Legoyd articles. Vladimir Legoyda - Do jeans interfere with salvation

Vladimir Romanovich Legoyda

Do jeans interfere with salvation. An experience modern apologetics

BY BLESSING

His Holiness Patriarch of Moscow

and all Rus'

ALEXIA II

INFORMATION SUPPORT:

Internet portal " Orthodox book Russia"

www.pravkniga.ru

Foreword

The book you are holding in your hands is not quite usual for Orthodox apologetic literature. The author compiled it on the basis of his articles over the past ten years. These were articles of various kinds - both written for specific publications, and popular science works, and texts of numerous speeches.

The composition of the collection is by no means accidental. It opens with a thematic block of materials that have been published for several years in the Prologue section of the Foma magazine. These are relatively short texts, in fact, small essays, the task of which is to show the unbeliever the beauty of Orthodoxy, its versatility. Where people brought up on common atheistic clichés see something cramped, dull gray, to open a huge space filled with light...

However, what will happen next? Even if an unbelieving reader catches a glimpse of this beauty, he will immediately have a “line of defense” in his mind - numerous (and, as a rule, quite standard) questions. And these questions are answered by the second part of the book, and entitled: "Frequently Asked Questions." This mainly also included publications from "Thomas", but from more serious, "theoretical" headings - "Errors and Paradoxes", "Chronos", "Orthodoxy". Here we will talk about the history of the Church, about the relationship between science and religion, that is, about "questions of the mind."

But besides “questions of the mind”, there are also “questions of the heart” – in other words, those problems, bewilderment, and sometimes even resentment that arise in a person who begins his entry into the life of the Church. This is what the third part of the book is devoted to - "Dialogues with the Doubters." These are really dialogues - Vladimir Legoyda does not, like a training boxer, "shadow fight", but talks with very real opponents - with the authors of letters addressed to "Foma", with people who entered into correspondence with him by e-mail. I must say that the editing here was minimal - in preparing the book it was important to keep the spirit of communication alive, to show these disputes "as is", without cuts and stylistic smoothing.

But, let's say a person agreed with the arguments of an Orthodox apologist, received answers to questions scratching in his head - what next? And then life begins, which for all of us takes place not in a cosmic vacuum, not in a wild jungle, but in space, albeit non-physical, but no less significant. In the space of culture. That is the title of the final part of the book. Orthodoxy and culture. How do they compare? How to combine faith and occupation with creativity, art? And what about society, social life (which, after all, is also included in the space of culture)? How should (and how should not) be embodied in these forms religious faith? The author (unlike some Orthodox publicists) does not seek here to give chased formulas, final answers that are not subject to criticism. Rather, he tries to outline the general principles of the approach, shares his thoughts. And how could it be otherwise? After all, Christianity is not a "clear algorithm", not a collection of "political and culinary recipes", but Christ Himself. Way, Truth and Life. And on this path, which is long throughout our lives, we have to look for solutions every now and then. Yes, we have something to rely on, but no one and nothing frees us from the work of the mind and heart.

And it is precisely this construction of the book that distinguishes it from most apologetic writings. As a rule, they are addressed to one or another, but quite a specific type of reader. And the collection "Do jeans interfere with salvation" covers the widest range. There is hardly a person who will not be affected by anything in the book, to whom nothing will seem interesting. Of course, the opposite is also true - one or another reader will certainly miss some materials. Just because it's not him. Maybe still underage. Or, on the contrary, outgrown. But in any case, everyone will find something for themselves.

Therefore, I am ready to boldly recommend the collection to anyone who is interested in historical and cultural issues, who is looking for answers to the moral and spiritual questions that the beginning of the 21st century, fraught with dangers and full of difficulties, puts before us.

Vladimir GURBOLIKOV

Show the beauty of Orthodoxy

To my teachers -

Vyacheslav Dyakov,

Yuri Vyazemsky,

Abbot Herman -

with thanks

and love.

“Here you don’t have a plain, here the climate is different, avalanches come one after another, and here a rockfall roars behind a rockfall. And you can turn around, go around the cliff, but we choose a difficult path, dangerous, like a military path ... ”These words of Vysotsky, if you believe those who go in for mountaineering, quite accurately convey the feeling of ascending to the top.

But both the songs of the Russian bard and the stories of the climbers themselves are extremely stingy with any enthusiastic descriptions. It is almost always about overcoming fear, difficulties and adversity. And if you do not realize that a difficult ascent is only a path to the top, and not a goal, it is hardly possible to understand why these "sick" people are drawn to the mountains. After all, it's dangerous. And scary. And uncomfortable. But somehow happy. Although hardly an outsider is able to realize this joy. To feel it, you have to experience it. Try…

"What will Legoyda say?" - seriously or jokingly, but still often think journalists who write about religion and the Church.

A professor at MGIMO, a member of the Public Chamber and editor-in-chief of the most famous Orthodox magazine, Foma, has been combining two conflicting jobs for several years: an editor and a publicist, who needs to write more unexpectedly, and a church “minister of the press,” who needs to make sure that surprises and incorrect interpretations there was no church life in the media.

Mysterious Synodal Information Department of the Russian Orthodox Church located in the Andreevsky Monastery - 15 minutes from the Vorobyovy Gory metro station along the embankment. It is not easy to reach, in winter it is scary. But there is a lot of space - this is not the editorial office of "Thomas", where you can not turn around.

In anticipation of the interview, I ask the secretary about Legoyda’s schedule: yesterday I was free at ten o’clock, until 23:00 - calls, by 5 o’clock in the morning I finally finished watching the film, on which they will call for comment in the morning, took exams in the afternoon, from there I myself went to an appointment - to His Holiness the Patriarch , just now graduate students-trainees have just left, will make a couple of calls - and will be ready to give interviews. “Only you are more prompt, because the next interview is already scheduled for 20:00.”

As I guessed, during the interview, things didn’t decrease - during the conversation, Legoyda simultaneously looked through the air of the Soyuz - whether they managed to film something they had planned together or not. By the way, it doesn't seem to work very well.

Vladimir Romanovich Legoyda

Candidate of Political Sciences, Professor at MGIMO.

