home Women A brief history of the division of Churches in the 11th century. What was the main reason for the division of churches? Division of the Christian Church into Catholic and Orthodox

A brief history of the division of Churches in the 11th century. What was the main reason for the division of churches? Division of the Christian Church into Catholic and Orthodox

Disagreements between the Pope (Western Church) and the Patriarch of Constantinople (and four other patriarchates - the Eastern Church), which began at the beginning of the 5th century, led to the fact that in 1054 the Pope was refused the demand to recognize him as the head of the entire Church. The prerequisites for such a demand were the threat of invasion by the Normans and, as a consequence, the need for military and political assistance. As a result of the refusal, the next Pope, through his legates, informed the Patriarch of Constantinople about his deposition and excommunication. To which he responded with an anathema against the legates and the Pope.

To deny the ancient Western commitment to arrogance and the desire to be above everyone else is pointless. It is thanks to these qualities Western countries became the dominant force throughout the world. Therefore, we can say with confidence that the schism occurred due to the arrogance of the Western Church and the pride of the Eastern. Arrogance because instead of standard diplomatic methods of gaining allies (which is what the Pope required), a position of strength and superiority was used. Pride because, instead of following the church canons about forgiveness, love for one’s neighbor, and so on, the request for help (albeit quite well veiled) was answered with a proud refusal. Consequently, the cause of the split was ordinary human factors.

Consequences of the split

The split was inevitable, since in addition to cultural differences and differences in the interpretation of faith and rituals, there was such an important factor as a sense of self-worth and irreconcilability with the fact that someone is superior. It is this factor that has played a leading role many times throughout history, both world history in general and church history in particular. The separation of churches such as the Protestant (much later) occurred precisely according to the same principle. However, no matter how much you prepare, no matter how much you predict, any division will certainly lead to a violation of established traditions and principles, and the destruction of possible prospects. Namely:

The schism introduced discord and dissonance into Christian faith, became the pre-final point of division and destruction of the Roman Empire and contributed to the approach of the final one - the fall of Byzantium.
Against the backdrop of strengthening Muslim trends of unification of the Middle East under the banners of one color and increase military power direct opponents of Christianity - the worst thing that could be invented - division. If by joint efforts it was possible to restrain the hordes of Muslims even on the outskirts of Constantinople, then the fact that the west and east (the churches) turned away from each other contributed to the fact that the last stronghold of the Romans fell under the onslaught of the Turks, and then he himself found himself under a real threat Rome.
The schism, initiated by the “Christian brothers” with their own hands, and confirmed by the two main clergy, became one of the worst phenomena in Christianity. For if you compare the influence of Christianity before and after, you can see that “before” the Christian religion grew and developed practically on its own, the ideas promoted by the Bible themselves fell into the minds of people, and the Islamic threat was an extremely unpleasant, but solvable problem. “After” - the expansion of the influence of Christianity gradually faded away, and the already increasing area of coverage of Islam began to grow by leaps and bounds.

Then many people appeared who protested against Catholicism, and so the Protestants appeared, led by the Augustinian monk Martin Luther in the 15th century. Protestantism is the third branch of Christianity, which is quite widespread.
And now there is a split in Ukrainian Church and completely brings such confusion into the ranks of believers that it becomes scary, what will all this lead to?!

Gdeshinsky Andrey

From the very beginning of its adoption as a state, two church centers emerged: Byzantium And Rome.

The position of the Patriarch of Constantinople and the Pope was not the same. The Eastern Roman Empire retained its independence for another millennium after the division of the Roman Empire, and the Western one ceased to exist at the end of the 5th century. Patriarch- head of the Eastern Church - was reliably protected state power from external enemies, but he was completely dependent on the emperor. The head of the Western Church, the pope, was relatively free from direct influence from secular power, but he had to constantly maneuver between the rulers of the barbarian states that formed on the territory of the former Western Roman Empire. From the middle of the 8th century. the pope receives a gift of land and at the same time becomes a secular sovereign. To manage economic affairs, the church created a powerful administrative apparatus. This is the objective state of affairs that determined the confrontation between the Eastern and Western churches.

