Second department. About the law. I. Determination of the distinctive properties of the law. II. Drafting a law: 1) proposal; 2) consideration; 3) approval. III. Execution of the law: 1) statutes and institutions; 2) promulgation; 3) the effect of promulgation; 4) the limits of the law - prescription and

Article 2. Basic concepts used in this Federal Law For the purposes of this Federal Law, the following basic concepts are applied: 1) education is a single purposeful process of education and training, which is a socially significant benefit and

1. Mythological views on power and law Political and legal teachings in the strict and special sense of this concept appeared only during the rather long existence of early class societies and states. In theoretical and epistemological terms, the genesis of political and

Appendix 5 Features of the behavior of “thieves in law” A “thief in law” is an “authority” from the criminal environment, collectively recognized by other leaders of the criminal world and who has undergone the “coronation” procedure. “Coronation” is a formalized procedure for accepting a criminal into law.

“The Sermon on Law and Grace,” written by Hilarion approximately between 1037-1050, was the first Russian political treatise that has come down to us and allows us to call its author the founder of the political and legal thought of Ancient Rus'. Hilarion's treatise defined many topics of the formation and further development of the Russian state and law, which were discussed throughout the medieval period and retained their significance in modern times. Among them, problems of the relationship between law and justice occupied an important place.

The first part of the “Word” provides an understanding of “law” and “truth” and clarifies their relationship. Hilarion. A Word about Law and Grace // Library of Literature of Ancient Rus'. - St. Petersburg, 1997.

Hilarion puts forward a theological and historical concept that substantiates the inclusion of the Russian land in the global progress of the triumph of “divine light” (i.e. Christianity) over the “darkness of paganism.” He views the historical process as a change in the principles of religion. The Old Law is based on the principle of law, the New Testament is based on the principle of grace. Grace for Hilarion is a synonym for truth, and law is only its shadow, servant and forerunner of grace.

Hilarion emphasized that Truth is perceived by humanity thanks to the Law, and not in spite of it. “After all, Christ came into the world not to break the law, but, on the contrary, to fulfill it.” We are talking here about the relationship between law and justice. It should be emphasized that Hilarion was already operating with the prevailing ideas in Rus' about the single semantic meaning of the terms “law” and “truth.” “Illarion,” noted I.A. Isaev and N.M. Zolotukhin, “one of the first in the history of political and legal thought to approve a certain political and legal tradition, according to which “truth” is perceived and used as a legal term that includes moral motivation in its content.”

Having examined a number of the main confessional sources of the main world religions, we can come to the conclusion that, despite the difference in views, mentality, geopolitical factors, fictions are contained in all areas of cult religious life and have firmly, since time immemorial, entered the system as normative regulators sources of religions both in the early stages of their creation and to this day.

Kievan Rus was an early feudal state of the 10th-11th centuries. The central administration of Kievan Rus was concentrated in the hands of the monarch (Grand Duke), and the system of central administration was palace-patrimonial. The Grand Duke ruled not alone, but together with the entire princely family, with other princes - his brothers, sons and nephews. A significant role in the social processes of Kievan Rus was played by state power, a special mechanism of power, the order of reign and the transfer of princely power. The status of the prince in society and the relationship between princely power and the church were also peculiar. All the specifics of state power were reflected in political and legal thought, the development of which was determined by many factors.

The first and most important among them was active political life, as reported by the monuments of ancient Russian writing that have reached us, in which an intense struggle was presented between various groups within the ruling stratum for power. All this gave rise to thought about the essence and limits of this power, about its purpose in public life, about the qualities that its bearer, the Grand Duke, should have. The presence in Kievan Rus, in addition to secular power, of the Orthodox Church led to the emergence of a solution in political thought to the relationship between church and secular power.

The second factor determining the content and nature of the political and legal thought of Kievan Rus was the cultural factor. Kievan Rus was a society and state with a highly developed spiritual culture. As noted by Academician D.S. Likhachev: “The appearance of Russian literature at the end of the 10th - beginning of the 11th century immediately presented us with works of literature that were mature and perfect, complex and deep in content, testifying to developed national and historical self-knowledge.” The political and legal thought of Kievan Rus has reached us in the form of a set of political and legal ideas and views contained in the texts of chronicles, legal monuments, and works of ancient Russian literature. The genres of works in which political and legal thought were embodied are both genres of literature and oral creativity, such as: message, teaching, word, prayer, etc. D.S. Likhachev. Favorites. - Leningrad., 1987. - T. 2.

The third factor was Orthodox Christianity. After the baptism of Rus', the princes inevitably gained a special position in relation to the Christian religion and church. In Kievan Rus, the head of state was the disseminator of Christianity and, in a sense, even the creator of the church organization. The fate of the Christian religion and the church in Rus' largely depended on the Russian princes. The Church advocated strengthening the central state power and sought to maintain the unity of the state organization. At the same time, the grand ducal power also needed an alliance with the Orthodox Christian Church. In a state as vast in territory and with a population of many different ethnic groups as Kievan Rus was, Orthodoxy turned out to be more consistent with the interests of the central government than paganism. Thus, state power instilled Christianity in Russian society, built churches and spread literacy, and the church extolled the centralization of the state and the prince, which indicated their support for each other.