Editor in Chief"THOMAS" . Chairman of the Board of the Foundation for the Promotion of Cultural and Educational Activities "Foma Center". Member of the public expert council at the Moscow State Duma Commission on interethnic and interfaith relations. Chairman of the Education Commission of the Public Council of the Central Federal District. Permanent member of the jury of the humanitarian TV quiz for high school students"Clever and Wise" ("1st channel"). Member of the editorial board of the journal "Alpha and Omega".

Blitz

- What is your main task as head of the Synodal Information Department?

My main task is to make the Department work, and work effectively. But if we talk about the tasks of the Department itself, then here we can somewhat conditionally distinguish two areas: interaction with secular media and with Orthodox media and diocesan press services and other information departments.

Concerning secular media, here we also set ourselves two main tasks: first, the position of the Church should be present in the media field, the second - it must be expressed adequately: both in form and in content. Briefly so. A little, but not easy, I assure you.

As for “their own”, church, media resources, here the main task of the Department is to build a unified information space the whole Church. Of course, first of all, in terms of meaning, and not in terms of technology. We are engaged in technologies to a lesser extent, in contrast to our secular vis-a-vis- Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communications of the Russian Federation. To this end, we are trying to develop our own information and media resources.

In October 2010, at the festival of Orthodox media "Faith and Word", the presentation of the official video channel of the Russian Orthodox Church on YouTube took place - for those who read less and less on paper and watch more. We give people the opportunity to receive information about the Church, including in the format of short familiar videos, because it is this format that is considered the most popular and convenient for Internet users.

- The situation in the field of modern religious journalism is far from satisfactory ...

Indeed, the Orthodox media community still faces a number of important and ambitious tasks. We still do not have an Orthodox newspaper - public, mass, significant for the general reader. There is no weekly conceptual magazine, one that could be built into one row with the same "Itogi", "Kommersant-Vlast", "Expert". At the same time, I am not sure that these are the main problems in our information work today.

- What do you think is more important?

I'll name a few things. Firstly, it is the persistence in the media of a number of false stereotypes about the Church (“The Church is rich, but does not help anyone”; “The Church has grown together with the authorities”, etc.).

Secondly, the unwillingness (inability?) of many authors to write about what is really the main thing in the Church, and not about minor things. Now I'm not even talking about scandals (or pseudo-scandals), but about minor things for the Church. Secondary from the point of view of church self-identity, of course - if you will allow me to put it that way.

- But wouldn't having your own newspaper or a popular weekly magazine help solve these problems?

I think only partly. They would help solve the problem of having a channel to adequately communicate the opinion of the Church to the audience. But I'm talking about the whole picture of church life, which today is drawn by the secular media and reaches the reader or viewer through other channels.

- The most a big problem Orthodox journalism today?

I've talked about this many times already. Orthodox journalism, insofar as it lays claim to this title, must be Christ-centered. Without it, there is no point in its existence.

Speaking of more technical issues, many Orthodox media outlets lack the responsiveness to important social events. In theory, it is Orthodox journalism that should give an ecclesiastical, moral assessment of what is happening in our society. And this is not always possible and not for everyone. But some people succeed. Here is Pravmir, for example. I would even say that you sometimes react too quickly. You can think longer: suddenly something is not worth publishing. Of course, you can cut it out if you want.

We got to the unsolvable: low efficiency is bad, high efficiency is also bad - “Why did you translate this news” and “why did you take a comment from N". Difficult. And what prompted you at MGIMO to take this difficult path of Orthodox journalism?

But what, unclean animals study at MGIMO, or what?

Speaking seriously, I never set myself the task of engaging in religious journalism. In general, I have always enjoyed teaching. And now, perhaps, still most of all like it. But the years of study at the institute became for me a time of acquaintance with the life of the Church. And then there was both a desire and a blessing to make a magazine. Actually, it was our original attempt to answer the question in this way: what is faith, what does it mean to “live according to the Gospel”? We had many conversations with classmates about faith, about life and death, about honor and dignity. Such kitchen "Soviet" conversations, but not about power (more precisely, against power), but about the main thing: why live and why die.

Death to the world!

- Can you tell us about the atmosphere of that time?

Sounds like a question to a veteran of the Patriotic War of 1812. It was not so long ago at all ... Although, you are probably right - the atmosphere has changed since then. I would say, paraphrasing Jaspers, that it was mini- axial time. At least for journalism.

The main printed Orthodox publications of the last twenty years have appeared. In 1994, the magazine "Alpha and Omega" was published, in 1995 - the newspaper "Tatyanin's Day" and the magazine "Vstrecha", and in 1996 - the magazine "Foma". Since then, by the way, no new magazine formats have been created.

Of course, we are not Christopher Columba either, magazines were invented before us, but it seems to me that all subsequent publications in one way or another worked out existing formats. Is that the magazine "Grapes" - no. And relatively recently, the magazine "Family" appeared, published in Kyiv.

- And how did "Foma" appear?

- In the early 90s, I spent a year in the USA, at one of the universities in Northern California.

There he met people from the community, which was founded at one time by Father Seraphim (Rose) and Father Herman (Podmoshensky). In the city where I studied, there was even ... Epiphany Skete. An ordinary-looking house in which two young novices lived, one of them is a former rock musician. They began to publish a magazine for punks - Death to the World - death to the world. I helped them a little.

When I was leaving, Father Herman told me that now we need to publish a magazine in Russia. I say: “Father, I have never punked, what kind of punk am I!”. The answer was: “God gave you a head, now learn how to use it. Think of it in such a way that you get an interesting Orthodox magazine.”

So I left the States with this blessing. I don't know if I learned how to use my head, but I broke it pretty good.

First we ( now - Hieromonk Simeon - approx. ed.) wanted to make a magazine together. I remember he even wrote some kind of fairy tale - as the first publication. It didn't make much of an impression on me then.

Vlad and I were very good friends and still treat each other warmly. And, you know, I'm very glad that we didn't get a joint publication. Because as a result, instead of one bad media - in case we continued the joint creative search, which obviously did not go well - we got two far from the worst ones. and was, in my opinion, its best editor-in-chief, so that all subsequent and worthy chief editors of this excellent publication will not be offended by me (I am talking, first of all, about the era of the paper "TD"). And after a short time we made "Foma".

- How "were looking for people"?

