] Author: Leo Taxil. 2nd edition. Translation from French by L. Boltsova. Artist A.Ya. Gladyshev.
(Moscow: Publishing House of Political Literature (Politizdat), 1988. - Series “Library of Atheistic Literature”)
Scan, processing, Djv format: Berseus, Skaramusch, 2013
- SUMMARY:
Holy libertines (7).
Fathers of clericalism (7).
The Holy See and Women (15).
Sixtus III (10).
Leo I (17).
Civil strife among popes (20).
Great Gregory (21).
Disgusting morals (24).
Quarrels and fights (25).
Whose baby is it? (27).
Rubber conscience (30).
As is the master, so are the servants (32).
Paschal I (33).
Production of relics wholesale and retail (34).
Orgies and murders (35).
Return the money! (36).
Deification of icons (37).
Murderer, thief, rogue and traitor (38).
Pork snout (40).
Nuns and the Holy Father (41).
Pope Joanna (42).
Who wants a tiara? (43).
Disgusting details (44).
Ladies tricks (45).
The Archbishop condemns Nicholas I (47).
Finger of God (48).
Morality of the High Priest (49).
Bishop-fratricide (49).
Dad is a forger (51).
The Roman's Revenge (52).
Decaying alive (52).
Sale by public auction (53).
Greed of the monks (54).
Extermination of locusts (54).
Thief, murderer and virgin! (56).
Two-week reign (57).
Stephen VII (58).
Crimes and follies of Stephen VII (58).
Church in the 9th century (59).
Air! Air! (60).
Results of Christianity (61).
Christopher the Executioner (62).
Holy Fathers and Courtesans (63).
Mother and daughter (63).
How dangerous it is sometimes to love an empress (65).
Intimate blessing (67).
John XI, beloved of his mother (68).
Great family (68).
Loss of the throne (70).
The end justifies the means (73).
Carnival in the Cathedral (74).
Courtesan, canonized (75).
Brawl on the Holy See (77).
Revenge and pleasures of the high priests (78).
The price of baptism (79).
Good remains also... strengthen friendship (81).
Two miracles (82).
Get out of my place! (84).
Patron and ward (85).
New exploits of Boniface (87).
Posthumous revenge (88).
Superstitions (89).
The stones cry and... dance! (90).
Fortune Teller Bees (92).
With one saber strike (93).
First prayer (95).
Second prayer (95).
How to stop an earthquake (96).
Purgatory in Sicily (97).
Letter of Jesus Christ (100).
Down with the tyrant! (103).
Baby daddy (103).
A few more words about Benedict IX (104).
Retired Dad's Pastimes (105).
Three high priests at the same time on the holy throne (105).
Holy Four (107).
Bloodbath (107).
Clement II (108).
Who should sit in the chair? (109).
Old acquaintance (110).
Benedict IX - forever and ever (111).
Drive the coin! (112).
Confession of the Holy Father (113).
How two shops competed with each other (115).
The Devil at Mass (117).
Judges and defendants (119).
What is the best dad worth? (120).
Difficult choice (122).
Fanaticism (124).
Fights for the papal throne (125).
Aldobrandini, or the unburnt monk (128).
Jugglers of the Most High (131).
“In vino veritas!” (133).
Gregory VII (135).
Gregory is a champion of asceticism (139).
Conspiracy against Gregory VII (140).
Henry IV at Canossa (143).
Dad's devilish trick (145).
Miraculous tiara (147).
Civil strife on the throne and the holy see (148).
The truth about the Crusades (149).
Paschal II is a faithful follower of Gregory VII (153).
The teacher and his worthy student (156).
The fight between two opponents (161).
Christianity is a religion of mercy (164).
Curious little book (166).
The headquarters of the Catholic army is in danger (168).
Which other saint was granted such mercy? (169).
Adrian IV (171).
Death of Arnold of Brescia (172).
Alexander III (173).
Massacre of the Waldensians (175).
Lucius III (179).
Gregory VIII (184).
Popes of the 13th century (185).
Francis of Assisi (189).
Honorius III (191).
Gregory IX (191).
Celestine IV (198).
Innocent IV (199).
Alexander IV (201).
Boniface VIII (205).
Holy Year (212).
House in Loreto (213).
Triumph of charlatans (214).
Gang of bandits (216).
John XXII (217).
Absolution according to the price list (220).
Bandits in a tiara (223).
Massacre of heretics (225).
Brawl between predators and bandits (226).
John XXIII (231).
Enlightened charlatan and libertine (234).
