Christianity and socialism. On modern topics

“People swear by the highest” (Heb. 6:16). This truth remains unchanged always and everywhere. For a person, some one or some series of truths always constitute the “highest,” and this highest is the authority for a person, he refers to it, he swears by it. But not all people have the same truths - “more”; sometimes “higher” is completely false; man, however, still swears by this illusory truth as an authority. The standards with which people approach the phenomena of life around them are very diverse. Everyone chooses the authority that seems best to him, and therefore one can recognize the position: tell me what your authorities are, and I will tell you what kind of person you are. Before, people were different, and they had different authorities. The Word of God, the church statutes - these are the former, equally understandable and dear to everyone, eternally unchanging and perfect authorities. Consistent with the word of God and church laws is good; that which disagrees and contradicts them cannot be good. I.T. Pososhkov wrote his “Paternal Testament” precisely “for confirmation of the Divine Scriptures”; there he definitely declares: “We all, who live in the Orthodox faith, know these things, for all the truth is contained in the words of the Lord,” and he says to his son: “I firmly command and conjure you, my son, to adhere with all your might to the Holy Eastern Church, as the mother who gave birth to you... and to cut off all opponents of the Holy Church from yourself and in no way Do not have friendly communication with them, since they are God’s enemies” 2. Here are the authorities! God and the Holy Church! Let the opponents of God and the Church also be your opponents! Now many have completely different authorities, even opposite ones. In fact, where will you now find references to God and the Church in the “advanced” press? Isn’t agreement with God’s laws and with the Church of Christ now considered a sign of bad taste, backwardness, and isn’t contradiction with them considered a good omen? I remember one student (alas, of the academy), who, seeing a complete stranger at a Lenten meal, said: “Probably one of the pogromists!” Another student, when I praised the theological academy to him, listing its good qualities, interrupted me quite seriously: “No, tell me, what has your academy done for the revolution?” I refused to list such dubious merits, but such a statement is very typical of our time. Now it is not what is good that pleases God, what is churchly, but what is “progressive”, “liberal”, “revolutionary”. “Left” means good, moral; “right” – therefore, a collection of all kinds of evils. “According to Marx!” - this is the best praise for any teaching, for any opinion. Even holy Christian teaching is valued by these new standards. In Christianity, therefore, all its main teachings about the personal feat of repentance and humility are discarded, and only some “social teaching” is taken and discussed, and only what can be interpreted in a liberal-revolutionary way is approved in it. Church writers and figures, even the great holy fathers, are valued in the same small and base coin. We ourselves witnessed how one “speaker”, in praise of St. John Chrysostom, declared on November 13, 1907, that the great saint in some ways thought like Marx, only a little worse. We say this with confidence! – blasphemy now confuses few people. In life, some new worldview persistently declares itself, new gods, new idols are erected. Of course, the Church of Christ is holy and immaculate. Church people live according to the former Divine laws, without bending the knee to Baal; for them there is no god except God and His Christ, there is no authority except the authority of the church. However, there are many people who have already adopted a new worldview, who have already bowed before the new idols, but for some reason still do not leave the Church completely. Such people constantly judge Christianity, the Church, judge not as those taught by the Church, but as its teachers; they want to “correct” the church’s understanding of Christianity, replacing it with their own, according to which Christ’s teaching turns out to be remarkably consistent with all the latest godless teachings and deeds, up to and including revolutions, expropriations and bombs. On the basis of such interpretations of Christianity, in renunciation of the authority of the church, either “Christian brotherhood (?!) struggle”, or “Christian socialism” appear, and who knows whether “Christian” robbery, etc. will appear someday? Epochs of decline are always characterized by the absence of definite, clearly expressed beliefs. People seem to become relaxed, for whom laziness does not allow them to think through every thought to the end, and therefore the most contradictory elements, collected from different sources, calmly coexist in their worldview. This is the nature of