The Russian Church was considered part of the Patriarchate of Constantinople. Its head was the metropolitan, appointed by the Patriarch of Constantinople. But in 1048-52, the Greeks continued a difficult war with the Pechenegs, and during this same period there was an attempt to return to the independent election of a desired candidate from their Russian environment, with the appointment of his bishops by the council and the subsequent recognition of the Patriarch of Constantinople. In the chronicle under 1050 a note appears: “Hillarion was appointed Metropolitan of Kyiv by Patriarch Michael Kerularius.” Although this did not happen, it was probably also desired by the nationalist party, which knew that Yaroslav, himself the son of a Greek woman, dreamed of the marriage of his sons with Byzantine princesses, which soon (in 1052) came true. In the legend of Nestor, included in the “Kievo-Pechersk Paterikon”, “Why was the Pechersk Monastery nicknamed”, it is reported that Prince Yaroslav, who took the Kiev grand-ducal table after the victory over Svyatopolk, fell in love with the village of Berestovo, which is near Kyiv, and the local Church of the Holy Apostles. Hilarion was a priest in the Church of the Holy Apostles and, as it was said in the chronicle: “Presbyter Larion was a good man, a scribe and a faster. Therefore, God deigned to place it on the heart of the blessed Grand Duke Yaroslav, and, having gathered the bishops, he was installed as metropolitan in St. Sophia, and these are his little cookies.

Hilarion, who agreed to independently install the “Rusyns” as metropolitan, was an educated man of his time. He could understand the letter of the canons and freely interpret them with full knowledge of the matter. Ilarionov’s “The Word of Law and Grace” is the height of thought and style, which is a literary work of the pre-Mongol period - a brilliant proof of the author’s erudition.

Hilarion "Sermon on Law and Grace"

Political ideas in Hilarion’s work “The Sermon on Law and Grace”

In the middle of the 11th century. the first purely political work appears - “The Sermon on Law and Grace” by the first Metropolitan of Kyiv Hilarion, i.e. he can safely be called the founder of the political and legal thought of Ancient Rus'. We know practically nothing about the life of Hilarion. There are only two mentions in the “Tale of Bygone Years” (outlining the beginning of the history of the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery), a record of similar content at the end of the “Confession of Faith” by Hilarion himself (or on his behalf), Simon’s reference to the “Life of Anthony” (about ordination to the presbyterate and the tonsure of Hilarion by Anthony of Pechersk) and the mention of his name in the “Charter of Yaroslav”. It is also reliably known that in 1051 he was the first of the Russian metropolitans to be installed in the Kyiv metropolis.

Hilarion reveals both in time and in the perfection of his creations a number of the largest writers of Kievan Rus. In addition to the “Sermon on Law and Grace,” two more of his works have reached us - “Prayer” and “Confession of Faith,” but the main one, undoubtedly, is the “Sermon on Law and Grace.” The “Lay” was written between 1037-1050 (the first date is the illumination of the Cathedral of Sophia, the second is the death of Yaroslav’s wife Irina - Ingigerd, which is usually dated 1050). Historian M.D. Priselkov narrows these chronological milestones to 1037-1043, believing that the optimistic nature of the Lay indicates its composition before the unfortunate campaign of Vladimir Yaroslavich against Constantinople in 1043. Another modern researcher who has attempted to establish a more precise time of appearance of this work gives the date as March 25, 1038.

The term “word” used to denote the genre was invented by scientists - Hilarion himself calls his work a “story”, since in it he narrates and tells. This is nothing more than a sermon, however, not only delivered in one of the church churches, but also set out on paper. Therefore, he calls his creation not only a story, but also a scripture.

Hilarion's treatise defined many topics of the formation and further development of the Russian state and law, which were discussed throughout the medieval period and retained their significance in modern times. Among them, problems of the relationship between law and justice occupied an important place. The idea of ​​the organization of political power, the status of its bearer, his responsibility for governing the country and the people, ideas about law and truth, law and morality were of a supra-individual nature and became a distinctive feature of the legal consciousness of Russian society over almost all subsequent centuries.

Already based on the title, it becomes clear what the Metropolitan is going to talk about: “About the law given by Moses, and about Grace and Truth revealed by Jesus Christ, and how the Law passed away, and Grace and Truth filled the whole earth, and Faith spread among all nations right up to our Russian people; and praise to our Grand Duke Vladimir, by whom we were baptized; and Prayer to God from our entire Earth.”

Thus, the Discourse on Law and Grace can be divided into three parts:

1. The first part of the “Word” examines such concepts as “Law” and “Truth” and clarifies their relationship. Hilarion puts forward a theological and historical concept, according to which the time has come for the free introduction of all peoples to Christianity (the New Testament has a worldwide distribution), i.e. the victory of “divine light” over the “darkness of paganism.” He views the historical process as a change in the principles of religion: the Old Testament is based on the principle of Law, the New Testament is based on the principle of Grace. Grace for Hilarion is a synonym for Truth, and Law is only its shadow, servant and forerunner of Grace.

As noted by N.M. Zolotukhin, “truth is perceived by Hilarion as a certain absolute ideal, common to all times and peoples, which, although it has a general religious status, but in its content includes a set of epistemological and moral aspects that make it possible to assess the surrounding reality and human behavior.” According to Hilarion, the “Law” was transmitted to people through Moses, and “Truth” is the highest level in the moral state of a person who has accepted the teachings of Christ and follows him. The Old Testament prohibitions, according to Hilarion, are insufficient; morality and justice are a problem of a person’s free choice. A person must freely do good and justice - this is Hilarion’s central idea. He contrasts the law as the fulfillment of an obligatory instruction with the Truth as the result of the implementation of a person’s free will, the content of which is determined by the internal consciousness of the individual, based on the moral and ethical commandments of the New Testament.