Torture Garden (235).
Tiarone Assassin (237).
Cut heads, but pay! (239).
Golden extravaganza (241).
The sad story of three brave young men (242).
Financial transactions of the holy father (243).
Sober thoughts (244).
Electoral chaos (247).
Murder by proxy (248).
Hunting a Man (249).
The Last Atrocities of Innocent VIII (250).
Alexander VI (254).
Julius II (275).
Illness sent by providence (280).
Leo X on a perforated chair (281).
The Great Hypocrite (283).
Tragedy after vaudeville (285).
Indulgence Fair (287).
Luther and Leo X (290).
Millions of victims (298).
Murder in three acts (300).
Clement VII, Henry VIII and Charles V (304).
Murder, intrigue and entertainment (307).
Conscience at auction (311).
Paul III and his family (312).
Religious Morality in Action (315).
One for two (319).
Orgies in the Vatican (321).
About the monkey keeper and the loving dad (322).
Eve's Apple and the Holy Father's Peacock (324).
Paul IV, friend of the Jesuits (325).
Pius IV (327).
Excessive gratitude is destructive (328).
An Ominous Warning (329).
The pope's atrocities are torture and execution (332).
Execution of mother (335).
Rope around the neck for a word (336).
Christian priests and priestesses of love (338).
Three monsters (339).
No mercy! (342).
The last crimes of the saint (343).
Gregory XIII (345).
Bartholomew's Night (345).
New victims of religion (348).
Jesuits at work (348).
Dad's Failures (349).
Philip II bypasses the pope (350).
A series of conspiracies (351).
The hypocrisy of Gregory XIII (353).
Successor of Gregory XIII (353).
Tricks of the future dad (354).
Sad debut (356).
Sixtus V tries to threaten the kings (358).
Pope and pious fathers (359).
Hypocritical politics (361).
Vile betrayal (363).
The dispute between the pope and the emperor (364).
Revenge of the sons of Ignatius of Loyola (365).
Urban VII (366).
There is an honest man on the holy throne! (367).
Good fathers are not to be trifled with! (368).
Gregory XIV (368).
Trouble after trouble (369).
Innocent IX (370).
Clement VIII (370).
Conversion of the wicked Henry (371).
Demand for regicide (371).
Let's go to the Jesuits! (372).
Jean Chatel obeys good fathers (373).
The failure of the black gang (374).
Cowardly treatment (375).
Caesar, defeated by Clement (376).
Defeat and end of the Catholic tyrant (377).
Return of the Jesuits (378).
Death of the Holy Father (380).
Leo XI (381).
Paul V (381).
His Holiness accommodates relatives (382).
Paul V and the Venetian Republic (383).
Jesuits in England (386).
The controversy between the throne and the altar (387).
Jesuits and the University (388).
The valiant fathers raise their heads (390).
The double impudence of the Jesuits (392).
Salad of politics and religion (394).
The Borghese family and the Roman court (396).
Gregory XV (398).
General beating
Papal greetings (400).
The High Priest's Last Plan (401).
Urban VIII (402).
Politics of the Holy Father (404).
The Church persecutes the genius (405).
Victims of superstition (406).
The Doctrines and Morals of the Good Fathers (407).
Old rooster with two hens (412).
Some go to the forest, some for firewood (413).
Olympia's Revenge (416).
A striking change (419).
Religious Obscenities (426).
Adventures of a Clairvoyant (427).
To the glory of the Lord! (430).
Drunkenness, treachery, fraud (434).
Pasha churches (436).
Church clowns (437).
The Troubled Saint (441).
Jesuit burned by the Dominicans (448).
Defeat of the Jesuits (450).
Clement XIV (455).
Pius VI and his family (456).
Pius VI - thief and murderer (458).
Pius VI and Bonaparte (460).
Roman Republic (462).
Love and betrayal (465).
Bonaparte and Pius VII (467).
When the Devil Gets Old (469).
Return to the Middle Ages (471).
The last pope is an unlimited monarch (475).
Afterword (481).
Index of names (491).
Publisher's abstract:“The Sacred Den” by the famous French publicist Leo Taxil, already familiar to Soviet readers from the books “Funny Bible” and “Funny Gospel,” recreates the history of Christianity, or rather, its Western branch - Catholicism. This is a very peculiar story. It is carefully hushed up by supporters of religion.
Written in a brightly satirical, lively, fascinating way, the book shows that church hierarchs are, as it were, the focus of all the vices and sins against which they speak out in words.
