In the film, father Alexander's pop dream. Who did Father Alexander serve? Better live controversy about the war than Soviet mythology

On Easter night from the third to the fourth of April, Vladimir Khotinenko's film "Pop", dedicated to one of the little-studied pages of the Great Patriotic War- the activities of the Pskov Orthodox Mission, which revived church life in the territories of the north-west of the USSR occupied by the Germans. Many clergy have already had the opportunity to get acquainted with this picture as part of special screenings. Archpriest Georgy Mitrofanov, who deals with the history of the Russian Orthodox Church of the 20th century, in an interview with RIA Novosti correspondent Dina Danilova, expressed his opinion about how controversial this film is from a historical and spiritual point of view, and also about whether a controversy about the events of that time is needed.

- Father George, how reliable is the film from a historical point of view?

The film directed by Vladimir Khotinenko "Pop", unfortunately, is different (which, perhaps, for feature film and admissible) significant arbitrariness in terms of the depiction of historical events. It must be said that the protagonist of this film - the father of Alexander Ionin, is not named so by chance. Here, of course, there is a hint at one of the leading clergymen of the Pskov mission, Archpriest Alexei Ionov. And already from this point of view there are certain contradictions.

Born in 1907 in Dvinsk, Father Alexei Ionov, in fact, never lived in the Soviet Union, with the exception of one year - the period of Soviet occupation of the Baltic States - from the summer of 1940 to the summer of 1941. He studied at the Theological Faculty of the University of Riga, then graduated from St. Sergius Theological University in Paris. He least of all resembled a village priest, and even more so, he couldn’t “okay” in any way. This is pretty much enough artificial moment immediately causes a feeling of unreliability in relation to the main character and to many events.

It must be said that, being an active member of the Russian student Christian movement, Father Alexei Ionov was indeed an active educator, a missionary, but, in addition, he was a consistent anti-communist, for whom the Soviet regime was presented as the main enemy of the Russian Orthodox Church. In fact, such were the moods of many other participants in the Pskov mission...

Arriving in March 1941 in the Baltics, Metropolitan Sergius Voskresensky, who appears in the film, was initially perceived by representatives of the local clergy simply as a Bolshevik agent. And it took him very great efforts already during the occupation, taking a consistent anti-communist position, in order to gain the confidence of this clergy, as well as the German occupation authorities.

From 1941 to 1944, Sergius Voskresensky consistently called on the Orthodox clergy and Orthodox Christians to support the German army, stressing that only the defeat of Bolshevism in the Soviet Union would help preserve the Russian Orthodox Church. Prayers for the granting of victory to the German army in the churches of the Baltic states and the Pskov mission have been served since 1941.

So the atmosphere that accompanied the beginning of the activities of the Pskov mission and its subsequent activities was quite definitely anti-communist. And the overwhelming majority of the missionaries had no hidden sympathy for the Red Army. And it is no coincidence that both father Georgy Benigsen, who also appears in the film, and father Alexei Ionov (the prototype of the protagonist), left with the Germans. Father George served in the cathedral in Berlin in 1944-1945, father Alexei Ionov performed prayers in the Committee for the Liberation of the Peoples of Russia, which was led by General Vlasov, and then, in general, once in America, he ended his life in the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad ...

OCCUPATION: ATTEMPT TO SURVIVE

A strange village, rather a farm that appears in the film, raises questions. It is enough to look at how the young kolkhoz women are dressed in the club: in the cities they didn’t go around like that in any. We must be aware of the terrible situation in which the Pskov region was on the eve of the war ...

As for the general situation. We must be aware that about 70 million civilians were left in the occupied territories. Basically, old people, women and children, there were few men... And these people, basically, only dreamed of surviving, surviving with their children and old people. They lived in difficult conditions.

I must say that the regime of occupation in the Pskov region and in general in the regions of the RSFR was milder than in Ukraine and the Baltic states, because the occupation was under the jurisdiction of the military administration. And in general, in many areas, if there were no partisans, the situation was rather calm. Where partisans appeared, looting of the civilian population began, already paying no small tribute to the German occupation authorities, already from the side of the partisans, Sonderkommandos began to operate, and the population was involved in the most cruel war that could be - in a partisan war.

Therefore, the majority of the population perceived the partisans as a great misfortune, therefore the policemen from the local population were often perceived simply as people who defended both the arbitrariness of the partisans and the arbitrariness of German soldiers. Of course, the policemen could also be used in punitive actions against the civilian population, of course, among the policemen there were quite a few who could be considered war criminals, but the bulk of the policemen were local residents who tried to maintain at least some peace and prosperity for their villages, their families.

That is why the picture seems very strange when the priest refuses to bury the policemen, meaning that these are the sons, brothers and husbands of his flock, the peasants of this village.

At the same time, this attempt by the priest to prevent the hanging of four partisans looks rather far-fetched. For the majority in this village, the partisans were, in general, a misfortune, the inhabitants could cry over their relatives - the murdered policemen, but it is doubtful that they wept over the partisans, who caused problems for themselves by their activities. That was the terrible truth about the war in the occupied territory - people were just trying to live, to survive.

And here only one can be amazed - now, if such a punitive action would be carried out by the NKVD - this speech of the priest regarding the protection of the four executed would lead to the fifth gallows - for him. And here he is generously released... This inadequate perception of some aspects of the occupational reality, apparently subordinated to the usual ideological stereotype, of course, gives a convention.

In general, the picture turns out, to some extent, ominously expressive. The peasants who are restoring the temple hardly remember when it was closed, although they are talking about 1930. Then they joyfully take out the bell, which they themselves threw into the water.. And later, when the Soviet troops arrived, when the priest was arrested, no one tries to somehow react to this. Only his unfortunate adopted children offer to donate blood to save him, a rather hopeless picture... The question arises, what exactly did the priest do all this time in relation to his flock? That is, the village very easily returns to its downtrodden Soviet state ...

Therefore, the image of the village, although there are many deliberate scenes imitating documentary footage, for example, the appearance of the Germans and so on, also seems to be, in general, rather artificial.

SHEPHERD OR AGITATOR?

- In your opinion, is this convention justified by the way the film turned out as a whole?