eclecticism. Our time can serve as an illustration of this. Don’t many people now have the desire to combine the most impossible things into one? Oh, this desire is too much now! One of the most prominent misunderstandings that arose on the basis described is the misunderstanding with socialism. On the one hand, they prove that Christ was a socialist, on the other, that socialism is completely consistent with Christianity. Of course, in all these considerations Christianity is not taken in the only possible and definite form of the Holy Church of Christ. The Holy Church is contemptuously called “official”, “entered into the service of the old regime”... and other crazy verbs. Everyone interprets Christianity as he likes, and only a small part of its sacred books is taken into account. Pavlova's messages are discarded, but no one knows them! Even the “appropriate” is selected from the Gospel - for example, the expulsion of traders from the church to prove the legality and necessity of violence, of course, only revolutionary 3. With such methods, of course, it is not difficult to prove anything, not just the agreement of Christianity and socialism. In light journalistic literature one can constantly encounter experiences of agreement between pagan socialism and Christianity. It is enough just to socialize Christianity and Christianize socialism - and you get “Christian socialism.” Therefore, any experience to understand from a strictly Christian point of view the question - is socialism ours (Christians) or is it our adversary - can only be welcomed. Serious and thorough experience is especially welcome. Such an experience, unique and outstanding from the mass of others, devoid of seriousness and thoroughness, was given by V.A. Kozhevnikov in his wonderful brochure: “The attitude of socialism to religion in general and to Christianity in particular” 4. It is not surprising that the author gave a particularly thorough and involuntarily convincing solution to the problem; the author knows socialism from its very sources much better than most of our would-be socialists. The author speaks exclusively in the words of socialist literature, and this literature represents such an overwhelmingly huge quantity that only bad faith can not believe him, not be convinced by his arguments. We strongly recommend that everyone who wants to be ready to give a thorough answer to anyone asking about Christianity and socialism not only gets acquainted with the brochure by V.A. Kozhevnikov, but also to always have it at hand. But since not everyone can get acquainted with this brochure, we would like to briefly convey the results of V.A.’s research. Kozhevnikova. We only apologize to the reader: there is no way to convey all the richness of the contents of this wonderful brochure, otherwise the entire brochure would have to be reprinted. V.A. Kozhevnikov declares that in the relations of socialism to Christianity there is no, even partial, truth: “Everything here in content is contrary to Christian truths, in form it is offensive to Christian feelings.” It is in vain that some people think that socialism is only an economic theory. No, socialism wants to replace everything, it creates its own religion. The resolutions of various socialist congresses and the reasoning of the leaders of socialism clearly and definitely express the demand for a revolution in all human thinking. “Socialism is not and cannot be only an economic science, only a gastric question... In the end, socialists strive to make a revolution in the entire legal, moral, philosophical and religious superstructure” (Vandervelde). “Is socialism just an economic theory? – we read in the socialist catechism of Bax and Quelch. - Under no circumstances! Socialism embraces all relations of human life." According to Bax, in religion socialism is expressed as atheistic humanism. If socialism looks at itself as a worldview, then what kind of worldview is it? This is, first of all, consistent materialism. The materialist understanding of history, as the socialists themselves admit, constitutes the essence of the entire theory of their teaching, its cornerstone, as Bernstein put it. “The main reasons for all social changes and revolutions must be sought not in the heads of people and not in their views on eternal truth and justice, but in changes in methods of production and distribution” (Engels). If socialism is so closely connected with materialism, then how can it relate to religion? Grossly distorting the moral and educational significance of religion, Marx-Engels’ materialist criticism sees in religion only a “human product,” a product of ignorant imagination or selfish motives, in God Himself only a reflection of economic relations, and even in the Christian God dares to see “an anthropological idealization of capitalism, thirsty for power and pleasure.” Religion, caused, as Engels put it, by “man’s dark primitive ideas about his own and surrounding