Designed for a wide range of readers.
Notes on
atheistic literature of recent years.
Careful familiarization with the very numerous anti-religious
literature led me to the following conclusions:
1. This literature is striking, first of all, by its incredible backwardness.
In it you can find many provisions expressed in science for 100-150 years
ago and after long since decisively rejected.
2. In many cases the situation is much worse: here we find
a mass of gross distortions of facts and completely obvious fabrications.
ignorance, often in the most basic matters. The latter, however,
is explained, in particular, by the fact that among the many people writing in
atheistic themes, there is not one not only outstanding, but just ordinary
Over 120 books and articles of anti-religious propaganda were reviewed.
Despite such an abundance of literature, comments on it can be reduced to:
several points, since the vast majority of these brochures and articles
conscientiously repeat each other. Sometimes this conscientiousness happens
amazing.
For example, Guryev textually repeats Yaroslavsky and Rozhitsin, who
does not remain in debt, also literally reproducing Yaroslavsky. Similar "
many borrowings" were found in various articles and books, although I did not
The goal was to establish the degree of originality of the literature reviewed.
Let me group the main comments as follows.
WAS CHRIST RISEN?
This is the fundamental question of all religion, all philosophy, all sciences,
concerning human views, for only God could rise again.
Therefore, the question of resurrection is the question of whether God exists. Not
it is surprising that almost all the works of anti-religious people are based on
question about the resurrection, and they all, as expected, answer this question
negative. They may not realize that after some
the most important discoveries (I will talk about them later) did not recognize the fact of the resurrection of Christ
who else than Friedrich Engels. Specifically, in the preface to the reissue of his
in his essays he writes:
"The newest Cappadocian discoveries oblige us to change our view of
some few, but the most important events in world history, and the fact that
previously seemed worthy of the attention of only mythologists, will henceforth have to
attract the attention of historians. New documents that conquer skeptics with their
convincingly, they speak in favor of the greatest of miracles in history, about
the return to life of the One who was deprived of it on Calvary."
True, these lines of Engels remained unknown in Russia even
because they have never been translated into Russian in publications
Marx and Engels.
The Cappadocian discoveries, which convinced even Engels, were followed by a series of
discoveries are no less, but more important. More on this later. Now let's go back to
atheistic literature.
The basis for anti-religious people, in particular for deniers
resurrection, is, as they claim, the lack of evidence of
resurrection.
What is the reality like? Are they really like that?
no evidence? One of the most frequently speaking authors,
a certain Duluman writes: “At a time when, according to the teachings of the clergy, there should have been
exist on earth Christ, there lived many scientists and writers: Josephus,
Austin of Tiberias, Plexides, Seneca, etc. - but they all didn’t say a word
talking about Christ."
I quoted from Duluman not because I think he is the most
quoted here a certain Candidov, who rewrote these lines from
Rakovich, and he, in turn, took them from Shakhnovich, who literally
repeats Yaroslavsky, that is, this is the general opinion of our atheists. Is it true,
here and there there are small variations: for example, a certain Sokolovsky to
the writers listed by Duluman are added by Liberia Zulia, and Rozhitsin and
Tarnogradsky - Tacita and Balandia. This exhausts the list of ancient
They didn’t write about Christ. Is it so?
Let's start in order. Neither Austen really wrote about Christ
Tiberias, nor Liberius Sulius, nor Balandius, but for the reason that these
"ancient writers" never existed. There was no Liberius Sulia
neither in ancient times nor in later times. There was Lavrenty Sury, but also
he lived not at the time of Christ, but ten centuries later. Even greater embarrassment
happened with the “ancient writer” Balandius. He was never there either
nature, and there was a monk Bollan, but he lived after Christ by one thousand five hundred years,
Therefore, it is not surprising that, describing contemporary events, he could not
relate specifically to the resurrection of Christ. Austin of Tiberias is also fictional. IN
Ossia Tverdnik, who lived during the Palestinian events, is known in literature,
but this is not a writer at all, but the hero of an old Byzantine story,
literary character.
So, these “ancient writers” can hardly be taken into account. But
Besides them, atheists also mention Josephus, Pliny the Elder, and Tacitus.
They, according to atheists, also did not leave any evidence of
resurrection of Jesus Christ. Is it so?
Let's start with Josephus. He is one of the most reliable historical
witnesses. Karl Marx said: "Reliable history can only be written in
based on such documents as the works of Josephus and equivalent ones."