Vladimir Khotinenko is a director, of course, a talented one. I believe he took off best movie on a religious theme in our cinema - the film "Muslim". And this alone already caused me an absentee disposition to the film "Pop". Moreover, we have not yet had a film that would have tried to depict the activities of a clergyman during the war in the occupied territory, there was no film where this would have been seriously shown.

Of course, there are very successful episodes in this film, for example, a conversation between a clergyman and a Jewish girl, and then her baptism at the moment the German troops entered the Latvian village. Revival of the temple, Easter Procession, - a very expressive scene when we see this procession, surrounded on one side by a ring barking dogs, and on the other hand, on the other side of the river, the commissar, pumping up hatred for this priest and everything that happens. We see two rings of evil around the church - Nazi evil and communist evil.

The scene that ends the film is incomparable, when a decrepit old man who has passed through the camps and lives as a resident of the Pskov-Caves Monastery sees a group of young people ... He sees that his work on Pskov land has been crossed out. A godless generation was born on this earth enlightened by him and baptized by him...

This is a very strong scene, which largely contradicts the general context of the film, where the protagonist acts not so much as a priest, but as an agitator and social worker carrying food to the prisoners. Yes, this was done by representatives of the Pskov Mission, but they were still serving the liturgy to the captives, confessing them, instructing them somehow in the most difficult conditions. Nobody dealt with them, the Stalinist regime betrayed them. But we do not see the main character as a pastor, as a missionary, we see him constantly preoccupied with one thing: to carry out his ministry under the rule of the Germans, and try to denounce the same Germans, in an attempt to remain a patriot of his country, although it is rather difficult to say which country. There is such an ambiguity here - every Christian has, first of all, a heavenly fatherland, which can be persecuted in one or another of his earthly fatherlands.

In any case, summing up some result, we can say that this film makes me feel like a half-truth. So I often think about what is better - true or false? Certainly true. But when it comes to half-truths, a certain kind of doubt arises.

The participants in the Pskov mission were terribly slandered. They then split into three groups. Some of them went west with the Germans, a little more than half remained here, and most of them were repressed, but not all.

I had the opportunity to communicate for many years with two members of the Pskov mission. Archpriest Livery Voronov, professor of our St. Petersburg Theological Academy and Archimandrite Kirill Nachis, confessor of our diocese. Both of them were members of the Pskov mission, both then sat in the camps. And both, especially Archimandrite Kirill, had the feeling that this was one of the happiest periods in their lives.

At the same time, one must be aware that many members of the Pskov mission were Russian emigrants who dreamed of coming to Russia. They crossed the border of the Pskov region with Easter hymns. They did not discuss how to outsmart the “sausage men”, they rejoiced at the opportunity to come to their native land and start pastoral work, as was largely characteristic of the first wave of emigrants. The film does not evoke this feeling. There is sometimes a feeling that the author has such a political self-censorship: not to deviate from ideological stereotypes, taking up a topic that really has not been revealed before.

And now, after watching this film several times, I still come to the conclusion that a half-truth is almost the same as a lie. And now the feeling of the half-truth of this film makes me very complex relationship, moreover, what I repeat, in this film there are brilliant episodes, excellent acting work.

But overall, the film is very controversial and uneven. It is very good that such an outstanding director turned to such a until recently forbidden topic, but it is very sad that there is complete freedom, as artistic creativity, and the desire to convey historical authenticity, I did not feel this desire there ...

In general, the film is vulnerable both from a historical and spiritual point of view, because the historical reality is far from reliable, but from the spiritual point of view, we do not see in the main character, first of all, a pastor, preacher, confessor, missionary, educator, but we see him only as an agitator and social worker.

THE SECOND BAPTISM OF RUSSIA

- What did the Pskov mission actually do?

The Orthodox priests of the Pskov mission, created on the initiative of Metropolitan Sergius Voskresensky, who worked in the occupied territories of the North-West, received such great freedom for activity that the Orthodox clergy did not have either before the war, or after the war, never in Soviet period. This, in particular, manifested itself in the fact that the clergy of the Pskov mission had the opportunity to teach the law of God in schools. Just Father Alexei Ionov created a whole system of teaching the Law of God in schools, for example, in the Ostrovsky district of Pskov.

They spoke in newspapers, on the radio, organized kindergartens, various social organizations, in particular, children's and youth. The Russian Orthodox clergy never had such broad freedom and the right to carry out educational and social work in the USSR. By the end of the mission, there were already 400 parishes in the Pskov, Novgorod and Leningrad regions.

And this, of course, prompted many members of the Pskov mission to consider their activities during the war as activities for the second baptism of Russia! And most importantly, what they were doing was, of course, pastoral, educational, missionary activity, and not some kind of socio-political. Unfortunately, these moments are not presented enough in the film.

BETTER LIVE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE WAR THAN SOVIET MYTHOLOGY

Don't you think that this film will cause new wave controversy between the Soviet and anti-Soviet views on the history of the Second World War, our society is already divided, is it good?

We have been in unanimity for too long, which has weaned us from thinking about anything seriously and experiencing anything seriously. Therefore, a lively, sincere and interested polemic will only be useful to us. Unfortunately, it must be admitted that the last myth of the Soviet ideology that has not been debunked is the myth of the Second World War, as the communists understood it. And any honest conversation about the real Second World War, about those aspects of it that were either defaulted or given completely perversely, can only be useful for our society.

Moreover, I am very alarmed by the desire to form a new national ideology only on the basis of the experience of victory in World War II. I am deeply convinced that any national ideology will only be truly creative and fruitful if it is addressed not to the themes of war, that is, destruction, but to the themes of the creation of Russian statehood, Russian culture, the Russian church, including.

ACTOR'S LUCK OF MAKOVETSKY

How do you, as a clergyman, feel about the fact that the main role, the role of a priest, was played by an actor who played various characters in the past, including a thief and a seducer?

I have always been aware that art involves an element of a certain kind of convention. That is why I am very concerned that people in our cinema leave an idea of history to themselves ... But at the same time, this is rather conditional and I can say that since cinema exists, there may be the performance of the roles of priests and, perhaps, even saints. Let's say Harris in the film "The Third Miracle" creates a wonderful image of a priest, although this Hollywood actor has not played anyone, or, for example, Jeremy Irons and Robert De Niro in the film "Mission" create a very expressive image of the monks.