For several centuries, there was a struggle between these branches of the church with varying success, however, while the parties needed each other’s support, a complete break did not occur. In the middle of the 9th century. occurred between the papacy and the patriarchy, marking the beginning of the final schism. First of all, it concerned the appointment to the patriarchal throne Photia who was disliked by dad Nicholas I. The parties did not want to compromise also because it was connected with territorial claims in Bulgaria and Sicily. Bulgaria had recently been baptized, and the parties were arguing over whose jurisdiction it should fall.

Disputes also flared up over religious issues. The Roman Church distributed the Creed adopted at the council with an additional word filioque(and the Son), which meant the recognition of the procession of the Holy Spirit not only from God the Father, but also from God the Son. It was serious deviation from the initial understanding. In addition, the Roman Church allowed fasting on Saturdays, allowed the consumption of cheese and milk during Lent and other liberties. But this time it did not come to a complete break, since the parties were not yet strong enough.

In the middle of the 11th century. The crisis between the two churches took an irreconcilable form and led to a final break. The pope strengthened his influence in Sicily, where the patriarchy had previously occupied a dominant position. In response to this, the patriarch Mikhail Kirulariy ordered that worship according to the Greek model be introduced in the Latin churches of Constantinople. The Patriarch and the Pope exchanged threatening messages. Finally, in 1054, the pope sent his envoys to Constantinople, led by Cardinal Humbert. Patriarch Michael refused to enter into negotiations with them. As a result, the pope and the patriarch exchanged anathemas against each other, which marked the final split of the Christian churches and the emergence of the main trends -

The church schism is one of the most tragic, ugliest and painful phenomena in the history of the Church, which was a consequence of this oblivion, the impoverishment of love between brothers in Christ. Today we will talk a little about it.

“If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but do not have love, then I am a ringing gossamer or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries, and have all knowledge and all faith, so that I could move mountains, but do not have love, then I am nothing. And if I give away all my goods and give my body to be burned, but do not have love, it profits me nothing,” wrote the Apostle Paul to the Corinthians, instructing them in the main law. Christian life, the law of Love for God and other people.

Unfortunately, not all members of the Church and not always remembered these words and experienced them in their inner life. The consequence of this oblivion, the impoverishment of love between brothers in Christ, was one of the most tragic, ugliest and painful phenomena in the history of the Church, called the church schism. Today we will talk a little about it.

What is schism

Church schism (Greek: schism) is one of the most difficult topics to discuss. Even terminologically. Initially, schism was the name given to any disunity in the Church: the emergence of a new heretical group, the cessation of Eucharistic communion between episcopal sees, and simple quarrels within the community between, for example, a bishop and several priests.

Somewhat later, the term “schism” acquired its modern meaning. This is what they began to call the cessation of prayerful and Eucharistic communion between Local Churches (or communities within one of them), caused not by a distortion of dogmatic teaching in one of them, but by accumulated ritual and cultural differences, as well as discord between the clergy.

In heretical groups the very idea of God is distorted, the Holy Tradition left to us by the apostles (and the Holy Scripture as part of it) is distorted. Therefore, no matter how great a heretical sect is, it falls away from church unity and is deprived of grace. At the same time, the Church itself remains one and true.

With the split, everything is noticeably more complicated. Since disagreements and the cessation of prayerful communication can occur on the basis of a banal riot of passions in the souls of individual hierarchs, Churches or communities that have fallen into schism do not cease to be part of the one Church of Christ. The split may end or even deeper disruption inner life one of the Churches with subsequent distortion of dogma and morality in it (and then it turns into a heretical sect) or reconciliation and restoration of communication - “healing”.

However, even a simple violation of church unity and prayerful communication is a great evil and those who undertake it commit terrible sin, and some schisms may take tens, if not hundreds of years to overcome.

Novatian Schism

This is the first schism in the Church, which occurred in the 3rd century. “Novatian” it was named after the deacon Novatian who headed it, who belonged to the Roman Church.

The beginning of the 4th century was marked by the end of the persecution of the Church by the authorities of the Roman Empire, but the last few persecutions, in particular Diocletian's, were the longest and most terrible. Many captured Christians could not stand the torture or were so frightened by it that they renounced their faith and sacrificed to idols.

The Carthaginian Bishop Cyprian and Pope Cornelius showed mercy to those members of the Church who, out of cowardice, renounced, and with their episcopal authority began to accept many of them back into the community.

Deacon Novatian rebelled against the decision of Pope Cornelius and proclaimed himself an antipope. He stated that only confessors have the right to receive the “fallen” - those who suffered persecution, did not renounce the faith, but for one reason or another survived, that is, did not become a martyr. The self-proclaimed bishop was supported by several representatives of the clergy and many laity, whom he led away from church unity.

According to the teachings of Novatian, the Church is a society of saints and all those who have fallen and committed mortal sins after baptism must be cast out of it and in no case can be accepted back. The Church cannot forgive serious sinners, lest it itself become unclean. The teaching was condemned by Pope Cornelius, Bishop Cyprian of Carthage and Archbishop of Alexandria Dionysius. Later, the fathers of the First spoke out against this way of thinking. Ecumenical Council.

Akakian schism

This schism between the Churches of Constantinople and the Roman Church occurred in 484, lasted 35 years, and became a harbinger of the schism of 1054.

The decisions of the Fourth Ecumenical Council (Chalcedon) caused a long-term “Monophysite turmoil.” Monophysites, illiterate monks who followed the Monophysite hierarchs, captured Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem, expelling the Chalcedonite bishops from there.

In an effort to bring the inhabitants of the Roman Empire to agreement and unity in faith, Emperor Zeno and Patriarch Acacius of Constantinopolis developed a compromise doctrinal formula, the wording of which could be interpreted in two ways and seemed to match the Monophysite heretics with the Church.

Pope Felix II was against the policy of distorting the truths of Orthodoxy, even for the sake of achievement. He demanded that Acacius come to the council in Rome to give explanations on the document he and the emperor were sending out.

In response to Acacius’ refusal and his bribery of the papal legates, Felix II in July 484 at a local council in Rome excommunicated Acacius from the Church, and he, in turn, excommunicated Pope Felix from the Church.

Mutual excommunication was maintained by both sides for 35 years, until it was overcome in 519 by the efforts of Patriarch John II and Pope Hormizda.

Great Schism of 1054

This schism became the largest in the history of the Church and has not yet been overcome, although almost 1000 years have passed since the break in relations between the Roman Church and the four Patriarchates of the East.

The disagreements that caused the Great Schism accumulated over several centuries and were of a cultural, political, theological and ritual nature.

In the East they spoke and wrote Greek, while in the West Latin was used. Many terms in the two languages differed in shades of meaning, which very often served as the cause of misunderstanding and even hostility during numerous theological disputes and the Ecumenical Councils that tried to resolve them.

Over the course of several centuries, the authoritative ecclesiastical centers in Gaul (Arles) and North Africa (Carthage) were destroyed by the barbarians, and the popes remained the single most authoritative of the ancient episcopal sees in the West. Gradually, the awareness of their exceptional position in the West of the former Roman Empire, the mystical conviction that they are the “successors of the Apostle Peter” and the desire to extend their influence beyond the boundaries of the Roman Church led the popes to the formation of the doctrine of primacy.

According to the new doctrine, the Roman pontiffs began to claim sole supreme power in the Church, which the patriarchs of the East, who adhered to the ancient church practice of conciliar resolution of all important issues, could not agree with.

There was only one theological disagreement at the time of the break in communication - the addition to the Creed accepted in the West - the “filioque”. One single word, once arbitrarily added to a prayer by Spanish bishops in the fight against the Arians, completely changed the order of relations between the Persons of the Holy Trinity and greatly confused the bishops of the East.

Finally, there was a whole series of ritual differences that were most striking to the uninitiated. The Greek clergy wore beards, while the Latin clergy shaved smoothly and cut their hair under the “crown of thorns.” In the East, priests could create families, while in the West, compulsory celibacy was practiced. The Greeks used leavened bread for the Eucharist (comunion), and the Latins used unleavened bread. In the West they ate strangled meat and fasted on the Saturdays of Lent, which was not done in the East. There were other differences as well.

The contradictions escalated in 1053, when the Patriarch of Constantinople Michael Cerularius learned that the Greek rite in the south of Italy was being replaced by the Latin one. In response, Cerularius closed all the churches of the Latin rite in Constantinople and instructed the Bulgarian Archbishop Leo of Ohrid to compose a letter against the Latins, which would condemn various elements Latin rite.

In response, Cardinal Humbert Silva-Candide wrote the essay “Dialogue”, in which he defended the Latin rites and condemned the Greek ones. In turn, Saint Nikita Stiphatus created the treatise “Anti-Dialogue”, or “The Sermon on Unleavened Bread, Sabbath Fasting and the Marriage of Priests” against the work of Humbert, and Patriarch Michael closed all the Latin churches in Constantinople.

Then Pope Leo IX sent legates led by Cardinal Humbert to Constantinople. With him, the pope sent a message to Patriarch Michael, which, in support of the papal claims to full power in the Church, contained lengthy extracts from a forged document known as the “Donation of Constantine.”

The Patriarch rejected the papal claims to supreme power in the Church, and the angry legates threw a bull on the throne of Hagia Sophia, anathematizing the Patriarch. In turn, Patriarch Michael also excommunicated the legates and the pope, who had already died by that time, from the Church, but this did not mean anything - the break in communication took on an official character.

Similar schisms, such as the Acacian Schism, had happened before, and no one thought that the Great Schism would be so long-lasting. However, over time, the West increasingly deviated from the purity of Christ’s teaching into its own moral and dogmatic fabrications, which gradually deepened the schism into heresy.

New dogmas were added to the filioque about the infallibility of the Pope and the immaculate conception of the Virgin Mary. The morality of the West has also become even more distorted. In addition to the doctrine of papal supremacy, the doctrine of holy war with the infidels was invented, as a result of which the clergy and monks took up arms.

Also, the Roman Church attempted to forcefully subjugate Eastern Churches the power of the pope, the planting of a parallel Latin hierarchy in the East, the conclusion of various unions and active proselytism in the canonical territory of the Eastern Churches.

Finally, not only priests, but also the highest hierarchs of the Roman Church began to violate their own vows of celibacy. A striking example of the “infallibility” of the Roman pontiffs was the life of Pope Alexander VI Borgia.

What adds to the severity of the schism is that the Roman Church, which remained the only most authoritative see in the West, influenced almost all of Western Europe, North Africa and the colonies formed by Western European states. And the ancient Eastern Patriarchates were for many centuries under the rule of the Turks, who destroyed and oppressed the Orthodox. Therefore, there are significantly more Catholics than Orthodox Christians in all Local Churches combined, and people unfamiliar with the problem get the impression that the Orthodox are in schism with their spiritual monarch - the pope.

Today, Local Orthodox Churches cooperate with the Roman Catholic Church on a number of issues. For example, in the social and cultural spheres, however, they still do not have prayerful communication. Healing this schism is possible only if Catholics renounce the dogmas they developed outside the conciliar unity and renounce the doctrine of the supremacy of the power of the pope throughout the Church. Unfortunately, such a step by the Roman Church seems unlikely...

Old Believer schism

This schism occurred in the Russian Orthodox Church in the 1650-60s as a result of the church reforms of Patriarch Nikon.

In those days, liturgical books were copied by hand and, over time, they accumulated errors that needed to be corrected. In addition to the book law, the patriarch wanted to unify church ceremonies, liturgical regulations, canons of icon painting, etc. As a model, Nikon chose contemporary Greek practices and church books, and invited a number of Greek scientists and scribes to carry out book research.

Patriarch Nikon had a stronger influence on Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich and was a very powerful and proud man. When carrying out the reform, Nikon preferred not to explain his actions and motives to his opponents, but to suppress any objections with the help of patriarchal authority and, as they say today, “administrative resource” - the support of the tsar.

In 1654, the Patriarch organized a Council of Hierarchs, at which, as a result of pressure on the participants, he obtained permission to conduct a “book investigation of ancient Greek and Slavic manuscripts.” However, the comparison was not with old models, but with modern Greek practice.

In 1656, the patriarch convened in Moscow new Cathedral, on which all those who cross themselves with two fingers were declared heretics, excommunicated from the Father, Son and Holy Spirit and solemnly anathematized on the Sunday of Orthodoxy.

The patriarch's intolerance caused a split in society. The broad masses of the people, many representatives of the nobility, rebelled against the Church reform and in defense of the old rituals. The leaders of the religious protest movement were some well-known clergy: archpriest Avvakum, archpriests Longin of Murom and Daniil of Kostroma, priest Lazar Romanovsky, priest Nikita Dobrynin, nicknamed Pustosvyat, as well as deacon Fedor and monk Epiphanius. A number of monasteries declared their disobedience to the authorities and closed their gates to the royal officials.

Old Believer preachers also did not become “innocent sheep.” Many of them traveled around the cities and villages of the country (especially in the North), preaching the coming of the Antichrist into the world and self-immolation as a way to preserve spiritual purity. Many representatives of the common people followed their advice and committed suicide - burning or burying themselves alive along with their children.

Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich did not want such disturbances either in the Church or in his state. He invited the patriarch to resign his rank. The offended Nikon went to the New Jerusalem Monastery and was deposed at the council in 1667 under the pretext of leaving the see without permission. At the same time, the anathema to the Old Believers was confirmed and their further persecution by the authorities was sanctioned, which cemented the split.

Later, the government repeatedly tried to find ways of reconciliation between the Russian Orthodox Church, the reform that followed, and the Old Believers. But this was difficult to do, since the Old Believers themselves very quickly disintegrated into a number of groups and movements, diverse in teaching, many of which even abandoned the church hierarchy.

At the end of the 1790s, the Edinoverie was established. The Old Believers, the “priests,” who retained their hierarchy, were allowed to create Old Believer parishes and conduct services according to the old rites if they recognized the primacy of the patriarch and became part of the Russian Orthodox Church. Later, the government and church hierarchs made many efforts to attract new Old Believer communities to Edinoverie.

Finally, in 1926, the Holy Synod, and in 1971, the Local Council of the Russian Orthodox Church, lifted the anathemas from the Old Believers, and the old rituals were recognized as equally saving. The Church also brought repentance and apology to the Old Believers for the violence previously inflicted on them in attempts to force them to accept the reform.

From this moment on, the Old Believer schism, represented by Edinoverie communities, is considered healed, although in Russia there is also a separate Old Believers Church and a variety of old-time religious groups of various persuasions.

In contact with

Religion is a spiritual component of life, according to many. Nowadays there are many different beliefs, but in the center there are always two directions that attract the most attention. The Orthodox and Catholic churches are the largest and most global in the religious world. But once it was one single church, one faith. Why and how the division of churches occurred is quite difficult to judge, because only historical information has survived to this day, but certain conclusions can still be drawn from it.