In addition, Flavius during his life could also have been aware of events
described in the Gospel. Finally, Josephus was not a follower of Christ, and no
there is reason to expect from him some exaggerations beneficial to Christians.
Does Josephus really say nothing about the resurrection of Christ?
Those who say this should look into the world at least once in their lives.
excerpts from his works published in the Soviet edition of the USSR Academy of Sciences. There
it is written in black and white: “At this time Jesus Christ, a man, spoke
high wisdom, if only one can call Him a man, a perfecter
wonderful things; when, following the denunciation of our leading people, Pilate crucified Him
on the cross, those who first loved Him were shaken. On the third day
He appeared to them alive again." How does this fit in with the statements and
assurances that Josephus does not say a word about Christ?
Let me make a small disclaimer. A hundred years ago this testimony of Josephus was
questioned. The point was this: at first two were known
version of the manuscript. In one of them the words “on the third day He appeared to them
alive" were, but absent in the other. On this basis, B. Bauer (1809-
1882), and then his followers decided that these words were inscribed
Christians later. This is how the legend of interpolation appeared in Josephus.
However, three more variants were later found, and these findings led to
another conclusion: the discrepancies between the first and second options are not explained
inscription in the first version, and loss of pages in the second version, in which
two more chapters turned out to be missing, which became clear from those found later
three options where lines about the resurrection of Christ are present. Besides,
One more circumstance is very important. World scientist Yu. Wellhausen
[Wellhausen, modern,] together with another major philologist De Sessoni
brought indisputable evidence that the lines of Flavius were written by him
ourselves. The fact is that Josephus wrote in a very unique language, with
compliance with all the features, so it is impossible to fake it. But,
Of course, the final blow to doubts about the authenticity of the manuscript was dealt
discovery of three versions of his works. The first version of the manuscript was the most
the oldest of all.
At present, none of the scientists repeat speculations about the records of
Flavia. So whoever continues to do this shows that he is behind
for ninety to a hundred years.
At the moment of Christ's resurrection, Labirinios found himself with his
officials near this place. Those who clearly saw the fall of the stone,
covering the coffin, rising above this place with an unusually bright shining
figure, Labirinios, along with his companions and guards, rushed
report this to the authorities.
Greek Hermidius [Germisius], who held the official position of biographer
ruler of Judea, also wrote a biography of Pilate. His messages deserve
special attention for two reasons. Firstly, they contain extremely
a lot of reliable information on the history of Palestine and Rome and formed the basis
history of Judea. Secondly, Hermidius stands out sharply in his manner
presentation. This person is not able to succumb to any impressions. By
definition of the famous historian Academician S. A. Zhebelev: “he is with
with the impartial precision of a photographic camera he narrated everything.”
The testimony of Hermidius is also valuable because he, too, during the resurrection
was near that place, accompanying one of Pilate’s assistants. Important
add that Hermidius was at first opposed to Christ and, like himself
spoke, persuaded Pilate's wife not to restrain her husband from the death sentence
To Christ. Until the crucifixion, he considered Christ a deceiver. Therefore he
on his own initiative went to the tomb on Sunday night, hoping
make sure you are right. But it turned out differently.
"Approaching the tomb and being one hundred and fifty steps away from it, -
writes Hermidius, “we saw in the faint light of the early dawn the guards at the tomb: two
people were sitting, the rest were lying on the ground, it was very quiet. We walked very
slowly, and we were overtaken by the guards who were going to the coffin to replace the one who
I had been there since the evening. Then suddenly it became very light. We could not
understand where this light comes from. But they soon saw that it was coming from a moving
from above a shining cloud. It sank to the coffin and appeared above the ground
a man who seems to be all glowing. Then there was a clap of thunder, but not in the sky,
but on the ground. From this blow the guards jumped up in horror and then fell. In it
While a woman was walking towards the coffin to the right of us along the path, she suddenly shouted:
"It's opened! It's opened!" And at this time it became clear to us that indeed
a very large stone rolled at the entrance to the cave, as if by itself
got up and opened the coffin [opened the entrance to the cave of the coffin]. We were very scared.
Then, some time later, the light above the coffin disappeared, it became as quiet as
usually. When we approached the coffin, it turned out that it was no longer there.
the body of a buried person."