In the film "Pop" there was an element of artificiality (in the image of the main character), but in general, it seems to me that this is more of Makovetsky's acting success than not luck. In general (in our cinema), the image of the priest was unlucky: it is difficult for actors to enter into this image, and this indicates how deeply secularized our society is. Any actor is a hypocrite in the sense that, being in life, he adopts some character traits of people of different socio-psychological types. But here, apparently, the overwhelming majority of actors have no experience of communicating with priests ...

Do you think it was an attempt to make a film about the history of the Russian Orthodox Church during World War II, or is it a film about a specific character?

I think it's the second one. That is why, at the end of the film, the version that Metropolitan Sergius Voskresensky was killed by the Germans on the road from Vilnius to Kaunas is presented as an absolute truth. Until now, historians argue on this topic. And as a church historian, I am inclined to the version that dominated all previous years, that it was partisans who killed him, or rather, even a sabotage group abandoned in the rear. That is, there, of course, they treat the history of the church very freely, and not at all convincingly. So, Sergius Voskresensky, who was the largest figure in the Russian church, could be the hero of a separate film. But here, apparently, it was important to show the main character, and everyone else just plays the background for him, even the clergy.

- Will you talk about that film with the flock, advise you to watch it?

Many of my parishioners have already watched this film during two screenings that took place in our diocese. With some we have already discussed this film and will discuss as we continue to watch. We have too few films with a church theme, so the film "Pop" on this moment is one of the most informative and interesting.

On Easter night from April 3 to April 4, Vladimir Khotinenko’s film “Pop” is released in wide release, dedicated to one of the little-studied pages of the Great Patriotic War - the activities of the Pskov Orthodox Mission, which revived church life in the territories of the north-west of the USSR occupied by the Germans. Many clergy have already had the opportunity to get acquainted with this picture as part of special screenings. Archpriest Georgy Mitrofanov, who deals with the history of the Russian Orthodox Church of the 20th century, in an interview with RIA Novosti correspondent Dina Danilova, expressed his opinion about how controversial this film is from a historical and spiritual point of view, and also about whether a controversy about the events of that time is needed.

- Father George, how reliable is the film from a historical point of view?

The film directed by Vladimir Khotinenko "Pop", unfortunately, differs (which, perhaps, is acceptable for a feature film) by significant arbitrariness in terms of depicting historical events. It must be said that the main character of this film, Father Alexander Ionin, is not named so by chance. Here, of course, there is a hint at one of the leading clergymen of the Pskov mission, Archpriest Alexei Ionov. And already from this point of view there are certain contradictions.

Born in 1907 in Dvinsk, Father Alexei Ionov, in fact, never lived in the Soviet Union, with the exception of one year - the period of Soviet occupation of the Baltic States - from the summer of 1940 to the summer of 1941. He studied at the Theological Faculty of the University of Riga, then graduated from St. Sergius Theological University in Paris. He least of all resembled a village priest, and even more so, he couldn’t “okay” in any way. This, to a sufficient extent, a rather artificial moment immediately causes a feeling of unreliability in relation to the main character and to many events.

OCCUPATION: ATTEMPT TO SURVIVE

That is why the picture seems very strange when the priest refuses to bury the policemen, meaning that these are the sons, brothers and husbands of his flock, the peasants of this village.

SHEPHERD OR AGITATOR?

- In your opinion, is this convention justified by the way the film turned out as a whole?

Vladimir Khotinenko is a director, of course, a talented one. I believe that he made the best film on a religious theme in our cinema - the film "Muslim". And this alone already caused me an absentee disposition to the film "Pop". Moreover, we have not yet had a film that would have tried to depict the activities of a clergyman during the war in the occupied territory, there was no film where this would have been seriously shown.

Of course, there are very successful episodes in this film, for example, a conversation between a clergyman and a Jewish girl, and then her baptism at the moment the German troops entered the Latvian village. The revival of the temple, the Easter procession, is a very expressive scene when we see this procession, surrounded, on the one hand, by a ring of barking dogs, and on the other, on the other side of the river, a commissar pumping hatred for this priest and everything that happens. We see two rings of evil around the church - Nazi evil and communist evil.

And now, after watching this film several times, I still come to the conclusion that a half-truth is almost the same as a lie. And the feeling of the half-truth of this film makes me have a very difficult attitude towards it, moreover, I repeat, this film has brilliant episodes, excellent acting work.

But overall, the film is very controversial and uneven. It is very good that such an outstanding director turned to such a until recently taboo topic, but it is very sad that I did not feel this desire for complete freedom, both artistic creativity and the desire to convey historical authenticity ...

THE SECOND BAPTISM OF RUSSIA

- What did the Pskov mission actually do?

The Orthodox priests of the Pskov mission, created on the initiative of Metropolitan Sergius Voskresensky, who worked in the occupied territories of the North-West, received such great freedom for activity that the Orthodox clergy did not have either before the war, or after the war, never in the Soviet period. This, in particular, manifested itself in the fact that the clergy of the Pskov mission had the opportunity to teach the law of God in schools. Just Father Alexei Ionov created a whole system of teaching the Law of God in schools, for example, in the Ostrovsky district of Pskov.

And this, of course, prompted many members of the Pskov mission to consider their activities during the war as activities for the second baptism of Russia! And most importantly, what they were doing, of course, was pastoral, educational, missionary activity, and not some kind of socio-political one. Unfortunately, these moments are not presented enough in the film.

BETTER LIVE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE WAR THAN SOVIET MYTHOLOGY

Don't you think that this film will cause a new wave of controversy between the Soviet and anti-Soviet views on the history of World War II, our society is already divided, is that a good thing?

ACTOR'S LUCK OF MAKOVETSKY

How do you, as a clergyman, feel about the fact that the main role, the role of a priest, was played by an actor who played various characters in the past, including a thief and a seducer?

Do you think it was an attempt to make a film about the history of the Russian Orthodox Church during World War II, or is it a film about a specific character?