nature” and determined in its changes by “class, and therefore economic relations” - religion seemed to Marx to be an outdated superstition, “a finished question for the intellectual, but an opium for the people.” According to this, Marx considered “the liberation of conscience from the spell of religion” to be “promoting the real happiness of the people.” True, there are thinkers who argue that socialism is not inevitably connected with materialism, but these are no longer true socialists. Such thinkers try to give socialism a philosophical and ethical overtone, even a Christian one. Staudinger is trying to convince “fellow socialists” that “the main idea of ​​Christ is the same as ours, His idea of ​​unity is also our God. His idea of ​​realizing this unity is also our Christ, and although we renounce all dogmas, in principle our ethics are Christian.” Faithful socialists resolutely refuse to accept the recommended “deepening” of the foundations of socialism, which, in their opinion, is completely unsuitable for them. Bebel lashes out at the invitation to “all study, philosophize, and work on oneself.” Konrad Schmidt shuns Kantian humanism: there is no propaganda force in it, but only old metaphysical ideas, monastic asceticism and morality, suitable only for Angels. Plekhanov sees in the experiments of “deepening” socialism “opium for lulling the proletariat”, Mehring sees “muddy water for unclean fishing”, Menger does not understand why loud phrases about unnecessary higher philosophical principles, when there is “its own ethics, rejecting any religious basis and guaranteeing even the revival of religious consciousness.” Dietzgen has long proposed to “throw overboard everything that is great in morality,” because “specially proletarian logic saves us from all philosophical and religious mysticism.” Similar thoughts are expressed by Kautsky and Lenin Axelrod. We, says Axelrod, are tired of the boring and monotonous pestering of critics, teachers, and various improvers of socialism; it's time to end them! To take their path would mean falling into terrible confusion and mental demoralization, depriving socialism of its living revolutionary side, in other words, its essence, and replacing it again with the reactionary, religious character of the entire philosophical mindset. It seems that it is now clear to everyone that socialism as a certain worldview is essentially the enemy of all idealism, all unchangeable principles of morality and the enemy of all religion. Reducing everything in the world to matter, the socialist worldview leaves no place for the Divine principle. This is the theoretical attitude of socialism to religion. In practice, socialists often make concessions for the sake of winning tactics, which in moral language should be called a betrayal of truth and truth. In practice, socialists have to take into account the mood of the rural population and even the traditional habits of the working environment, not to mention the clergy and other classes. “The layer of Christian workers offers the most stubborn resistance to propaganda” (A. Pannekoek). One will inevitably pay serious attention to religion, this, as Engels put it, the greatest conservative force. “We will never be able to gain trust if we demand that the state take violent measures against the Church,” admits Kautsky. What to do? “In order to overcome the distrust of the workers and quickly reach them, in our own ranks there arises a desire to obscure our basic views and, in the name of temporary success, to sacrifice the clarity of thought and feeling of our own comrades,” Anton Pannekoek cynically and frankly admits. And so we see how socialists “adapt.” According to the Erfurt Program, religion is a private matter. According to the “working catechism,” social democracy requires neither atheism nor theism. Stampfer claims that “the tenets of socialism concern neither God nor the afterlife; slander - as if he is a sworn enemy of the Church.” You can be both a Christian and a Social Democrat (Kautsky). There is absolutely no sincerity in all these and similar statements. The Erfurt program does not satisfy the most consistent socialists; they demand a sharper emphasis on the hostile attitude towards the Church. In fact, socialists are fighting religion, but using the same tactics they hide behind the guise of fighting against clerics, and this fight is justified by the fact that they: 1) have claims to political power, 2) are fanatical, 3) promote ignorance and 4) support the capitalist system. But, of course, all this is just a pretense - in fact, socialists are at enmity against any religion, against God. But such hypocrisy, such lies are immoral, outrageously immoral! To this the socialists will answer you like this: “There is nothing to recommend to us only moral means! They won’t get you far in politics!” (Bebel). “In every party, methods of deceit are inevitable and the laws of traditional