Hilarion emphasized that Truth is perceived by humanity thanks to the Law, and not in spite of it. “After all, Christ came into the world not to break the law, but, on the contrary, to fulfill it.” We are talking here about the relationship between law and justice. It should be emphasized that Hilarion was already operating with the prevailing ideas in Rus' about the single semantic meaning of the terms “Law” and “Truth”. “Ilarion,” note I.A. Isaev and N.M. Zolotukhin, “one of the first in the history of political and legal thought to establish a certain political and legal tradition, according to which “truth” is perceived and used as a legal term that includes moral motivation in its content.”

Hilarion in his “Word” emphasizes that following the norms of the Old Testament alone does not lead people to the salvation of the soul, just as the knowledge of the Law (the “shadow”) of the ancient Jews did not save them. Moreover, preference for the Old Testament can lead to Judaism. And only the New Testament (“truth”), given to humanity by Jesus Christ, is Grace, for Jesus, by his death, atoned for all human sins, and by his posthumous resurrection He opened the path to salvation for all peoples. To prove his thought, Hilarion cites his reasoning on the biblical parable of Sarah and Hagar, the meaning of which, according to Hilarion, is very deep. Hagar is an image of the Old Testament, the Law, which is born earlier, but, born of a slave, continues to remain a slave. Sarah is a symbol of the New Testament, Grace, which is born from the free Isaac. Likewise, the Old Testament cannot be true, although it came before the New Testament. Therefore, not "birthright" What is of decisive importance is that the Lord sent the truth to people in the covenants of Jesus Christ. Hilarion’s discussion of Sarah and Hagar reveals two important ideas:

• -Firstly, Christ’s Grace is so significant that it saves all people who have received Holy Baptism, regardless of when the baptism itself occurred;
• -Secondly, the mere fact of baptism is enough for people who accepted it to be worthy of salvation.

Thus, the comparison of Law and Grace, which is given in Hilarion’s work, is, in essence, a opposition of two religious teachings, two worldview systems - Judaism and Christianity. However, Hilarion does not fall into religious dogma. He compares with each other what can be called political meaning these religions. In other words, he approaches Judaism and Christianity as ideologies, each of which carries within itself a very specific goal and way of life, behavioral stereotypes, social condition and, in addition, forms a certain policy in relation to other peoples.

According to the Slovo researcher I.N. Zhdanova, Metropolitan Hilarion draws on images of Judaism and the Old Testament only in order to “reveal through these images his main idea about the recognition of pagans: new wine requires new wineskins, new teaching requires new peoples, to which the Russian people belong.”

2. In the second part of his “Word,” Hilarion, narrowing the topic, moves on to a description of the spread of Christianity throughout the Russian land: “The grace-filled faith has spread throughout the entire earth and reached our Russian people,” “And now with all Christians we glorify the Holy Trinity .

The Baptism of Rus', performed by Grand Duke Vladimir, showed that Grace had spread to Russian borders. Consequently, the Lord did not despise Rus', but saved it, leading it to the knowledge of the truth. Having accepted Rus' under his protection, the Lord granted it greatness. And now this is not a “thin” and “unknown” land, but the Russian land, “known and heard in all four corners” of the world. Moreover, Christian Rus' can hope for a great and wonderful future, for it is predetermined by God's Providence. Rus' has equal rights with all countries and does not need anyone’s tutelage: “Our most good God had mercy on all nations, and he did not despise us: he wanted to - and saved us and brought us to the knowledge of the truth!”

3. The third part of the Lay is devoted to the glorification of the great princes of Kyiv. First of all, we are talking about Prince Vladimir (baptized Vasily), whom the Almighty Himself visited and in whose heart the light of knowledge shone. However, the Metropolitan claims that there were great princes before Vladimir. Vladimir is only “glorious of the glorious”, “noble of the noble”. In addition to him, Hilarion glorifies Prince Yaroslav the Wise (in baptism - George), whose contemporary and comrade-in-arms the Metropolitan himself was. And also Igor and Svyatoslav, who laid the foundation for the future power of the Russian state. Moreover, in his work Hilarion refers to the Russian princes with the title “Kagan”. But this title in those days was equivalent to the title of emperor. And Hilarion compares Vladimir himself with Emperor Constantine. Hilarion describes the strength and power of the Russian princes, the glory of the Russian land, the “sole power” of Vladimir and his military successes with the deliberate goal of showing that the adoption of Christianity by the powerful Vladimir was not forced, that it was the result of Vladimir’s free choice. Emphasizing that the baptism of Rus' was the personal matter of Prince Vladimir alone, in which “piety and power” were combined, Hilarion clearly polemicizes with the point of view of the Greeks, who ascribed to themselves the initiative to baptize the “barbarian” people.

Hilarion then proceeds to describe Vladimir’s personal qualities and his merits, obviously intending to point out the need for Vladimir’s canonization. Hilarion gives argument after argument in favor of Vladimir's holiness: he believed in Christ without seeing him, he tirelessly gave alms; he cleansed his former sins with this alms; he baptized Rus' - a glorious and strong people - and thereby is equal to Constantine, who baptized the Greeks.