- Will you talk about that film with the flock, advise you to watch it?

Many of my parishioners have already watched this film during two screenings that took place in our diocese. With some we have already discussed this film and will discuss as we continue to watch. We have too few films with a church theme, so the film "Pop" is currently one of the most informative and interesting.

Alexander Segen: Under any circumstances, you need to remain human

- Alexander Yurievich, how did it happen that you became interested in the history of the Pskov Mission?

Initially, the project to create a feature film dedicated to the Pskov Mission was nurtured in the publishing and cinematographic center "Orthodox Encyclopedia", and the idea belonged to the unforgettable Patriarch Alexy II, whose father, as you know, served as a priest in the lands occupied by the Nazis. In the summer of 2005, I met with CEO"Orthodox Encyclopedia" by Sergei Leonidovich Kravets and film director Vladimir Ivanovich Khotinenko, and we agreed that I would write the literary basis for the script. I was given Required documents on the history of the Pskov Orthodox Mission, the memoirs of the participants in those events, and by the beginning of 2006 I completed work on the first version of the novel "Pop", which was published in the magazine "Our Contemporary". This publication was carefully read by one of my spiritual patrons, Hieromonk Roman (Matyushin), made many useful remarks, and when I was preparing a book at the publishing house of the Sretensky Monastery, I can say that I wrote the second version of the novel. Well, then there was already work on the script and the film.

All yours historical novels- "Sovereign", "Tamerlane", "The Singing King", "The Sun of the Russian Land" - dedicated to rulers, historical figures. When creating a work about the history of the Russian Church during the war years, one could write, for example, about Metropolitan Sergius (Stragorodsky). Why did you choose a simple priest, a “little man” as the main character?

Since it was specifically about the history of the Pskov Orthodox mission, it is more appropriate to talk about the image of another Sergius - Metropolitan Sergius (Voskresensky). Initially, it was intended that way - that his figure would be at the center of the story. But when I started working on the book, I was carried away by the memories of the priest Alexei Ionov, and I decided to write collective image ordinary member of the Pskov mission. In plot, father Alexei Ionov became the main prototype of our hero. But at the end of the war, Father Alexei left with the Germans and spent most of his life in Germany, while my hero, Father Alexander Ionin, had to stay and go through the Stalinist camps. And I copied his character from my spiritual father, priest Sergius Vishnevsky, who lives and serves in the village of Florovsky, Yaroslavl diocese. Many statements of Father Alexander actually belong to Father Sergius. While working on the image, I constantly imagined how my dear father Sergius would behave in this or that situation. Therefore, the novel is dedicated not only to blessed memory selfless Russian pastors of the Pskov Orthodox Mission during the Great Patriotic War, but also to the mitered archpriest Sergei Vishnevsky.

Did you personally know any of the priests of the Pskov Mission or their descendants? Have they read the novel, seen the movie, do you have any feedback?

Unfortunately, I didn't know any of them personally. Some of them may have read my book, but I don't have any reviews yet. Although, when this year I was at the St. Korniliev readings in the Pskov-Caves Monastery, they approached me different people with thanks. And Metropolitan of Tallinn and All Estonia Kornily even came from Tallinn to listen to my report on the Pskov mission.

Real characters act as minor characters in the novel. historical figures under their own names. For example, Metropolitan Sergius (Voskresensky), the priests of the Pskov mission. When you created their characters and dialogues with their participation, was it pure fiction or did you recreate traits and ideas that someone told you? For example, Archpriest Georgy Benigsen in the book says that St. Alexander Nevsky was canonized under "the pious Tsar Ivan the Terrible." Do you have evidence that Father George considered Ivan the Terrible pious?

When I work on the image of a hero who really lived once, I try to stick to the facts of his biography. It happens that new, more accurate facts emerge after I have written something based on previous data. For example, in the first two versions of the novel, the murder of Metropolitan Sergius (Voskresensky) was shown incorrectly. I was based on the facts available for 2005, and soon new data were published, where historical picture this atrocity has been fully restored. In the third version of the novel, published by the Veche publishing house, the murder of the hierarch is shown differently, here I was based on new data.

By the way, it is absolutely necessary to mention the name of the remarkable Pskov historian Konstantin Obozny, who is the most authoritative researcher of the history of the Pskov Orthodox Mission. He helped a lot in creating the script for the film, advised, expressed strict comments, which were taken into account.

If we return to your question about the assessment of Ivan the Terrible, then Father Georgy Benigsen speaks of the piety of the young tsar, who, under the guidance and patronage of the holy hierarch Metropolitan Macarius, canonized the holy noble prince Alexander Nevsky and then took Kazan. You are probably worried about how I feel about the personality of the first Russian Tsar. I do not speak with those who demand his speedy canonization. But I am not one of those who pour mud on him. The tragic figure of Ivan the Terrible, in my opinion, requires more careful study.

Is the translation of “Pop” into film language adequate to your idea and the meanings that you put into the book? Is there anything in Khotinenko's interpretation that you don't quite agree with?

The script was being written in the following way: I brought my version to Vladimir Ivanovich, he gave instructions - what needs to be removed, what to add. We worked out every scene together. It was an amazing sincere, cordial fellowship and co-creation of the writer and director. I was happy to work with a man whom I consider one of the best Russian film directors. Only occasionally did his ideas about the script cause me bewilderment, but he was able to delicately and patiently explain why he wants to do this and not otherwise, and I agreed - the director knows better. At the same time, under the guidance of Khotinenko, one might say, I took screenwriting courses. The atmosphere of the film, in my opinion, is fully adequate to the atmosphere of my book. And the fact that a lot has been changed in the plot, many scenes are shown in a completely different way than in the novel, this is even interesting. I was happy to create a new design together with Vladimir Ivanovich. And everything that was new to me in the process of working on the script, I inserted into the third version of the novel. What I came up with in the script of Khotinenko, I, of course, did not include in my book.

One of the themes of the book is patriotism, love for the motherland. How do you see the relationship between the communist regime and historical Russia?