morality here completely recede into the background” (Menger). What can you do about party tactics?! And this tactic is such that the Jesuit fathers would be delighted with it. The most straightforward and honest (if we can talk about the honesty of a socialist) socialists, however, let it slip and openly declare their hostility to religion. The French Social Revolutionary Party decreed on August 22, 1901: “Citizen members of the party undertake under no circumstances to perform any religious acts together with representatives of any religion.” (Freedom of conscience!!!) Bebel, before the entire Reichstag on December 31, 1881, declared: “In the religious field we strive for atheism,” and on September 16, 1878, he expressed his “firm confidence that socialism will lead to atheism.” The same blasphemous Bebel calls himself an enemy of any religion, which “people of higher discernment do not need.” Liebknecht at the Gallic Congress expressed the hope that “the fundamental principles of socialism will overcome religious forms of popular unreason.” According to Todt, “he is not even worthy of the name of socialist who is not himself an atheist and does not devote himself with all zeal to the spread of atheism.” Lafargue is indignant that “the foundations of religion have not yet been completely eradicated even from the minds of scientists,” but is consoled by the hope that in the future socialism will finally eradicate faith in God from the human soul. Some socialists envision in the distance the “first day of socialism,” its international celebration in the Vatican and St. Peter’s Basilica, when “the entire religious past will turn into the subject of curious conversations and funny jokes, when educational institutions, craft schools or exhibitions of works of modern production (not even art!) will be located in churches, and when the place of religion will be taken by the merging of all interests into economic solidarity!” It is clear that in the socialist worldview there is no place left for belief in the immortality of the soul. The denial of immortality is one of the main conditions for the success of socialism, “because with the weakening of faith in Heaven, the socialist demands of heaven on earth grow stronger” (Bebel). Dietzgen advises the other world to prefer “the cozy world of this world.” On February 3, 1893, one Catholic deputy asked the Social Democrats of the German Reichstag whether they believed in an afterlife? “No,” they answered unanimously. One socialist newspaper, Neue Zeit, advised that “threats of hell should be ridiculed, and references to Heaven should be despised.” It is terrible to read the blasphemy of socialists against religion, but these blasphemies are even more intensified when it comes to the Christian faith. There was a time of sentimental socialism, when it assumed the role of a direct successor of the covenants of the Gospel. Then in the homes of some socialist workers one could find an engraving depicting Jesus as a carpenter with the following inscription: “Jesus of Nazareth, first representative of the people.” On the day of the Nativity of Christ they gathered at democratic banquets to celebrate His birth. Proudhon himself, despite his anticlericalism, had to pay tribute to fashion and place advertisements and reports about these Christian Socialist evenings in his magazine. On April 25, 1848, a commission of democratic socialist women organized a “banquet on the birthday of Christ” at the Valentino Castle with an entrance fee of 1 franc 50 centimes per person (for children 50 centimes). Peuple, Proudhon's journal, published the following report: “The meeting was opened in a dignified manner - with the reading of the Sermon on the Mount; the anthem in honor of brotherhood, sung with great enthusiasm, was followed by a series of toasts, a list of which we give: “For Christ, the father of socialism!” - suggested by one lady whose name we did not remember. “For the coming of God to earth!” – suggested by Zhanna Derouin. Our friend, Pierre Leroux, always ready to accommodate the wishes of his brothers and friends, once again read and explained the Sermon on the Mount and welcomed the advent of a new religion... This impromptu speech was received with the most ardent approval. "Here's to Christmas!" – suggested by m-me Brazier. “For Saint-Just, victim of Thermidor!” – suggested by Herve. “For the resurrection of Christ, for France!” – proposed by Bernard” 5 . We think that such blasphemous “banquets” will not win any Christians over in favor of socialism, but now even that is not the case 6 . “Now the socialists have one desire: to debunk Christianity, to undermine the reliability of its historical foundations, to ridicule its ideological content and to trample even its moral teaching into the mud.” Christianity is derived from economic conditions and demands. For the sake of decency, they try to present the matter “scientifically.” At the Mainz