In general, in the third part, Hilarion raises the question of the organization of political power, the status of its bearer, his responsibility for governing the country and people, and other characteristics of the state:

• -The essence of the state, according to Hilarion, is divine, since in its purpose it realizes the divine will. The bearer of supreme power - the Grand Duke - is perceived by Hilarion as a direct exponent of the divine will; he calls him a “participant” of the heavenly kingdom and sees in him the direct “vicar” of God on earth;
• -the origin of power is hereditary, and Hilarion calculates the genealogy of modern princes, starting with “old Igor”;
• -The Grand Duke, according to Hilarion, must be the “single sovereign” of his land. Vladimir, being “the sole ruler of his land,” “conquered the surrounding countries - those with peace, and the rebellious with the sword.” He “grazed his entire land with courage and meaning.” The state structure is presented to Hilarion as the unity of the entire land, subject to the Grand Duke. His assertion that power and kingdom are one means the subordination of the entire land to the supreme power of the Grand Duke;
• -the highest goal of the state is to ensure the interests of all subjects. Hilarion considers the main task of the Grand Duke and the goal of all his activities to be the organization of good governance in the country, ensuring peace and abundance in the country. He advises to rule wisely, rid the country of “plagues and famines,” and create all the conditions for its prosperity. Those. government is selfless work aimed at achieving goals. Hilarion for the first time introduces the term “thunderstorm” into Russian political literature to characterize the power of the Grand Duke, capable of “threatening” his enemies and protecting his subjects;
• -It is also necessary to take care of the church (“grow the church”), resettle the cities, take care of the world and preserve “our property.” By “property” Hilarion does not mean treasures or the prince’s treasury, but the numerous subjects of the Grand Duke who need his care and support: “...save husbands and wives and babies. Those who are in captivity, in captivity, on the road, on the voyage, in prisons, the hungry and thirsty and the naked - have mercy on everyone, comfort and rejoice everyone, creating joy in their body and soul”;
• - the implementation of supreme power should be carried out only on the basis of the Law - truth. The power of the prince is reasonable, courageous and based “on truth.” He is “clothed with truth, girded with strength, shod with truth and crowned with meaning”;
• -Power, according to Hilarion, must be used correctly, defend truth and justice. Justice must be done according to law and at the same time mercifully. Hilarion introduces into political and legal theory the theme of “mercy for the guilty”: fair punishment is inevitable, but it does not exclude mercy, because “mercy is exalted over judgment.” But mercy does not exclude retribution for committed misdeeds and crimes. Everyone who commits lawlessness must be punished so that everyone is rewarded “according to his deeds” and no one is “saved.” The prince’s anger, according to Hilarion, should not destroy a person, so he advises punishing “in small amounts” and soon forgiving. “A little execution and a lot of mercy and with mercy heal, with a little insult and quickly you will rejoice, for our nature does not tolerate the duty of bearing your anger like a stalk of fire.” Hilarion believes in the corrective power of forgiveness more than in the result of punishment. “To have mercy,” he concludes, “means to save.” The merciful and legal activities of the ruler, aimed at maintaining justice, are combined, according to Hilarion, with his personal moral character. For the first time in Russian socio-political thought, Hilarion “created the image of a just ruler of the Christian type, developed moral criteria” that he must meet;
• -As for the foreign policy line, it is based on the Christian idea of ​​​​the equality of all peoples.

The third, final part of the “Lay” in some manuscripts is followed by a prayer to Vladimir, permeated with the same patriotic enthusiasm, patriotic thought, and inscribed with the name of the same Hilarion. "And while the world stands<сей>, do not bring misfortune and temptation upon us, do not deliver us into the hands of foreigners, so that your city is not called a captive city, but<овцы>your flock - "strangers in a land that is not theirs." Whether this final prayer of Hilarion was an organic part of the “Word”, or whether it was composed separately is not yet entirely clear, but, in any case, it is one with the “Word” in thought.

Kyiv Metropolitan. Wrote in the 11th century. The first Russian political treatise is “The Word of Law and Grace,” where he attempted to substantiate the independence of the Kyiv state from Byzantium and the idea of ​​strong princely power.

Hilarion's ideas were further developed in the chronicles. They were compiled over many centuries and were subject to numerous alterations. Relatively late chronicles have reached us (Novgorod Chronicle of the 13th-14th centuries, Laurentian Chronicle of 1377, Ipatiev Chronicle of the early 15th century). The core of the chronicle was "The Tale of Bygone Years" by Nestor, completed under Vladimir Monomakh. Nestor is a monk of the Kiev-Pechersk Monastery, a widely educated person. In his “Tale” he defended the ideas of unity and sovereignty of baptized Rus'.

Nestor views the desire for conquest as pride, arrogance and “sedition.” In "The Tale..." they decided three tasks:

Confirmation of the legitimacy of princely power;

Justification of Rus''s independence from Byzantium;

Increasing the importance of the power of the Kyiv princes (emphasizing their seniority among the Russian princes and ending internecine wars).

The Tale of Bygone Years organically includes works Vladimir Monomakh:“Lesson for children”, “Letter to cousin Oleg Chernigovsky”, “Autobiography”. In them, Monomakh touches on a wide range of issues: he establishes the scope of power of the Grand Duke of Kyiv, determines his relations with the vassal princes. Monomakh pays his main attention to the idea of ​​strengthening state unity, subordinating the interests of individual princes to the tasks and goals of the entire Russian land.

By the beginning of the 13th century. the center of Russian socio-political life moves from Kyiv to Vladimir. This is where the “Prayer of Daniel the Imprisoner” (1229) appears., which defines ways to strengthen princely power.