I believe that historical Russia survived and won despite the communist regime, resisting it and overcoming it. Our Church, oppressed and slowly destroyed by this regime, has become much stronger in the twentieth century than it was at the end of the nineteenth, it has become pure, it has revealed a radiant host of new martyrs. I am not a communist, never have been, but I am disgusted when the Soviet era of our history is indiscriminately denounced. It was necessary for Russia to cleanse itself after going through the crucible of suffering. I would not want Soviet power to return, but I do not think that one could do without it.

Comparison of the camp with a “monastery with a strict charter” - is this your view of the Gulag, or did the priests who went through the camps really say so?

Gulag stands for General Directorate of Camps, and cannot be compared with a monastery in any way. But the camp life in many ways resembled strict monasteries. Some monastery even used to be stricter than other camps. Let us recall the monasteries of Joseph Volotsky, Nil Sorsky... It was easier for an Orthodox person to go through the horrors of the camps, since a truly believing Christian perceives any difficult test as a blessing for his soul, as a cleansing from sinful filth. He will always find in his past the reason for which the Lord punishes him so, and humbly accept God's will.

The protagonist of the novel, Father Alexander Ionin, in the finale says that he is praying for Stalin, because he “finished off the original terrible Bolshevism”, restored the patriarchate and under him a victory was won. These are his last words on the pages of the novel; in fact, they are perceived as the result of the entire book. Is that how it was intended? Is this the main conclusion?

No, Father Alexander’s last words are songs: “Do not awaken the memories of past days, past days ...” In addition to the words of Father Alexander you mentioned, there are also the words of Father Nikolai: “Stalin would have worked twenty years in the camps, he would still be alive ". So it is absurd to perceive a conversation between two priests as two Stalinists. And I'm not a Stalinist either. In the novel, Stalin's attitude towards people is expressed in his conversation with Beria, where they discuss what to do with the priests of the Pskov mission, and both come to the conclusion that there is no need to figure out who served Hitler, who did not serve, but it is necessary to give everyone vouchers to camps, some for ten, some for twenty. But one cannot deny the fact that in the 1930s Stalin really destroyed the "original terrible Bolshevism." In my novel “Gentlemen and Comrades”, dedicated to the terrible Moscow events of November 1917, I just describe this “Bolsheviks”, drunk with blood, shooting at the Kremlin even after the junkers surrendered in it, just to amuse themselves at the sight of the destruction of the Russian shrine . So, in the thirties, Stalin physically destroyed almost all the participants in that Moscow massacre. But at the same time, priests were shot and brutally murdered. And after the restoration of the patriarchate, which the apologists of the leader of the peoples recklessly regard as Stalin's transition to Orthodoxy, executions and atrocities did not subside. Just take a look at our new orthodox calendar how often the new martyrs are mentioned there, who suffered in 1944, and in 1945, and in 1946, and later.

Not, main result The book is not at all in the apologetics of Stalin, but in the fact that under any - even the most terrible - circumstances, one must remain human. Christians must remain Christians. And with dignity endure the most difficult trials. For he who endures to the end will be saved.

The book we are talking about was published a few years ago. In November 2008, at the 6th International Charitable Festival "Radiant Angel", a film of the same name based on it was shown, with Sergei Makovetsky in leading role. A wide screening of this film in the city of Arkhangelsk is expected in early April 2010. It must be said that discussions have already flared up around it. More precisely, the subject of controversy is the activities of the organization to which the hero of the book and film, priest Alexander Ionin, belongs. That is, the Orthodox mission created during the Great Patriotic War by the Nazis on the territory of the occupied Pskov region. Some of the participants in these discussions consider its employees to be accomplices of the enemies, praying for the victory of German weapons. Others - people who, using the patronage of the Germans, honestly and faithfully fulfilled their priestly duty to God and the flock. However, in A. Segen's novel, it is not so much about the activities of this mission, but about the ministry of only one of its ordinary members - Archpriest Alexander Ionin. That is why the book is called "Pop".

At first glance, it may seem that the author chose the wrong title for his novel. After all, in our minds, the word "pop" is associated with the hero of Pushkin's "The Tale of the Priest and his worker Balda." Or with the “priest Sivoldai” similar to him from the fairy tales of S. Pisakhov. That is, with such characters, in which there are much more flaws than virtues. Therefore, even knowing that there is nothing offensive in this word, which came to us from the Greek language, and meaning "father" or "father", we still avoid using it in relation to priests. And, it would seem, the question is quite logical: could not A. Seguin choose a more euphonious and pious title for his book? For example: "The Cross of Father Alexander". Or "The Good and Faithful Shepherd." Moreover, when reading the novel, it becomes obvious that its hero is a true shepherd, “laying down his life for the sheep” (John 10, 11). What is it, a mistake or a conscious step?

But here it is worth remembering that the author of the book is a professional writer, experienced master the words. And, as they get to know it, the reader will understand that the choice of the title for it is by no means accidental. It is no accident that the hero of the novel is the most ordinary rural priest, reminiscent of the characters of N.S. Leskov. Unsightly in appearance, childishly simple-hearted, a little afraid of his domineering wife. That is, a person to whom the definition of “pop” is most appropriate. But, according to one of the main characters of the novel, the Orthodox German Johann Freigausen, next to him more than anywhere else, the presence of God is felt. Because in weakness Fr. Alexander is accomplished by the power of the Lord, which makes him a real ascetic. Just as in the distant 15th century, she turned the peasant girl Joan of Arc into a fearless warrior, and later into a martyr. It is no coincidence that o. Alexander Ionin, being Orthodox priest, nevertheless respectfully speaks of this Catholic saint that she "suffered honestly for her people and was devoted to the Lord to the end." For the same can be said about him. Actually, the feat of. Alexander Ionin is just that he honestly and faithfully serves God and people in a godless world.