The first issue of the magazine "Foma"

My close friend and godson Alexei Zakharov, who knew about the painful search for brothers in misfortune, once came to me with a copy of the central newspaper of the trade unions Solidarity and with the words: “Are you looking for a man? That's who you need." And he handed over the issue of the newspaper where Vladimir Gurbolikov's article was published.

Both texts were on a church theme. More precisely, the first - with questions, doubts and even claims, and the second - with an attempt to answer. A very good answer, I must say. I even remember the title of Volodya's article: "The meeting place cannot be changed." It's about the Church. We later published a revised version of this text in Foma with the heading "An era of distrust, or the meeting place cannot be changed." The article was software. Well, then I read Volodya and understood: the meeting place cannot be changed. Such a place turned out to be the Church of St. John the Evangelist near Pushkinskaya Square. Volodya and Lesha were both his parishioners. So we met, and all questions about finding a partner disappeared. We realized that we could work together. That's how we've been doing it for 15 years. This is a great happiness and mercy of God.

- Right off the bat?

Of course, I didn’t understand much then and didn’t know how to do it, although I graduated from the journalism department. In addition… How is the way of a journalist drawn (or was drawn to me then) in a standard way: first you run around with a voice recorder, a notepad, something else, and then you grow, you grow… Maybe you will become an editor. You know what they say: I went from a plumber to a minister... It was not like that for me at all. In, so to speak, Fomovskaya work book I have only two entries: the editor, more precisely, the co-editor, then the editor-in-chief.

... "Foma" was not conceived as a professional project. In the sense that we did not write business plans, and in general we did not write almost any plans. For a long time they did not receive money for their work ... The transition to "Foma" as a professional publication was a very serious and important stage. It’s just that at some point we realized: you can’t mock readers and publish a magazine three times a year, whenever you want. But it happened that you want, but there are no funds for the release ...

- There is a story about three births of the magazine...

Yes. This, it seems, I came up with a story about three births. Well, or I like to think that I am. The first - when Volodya and I met. The second is when they came up with the name. It was a dream of Volodya's wife Katya. Incidentally, one of my Orthodox friends and publishers told me sternly: “A woman? Had a dream? You can't call it that for anything!" Well, I did it strictly according to the classics. More precisely, on the classics.

- Remember, in "Office Romance" the heroine Akhedzhakova asks her boss, "mymra", what she thinks about the boots that she was offered to buy. And after the boss’s answer that she would never take, she unequivocally sums up: “So, good boots, you have to take them.”

Although, perhaps, I just came up with this for you. And my first reaction to Katya's dream was negative. But then we realized that we were doomed to this name. And the third birth is when father Arkady Shatov (now Bishop Panteleimon (Shatov) - approx. ed) gave us money for the first issue of the magazine. I gave it not from financial abundance - I think these funds were intended for some other important things, for the life of the parish. But without his help, none of this would have happened. We showed him the layout. He asked why the magazine had not been published until now. There is no money, we say. How many do you need? So much. Take it. Give back if you can.

- Were you able to?

Yes, as far as I remember. So father Arkady became our godfather. And for a long time he was the secret confessor of the publication, he read all the texts. Helped us a lot. There were times when we argued about the possibility of publishing this or that material. Maybe that's why at some point the "Neskuchny Sad" appeared and Father Arkady became his "vowel" confessor.

What other names were there?

I wanted to call it "Transfiguration", so that everything was simple and clear - I read the magazine and changed. Opened to the doubters, closed to the believers! And then it turned out that that was the name of the magazine of Moscow feminists. Volodya wanted to name the magazine "Doors", "Ark" ... And many years later, a marketing friend told me that the best name for the magazine is a masculine noun of two syllables. What can you say? Only: providentially, as the Orthodox say.

- And there were no incidents with the name?

I don't remember the cases. But I remember that when I showed the first issue to Alexei Viktorovich Shestopal, head of the MGIMO philosophy department, he asked: “Thomas? What is Foma? Aquinas? I said apostle. And Alexey Viktorovich became a member of our editorial board.

- Marina Andreevna Zhurinskaya, the editor of Alpha and Omega, played a big role in the development of the magazine, right?

Played and plays. And in the life of the magazine, and in my life. I am happy that I know Marina Andreevna and have the opportunity to communicate with her. It was MAZH (as we sometimes call it in internal correspondence) that ironically formulated that an Orthodox magazine should be Christ-centered. If he is not, then he has no right to exist. I was with her this morning, driving and painfully trying to remember how we met her. To be honest, I did not remember the first meeting in detail. Marina Andreevna is a great woman. I repeat, I am happy that I have the opportunity to communicate with her. Although, I confess, this communication is not always easy.

Marina Zhurinskaya in the editorial office of "Thomas"

She belongs to that circle of people who are almost gone. And by the level of culture, knowledge, and by the possession of the word, and by the flight of thought, so to speak. These are people, after communication with whom you want to do something. After talking with Marina Andreevna, you always want to learn more, read a book, somehow pull yourself up to her level.

- What does it mean - the "Christocentricity" of the magazine?

Christocentricity is always a conversation about the main thing in Christianity. Once in St. Petersburg we had a pseudo-debate with a popular St. Petersburg Catholic writer. He said something like that in Orthodox journals he comes across a lot of material about the greatness of Russia, about the value of the monarchy, about the contribution of Orthodoxy to culture and other similar things, but very little about the Founder of Christianity. I think there is something to think about here.

This does not mean, of course, that the word "Christ" should be on every page. Personal tone has always been important to us. Our motto is to show the beauty of Orthodoxy - as he wrote Archpriest Valentin Sventsitsky. Therefore, we immediately said that we do not write about sects, we are not at war with anyone.

- And what's wrong with a warning, a polemic?

A person can cry out to God from the abyss of sin, or he can reach for beauty and love. We mostly see the second way, although, of course, if you look at the personal confessions that “Thomas” was always rich in, there is also an abyss of sin from which a person tries to escape.

- Who else would you classify as your teachers?

Of course, Yuri Pavlovich Vyazemsky, who played a huge role in my life. I learned a lot from him and am still learning - not only as a teacher or supervisor, but also as a thinker and artist. During my school years I had an older friend and teacher, Vyacheslav Nikolaevich Dyakov. Unfortunately, we now live in different countries(I grew up in Northern Kazakhstan) and very rarely see each other and communicate.