The author of “Prayer” himself is a former warrior of the prince, who fell out of favor and possibly into imprisonment. Strong princely power is the core of the entire work. The prince must rule fairly, have Duma members with him and rely on their advice. The challenge was to ensure that the right people were selected. The prince's advisers must be smart and not allow lawlessness. Among the qualities of an ideal prince, he singled out concern for his subjects: “The earth produces fruit in abundance, trees produce vegetables; and you, prince, give us wealth and glory.”

In the XV - XVII centuries. There is a further strengthening of the Moscow state and its rulers. In connection with the increased role of the ruler, the moral and legal standards by which he should be guided were actively discussed. In disputes on these issues, the main directions of political thought were formulated: the theory of “Moscow - the third Rome”, the dispute between the “non-possessors” and the “Posiflans”, the despotic doctrine of Ivan the Terrible, the tyrant-fighting ideas of A. Kurbsky.

The theory “Moscow is the third Rome” received its final formulation in the letters of Philotheus, a monk of the Pskov Elezar Monastery, to the Pskov governor and Grand Duke Vasily and Ivan. These messages became widely known political documents of the late fifteenth and early seventeenth centuries. The main goal of the theory is to prove the regularity of the rise of Moscow and the Grand Duke of Moscow as the head of the entire Russian land. To base this goal, Philotheus formulates a theological and historical concept of statehood, the stimulus for which was the conquest of Byzantium by the Turks in 1453.

The history of mankind is the emergence, development and decline of world kingdoms in accordance with the will of God. The first world kingdom - Ancient Rome - fell because of its paganism. The second world kingdom - Byzantium - perished due to a union with the Catholic Church. Byzantium was punished by God and Constantinople was conquered by the Turks. The third Rome is Moscow. The center of Orthodoxy will stand until the end of the world, for the Russian state was elected to protect the Orthodox faith.

Philotheus represents the Church as one of the departments of the state, so he entrusts the king with the responsibility of combating heresies, appointing bishops, and maintaining churches and monasteries.

The problem of the relationship between secular and spiritual authorities was solved by Philotheus by increasing the volume of secular power and limiting spiritual power, its complete subordination to secular rulers.

Secular power must be exercised in legal forms. Philotheus advises the king to live righteously, making sure that his subjects live according to the law and commandments.

The laws of the state are only part of the “truth”, supported by the power of the state; they are based on divine commandments, which are implemented through them.

Philotheus considers any immoral act to be lawlessness, regardless of whether it is indicated in the sources of law. Any immoral action is a violation of “truth”, which is punishable by the will of Providence. If anyone has suffered, then restoration of justice is expected primarily from heavenly powers.

The role of the church in the life of society and the relationship between church and state were actively discussed by the “Josephites” and “non-possessors.”

The reason for the formation of these currents of political thought and the polemics between them was the problem of secularization of the monastery lands. The tsarist government repeatedly raised the issue of transferring the monastery lands into the hands of the state. This was the third part of the land suitable for agriculture.

Supporters of depriving the church of its right to own land began to be called “non-covetous.” Adherents of preserving existing church lands and wealth were called “Josephites,” after their ideologist Joseph Volotsky, abbot of the Volokolamsk monastery.

In the politics of the legal sphere, there were no serious disputes between the non-acquisitive Josephites; both directions advocated the unification of Russian lands and the creation of a single state that would defend “truth.” The founder of the doctrine of “non-possessors” Nil Sorsky

(1433-1508) was a widely educated man for his time, an expert in Byzantine church literature. He preached asceticism and renounced acquisitions. Sorsky founded a monastery on the Sora River, near the Kirillo-Belozersky Monastery, where he lived with other monks through his labor, contrasting similar monasteries with rich monasteries. At the Council of 1503, he supported the proposal of the grand ducal authorities to eliminate church land ownership, preached the ideas of spiritual asceticism and moral improvement. His views come from the early Christian interpretation of human nature. It consists of the mind of passions: gluttony, fornication, anger, sadness, despondency, vanity, pride, love of money. A righteous person must fight these passions, and especially the love of money.

The activities of the church should be limited to the spiritual sphere and focused on helping a person overcome passions.

The ideal organization capable of solving this problem is the early Christian community, the economic basis of which was the common property and duty of labor of each community member. Faith should not be a sphere of state intervention; it is the prerogative of the church.

Vassian owns the edition of the Helmsman of 1511 - a collection of apostolic, conciliar and episcopal rules and epistles, which were guidelines for the administration of the church and in the ecclesiastical court. Having opposed the divorce of Vasily III, Vassian was alienated from the prince, and in 1531 he was again exiled to the Volokolamsk monastery, where he died.

The founder of the “Josephite” theory was Joseph Volotsky, abbot and founder of the Volokolamsk monastery.

The Josephites denied the secularization of the lands. They based monastic acquisition on the need to use church wealth for good deeds: build monasteries and churches, feed the monks, and give to the poor. At the same time, the personal non-covetousness of the monks was recognized. Joseph himself dressed so modestly that it was difficult to mistake him for the abbot of the monastery.

In his interpretation of the relationship between church and state, Joseph Volotsky changed his views. At first, he pursued the idea of ​​​​subordination of secular power to spiritual power. State power is of divine origin, but its bearer, being human by nature, is equal to his subjects and is subject to vices. His power must be limited by the highest spiritual control. The divine will cannot be mistaken, but the royal will can, and it must be resisted if the king is not God’s servant, but the devil.”