Party, a demand was made “to provide a scientific refutation of the teachings of Christianity, suitable for propaganda purposes.” And here comes a dirty and blasphemous socialist caricature of scientific literature. “Here you don’t know what to marvel at more: the psychological limitations of the authors or their ignorance of history, the backwardness of a fundamental point of view or dishonesty in juggling facts and distorting the meaning of texts? In no other area does the unscientific nature of socialism boasting of scientificity find such self-exposure as here, in its boyishly perky criticism of Christianity.” The “irrefutable conclusions of science” are taken from the Tübingen people. Lafargue sees the Christian faith as “a systematic combination of ideas and worlds that dominated the ancient world for hundreds of years.” The existence of Christ is “very vague” for Bebel; Christianity is borrowed from Egypt, from India, from Buddha, Zoroaster and even Socrates: of course, it is of human origin, and “the elimination of it, from the point of view of progress, is a necessity.” The church is “the yoke into which the clergy harnesses the people in the interests of the ruling classes” (Bebel). Socialists do not touch the dogmatic side of Christianity; Who now considers dogmas obligatory? But socialists dare to blaspheme even the moral Christian teaching and offer their own, “higher” teaching. According to this teaching, all morality is conditional; deviating only from one’s own morality is immoral, and in no case from someone else’s (Kautsky). Conscience, according to Menger, is only the fear of the unfavorable consequences of resisting the generally accepted and force, and force and morality are essentially the same thing. “The hope for the Messiah is meaningless, Christianity has not fulfilled its promises of universal redemption from the needs and worries of existence” (and where were such promises made?). Socialists do not criticize the moral teaching of Christianity, which they do not even want to know, but prefer to scold. Christianity is “a religion of hatred, persecution and oppression” (Bebel). “Christian mercy is explained by the desire to belittle the human dignity of the poor and to receive fabulous, usurious interest in the form of a heavenly reward for an insignificant earthly cost” (Lafargue). Finally, the height of socialist blasphemy, for which God Himself will punish them, is Bax’s wild expression “about the excess of constant references to the ideal perfection of the semi-mythical Syrian of the first century, when there are so many higher types in the ranks of the modern social movement.” (God save us from these “higher types”!) The perfection of the “modern social movement” is not in Christian life on earth, nor in eternal bliss in Heaven. Both are archived. “Our ideal is not poverty, not abstinence, but wealth, and immeasurable wealth, unheard-of wealth is the good of all humanity, its shrine, its “holy of holies”; all our hopes are built on the acquisition of wealth” (Dietzgen) 7. But enough, enough of these crazy words! May the readers forgive me that I wrote out the blasphemies of the socialists and thereby offended Christian feelings! I wanted to show what a moral disgrace socialism represents, what an abyss of evil and lies it contains, and what a misunderstanding therefore is any attempt to reconcile socialism with the Divine faith of Christ. Such attempts come not only from Christians who have lost their faith, who “change the glory of the incorruptible God into the likeness of the corruptible image of man and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things” (Rom. 1:23); Some of the socialists, or, better to say, of the workers seduced by socialism, are naively confident in the possibility of combining socialism with Christianity. The socialist press tries to use this confidence, proving “that Christ belongs not to the churchmen, but to the socialists.” Oscar Zimmer in his book “The Socialist of Nazareth” comes to the conclusion that all of Christ’s religious teachings were just an addition to His preaching of socialism. According to another author, Christ, unfortunately, could not complete the most important task - to write a textbook on political economy, but the modern luminaries of socialism brilliantly completed this task. All these experiments in an agreement between socialism and Christianity, no matter from which side they come, do not at all satisfy real socialists. The real conviction of the socialists is expressed by Bebel and Vandervelde: “Christianity and socialism strive for different things, they are opposites, like fire and water.” If you imagine all the satanic evil of socialism, expressed in the socialists’ own words, your heart will sink in horror. The magazine “Christian” in 1908 was accompanied by the book “Heaven on Earth” by Emil Gregorovius. The book makes an amazing impression. Socialism appears as a terrible monster, as a “mockery against God.” The same impression is produced by familiarization with the attitude of socialism towards our “Holy of Holies” - towards the Christian faith. Socialism is precisely the “mystery of iniquity” (2 Thess. 