Indeed, no matter what government, Soviet or fascist, the hero of the book does his ministry, in essence it is a godless government. Both Hitler and Stalin in the image of A. Segen are tyrants-theomachists. And they try to flirt with the Church only when they see it as a benefit for themselves. In the novel "Pop" this is shown very clearly. Here is Stalin, encouraged by victories Soviet army, distributing awards among his close associates, invites them “to mark the comrade God, who turned out not to be on the side of the Germans, but on our side. Our good and good Russian God. Then he makes some concessions to the persecuted Orthodox Church. However, Hitler says the same thing at the beginning of the novel: “Orthodox nonsense should do us good. We must give the opportunity to the priests to restore services, and let them, in gratitude, agitate the people for us.” We agree that these statements are essentially identical. Both dictators are trying to use the Orthodox Church to strengthen their own power. And only for the time being. It is no coincidence that in A. Segen's book, Hitler dreams of hanging "Russian priests" on the walls of the Moscow Kremlin after defeating Russia, so that "not the Cross, but the gallows" becomes their symbol. As for Stalin, it can be said that he realizes this dream of his opponent by sending, after the expulsion of the Germans from the Pskov region, all the arrested employees of the mission there to the camps. And at the same time he cynically rants: “the camp is the same monastery”, “suffering is necessary for the salvation of the soul”, and “The Lord God is on our side and will not condemn us.” Thus, the author gradually leads the reader to the conclusion that any totalitarian regime is essentially anti-Christian. After all, a person who tries to put himself above the Lord God, voluntarily or involuntarily, imitates the very first theomachist in the world - "the father of lies and a murderer from the beginning" (John 8, 44). And, thinking that he is “playing a big game” with his people, in fact he himself is a plaything of the dark forces.

I must say that A. Segen's novel is a multifaceted work. And the events described in it have analogies both in the past of Russia during the Mongol-Tatar yoke and the Time of Troubles, and in modern times. Moreover, in parallel with the Great Patriotic War, it describes another, no less cruel war, which, according to the hero of the novel, “... will never end. It will go on until the end of mankind." It's about about the invisible war between God and the devil, where the battlefield is the human heart. At the same time, it doesn’t matter when, in what country and under what ruler he lives: in Judea of the times of King Herod, under Nero, St. Constantine, Equal-to-the-Apostles Vladimir, Peter the Great, or in our time, during war or peace. After all, the confrontation between the followers of Christ and the godless world began long before the time in which the action of A. Segen's novel takes place, and will last until heaven and earth pass away. And therefore, as the protagonist of the novel says, “it’s never too late for the soul to wake up,” and you should not put off turning to God until later, in anticipation of more favorable and calm times. After all, the true servants and disciples of Christ have always been persecuted. According to St. Ignatius Bryanchaninov, the Savior “likened the position of His disciples and followers in the midst of vicious humanity to the position of sheep in the midst of wolves (M. 10, 16), and “foretold His disciples that they were in the world, that is, during the completion of the field of earthly life, they would mournful (John 16:33) that the world will hate them (John 15:18-19), that it will persecute them, humiliate them, put them to death (John 16:2-3). When reading the novel by A. Segen, it becomes obvious that the spiritual experience of his characters is also relevant for us. Because in the six and a half decades that separate us from them, "good and evil have not changed places." Of course, now Orthodox people are not shot, they are not sent to camps, they are not forced to renounce their faith. However, each of us knows the world lives by no means Orthodox ideals and values. Rather, they can be called anti-Christian.

Well, as the poet said, “times are not chosen, they live and die in them.” But the Lord gave us reason and free will. Therefore, the choice - how to live and how to die, always remains with the person himself. It is up to him to decide - whether to follow God, the Giver of Life, or to step on the path of eternal perdition - to choose the path of life or the path of death. As early as the end of the 2nd century, the Christian apologist writer Mark Minucius Felix argued: “whatever fate does, a person’s soul is free, and therefore it is not his external position that is judged, but his action.” In A. Seguin's novel, this problem of choosing between God and the world is most clearly shown by the example of two heroes - Fr. Alexander and the fascist colonel who oversees the Pskov mission, Johann Freigauzen. The image of this man is so vivid and tragic that we can consider him the second most important in the novel. Johann, or rather, Ivan Fedorovich Freigauzen, was born in Russia, and therefore knows the Russian language perfectly and even calls himself Russian. Moreover, he is the son of Orthodox parents, baptized in infancy. Among Hitler and his close associates, Freigausen looks like a black sheep. Because he sincerely believes in God, without hiding it. He observes fasts, regularly confesses and takes communion, and tries to confirm his faith. good deeds. It is he who protects Fr. Alexandra Ionina from the attacks of the policemen, helps him adopt and thereby save the baptized Jewish girl Eva from death. And, using his power, he gives the priest the opportunity to help Russian prisoners of war from a nearby concentration camp in Raw Lowland. However, the drama of Johann Freigausen is that, being a deeply religious and pious person, he is also "an ardent supporter of the ideas of National Socialism." That is, fascism. Freigausen sincerely believes that by serving Hitler, he is also serving the German people. But it is no coincidence that at one time the Holy Apostle Paul exhorted the Corinthian Christians “not to bow under the yoke of others with the unbelievers. For what is the fellowship of righteousness with iniquity? What does light have in common with darkness? What agreement is there between Christ and Belial?” (2 Cor. 6:14-15). Johann Freigausen is trying to connect the incompatible - service to God and his enemies. As a result, he feels himself in a spiritual impasse and confesses to Fr. Alexander that “fate is tearing him in two”, and therefore the only way out that remains for him is death.

In the course of the novel, this hero dies at the hands of partisans. However, it is worth considering how his fate could have been if he had survived? Perhaps, over time, the feeling of inner division would lead him to despair and suicide. Or, in his soul, the final substitution of faith in Christ for “the service of great Germany” could take place. The Christian writer-apologist Clive Lewis warned about such a temptation in his time in the famous "Letters of the Trickster", where an experienced demon advises a young imp by all means to involve his "ward" - a Christian in any political party. “Let him take patriotism or pacifism as part of his religion; and then, under the influence of the party spirit, let him regard it as the most important part of it. Then calmly and gradually bring him to the stage where religion simply becomes part of the “cause” ... If you have made the world an end and faith a means, a person is already almost in your hands ... If only rallies, political campaigns ... mean for him more than prayer, sacrament and mercy – it is ours.” The behavior of Johann Freigausen clearly confirms the validity of these words. For, believing that "the German army is delivering Russia from the atheists," he demands from Fr. Alexander "to call on God's grace on Germany", in case of disobedience, threatening reprisals. And also - to inspire their parishioners that getting pregnant from a German soldier is not a sin ... As Freigauzen no longer sees a sin in participating in the execution of partisans immediately after confession and communion. The fate of this hero of the book is a vivid example of the doom of a person who is trying to combine the incompatible - the Cross of Christ and the swastika. And his death is perceived by the reader as God's judgment on the fascist Freigauzen. But at the same time - and as His mercy in relation to His erring servant John, who chose "the path of death."