Subsequently, he exalts the power of the grand duke, without abandoning the idea of ​​​​limiting the power of the prince by divine commandments.

The right to resist the arbitrariness of secular power is replaced by “humility and prayer,” which alone can guide one on the path of the ruler.

Joseph Volotsky shows complete intolerance towards heretics. He considers dissent a crime not only against religion and the church, but also against the state. Heretics must be severely punished.

Little is known about the life and work of the author of the work, Hilarion. The chronicle notes his high moral and intellectual merits. “A presbyter named Larion, a good man, a scholar and a faster”10.
Yaroslav, having achieved the establishment of an independent metropolitanate in Kyiv, in 1051 nominated this particular educated priest as metropolitan. “Establish Yaroslav Larion as metropolitan,” the chronicle reports, “of the Ruthenians in St. Sophia, having gathered bishops”11, that is, independently, without the direct participation of the Byzantine Patriarchate.
Hilarion wrote the “Sermon on Law and Grace” during his priesthood in the Church of the Holy Apostles in the village of Berestovo (a suburb of Kyiv) approximately between 1037-1050.
This monument has long been the focus of attention of church historians, as it was perceived and studied exclusively as a church teaching work. Subsequently, it attracted the attention of philologists as a monument of ancient Russian writing. Meanwhile, this document is of greatest interest precisely for historians of political thought. Back in 1922, V. M. Istrin proposed considering “The Lay” primarily as a “document of socio-political content”12. V. S. Pokrovsky noted that the “Lay” is “the first political treatise of Ancient Rus' that has come down to us... presented in theological language”13. M. A. Alpatov characterized the monument as a “political speech” that accumulated all the most significant state-political ideas and concepts, which were then developed in the “Tale of Bygone Years”14. Modern scholars note that in the historiography of the monument, the question of its ideological and political content remains unresolved. When studying a work of such semantic orientation, the key problem is to understand the political ideology affirmed in it15.
In 1963, N. N. Rozov, having published the most complete and detailed text of the monument, clarifying its dating, rightfully raised the question of identifying the political and ideological content of the “Sermon on Law and Grace” as the primary task of studying the work.
The theme of the “Word” reflected the most pressing and pressing political issues of our time, when considering which the author formulated certain political ideals. Hilarion titled his work with multiple meanings: “On the law given by Moses and on grace and truth

Jesus was the Christ and how the law departed. Fill the whole earth with grace and truth, and faith in all languages, reaching even to our Russian language. And praise to our kagan Vladimir came from him and we were baptized and prayer to God from all our land. God bless you"16. The title itself indicates that the author intends to touch upon three large topics here: to clarify the relationship between law and truth, to evaluate the activities of Vladimir and the baptism of Rus' that he undertook, and to praise God in order to ensure the future prosperity of the country. The range of topics covered is vast in scope and complex in composition. Their disclosure is of a clearly expressed philosophical and political nature.
The first part of the “Word” provides an understanding of “law” and “truth” and clarifies their relationship. Truth is perceived by Hilarion as a certain absolute ideal, common to all times and peoples, which, although it has a general religious status, but in its content includes a set of epistemological and moral aspects that make it possible to assess the surrounding reality and human behavior. Christ and his teaching are declared to be the highest truth, and only knowledge and assimilation of this teaching (through grace) makes it possible to use the moral and ethical ideal of Christianity, formulated in commandments-decrees and commandments-prohibitions, that determine the model of Christian behavior, as evaluative criteria for all actions and situations. in the world, as well as the commandments of achieving beatitude, requiring high internal perfection.
Here it should be immediately stipulated that due to the inherent lack of differentiation of theological and legal categories in the early Middle Ages (in the Bible, as well as subsequently in the Koran, a number of norms of criminal, civil and family law were written down as divine commandments and laws), law was usually understood as a divine command formulated by a divine or prophetic figure: in the Bible, Moses; in the Koran - Mohammed; in the New Testament - Jesus Christ. Hilarion’s appeal to the word “law” suggests the perception of this category in both theological and legal semantic meaning.
Hilarion clearly distinguishes between the concepts of “law” as an external institution-prescription that regulates human behavior in society by violent measures, and “truth”, expressed in the high moral state of a person (in his understanding only a Christian) who does not need
due to its perfection in the regulatory activity of the law, the relativity and transitory nature of which, according to Hilarion, is obvious. The law determines the external actions of people at that stage when people have not yet comprehended the truth. It was given to humanity only “for preparation for truth and grace, so that human nature may become accustomed to it,” for humanity, as an unclean vessel, must first be washed with water-law, and then it will become capable of receiving the “milk of grace.” “The law is the forerunner and servant of grace and truth”17. The state under the law does not make people free, because the slavish fulfillment of external regulations inherent in its content is not freedom. Only knowledge of the truth provides a person with freedom to choose his behavior.
The New Testament tradition directly connects the possibility of responsibility for one's actions with the presence of free will, indicating that only the truth can make people free and provide them, on the basis of knowledge, with the choice of their line of behavior, dictated by the high moral principles of a free spirit. Free will and freedom of action are determined by the moral status of the individual. It is interesting to note that Hilarion’s law and truth do not oppose each other - truth is perceived by humanity thanks to the law, and not in spite of it, Hilarion asserts, while referring to the provisions of the New Testament teaching that Jesus Christ did not come into the world for the purpose of to break the law, but, on the contrary, to fulfill it (“I did not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it”).
This is a very interesting initial idea of ​​​​the relationship between law and morality with a deep argument for the preference of moral criteria in determining the form of human behavior in society. Hilarion apparently uses the idea that was already established in society at that time about the single semantic meaning of the terms “truth” and “law.”