2:7), which the holy Apostle Paul prophesied about. Is it necessary to refute socialism? No, it is enough just to say what socialism is, and everyone who has not yet lost some faith in Christ will turn away with horror from this ungodly temptation. A believer is absolutely unable to talk about any kind of agreement between socialism and Christianity. Socialism is not only not ours, but it is a clear and dangerous adversary. He is guilty of hostility to Christianity and does not deserve any leniency. He is our enemy. This needs to be recognized by every member of the Church, and the Church needs to announce it loudly to the whole world. If deviation into heresy leads to excommunication from the Church, then deviation into socialism - an error more severe than any heresy - all the more deserves the same punishment. “If anyone loves not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be cursed” (1 Cor. 16:22). And how much socialism loves Jesus Christ - we have already seen this. All obvious socialists must be anathematized. Predatory wolves must be removed from the herd, otherwise the entire herd will disappear. Why talk about some kind of Christianization of socialism? These are empty words. How to Christianize atheism? “Christian socialism” is an internal contradiction. Christian is therefore not socialism. It’s strange to talk about “Christian atheism.” If you do not loudly and openly call socialism the enemy of Christianity, then nothing can come of it except harm, except temptation. Any compromises are inappropriate here. You need to look the enemy in the eyes, reducing the danger is always harmful. At present, one can breathe a sigh of relief and note with consolation that the Orthodox All-Russian Church has already taken a decisive step in defining its relationship to socialism, this “harmful doll” that has appeared among the abundant wheat in our Fatherland 8 . The denunciation of socialism is introduced into the seminar course. The denunciation program was developed by the famous Moscow missionary I.G. Aivazov, edited by our most authoritative hierarch, Archbishop Anthony of Volyn. Representatives of the Church do not curry favor with socialism, like some “renovationists,” but resolutely deny disagreement with Christianity. This shows respect and admiration for the Christian truth, and if someone does not respect his own beliefs, he will never teach others to respect these beliefs. The more convinced we are and the more we respect our convictions, the sooner we will earn respect for ourselves and the sooner they will follow us. The Catholic clergy, which is distinguished by its respect for its Church, has long spoken out against socialism and entered into a struggle with it. However, this can be said more about German Catholics; in Italy they are not averse to sometimes sympathizing with the socialists, with whom they are united by a common hostility to the government, which, in the opinion of the faithful papists, has unjustly offended the Catholic Church. In Germany, the Catholic clergy founded the “People's Union of Catholic Germany” “Volksverein fur das katholische Deutscland” back in the 90s. The activities of this union are not to the liking of socialists, and in the socialist press, even moderate ones, one can read all sorts of curses against the union. Thus, in the July book (1908) of one socialist magazine “Sozialistische Monatshefte” Erdmann calls the union a “factory of lies” (Lugenfabrik), a “Jesuit school”, etc., but, nevertheless, the author condemns the socialists for considering the union a frivolous enemy. The Union, according to Erdmann, achieves success thanks to its organization and the diligence of its members. Recently, some news about the activities of the union 9 has begun to appear in our press, and therefore we consider it not superfluous to give brief information about the emergence, organization and activities of the union. Since 1890, socialist propaganda intensified in Germany. At the same time, an appeal was issued to German Catholics, which drew attention to the spread of dangerous false teachings. Social-Democracy is aware that it has the strongest enemy in the Catholic people, and therefore at the Gallic Congress it declared war on Catholicism. The advancing enemy must be resisted by the strong and organized. The Union took upon itself the task of fighting false teachings and revolutionary plans. “Unite,” says the appeal, “Catholic people, tested in loyalty and readiness to make sacrifices for the Church and the Fatherland! Unite in defense of Christian society! All states - high and low, spiritual and laity, employers and workers - join the union in order to repel the advancing enemy, guide the erring on the