September 2023
    It is unfortunate that the church not only decided to become one of the state institutions, “poking its nose” everywhere, but it also unambiguously took a position in defense of the ruling class. Thus, repeating what it happened before the Great October Socialist Revolution, and why the priest was the same hated character as the official. After all, he was an official (the Holy Synod was headed by the Chief Prosecutor) with the right to criminal prosecution, and at the same time the richest feudal lord.
    Try to find good things about priests in Russian fairy tales or folk proverbs.
    And only under Soviet power, the church, separated from the state, was what Jesus Iosifovich commanded.
  60. The comment was deleted.
  61. 0
    6 September 2023
    Quote: Sevan
    Perhaps Stalin should definitely say thank you for one thing, for the fact that in the struggle for power he cut out the so-called. Lenin's guard. As for the rest, he was an ordinary skilled opportunist, as soon as he smelled something fried, he restored his shoulder straps, and the guard, and stopped the persecution of the church.

    Horses and people mixed together... When were shoulder straps introduced?
  62. -1
    9 September 2023
    Therefore, the anti-Russian policy, which included persecution of Orthodoxy with the goal of completely destroying it as part of Russian history and culture, clearly did not suit Stalin. Already in the 1930s, on his initiative, the names of Russian commanders, heroes, the exploits of the Russian army, the names of princes and kings who worked for the strengthening of our state were returned to Soviet history and education. The “great purge” also began, when most of the Trotskyists, internationalist revolutionaries and a possible “fifth column” in a future world war were able to be neutralized.


    ABOUT! What a complete anti-Soviet thing. I shake hands.

    After these lines, I don’t see any point in discussing the contents of the article.
  63. +1
    10 September 2023
    It is not entirely clear what relation this creation has to the subject of VO.
    Apart from the desire to spoil things with absolute ignorance of the issue, there is nothing at all in the article.
  64. +1
    10 September 2023
    Reviving relations with the Church, Stalin was guided by the biblical principle - “Whoever is not against us is for us,” trying to unite all opponents of fascism.
    As far as I know, in the region of Belarus, 50% of the clergy were executed by the Nazis for helping the partisans.
    But the principle of “divide and conquer” is the principle of the devil.
    And on whose side are those who, at a time when the people and the country, in general everyone who is against fascists and open Satanists, need to unite in order to survive and win, I think it’s clear.
    Both the leadership of the Church and the vast majority of believers take a patriotic position, accordingly, the goals of this article are obvious.
  65. 0
    11 September 2023
    Stalin was, first of all, a Man, and not just a function of another party, people or another sect of the living world. In 1941, Stalin was not ready to accept martyrdom when Hitler stood near Moscow. You won’t get so excited when you want to live. Generals of all times unanimously assert that there are never too many churches as missiles. As soon as Japan capitulated, Stalin’s scientific atheism began to again take precedence over the ideas of the Russian Orthodox Church.
    1. 0
      January 12 2024
      Quote: Danila Rastorguev
      . As soon as Japan capitulated, Stalin’s scientific atheism began to again take precedence over the ideas of the Russian Orthodox Church.

      I am glad that you know the innermost thoughts of Stalin, who died 70 years ago. (However, I note that after 1 minute of any discourse, usually any Russian person will say: “I know what you think” - this is already a tradition - to know all other people’s thoughts).
      I'll add just one fact. In order for the USSR to change its policy towards the Russian Orthodox Church, Stalin did not have to change absolutely nothing in Soviet legislation.
      The “Workers and Peasants Party” changed the direction of its “thoughts” at the first click.

      In the same way, under Khrushchev they changed everything again. On the contrary, they returned to atheism, but completely abandoned Marxism. Because the Master ordered it so.
      It's not about Stalin...and "not about the reel"!. And in his amazing ability to guess what Barin wants laughing
  66. The comment was deleted.
  67. -1
    December 25 2023
    After the author’s words, “Russian communism (Bolshevism) in its origins had the same principles as primordial Christianity,” I stopped reading. The meaning of the article became clear even without reading it.
  68. -1
    January 10 2024
    Thousands of times in the history of Russia, it was Vera who helped us survive, withstand and win. It is Vera who is one of the pillars of the safety of our Mother Rus'. And it finally came to the bloody ghoul and cannibal Dzhugashvili. Which hardly stopped his black, bloody soul from burning in hell.
  69. 0
    February 4 2024
    The church never died.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"