V. Dahl, exploring the meaning of the word “truth”, argues that in Russia “by the first root meaning, truth is called Code of Law, Russian Pravda, Yaroslavova’s Pravda, Collection of laws, regulations, Pravda - old law
courts, the power to judge, punish and pardon, judgment and punishment"18. However, when analyzing this term, one cannot fail to take into account that the general philosophical and literary meaning inherent in both this word itself and the entire synonymous series associated with it includes not only a legal aspect. “Truth” is considered the same as “truth.” .. without deception, justice, virtue...”19. In legal criteria, this meaning is also not lost, but, on the contrary, is perceived as the initial beginning, in which the legal moment is only a significant structural element of the entire content. While retaining the general meaning in the abstract, in a specifically legal understanding, “truth”, as a rule, expresses specifically legal concepts or even entire formulas. In this regard, it should be noted that Hilarion, in his work, was one of the first to theoretically approve a certain political and legal tradition, according to which “truth” is perceived and used as a legal concept that includes moral motivation in its content. Such technical and legal characteristics have already been found in the legislation of Hilarion’s time. So, in Art. 56 of Russian Pravda states that a purchaser who has fled because of poor treatment (“insults of sharing his master”) should not be immediately turned into slavery, but must be “given the truth,” i.e., consider all the circumstances of the case and resolve him on the basis of justice and law.
The second meaning of the word “truth” appears clearly here, but it is obviously associated with legal categories, since it provides for the establishment of the truth in a case for its fair and legal resolution20.
In spreading the moral and ethical ideal of Christianity, Hilarion sees the path to the improvement of humanity.
In his work, he pursues the idea of ​​​​the equality of all Christian peoples, repeatedly emphasizing that the time of the chosenness of one people has passed, since the mission of Christ was to save all languages, that another period has come when everyone is equal before God. His teaching applies equally to all people without exception, regardless of gender, age, social status and race. “In all the nations is your salvation, and the kings of the land and all the people, the princes and all the judges of the land, young men and maidens, old men and young men” - all are subordinated to one truth, which is the same for everyone “from war to
current to the west”21 and some peoples cannot be “offended” by others22. The exaltation of one people to the detriment of another gives rise only to envy and anger - feelings incompatible with the moral ideals of a Christian, Hilarion believed. The idea of ​​the universality of teaching and the equality of people who perceive it is proclaimed by him as a condemnation of the idea of ​​chosenness and national narrow-mindedness.
Hilarion also actively condemns Byzantium's claims to hegemony throughout the Orthodox world. This position follows directly from his general scheme of equality of peoples. During Hilarion's speech, relations between Byzantium and Russia became very strained as a result of the unsuccessful (for Rus') war of 1043. Hilarion, who subtly takes into account in his constructions the trends in the development of public opinion, formulated a negative attitude towards Byzantium in the form of a denial of the possibility of its complete hegemony, humiliating Russia as a sovereign state. Reflecting in his doctrine the increased national self-awareness of the consolidating Russian state, Hilarion tries to determine the place of Rus' in world history and the historical role of the Russian people. “The Word” is full of pride in the successes of Christian culture in Rus'... but for all that, it is devoid of national limitations”23.
Hilarion characterized Kievan Rus as a society that had already embarked on the path of truth.
In “The Lay” he strives to show not only the high level of social and state organization of the country, but also the international significance of the Russian state, as completely equal in the circle of countries known to him24.
Having set the task of achieving moral principles in all spheres of socio-political life, Hilarion turns to a discussion of political problems associated with elucidating the origin, essence, and methods of exercising power.
The essence of all power in society is proclaimed to be the divine will. Its bearer - the prince - is a “participant” and “heir” of the heavenly kingdom25. The origin of the highest powers of power is legal. The Grand Duke's table is governed by hereditary succession.
Hilarion associates political successes in the country with the spread of education and book knowledge in society. It is interesting to note that this idea was deeply argued in ancient times. Thus, in Plato’s political treatise “The State” the best form of rights
iv

leniya is made dependent on the knowledge of the rulers. The criterion for assessing their merits and merits is philosophical education26. Hilarion, like the Greek thinker, attaches great importance to the education of the ruler and his preparation for political activity. The future supreme ruler, born from noble parents, is prepared from childhood by the entire system of education (“from childhood”) to fulfill his highest duty to people and God.
The thinker pays great attention to describing the form of government and especially the methods and means of exercising power. The prince must “be the sole ruler of his land”27. The formula used by Hilarion clearly expresses his idea of ​​a single sovereign power within the entire subject territory. In the future, this terminology will be decisive in medieval Russian political theory. The sole power of the prince is not arbitrary, it is strong in “courage and meaning” and is based on the law (“she shepherds her land with righteousness”). The Grand Duke, “friend of truth, the meaning of mercy,” takes care of churches and monasteries. He is obliged to tirelessly give alms and be generous towards his subjects, remember the sick, widows and orphans and all others “demanding mercy”28.
Governance of the state, according to Hilarion, is associated with selfless activity (“the main thing is to die”)29, aimed at achieving the highest goal - ensuring the interests of all subjects.
Justice must be administered in the state only according to the law, but mercifully. “Execution is not enough, mercy is much.” In addition to harsh measures of a legal nature, Hilarion also advises the use of moral influence, preserving here the principle of mercy as prevailing: “with a little insult, you soon become happy”30, because it is much more important to influence a person by showing him mercy, in the form of pardon, than to subject him to severe punishment , which, according to Hilarion, is contrary to the very nature of man.
Hilarion's description of the legal and at the same time merciful activities of the Grand Duke is closely connected with the modeling of the moral character of a ruler invested with all the power of imperious authority. Essentially, Hilarion was the first in the history of Russian political thought to create the image of a ruler of the Christian type and develop the moral criteria that he must meet.