path of truth, protect the wavering and enable them to be confirmed in the faith. May the people preserve the holy faith - this is the most important, greatest public matter! " Currently, the union has more than 600,000 members, and each contributes a mark (46 kopecks) per year to the needs of the union. According to the current charter, the union has the goal of educating the people on all issues of social life in its modern development and raising the mental and economic level of all industrial classes - combating all attacks on the Christian foundations of public life, all false teachings and destructive aspirations. The union attracts new members, organizes meetings and courses, publishes and distributes “flying leaflets”, appeals and books, publishes articles in magazines, prepares speakers and writers who would promote the goals of the union, helps institutions with similar tasks, collects scientific and practical materials, provides answers to specific questions, etc. In individual cities and rural districts there are special leaders who manage the affairs of the union locally, organize meetings, etc. In less than a year, from July 17, 1906 to June 31, 1907, the union organized about 2,500 people's assemblies. The Union published 95 “flying leaflets”. The leaflets sold 43 million copies. The contents of these leaflets can be judged by their titles: “Can a Catholic worker be a Social Democrat?”, “Social Democracy as a workers-loving party in its true light,” “What is the attitude of Social Democracy to the land question?”, “Why should Catholic landowners remain faithful to the center?”, “What has the Catholic Party done for the workers?” Under the general title “Social Issues of the Day,” brochures are published on issues of education, workers’ insurance, communal services, politics, labor issues, etc. By the middle of 1907, more than 122 thousand copies of such brochures had been sold. The union publishes a special organ for Catholic workers, and a monthly magazine, Social Culture, for more educated circles. This is the activity of the Catholic Union. Any activity aimed at fighting socialism and protecting those who waver from harmful error is honorable and salutary, as the apostle says: “Brothers! If any of you deviates from the truth, and someone converts him, let him know that he who converts a sinner from his false path will save a soul from death and cover a multitude of sins” (James 5:19-20). Published according to the publication: Troitsky V. Christianity and Socialism. On modern topics. - Christian. Sergiev Posad, 1910. Nos. 1–4. Signed: Vladimir Troitsky. Using living and vivid examples, the author depicts socialism as a phenomenon that is fundamentally hostile to Christianity, although at times it hides behind Christian paraphernalia and treats Christianity with a familiar, condescending attitude. I.T. Pososhkov. Father's will. Ed. edited by E.M. Prilezhaeva. St. Petersburg, 1893. P.1,2–3,6. See: Questions of religion. Issue 1. pp. 36–37. V.A. Kozhevnikov. The attitude of socialism to religion in general and to Christianity in particular. Ed. "Religious and Philosophical Library". M., 1908. P.1–67. Price 45 kopecks. The brochure represents a public reading by the author at the Moscow Diocesan House on March 19, 1907. The brochure has already been published in its second edition. Borrowed from the book by E. Vandervelde. Socialist sketches. Socialism and religion. SPb.: Knigoizd. "Earth", 1906. pp. 27–28. “I wonder what newspapers like La Raison or L'Action would have said if the socialists of 1904 had gathered at Christmas, read the Sermon on the Mount, welcomed the descent of God to earth and declared a toast to Christ, the father of socialism!” says Vandervelde. Quote op. P.28. Socialism does not like labor either; “labor is evil” (Bucks). The divinity of socialism is not work, but pleasure, that is, according to Bebel, everyone’s participation not only in reasonable food and reasonable drink, not only in comfort and whim, but also in lust, since all the drives of nature must be satisfied and because animal drives are in no way lower than mental ones. (On this, see: V.A. Kozhevnikov. Cited works. pp. 53–55.) Orthodox Christian teaching is completely opposite. According to Orthodox teaching, “moral perfection is achieved through amateur, complex work on oneself, internal struggle, deprivation, and especially self-abasement.” “The Orthodox faith is an ascetic faith.” “Christianity is a teaching about the gradual elimination of passions, about the means and conditions for the gradual assimilation of virtues.” These conditions from the inside consist in exploits. See: Archbishop Anthony. “How does the Orthodox faith differ from Western confessions.” Complete set of works. Pochaev, 1906. T.4. P.185,189. See: Resolutions of the IV Missionary Congress. - Church Gazette. 1908. No. 37. For example, in the Rossiya newspaper. No. 827 and 828. You might be interested in: