Часть третья. Церковь и Византийская империя

I. Постиконоборческий период: общая характеристика

1. После победы над иконоборчеством начался период в истории Православной Церкви, сформировавший ее в том виде, в каком мы знаем ее сегодня.

В борьбе с иконоборчеством весьма важным аспектом были взаимоотношения между государством и монашеством. На более глубоком уровне вопрос сводился к роли Церкви: может ли она в основе своей быть "полезной" государству, или она в принципе остается "инородным" телом? Сюда входили и проблемы церковного имущества - того богатства, которым в то время обладала Церковь, - и все соблазны и злоупотребления, связанные с ним.

Исаврийцы представляли в этом споре цезарепапистский, эллинистический идеал. Вспомним слова Копронима: "Господь, вручив царство императорам, вместе с тем повелел им пасти верное стадо Христово по примеру Петра, главы апостолов".

Мы знаем, что победа иконопочитания, отвергшая навязываемое Церкви извне цезарепапистское прокрустово ложе, оказалась и победой монашества. Причем прошедшие гонения обновили, очистили его изнутри. Это возрождение связано с именем св. Феодора Студита. Ему принадлежит определение роли монашества как христианского максимализма; это внутренний актив Церкви, вечное напоминание о последнем призвании христианина, "опора и утверждение" Церкви. Студийский монастырь сделался "образцовым" монастырем империи, одним из главных центров ее церковной жизни.

Вместе с тем благодаря победе монашества произошло некое переосмысление роли императора и патриарха в Империи. Это переосмысление отражено в "Эпанагоге" - введении в свод законов, изданном в конце IX в. при императоре Василии I Македонском и составленном, скорее всего, под руководством великого Фотия.

The Epanagoge, too, proceeds from the parallelism of the king and the patriarch, "the greatest and most indispensable parts of the state," and it defines the duties of each of them. "The task of the Tsar is to protect and provide the forces of the people with good administration, to restore the damaged forces by vigilant care, and to acquire new strength by wisdom and just ways and actions. The goal of the patriarch is, firstly, to protect those people whom he received from God in piety and purity of life... he must convert all heretics, as far as possible, to Orthodoxy and the unity of the Church... and also to lead to the adoption of the faith of the infidels, striking them with splendor and glory and the miracle of their service... The tsar must do good, which is why he is called a benefactor... The goal of the patriarch is the salvation of the souls entrusted to him; he must live in Christ and be crucified for the world... The tsar must be the most excellent in Orthodoxy and piety... versed in the dogmas of the Holy Scriptures. Trinity and in the definitions of salvation through the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ... It is characteristic of the patriarch to be a teacher and to treat the high and the low equally without restrictions... and to speak about the truth and the defense of dogmas in the face of the tsar and not to be embarrassed... The Patriarch alone must interpret the canons of the ancients and the definitions of the Holy Fathers and the regulations of the Holy Councils... The Tsar has the right to reinforce, first, everything written in the Divine Scriptures, then also all the dogmas established by the Seven Holy Councils, as well as selected Roman laws..."

Although the Epanagoge forever remained only a bill, its influence on Byzantine society was enormous. And in the Slavic lands even more: from the beginning it was treated as a law with force.

It is important to note that the cement connecting the imperial and ecclesiastical in the state was Orthodoxy, the guardian of which was the Patriarch, and the protector was the emperor. But the emperor, and this is repeatedly emphasized in the Epanagoge, is a layman, and his service is worldly. So there can be no question of any "caesaropapism" allegedly expressed in this document. Moreover, in the entire subsequent history of the Byzantine Church we will not find any attempts by the emperors to interfere in the dogmatic life of the Church (with the exception of unionist attempts already at the very end of the existence of the Byzantine Empire). A new type of iconographic depiction of the emperor became standard - the "Emperor before Christ", a servant of God bowed in bow before his Lord and Master. On the other hand, beginning with Photius, we see powerful patriarchs interfering in the life of the state and even partially overshadowing the emperors: for example, Photius himself, as well as Patriarchs Nicholas the Mystic, Polyeuctus, Michael Cerularius, and others. It seems characteristic that Photius, despite all his truly numerous merits and the extremely important role he played in church history, was canonized only recently.

Only in late Byzantium did the emperor and the patriarch find the right balance between their roles and duties. But this will happen in an ever-shrinking Empire, pressed on all sides by enemies, at the very end of its history.

2. In theology, too, we are moving into a new epoch. The great epoch of the Ecumenical Councils has come to an end. Along with its completion, active dogmatic theological creativity also slowed down. The time of comprehension of the accumulated heritage began, the time of penetration into the depths. From now on, either a more "systematic" or a "mystical" theology was developed. Of course, this division into theological epochs is very conditional, but nevertheless we can speak of a general trend of theological thought. There is no doubt that it was in the post-iconoclastic era that the beginning of the so-called "school" theology, i.e. theology as an academic discipline, occurred.

The victory of icon veneration entailed a real cultural revival. The University of Constantinople began to function again. Caesar Bardas (uncle of Emperor Michael the Drunkard) gathered in it a remarkable circle of scholars. Such luminaries as the future Patriarch Photius and Constantine-Cyril, the future Slavic enlightener, came out of it.

An extremely important aspect of that time was also liturgical creativity. At the end of the iconoclastic period and in the post-iconoclastic era, our worship took shape, acquiring the final form in which we know it today. It is in the divine services that a deep comprehension of the theological heritage takes place. Divine services have become the spring, the living water of which is nourished by all subsequent generations. It is necessary to always remember the main principle of our attitude to worship: Lex orandi lex credendi est - the law of prayer is the law of faith, i.e. we believe as we pray. That is why any attempts at Uniatism - i.e. the preservation of the "Eastern Rite" while accepting Roman Catholic theology - are fundamentally unacceptable for Orthodoxy, as an obvious blasphemous spiritual masquerade.