Freigausen's antipode is another Orthodox hero of the novel, Fr. Alexander Ionin. A man named in honor of the holy noble prince Alexander Nevsky and ordained a priest by the Hieromartyr Veniamin of Petrograd. The mention of these two saints is extremely important for understanding the feat of life of Fr. Alexandra Ionina. Because all of them happened to live at a time when it might seem that the end of the world is coming. The usual way of life collapsed, so that a person could suddenly lose everything that he valued and owned - property, freedom, loved ones and relatives, life itself. And in the end, despair and embittered. In A. Segen's novel, this happens to one of the main characters, Alexei Lugotintsev, who vents his hatred for the Nazis who killed his friends and fiancee on a defenseless Orthodox woman, Taisiya Medvedeva. However, hatred is again “the way of death”. And therefore revenge does not give Alexei any reassurance or consolation. He acquires them only when he turns to God. Using his example, the author of the novel shows that only faith gives a person a chance to endure and remain himself "in the midst of earthly calamity." “God is not in power, but in truth,” Prince Alexander Nevsky once said. And the Hieromartyr Benjamin, in his suicide letter, wrote about it this way: “Christ is our life, light and peace. With Him always and everywhere is good. It has already been mentioned above that the hero of the book by A. Segen is an ordinary rural priest, not without human infirmities. However, unlike Johann Freigausen, this man steadily follows the "way of life". He is undividedly devoted to God and lives according to His commandments. And he testifies of Him with his deeds: he helps Soviet prisoners of war, tries to save partisans captured by the Germans from execution, adopts orphans. And later, following the example of Christ the Savior, he fully drinks the cup of sorrows in the Stalinist camps. But at the same time, he does not despair, he does not grumble at injustice. On the contrary, he rejoices that suffering has become a “great grindstone” for him, taught him firmness and humility. By the way, the general producer of the film "Pop", Sergei Kravets, quite accurately noticed one feature of Fr. Alexandra Ionina: he “... does not do anything outstanding, special. All his actions are natural and flow naturally from his entire previous life.” Perhaps this is precisely the key to why A. Segen's novel influences the reader so strongly that he does not notice or is ready to forgive the author for inaccuracies in the description of some of the hero's actions (for example, the fact that, contrary to church rules, Fr. Alexander Ionin admits the possibility of communion of people who have not yet been baptized, or he communes the partisan hiding under the dome of the church not with spare Gifts, but with the remains of the Holy Gifts from the Chalice). Why are books like this needed now? Yes, oh Alexander Ionin, it seems, "does not do anything outstanding." He just lives in Christ. And he preaches faith in Him not only and not so much by word as by deeds. Each of us Orthodox remembers the words of St. Seraphim of Sarov: “Acquire the spirit of peace and thousands around you will be saved.” But each of us knows the hard way how difficult it is to follow Christ. Especially when not praise and rewards await you for this, but ridicule and harassment. The value of A. Seguin's book is that it tells about heroism Everyday life Orthodox person. And the most ordinary, such "like you and me." Her hero is an ordinary warrior of the Orthodox Church, who protects his parishioners from the intrigues of sectarians, from despair, from anger, and leads them to Christ by his own example. But it is worth considering - if such are even the most ordinary Orthodox people, then what happiness and honor it is to be a person of the same faith with them.

On the example of his hero, A. Segen shows what Orthodoxy was, is and will be for Russia. We know and remember that at a time when our country turned out to be “stateless” and was pressed on all sides by enemies, the only thing that united, strengthened and consoled people, showed them an example of true humanity, was Orthodox Church. Just like a humble priest from the village of Zakaty, Fr. Alexander Ionin, in whose temple people destitute of the war find solace. Who accepts orphaned children of different nationalities into their home and family. And it turns a crowd of humiliated, tortured and offended Russian prisoners of war into the army of Christ, filling their lives with meaning and hope. Who forgives and saves from death his enemy, partisan Alexei Lugotintsev. By the way, it is this character of the novel that speaks in the best possible way of what Fr. Alexander: “The war embittered everyone. And he returned to kindness. And, through it - to God.

Concluding the story about the novel by A. Segen "Pop", I will remind readers of one episode from this book. Namely, when Alexander tells his parishioners that he would like to see them "at least sunbeams reflecting the light of the "sun of the Russian land" - Alexander Nevsky: "after all, the Lord loves those who shine with greetings and goodness to everyone." However, it is worth remembering that in the Orthodox hymnography, Christ the Savior is also called the “Sun of Truth” and “The Light of Truth, enlightening every person”, Who commanded His disciples: “... so let your light shine before people, so that they see your good deeds and glorify the Father your Heavenly” (Matt. 5, 16). And each of us, Orthodox people, is called to bring this light to the world.

On the Bright Week, the film directed by Vladimir Khotinenko "Pop", filmed by the TV company "Orthodox Encyclopedia", is released in wide release. The film is dedicated to the fate of the priest of the Pskov mission, which operated during the war in the territory occupied by the Germans. Alexander Segen, the author of the script for the film and the novel of the same name, answers the questions of the newspaper "Church Bulletin" and "Tatiana's Day".

- Alexander Yurievich, how did it happen that you became interested in the history of the Pskov mission?

Initially, the project to create a feature film dedicated to the Pskov mission was nurtured in the publishing and cinematographic center "Orthodox Encyclopedia", and the idea belonged to the unforgettable Patriarch Alexy II, whose father, as you know, served as a priest in the lands occupied by the Nazis. In the summer of 2005, I met with Sergei Leonidovich Kravets, general director of The Orthodox Encyclopedia, and film director Vladimir Ivanovich Khotinenko, and we agreed that I would write the literary basis for the script. I was provided with the necessary documents on the history of the Pskov Orthodox Mission, memoirs of the participants in those events, and by the beginning of 2006 I completed work on the first version of the novel "Pop", which was published in the magazine "Our Contemporary". This publication was carefully read by one of my spiritual patrons, Hieromonk Roman (Matyushin), made many useful remarks, and when I was preparing a book at the publishing house of the Sretensky Monastery, I can say that I wrote the second version of the novel. Well, then there was already work on the script and the film.