I have always listened very carefully to Volodya Gurbolikov, because he formulated, created and creates the creative and personal component of the magazine. We constantly discussed everything and at the same time both learned to live the church life. Now, unfortunately, we communicate much less, but we always feel and understand each other well. Vladimir Alexandrovich helped me break the stereotype that friends cannot work together.

What have you learned, what have you learned from each other?

At the very beginning of the “glorious deeds”, Volodya always told me that it was necessary to write easier: “Why don’t you write the way you tell? You are always very interesting. And when you write, you want to die right away.

Well, he somehow said it more tenderly, but the meaning was this. I remember that I rewrote the texts seven times. Volodya always said that the text should not contain deliberate morality, but “pictures” - stories in which a person himself will see this morality and deduce it for himself.

What do you like to write about the most?

- AT modern media Are there any good, pleasing examples of the right tone and conversation?

Yes, definitely. Gradually there is a departure from the museum story about Orthodoxy.

Over the past year, I often had to communicate with the leadership of the leading TV channels, they have a lot of applications for Orthodox films.

On Channel One this year, the trilogy "Christmas - Lent - Easter" was released. I remember, at a meeting with the creators of this trilogy, I sat and could not believe my eyes: where am I: On Channel One or at Thomas's meeting? So it's close in approach. Of course, this film can be criticized, but the attempt, it seems to me, is very successful. And correct. The intention to make such a film is very important.

- And what phenomena would you classify as real failures in the field of religious journalism?

No comment. :) ( the emoticon was entered by Legoyda himself - approx. ed.)

- And if we talk about some unfinished big plots? Were our media able to reveal the theme of the New Martyrs?

What does it mean to reveal? This is not an essay on a given topic. This is a permanent job. While it, from my point of view, is unsatisfactory. But something has already been done. Something is being done. The problem is that, in my opinion, the veneration of the New Martyrs has not become a fundamental part of our church life at all. A lot of work was carried out by the canonization commission. But these works are still little known even to the people of the Church - if we talk about a mass scale. Therefore, it is very important that the last Bishops' Cathedral gave a number of serious instructions to the Synodal institutions in connection with the veneration of the new martyrs.

The attitude towards the memory of the New Martyrs is an indirect indication of a terrible feature that is present in our church life - its outward formality. It is clear what you can pray for - for sailors traveling. The great martyr and healer Panteleimon also understands what to pray for. And what to ask of the new martyrs? Strengthening in faith. Isn't it necessary?

We have reduced most of the very important and acute problems of a person and his spiritual life to such a set of maxims that they do not read, knowing in advance what they will say about it. It turns out that we have closed many topics for ourselves. Are there any prospects? Before that, we talked about extensive development, in the field of expert journalism. What do we do with intensive?

I think before we talk about any development, we should try to understand why it happened. The changes that are taking place in the world are so fast that we do not always keep up with them.

The same problem is happening in education, because today's students are prepared differently, teenagers' brains work differently. They are accustomed to receiving information through channels through which no one gives it to them, because the generation of teachers has not been reorganized.

What is the specific modern stage development of the information society? The volume and speed of information circulation doom us not to searching for it, but to screening it out. The "information model" of Sherlock Holmes, who did not want to fill his head with unnecessary knowledge and unnecessary information, today is the lot of almost every person who works with the flow of information.

The model of television, where there are dozens of channels, is a model of the information society of the future. The way out that I see is the creation of niche professional resources that will "cling" a person from different angles. I can take and put side by side reviews of the magazine "Foma", positive and negative. I can agree with both of them. It's just written by different people. Truism: for different people you need to create different things. By execution, by way of conveying thoughts. But Christocentric in essence.

Then we can safely make a punk magazine that was published in a small town in California. This magazine was amazingly popular. It was of no interest to anyone except the punks themselves and specialists who looked at it from the perspective of counterculture researchers. But he hit the mark in this particular audience.

It's like a teacher's dilemma. You come to the classroom, there are up to thirty percent of those who want and can study, up to thirty percent of those who cannot and do not want to study, and a swamp that sways between them. And you understand that you are giving a highly intelligent lecture, and thirty percent listen to you, and if you tell a joke, then everyone listens to you. We need to break this audience and work with different people.

I am sure that in the next five years it is possible to increase the circulation of Foma, Neskuchny Sad, Slavyanka, because there are people who will read it. And not only because of the quality of publications, but not least because there is a hunger for this topic. But we, of course, will not change the global trend of falling print runs.

There are things that the media does not change. Why is it necessary to build at least two hundred churches in Moscow now? It’s elementary: priests don’t have the opportunity to be confessors when a hundred people come to you for confession…

- And what can be called among the achievements of recent years? Any myths busted?

I think that the stereotype that the Church is a collection of anti-intellectuals, who supposedly cannot take place anywhere, has been partially dispelled, and therefore they came to churches. True, the problem of interaction between the Church and academic society remains - an age-old problem, about which Kireevsky once wrote. The language of patristic intuitions has not been translated into the language spoken by modern science, and they are strangers to each other.

Has expert religious journalism developed in Russia today in the field of ecclesiastical and religious media?

We have few experts in the Western sense. Of course, we must work with the expert community. But the bench of people who are able to act as analysts is very small. Individual publicists understand the topic, but the circle of these comrades is very narrow.

With Minister of Culture Alexander Sokolov

Closely observing the interpretation and analysis of church events in the secular media, I can say that most of these interpretations do not stand up to criticism. But these explanations can be very plausible. But in general, pseudo-expertness is typical today for any environment. There are many people who proudly call themselves political scientists, and their explanations of the political process are terribly far from reality. It is often joked that a political scientist is a person who easily explains any events, and then, when they do not occur, explains why they did not occur. It seems that the same joke is about politics.

- What are the prospects for expert polemics in the niche of the Orthodox media?

I think that expert journalism must develop in the Orthodox media. Another thing is that it will have its own characteristics. We will not get away from the specifics of interpretations; value attitudes will still play their role here. There is another question: what problems and in what format should be discussed.

There is a position - you can not make dirty linen in public. This is, by the way, a very sound position. This is about Khamov's sin.