Split

Officially, the collapse occurred in 1054, it was then that two new ones appeared religious directions: Western and Eastern or, as they are also commonly called, Roman Catholic and Greek Catholic. Since then, adherents of the Eastern religion have been considered to be orthodox and faithful. But the reason for the division of religions began to emerge long before the ninth century and gradually led to great differences. Separation christian church to Western and Eastern was quite expected on the basis of these conflicts.

Disagreements between churches

The ground for the great schism was being laid on all sides. The conflict concerned almost all areas. The churches could not find agreement either in rituals, or in politics, or in culture. The nature of the problems was ecclesiological and theological, and it was no longer possible to hope for a peaceful solution to the issue.

Disagreements in politics

The main problem of the conflict on political grounds was the antagonism between the Byzantine emperors and the Popes. When the church was just emerging and getting on its feet, all of Rome was a single empire. Everything was one - politics, culture, and there was only one ruler at the head. But from the end of the third century political disagreements began. Still remaining a single empire, Rome was divided into several parts. The history of the division of churches is directly dependent on politics, because it was Emperor Constantine who initiated the schism by founding a new capital on the eastern side of Rome, known in modern times as Constantinople.

Naturally, the bishops began to base themselves on territorial position, and since it was there that the chair of the Apostle Peter was founded, they decided that it was time to declare themselves and gain more power, to become the dominant part of the entire Church. And the more time passed, the more ambitious the bishops perceived the situation. The Western church was consumed by pride.

In turn, the Popes defended the rights of the church, did not depend on the state of politics, and sometimes even opposed imperial opinion. But what happened main reason The division of churches on political grounds was the coronation of Charlemagne by Pope Leo III, while the Byzantine successors to the throne completely refused to recognize the rule of Charles and openly considered him a usurper. Thus, the struggle for the throne also affected spiritual matters.

Schism of the church (Orthodox, Catholic, great schism)

The official split (great schism) of the church into the Catholic in the West, centered in Rome, and the Orthodox in the East, centered in Constantinople, occurred in 1054. Historians still cannot come to a consensus regarding its causes. Some consider the main prerequisite for the rupture to be the claim of the Patriarch of Constantinople to supremacy in the Christian Church. Others are the Pope's desire to subordinate the churches of Southern Italy to his authority.

The historical background of schism goes back to the 4th century, when the Roman Empire, whose state religion became Christianity, had a second capital - Constantinople (now Istanbul). The geographical distance from each other of the two political and spiritual centers - Constantinople and Rome - led to the emergence of ritual and dogmatic differences between the churches of the west and east of the empire, which over time could not but lead to the search for truth and the struggle for leadership.

The gap was consolidated by military action, when in 1204, in the 4th crusade of the papacy, the crusaders defeated Constantinople. The split has not yet been overcome, although in 1965 the mutual curses were lifted.

A second schism of comparable magnitude began in the church when believers began to translate the Bible into their native languages and return to the chief apostolic sources, abandoning the doctrines of state churches that contradicted and added to the Holy Scriptures. It should be noted that for a long time in a significant part of the churches only the Latin text of the Bible was used. And in 1231, Pope Gregory IX, with his bull, prohibited the laity of the Western Church from reading Holy Scripture in any language, which was officially abolished only by the Second Vatican Council of 1962-1965. Despite the ban, in more progressive Europe, translating the Bible into native understandable ordinary people languages began in the 16th century.

In 1526, the Speyer Reichstag, at the request of the German princes, adopted a resolution on the right of every German prince to choose a religion for himself and his subjects. However, the 2nd Speyer Reichstag in 1529 overturned this decree. In response, a protest followed from the five princes of the imperial cities of Germany, from which the term “Protestantism” came from (Latin protestans, gen. protestantis - publicly proving). Thus, new churches that emerged from the bosom of the dominant faiths received the name Protestant. Now Protestantism is one of the three, along with Catholicism and Orthodoxy, the main directions of Christianity.