Having created a theoretically ideal image of a ruler, Hilarion tries to discover his features in the Kyiv princes. Oi begins with the praise of Vladimir I, who baptized Rus'. Prince Vladimir is famous for the fact that “your dominion is not in the bad and unknown of the land..., but in the Russian one, which is known and heard by all four nations of the earth”31. These circumstances further strengthen his moral responsibility. Russian great princes before him were distinguished by their courage and bravery. Thus, Vladimir’s father Svyatoslav found honor and respect for himself not only among his own people, “but also in many countries.” And Vladimir himself “was clothed with righteousness (that is, a legitimate ruler and his power is based on the law. - I. 3. J, girded with strength, shod with truth, crowned with meaning and flaunting alms like a hryvnia and gold utensils."32 In Yaroslav, Hilarion sees a worthy successor to the affairs of Svyatoslav and Vladimir. Talking about the activities of Yaroslav as Vladimir’s successor, he praises cultural successes, the construction of churches, the spread of book education, as a result of which, as he sees it, ordinary thinking has risen to the level of high spiritual abstractions.
Hilarion addresses his political treatise, polysemantic in subject matter, using the then established method of symbolic parallelism, not to a wide range of readers, but only to learned people capable of absorbing special knowledge: “we write neither to those who are ignorant, but to those who have been overfilled with the sweets of books.” a"33.
This very appeal clearly shows the class orientation of Hilarion, who expressed the position of the feudal aristocracy. Since during that period of development of Russian statehood the role of the Kyiv prince (and, consequently, his entourage, who took part in the exercise of power) was historically progressive, Hilarion’s work, which objectively reflected the complex of political ideas of the ruling feudal elite, accumulated advanced political and legal ideas.
17
2 Order 6791

Hilarion, for the first time in Russian political literature, raised the question of the responsibility of the prince to his subjects. The prince is obliged, writes Hilarion, “without a blessing God has given him. I will rule the people"34. Moreover, the prince is responsible for the people entrusted to his care and for his management of them: “for the work of his flock and his people”35. Following
Following Hilarion, the author of “The Tale of Bygone Years” addresses this problem, emphasizing that for the “evil” actions of the prince, “God brings great evil to the earth, since then (the prince - N. 3.) is the head of the earth”36.
Hilarion considers ensuring peace to be one of the most pressing foreign policy tasks. Thus, in the third part of his work, where wishes for his country are formulated in the form of a prayer, Hilarion first of all asks to save it from war. The prince is obliged to take care of the world and not start bloody wars (“the world is still standing, don’t bring temptation on us (us - N. 3.), don’t betray us into the hands of strangers”), which could end in tears for the Russian people (“ Let not your city be called captive." Neither one’s own nor another’s people should be “allowed sorrow and famine and vain deaths, fire, drowning...”37 Divine providence must ensure peace, and the prince must carry out a whole range of measures to prevent wars (“drive away military forces, establish peace , shorten the countries,” and even “threaten” some of them).
The prince’s responsibilities also include organizing good internal governance of the country (“Glady Ugobzi, Bolyars were wise, cities were settled...”)38.
Hilarion's treatise was highly appreciated by both his contemporaries and descendants. Over the centuries, it has shaped the political consciousness of many generations of writers and thinkers. The political and legal problems posed in it were discussed throughout the medieval period and many of them retained their significance in modern times. These include, first of all, the relationship between law and morality, the concept of supreme power, the legality of the origin of the powers of the head of state, the exercise of power within legal limits, the responsibility of the ruler to his subjects, and the determination of the course of foreign policy.
Hilarion painted an ideal image of the Grand Duke as the supreme ruler of the Christian type, developing for this purpose certain criteria (of a moral and legal nature), with the help of which he assessed the personality of the ruler and his activities as the head of state.
stva. This topic became central in political literature during the period of strengthening and development of the Moscow state.
In the works of the 14th-16th centuries, one can find not only the assimilation of the basic thoughts of the “Tale of Law and Grace,” but sometimes entire formulas of verbal expressions, with the help of which this or that figurative scheme was reproduced almost word for word. For example, the Perm Bishop Stefan, exposing the “heresy,” repeats almost verbatim some of the provisions of the “Sermon on Law and Grace”39. In a later work, “The Valaam Conversation” (mid-16th century), the author, criticizing his opponents, reproduces some of Hilarion’s formulas40.
The text of Hilarion's work was also consulted. conducting theoretical and dogmatic disputes. The treatise was also used for many centuries as an example of the glorification of the supreme ruler.
Thus, he had a multifaceted influence on political journalism, which continued to develop the problems posed by Hilarion.
“The Sermon on Law and Grace” precedes “The Tale of Bygone Years.” His ideological and political motives will be reflected and further developed in it, and it is through it that subsequently in many later chronicles they will determine the political issues to be discussed and the political ideas that need official approval.