But this does not mean that nothing can be criticized or that there is no critical attitude towards church life now. Take the speeches of His Holiness the Patriarch... I cannot recall a single leader of a large organization, corporation, who would be so exacting of himself and would so aptly point out the painful points of church life. Here is a speech by the Patriarch on monastic careerism, for example. We are told: the Church does not criticize itself. Excuse me, the first person in our country criticizes the shortcomings of church life in such a way that it will not seem to anyone.

Another thing is that the leadership of the Church is set to be constructive, and this is a very correct and wise, in my opinion, position. We want a constructive discussion of the problem? We want. We have created . Does it work perfectly? Not yet. But it works, and the real fruits of its labors are already there.

Legoyda Vladimir Romanovich

1973

Graduated: MGIMO

Organizations: Commission on Education of the Public Council of the Central Federal District, working group for the development of the document of the Russian Orthodox Church "Fundamentals of the teaching of the Russian Orthodox Church on dignity, freedom and human rights", Synodal Information Department, Synodal Biblical and Theological Commission, Inter-Council Presence of the Russian Orthodox Church, working group for the preparation of the modern Catechism of the Russian Orthodox Church, the Patriarchal Council for Culture, the Patriarchal Commission for the Family, the Protection of Motherhood and Childhood, the Church-Public Council for the Perpetuation of the Memory of the New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia, the Synodal Department for the Relations of the Church with Society and the Media, the Coordinating Committee for encouragement of initiatives under the auspices of the Russian Orthodox Church , KTSMD , Center for Church and International Relations , St. Seraphim of Sarov Charitable Foundation , Public Expert Council under the Moscow City Duma Commission on International th and interfaith relations, Young Guard of United Russia, Presidential Council Russian Federation for the Development of Civil Society Institutions and Human Rights, the Public Council under the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation, the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation, the Public Council under the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, the Board of Trustees of the Safe Internet League, the Public Council under the Commissioner for Children’s Rights under the President of the Russian Federation, the Council for Public Television, Board of Trustees of Radio Sport, Council for Interaction with Religious Associations under the President of the Russian Federation, Patriarchal Commission for Physical Culture and Sports

education

church positions

ecumenism

Member of the ecumenical forum "Meeting in Rimini" (year).

press

Published in publishing houses: Dar, Nikea, PSTGU, Foma-Center.

organizations

ideology

Vladimir Legoyda argues that society has different views on the political system, and he obviously recognizes the legitimacy of all these opinions:

No political regime, be it democracy, authoritarianism, etc., and no form state government(republic, monarchy) is not able to prevent a person from saving his soul ... Political issues are not included in the clearly defined “sphere of interest” of Orthodox dogma, which formulates obstacles on the way to the main (and in a sense, the only) goal Christian life: the salvation of the soul in God.

Legoyda recognizes public life as a personal matter for everyone:

It doesn't mean that Orthodox person cannot participate in politics, but assumes that no matter what political disputes we have, no matter how we differ in political opinions, we can all unite in Christ at one Chalice.

No politics, according to V. Legoyda, interferes with communication:

No politics, no even the most dramatic, tragic things can be an obstacle to communication between people of the same faith.

propaganda

According to Vladimir Legoyda, there should be two main points in the work of the Orthodox media - "aspiration for the future and proximity to human problems."

amoralism

Vladimir Legoyda is arguing against the commandments, considering morality possible only in human society: a man on a desert island cannot be moral. Sin is also "not a moral concept":

Imagine a person on a desert island: he does not need to be moral, in principle he cannot commit immoral acts. But he can still have a relationship with God ... The commandments have never, at least in Christianity, been the goal. Including because sin is not a moral category in Christianity, but an ontological one.

Vladimir Legoyda assesses abortion as follows:

Abortion is murder, this is an unequivocal, definite position of the Church, but this does not mean that we need to shoot and bring “under the article” those who committed it.

Mass culture

Vladimir Legoyda sees no boundaries between secular culture and the Church:

The pair "Church" and "culture" are not two horizontally located identical institutions that should interact like one ministry with another. No, it's all part of society. Many people of culture are believers, they are also a church. After all, what is a church? The church is a collection of believers. Therefore, any work created by a person who considers himself a Christian is also related to culture and the church.

From the point of view of Vladimir Legoyda, “The Church is inseparable from society” and precisely from a secularized, secularly religious society:

In the European cultural context, sports, as well as science and public administration, have become secularized over time, and the Church can only welcome this. We don’t make sacrifices to presidents (and we did to emperors), we don’t conjure over test tubes (the philosopher’s stone is a thing of the past), and we don’t dedicate sports to Zeus. This is a solid and unshakable foundation of European civilization.

rock opera "Jesus Christ Superstar"

In 2012, Vladimir Legoyda opposed the ban on the blasphemous rock opera "Jesus Christ Superstar": "I do not support the initiative of the anonymous Rostov Orthodox community to ban the rock opera".

After performances by Vladimir Legoyda, rock missionaries and representatives of the Rostov Metropolitanate at the Rostov Regional Philharmonic, ticket sales were resumed for the blasphemous rock opera Jesus Christ Superstar.

"Vangelia"

According to Legoyda, “the Bulgarian clairvoyant Vanga is perceived in the Bulgarian and Russian Orthodox Churches as a victim of an action dark forces". Legoyda considers the propaganda of these actions of the dark forces excusable, because "for last years The first channel at times more often began to show reports from church holidays and other church events, cover the visits of Patriarch Kirill and quote his sermons.

Another argument in favor of the channel was the Whole World charity marathon, recently organized by the efforts of the management of Channel One: “Why do we forget about good deeds people when we are possessed by a passionate desire for condemnation? .