Within Protestantism there are many denominations that mainly disagree in the interpretation of any texts of the Bible that do not affect the basic principle of salvation in Christ. In general, a significant part of these churches are friendly with each other and are united in the main thing - they do not recognize the supremacy of the pope and the supreme patriarchs. Many Protestant churches are guided by the principle of “Sola Scriptura” (Latin for “Scripture alone”).

As for Russia, the Russian Orthodox Church did not allow the translation of the Bible into a language understandable to ordinary people until the 19th century. The Synodal translation of the Holy Scriptures from Church Slavonic into Russian was carried out in Rus' only in 1876. It is still used by Russian-speaking believers of most Christian denominations.

According to Operation Peace, there are approximately 943 million Catholics, 720 million Protestants, and 211 million Orthodox Christians worldwide (Operation Peace, 2001).

There are countries in which certain religions predominate. The website, specializing in statistical data on the world's religions, provides the following data. More 50% population Catholics constitute in Italy, France, Spain, Ireland, Mexico, Poland, Canada, Argentina, Portugal, Austria, Vatican City, Belgium, Bolivia, Colombia, Cuba; Orthodox– in Russia, Armenia, Belarus, Bulgaria, Georgia, Greece, Macedonia, Moldova, Romania, Serbia and Montenegro, Ukraine, Cyprus; Protestants– in the USA, Great Britain, Denmark, Finland, Greenland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, New Zealand, Samoa, Namibia, South Africa, Jamaica, Tahiti.

However, all these figures do not entirely correctly reflect reality. In fact, there may be even more Protestants than Orthodox and Catholics combined. After all, the number of believers really professing in its Everyday life Orthodoxy and Catholicism are much smaller than the number of those who claim to belong to these faiths. I mean, a significant portion of Protestants know what they believe. They can explain why they are Protestants and belong to a particular church. They read the Bible and attend worship services. And the majority of Catholics and Orthodox Christians only visit church occasionally, but do not know the Bible at all and do not even understand the doctrinal differences between Catholicism, Orthodoxy and Protestantism. Such believers simply consider themselves Catholics or Orthodox according to the church where they were baptized, that is, according to their place of residence or according to the faith of their parents. They cannot claim to have become Catholic or Orthodox because they know, fully share and accept the doctrines of their church. They cannot say that they have read the Bible and are confident that the tenets of their church correspond to the teachings of the Holy Scriptures.

Thus, most Catholics and Orthodox are not them, since they do not know the doctrines of their churches and do not put them into practice. This is confirmed by the results of many sociological surveys. Thus, according to data from the All-Russian Center for the Study of Public Opinion (VTsIOM), obtained in the spring of 2009, only 4% of respondents who identify themselves as Orthodoxy receive the sacraments, 3% pray as prescribed by the church. The results of a VTsIOM study conducted in the spring of 2008 showed that only 3% of Orthodox Christians fully observe Lent. A population survey conducted by the Public Opinion Foundation (FOM) in the spring of 2008 showed that only 10% of Orthodox Christians go to church at least once a month. According to data obtained in 2006 by the sector of the sociology of religion of the Institute for Socio-Political Research Russian Academy Sciences (ISPI RAS), 72% of Russians who consider themselves Orthodox Christians have not picked up the Gospel at all or have read it a long time ago!

Unfortunately, currently in Russia, Ukraine, Belarus and other countries former USSR In relation to Protestant denominations, the image of totalitarian sects is often deliberately formed. Meanwhile, Protestantism means huge churches with a centuries-old history and a flock of many millions, beautiful houses of worship and churches, spectacular worship, impressive work on the missionary and social field, etc. As mentioned above, countries with a predominance of Protestantism include Sweden, the USA, Great Britain, Denmark, Finland, Greenland, Iceland, Norway..., that is, the most developed economically and socially states. Less than half, but more than 20% of the population, are Protestants in Germany, Latvia, Estonia, Hungary, Scotland, Switzerland, Australia, Canada, Guatemala and other countries.