All your historical novels - "The Sovereign", "Tamerlane", "The Singing King", "The Sun of the Russian Land" - are dedicated to rulers, historical figures. When creating a work about the history of the Russian Church during the war years, one could write, for example, about Metropolitan Sergius (Stragorodsky). Why did you choose a simple priest, a “little man” as the main character?

Since it was specifically about the history of the Pskov Orthodox mission, it is more appropriate to talk about the image of another Sergius - Metropolitan Sergius (Voskresensky). Initially, it was intended that way - that his figure would be at the center of the story. But when I started working on the book, I was fascinated by the memories of the priest Alexei Ionov, and I decided to write a collective image of an ordinary participant in the Pskov mission. In plot, father Alexei Ionov became the main prototype of our hero. But at the end of the war, Father Alexei left with the Germans and spent most of his life in Germany, while my hero, Father Alexander Ionin, had to stay and go through the Stalinist camps. And I copied his character from my spiritual father, priest Sergius Vishnevsky, who lives and serves in the village of Florovsky, Yaroslavl diocese. Many statements of Father Alexander actually belong to Father Sergius. While working on the image, I constantly imagined how my dear father Sergius would behave in this or that situation. Therefore, the novel is dedicated not only to the blessed memory of the selfless Russian pastors of the Pskov Orthodox Mission during the Great Patriotic War, but also to the mitered archpriest Sergei Vishnevsky.

Did you personally know any of the priests of the Pskov Mission or their descendants? Have they read the novel, seen the movie, do you have any feedback?

Unfortunately, I didn't know any of them personally. Some of them may have read my book, but I don't have any reviews yet. Although, when this year I was at St. Korniliev's readings in the Pskov-Caves Monastery, different people approached me with gratitude. And Metropolitan of Tallinn and All Estonia Kornily even came from Tallinn to listen to my report on the Pskov mission.

Real historical figures under their own names act as minor characters in the novel. For example, Metropolitan Sergius (Voskresensky), the priests of the Pskov mission. When you created their characters and dialogues with their participation, was it pure fiction or did you recreate traits and ideas that someone told you? For example, Archpriest Georgy Benigsen in the book says that St. Alexander Nevsky was canonized under "the pious Tsar Ivan the Terrible." Do you have evidence that Father George considered Ivan the Terrible pious?

When I work on the image of a hero who really lived once, I try to stick to the facts of his biography. It happens that new, more accurate facts emerge after I have written something based on previous data. For example, in the first two versions of the novel, the murder of Metropolitan Sergius (Voskresensky) was shown incorrectly. I was based on the facts available for 2005, and soon new data were published, where the historical picture of this atrocity was fully restored. In the third version of the novel, published by the Veche publishing house, the murder of the hierarch is shown differently, here I was based on new data.

Is the translation of “Pop” into film language adequate to your idea and the meanings that you put into the book? Is there anything in Khotinenko's interpretation that you don't quite agree with?

The script was written as follows: I brought my version to Vladimir Ivanovich, he gave instructions - what needs to be removed, what to add. We worked out every scene together. It was an amazing sincere, cordial fellowship and co-creation of the writer and director. I was happy to work with a man whom I consider one of the best Russian film directors. Only occasionally did his ideas about the script cause me bewilderment, but he was able to delicately and patiently explain why he wants to do this and not otherwise, and I agreed - the director knows better. At the same time, under the guidance of Khotinenko, one might say, I took screenwriting courses. The atmosphere of the film, in my opinion, is fully adequate to the atmosphere of my book. And the fact that a lot has been changed in the plot, many scenes are shown in a completely different way than in the novel, this is even interesting. I was happy to create a new design together with Vladimir Ivanovich. And everything that was new to me in the process of working on the script, I inserted into the third version of the novel. What I came up with in the script of Khotinenko, I, of course, did not include in my book.

One of the themes of the book is patriotism, love for the motherland. How do you see the relationship between the communist regime and historical Russia?

Comparison of the camp with a “monastery with a strict charter” - is this your view of the Gulag, or did the priests who went through the camps really say so?

No, Father Alexander’s last words are songs: “Do not awaken the memories of past days, past days ...” In addition to the words of Father Alexander you mentioned, there are also the words of Father Nikolai: “Stalin would have worked twenty years in the camps, he would still be alive ". So it is absurd to perceive a conversation between two priests as two Stalinists. And I'm not a Stalinist either. In the novel, Stalin's attitude towards people is expressed in his conversation with Beria, where they discuss what to do with the priests of the Pskov mission, and both come to the conclusion that there is no need to figure out who served Hitler, who did not serve, but it is necessary to give everyone vouchers to camps, some for ten, some for twenty. But one cannot deny the fact that in the 1930s Stalin really destroyed the "original terrible Bolshevism." In my novel “Gentlemen and Comrades”, dedicated to the terrible Moscow events of November 1917, I just describe this “Bolsheviks”, drunk with blood, shooting at the Kremlin even after the junkers surrendered in it, just to amuse themselves at the sight of the destruction of the Russian shrine . So, in the thirties, Stalin physically destroyed almost all the participants in that Moscow massacre. But at the same time, priests were shot and brutally murdered. And after the restoration of the patriarchate, which the apologists of the leader of the peoples recklessly regard as Stalin's transition to Orthodoxy, executions and atrocities did not subside. It is enough to look at our new Orthodox calendar, how often the new martyrs who suffered in 1944, and in 1945, and in 1946, and later, are mentioned there.

No, the main result of the book is not at all in the apologetics of Stalin, but in the fact that under any - even the most terrible - circumstances, one must remain human. Christians must remain Christians. And with dignity endure the most difficult trials. For he who endures to the end will be saved.

Photo from the site http://www.russianshanghai.com

Women's Portal Flero

RELATED ARTICLES