developments

• Give soul to Europe. Mission and Responsibility of the Churches (conference) (May 3, 2006)
• Meeting of the Central Committee of the WCC, 2006 (August 30, 2006)
• XII World Russian People's Council (February 20, 2008)
• Globalization, religion, traditional values ​​(summit) (April 27, 2010)
• IV All-Church Congress of Diocesan Missionaries of the Russian Orthodox Church (November 16, 2010)
• XV World Russian People's Council (May 25, 2011)
• IV Congress of Leaders of World and Traditional Religions (May 28, 2012)
• XIX World Russian People's Council (November 10, 2015)
• Meeting of the working group of representatives of the Russian Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church of Italy (February 21, 2017)
• XXI World Russian People's Council (November 1, 2017)
• Orthodoxy: yesterday, today, tomorrow - 2018 (forum) (August 23, 2018)
• II Baku Summit of Religious Leaders of the World (November 14, 2019)
• International Conference "Christian Values ​​in the Modern World" (November 28, 2019)

pathological speech →

awards

essays

books

• Legoyda V.R. Dependency declaration. - M.: Nikea, 2011. - 192 p.
• Legoyda V.R. Do jeans interfere with salvation. Experience of modern apologetics. - 3rd, correct. and additional .. - M .: Foma-Centre, Dar, 2007. - 384 p.
  • Legoyda V.R. Do jeans interfere with salvation. Experience of modern apologetics. - 1st. - M.: Foma-Centre, 2005.
  • Legoyda V.R. Do jeans interfere with salvation. Experience of modern apologetics. - 2nd. - M.: Foma-Centre, 2006.
• Legoyda V.R. The man in the skin of a dragon. - M.: Nikea, 2015. - 208 p.
• Legoyda V.R. A few words for Christmas. - M.: Nikea, 2016. - 48 p.
• Legoyda V.R. Church that raises its voice. - M.: Eksmo, 2018. - 192 p. -( Orthodox library). - ISBN 978-5-04-091178-3.

articles and interviews

• Legoyda V.R. On earthly and heavenly citizenship. // Church and society. - 1998. - No. 3.
• Legoyda V.R. The main danger of our time. // Pro et contra. - 1998.
• Legoyda V.R."Civil Religion" in the USA: Genesis and Main Characteristics // State, Religion, Church in Russia and Abroad. Information-analytical bulletin of the RAGS. - 1999. - No. 4.
• Legoyda V.R. The American Dream and US Foreign Policy. // Arms export. - 1999. - No. 6.
• Legoyda V.R. Religiosity in a non-religious society. Article 1-3. // Alpha and Omega . - 2000. - No. 1, 2, 4.
• Legoyda V.R. The Image of the President in American Political Culture. // Mass communications and mass consciousness. Digest of articles. Moscow: MGIMO, 2001
• Legoyda V.R. Religious discourse in modern media: is it possible to talk about Christianity in the era of secularism. // Church and time. - 2006. - No. 35.
• Legoyda V.R. Politics and Soul Salvation. // Foma. - 2008. - No. 1 (57).
• Legoyda V.R. Church and culture: tradition and conservatism. // Alpha and Omega, 2009, No. 54 (1);
• Legoyda V.R. New about human rights. // Alpha and Omega . - 2009. No. 55 (2).
• Legoyda V.R. Faith as cultural identity and faith as life. // Foma. - 2008. - June.
• Legoyda V.R. What was, what is. //Alpha and Omega . - 2010. - No. 1 (57).
• Legoyda V.R. Freud did not dream. // News. - 2011. - April 14.
• Legoyda V.R. USE as a large-scale moral problem. // News. - 2012. - June 13.
• Legoyda V.R. The world of utopias, or once again about the Church and the state. // www.expert.ru. - 2012. - October 8.
• Legoyda V.R. About children - without politics and selfishness. // www.expert.ru. - 2012. - December 21.
• Legoyda V.R. The church does not merge with the state, but defends its rights. // Arguments and Facts. - 2013. - January 11.
• Legoyda V.R. People matter, not numbers. // capitalism. - 2013. - February 12.
• Legoyda V.R. Feelings of believers and non-believers, or why you should not go with your charter to a strange monastery. // Independent newspaper. - 2013. - May 14.

appearances on radio and television

• "Channel 3" // Program "Triangle". - 2011. - January 6.
• Radio station "Mayak" // Program "Propaganda". - 2012. - February 15.
• TV channel “Rain” // “The Church intervened in the national question”. - 2011. - August 25.
• T/c Russia 1 // Program “Special Correspondent” // “Provocateurs”. - 2012. - April 24.; "Provocateurs 2". - 2012. - September 11.
• Radio station "Echo of Moscow" // Program "Parents meeting" // "Church and school: points of contact". - 2012. - November 18.
• TV channel "Rain" // Sobchak alive. - 2013. - February 7.
• T/c "Russia 24" // Program "Senate" // "Is it necessary to protect the feelings of believers?". - 2013. - April 17.
• Public Television of Russia // Program "Without Preface". - 2013. - June 25.
• World of Belogorye // Program "The Way, Truth and Life". - 2015. - May 5. [

He spoke out about the neo-pagan nature of the Olympic Games

Title of Thomas Hobbes' Leviathan (1651).

In his today's interview with the Interfax agency, the head of the Synodal Information Department, V. Legoyda, affirms, first of all, the dogma that Church is inseparable from society. With joy, MGIMO graduate V. Legoyd welcomes secularization in its full bloom:

In the European cultural context, sports, as well as science and public administration, have become secularized over time, and the Church can only welcome this. We don’t make sacrifices to presidents (and we did to emperors), we don’t conjure over test tubes (the philosopher’s stone is a thing of the past), and we don’t dedicate sports to Zeus. This is a solid and unshakable foundation of European civilization.

olympic fire

Now it is quite easy to answer the question about the Olympic flame:

I can hardly imagine that someone would consciously invest in the manipulation of the Olympic torch some sacred meaning. Lighting the Olympic flame is a theatrical performance, and people have not put any other meaning into it since the revival of the Olympic Games.

Conclusion, you ask? Very simple and, however, quite totalitarian:Many of our compatriots are looking forward to the Olympics to support their team, cheer for Russian athletes and pay tribute to the skills of foreign. BUT Church as we remember should not be separated from society.

The day before, guided by exactly the same logic, V. Legoyd from the Orthodox occult series "Vangelia" on Channel One TV. He admits that the Bulgarian clairvoyant Vanga is perceived in the Bulgarian and Russian Orthodox churches as a victim of the dark forces. However, Christians should not protest against the propaganda of the actions of these forces, since Channel One is not Orthodox.

A year ago V. Legoyda for similar reasons the initiative of the Orthodox community to ban the blasphemous rock opera "Jesus Christ Superstar": Of course, an Orthodox person cannot accept the image of Christ that is there ... but consider it an insult(feelings of believers - Ed.) - explicit overkill.

That is, if Channel One was Orthodox, the president was a tsar, a rock opera was a divine service, and chemistry was alchemy, then V. Legoyda could speak with a spiritual assessment of secular phenomena, and since there is nothing like that, then excuse me ...

How, then, is the dogma confessed above that “the Church is not separated from society” combined with this radically secular view of the Church?

And so that the Church does not have the right to act from Christian positions, and at the same time must follow the people and the state, including, on their way to the spiritual abyss. Such is the logic of the liberal state, Leviathan from the book of the same name by Thomas Hobbes, where the words from the book of Job are attributed to the state: There is no one like him on earth; he is made fearless; looks boldly at everything high; he is king over all the sons of pride(Job 41:25-26).

Or, as in more detail by V. Legoyd, identifying the Christian and liberal doctrine of good and evil:

Imagine a person on a desert island: he does not need to be moral, in principle he cannot commit immoral acts. But he can still have a relationship with God ...

Commandments have never, at least in Christianity, been the goal. Including because sin is not a moral category in Christianity, but an ontological one.

In conclusion, let us say that as a servant of a great and fearless state, V. Legoyda does his job well. But from the point of view of the Church ...

The spread of Islam in Europe may bring Christianity back in popularity; secularity has become new religion and treats others with neophyte aggression; The Church does not yet know what to do with bioethics, but has already allowed the baptism of surrogate babies. Forecast for the future of Orthodoxy and Christianity from Vladimir Legoyda - Chairman of the Synodal Department for Church Relations with Society and the Media of the Moscow Patriarchate

What is the future of religion in 10-20 years? Today in Europe, its social significance is noticeably declining. On the other hand, there is a growing number of Muslims in Third World countries, and Catholics in Africa and Latin America. You get two poles. What will be the outcome of their closeness?

The trends you mentioned do exist. Only in Europe is not the role of religion in general declining, but Christianity, which for centuries was the traditional religion for these places. True, this situation differs markedly from country to country, so it is rather difficult to talk about a general or one trend. It is one thing - Spain, Italy, Poland, another - France, Germany or, say, Norway. In parallel, the influence of Islam is growing in Europe and the world, and it is not yet clear what kind of global reaction its expansion will cause.

Cardinal Kurt Koch once said: "It is not strong Islam that should be feared, but weak Christianity." If we look at this statement as the starting point of a certain program, we can assume that in the European territories the strengthening of Islam will lead to a turn of society towards strong Christianity. True, this is not yet visible, but history very often develops not according to the scenario that seems most obvious to most.

From the moment when the Bolsheviks began to aggressively preach atheism, promises have repeatedly been made to bury religion. Unsuccessfully. Religion will not leave our lives, because this is what a person needs.

I confess, it becomes alarming when I find out that in Europe officials decide to destroy churches, it is forbidden to wear crosses in schools, and it becomes indecent to talk about faith within university walls. Do you think there will be countries in the future on the map of Europe in which religious activity will be outlawed or will be artificially reduced to zero?

I do not rule out that in some countries, at the level of public regulation, rules will be established that significantly restrict the public manifestation of religiosity. I have said many times: if for someone is a problem pectoral cross, which is visible to others, where is the guarantee that tomorrow the cross on the dome of the temple will not become the same problem? Are we going to have to close the temples with some kind of huge fences? with a negative reaction to bell ringing we are already facing. Moreover, in our country.

I think that such opposition also has quasi-religious roots. Secularism, which claims to be the sole regulator of public life, is already an ideology or a quasi-religion. At one time in history, the dominance of one religion implied mandatory restrictions on the other. A similar struggle between aggressive secularism and Christianity often takes place now.

From the point of view of sociology, the ROC is a large public organization. Greenpeace, for example, too. If you ask Greenpeace managers what they will be doing in the next 25 years, they will answer that the main topics for them will be global warming and waste disposal, and the problem of oil production and nuclear energy will become less important than before. Does the ROC have a similar clear vision of problems for the future?

The Russian Church, not to mention Christianity in general, is much older than Greenpeace. Here, at least, a slightly different angle of view.

The problems that a person solves in religion are the same age as a person. Modern apologetics says that people have an innate religious need. But both sociologists and anthropologists will agree that a person does not experience needs that are, in principle, unrealizable - that's how we are arranged. (I'm talking about needs now, and not about fantastic plans and Manilov's dreams). So our plans are designed not for 25 years, but for the entire time of the existence of mankind.

Oil deposits can change, but a person, while he lives, will not get away from the eternal problems of life and death. I was recently shown an article that says that scientists will change the aging gene and people will live to an average of 120 years. But the “damned questions” are not going anywhere. We'll just suffer for longer...

Everything will simply return to the Old Testament framework, where the patriarchs lived for a hundred years?

Yes, everything is already described.

At the same time, like Greenpeace, we are faced with modern challenges: environmental catastrophes, discussions about the education of the future, the departure of young people into virtuality... There are problems that do not have a ready-made theological solution. For example, some issues of bioethics, possible anthropological consequences are bioethical. There are issues that are being addressed. Recently, by the way, a separate document on the baptism of surrogate babies was adopted in the Russian Church.

And how, baptize?

We cross, of course. Strictly speaking, even the arguments against surrogate motherhood itself are more moral than purely theological. If a woman rents out her body for money, bears a child for someone, there is certainly a moral problem in this. But this does not mean that the child cannot be baptized.

Does the Church need to modernize its inner life and principles of working with people?

I try not to use the word "modernization" because for some people it will immediately cause a predictable reaction of rejection, and my words will immediately be marked in a certain way - even before reading and without trying to understand what is being said.

Does the Church need change? Of course they are. The Church is a living organism that is constantly changing. Look, today we have metropolitans on Vkontakte and Facebook. At the same time, there are metropolitans who have never seen either Facebook or Vkontakte.

Priests who are under 40 or 30 years old are people of their generation. They did not fall from the moon and grew in our time with all its pluses and minuses. I don't want to get into a discussion about generations X, Y, Z and Pepsi now, but they are going through the same difficulties as their peers.

When the Apostle Paul says, “I have become everything to all in order to save some,” is this not an indication of the need to change and the ability of a Christian to change for the sake of preaching the Gospel? Another thing is that this does not mean that every 10 years you need to change the language of worship or adjust it to the slang that has appeared.

There is a very serious missionary error when the preacher seeks to win over the audience and begins to say "we are the same as you." But Christians are not the same as non-Christians, no matter how politically incorrect it may sound today. This border cannot be crossed. “We are calling you to a place where you will not go without the Church”, “Christ promised that which you will never receive on your own” – only this can be true Orthodox preaching.

We communicate with Muslims, Buddhists and Jews, with believers and non-believers, and in each person we are called to respect the image of God, regardless of religious views this person. But the Christian himself tests these views with one thing - the Gospel. We cannot, we have no right to say that being a Christian or a Muslim is the same from the point of view of Christianity. No, not the same. Actually, this is the position of any world religion, in the center of which is the question of truth and salvation.

The presence of metropolitans on Vkontakte and Facebook is, of course, good. But now the main struggle on the Internet is for the style of presenting information to users. The question is not where to open an account, but how to tell about yourself there. Here, it seems to me, the Church has a serious problem, since 90% of bishops speak the language of not even ancient teachers, but Soviet officials, and prominent church experts speak the language of early 20th-century intellectuals, which few people today accept.

I do not agree with this figure for two reasons: firstly, we have recent times the number of bishops noticeably increased, as dioceses greatly increased (200 dioceses in Russia alone). Most of the bishops who have been ordained in recent years are young people, they simply cannot speak the language of the Soviet bureaucracy. Second point: how much of an "outdated" language is a serious problem? A friend of mine called today's youth "the design generation." I agree with this. But this has its advantages for the richest church tradition painting and architecture.

Besides, modern society very fragmented. Recently, the singer Shnur, in response to the words that he is mega-popular, said: "I am popular in certain social groups." And it's true: among some people he is popular, while among others it is considered indecent to simply mention his name. This is the nature of the modern world. On the one hand, this complicates life, because there are few universal authorities left in it. On the other hand, it seems to me that religion is one of those eternal themes, which experiments with style can harm and which can unite a large number of people precisely with its stylistic constancy.

For example, the problem of language, of course, exists: you need to speak in such a way that the audience understands you. We have experimental priests on Youtube. One, it seems to me, at all works in Max style +100500, only, of course, without swearing. But by the likes and dislikes, as well as by the comments, it is clear that not all of them are ready to accept it. But even with such a modern presentation, of course, these videos do not have millions of views. And it won't. As one of my acquaintances, who is professionally versed in this topic, rightly pointed out the reasons for this: “No swearing. No boobs. No mimi." It's hard to object.

I observed several experiments when the priest tried to switch with the audience not just to a clear language, but, let's say, to a subcultural one. Often the result was the exact opposite of the idea. Still, religious interest is deeply directed for style. They meet, of course, always according to their clothes, but they see them off according to their minds. In general, the main thing is that there is something to see off.

…Yes, today there is a problem of actualization of the sermon. But is there a universal recipe for solving this problem? Of course not. Although I can name one universal criterion: it should scratch the heart. A person, having heard a sermon, should understand how it relates to his life today, and, ideally, be inspired by what he hears.

Then, it seems to me, in Russian seminaries it is necessary to cancel sermon reading courses and just look at the site in free time TED.com . Because his short lectures fully meet the conditions that you have listed.

Trust me, His Holiness Patriarch well aware of the different formats of modern public speaking and in our seminaries not only classical homiletics courses are taught at the level of the 19th century.

That is TED.com watching?

Maybe not necessarily as you would like, but someone is definitely watching. That it is useful, I agree. Although there are other useful sites…

In Russia, theology has acquired the status of a secular science, the first dissertation was recently defended, and immediately many scientists were afraid that Russian higher education was slipping into archaism. Is this true or, on the contrary, will ecclesiastical thought become more relevant in dialogue with secular science?

I consider the problem of the legalization of theology in our academic environment as an atavism of the Soviet period. They were forced to recognize genetics, but theology is still "both wanted and pricked." We are all well aware that the scientific status of theology corresponds to world academic practice. And nothing extraordinary scientific point vision is not happening now. It seems to me that in protests against theology we see manifestations of a dogmatic-anti-scientific understanding of the humanities, which is found primarily among some natural scientists.

The main problem, as has always been since the time of Galileo, is the demarcation of religion and science. And within science too. Now we have introduced a new discipline, we need to draw a line of demarcation: here is religious studies, here is philosophy, here is theology. Methodologically, this is a simple, understandable thing.

I think for most ordinary people the question is “science theology or not?” not that important. The important thing is how noticeable and convincing she can make herself known. For example, psychology is actively involved in public life. Will theology, once established in the scientific community, also become more visible? Will the general public be interested in this?

I will say this: why not?

There is a very interesting contemporary theological thought, which is not yet widely known in Russia. Greek, for example. Or the tradition of modern Protestant apologetics, with which one may not agree on everything, but it is important and necessary to know.

Theology in dialogue with science will be able to attract the attention of not only the believing part of the population of our country and expand the horizons of all thinking people.

Interviewed by Ilya Peresedov.

Photo by Vladimir Eshtokin / Foma magazine

Vladimir Romanovich Legoyda

Chairman of the Synodal Department for Church Relations with Society and the Media of the Moscow Patriarchate.

Church and public figure, journalist, teacher, specialist in the field of cultural studies, political science and religious studies, candidate of political sciences, professor of the department of international journalism, professor of the department of world literature and culture of MGIMO (U) of the Russian Foreign Ministry, editor-in-chief of the magazine "Foma".

Secretary of the Supreme Church Council of the Russian Orthodox Church, member of the Inter-Council Presence of the Russian Orthodox Church, the Patriarchal Council for Culture, the Patriarchal Commission on Family Affairs, Protection of Motherhood and Childhood.

Member of the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation, Public Council under the Commissioner for the Rights of the President of the Russian Federation under the President of the Russian Federation, Chairman of the Commission on the Harmonization of Interethnic and Interreligious Relations of the Council for Cooperation with Religious Associations under the President of the Russian Federation.

Author of books and collections: “Do jeans interfere with salvation. The Experience of Modern Apologetics” (2005, 2006, 2007), “Declaration of Dependence” (2011), “The Man in the Skin of a Dragon” (2015), “A Few Words for the Nativity of Christ” (co-authored with Archpriest Pavel Velikanov, 2016). Author of scientific and popular science articles on general cultural and religious and philosophical topics.