The testimony of Hermidius is interesting from another point of view. He writes that
shortly before the execution of Christ, a coin with a large
image of Caesar [Tiberius] on one side and with a small image
Pilate on the other hand. On the day of Christ's trial, when Pilate's wife sent
people came to him, through whom she convinced her husband not to impose the death sentence,
she asked him: “How will you atone for your guilt, if the person you condemned
really the Son of God, and not a criminal?" - Pilate answered her: "If He
Son of God, then He will rise, and then the first thing I will do is
prohibition to mint my image on coins while I am alive."
explain that being depicted on coins was considered very high in Rome
honor. Pilate kept his promise. When was it established that Christ
resurrected, Pilate actually forbade depicting himself on coins. This
Hermidius' message is fully supported by material evidence.
From Roman numismatics it is known that in Jerusalem at that time there were
coins were made with the image of Caesar on one side and without the image
Pilate on the other [they began to mint coins only with the image of Caesar].
Syrian Yeishu [Eishu], a famous doctor close to Pilate and who treated
him... is one of the most outstanding people of his time. Prominent
a physician of his time, a naturalist who enjoyed wide fame in
East, and then in Rome, he left works that amounted to a whole
era in science. It is not for nothing that historians of science, including the American scientist
Kiggerists, they believe that Yeishu ranks as a doctor next to Hippocrates,
Celsus, Galen, and as an anatomist - next to Leonardo da Vinci and Vesalius
; only the little-known language in which he wrote prevented
his confession. What is important is under what circumstances Yeishu observed what was described.
them. On Pilate's instructions, from the evening before the resurrection he was near
the coffin along with his five assistants, who always accompanied him.
He also witnessed the burial of Christ. On Saturday he examined twice
coffin, and in the evening, by order of Pilate, he went here with his assistants and must
was spending the night here. Knowing the prophecies regarding the resurrection
Christ, Yeishu and his medical assistants were also interested in how
naturalists. Therefore, everything connected with Christ and His death, they
thoroughly researched. On Sunday night they took turns staying awake.
In the evening his assistants went to bed, but long before the resurrection they woke up and
resumed their observations of what was happening in nature. "We are all doctors,
the guards,” writes Yeishu, “were healthy, cheerful, and felt as usual.
We didn't have any premonitions. We did not believe at all that the deceased
may be resurrected. But He really rose again, and we all saw it
was a skeptic. In his writings he invariably repeated the expression that
Later, thanks to him, it became a proverb in the East: “What I myself do not
I saw it, I think it’s a fairy tale.”
As can be seen from the previous, contrary to the opinion of anti-religious people,
There is plenty of evidence of the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
One of the world's largest experts on antiquity, academician V.P.Buzeskul
said: "The Resurrection of Christ is confirmed by historical and archaeological
finds with such certainty as the existence of Ivan the Terrible and
Peter the Great... If you deny the resurrection of Christ, then you need to deny
(and with much greater reason) the existence of Pilate, Julius Caesar,
Nero, Augustus, Trojan, Marcus Aurelius, Russian princes Vladimir and Olga,
Alexander Nevsky, Ivan Kalita, Daniil Galitsky, Yuri Dolgorukov and
many others."
This is only a small part of the sources where it is said that Christ
really resurrected. For brevity, I will limit myself to just a list of others
sources: Epiphanius Africanus, Eusebius of Egypt, Sardonius Panidorus, Hippolytus
Macedonian, Ammon of Alexandria, Sabellinus the Greek, Isaac of Jerusalem,
Konstantin [Constantius] of Tire and others. These are only those who lived during
Christ, and were in Jerusalem or in the immediate vicinity of
him and were eyewitnesses of the resurrection itself or irrefutable facts,
confirming it...
It is extremely significant that several testimonies about the resurrection
[those who have not converted to Christianity] tend to suppress this fact in every possible way. Among
Jewish writers who spoke directly about the resurrection, we find such reliable
Mesopotamian, Maferkant.
Maferkant, in particular, was one of the members of the Sanhedrin, treasurer. To him
had to be present at the resurrection. He came to the tomb to
pay the guards who guarded the coffin. Maferkant saw that the coffin was secure
protected. Having paid the money, he left... But he did not have time to move away from the coffin
far away, when a clap of thunder was heard and a huge stone was thrown away by an unknown
by force. Returning back to the coffin, Maferkant saw from a distance the disappearing
shine. All this is described by him in the essay “On the Rulers of Palestine,” which
is one of the most valuable and truthful sources on the history of this
For reasons difficult to explain, Maferkant unexpectedly appeared in
Emelyan Yaroslavsky [who headed the union of atheists, real name
Gubelman Miney Izrailevich] in the following form: “He is silent about the resurrection of Christ
even such a sensationalist hack as Mayferkant, called
Maruta". Truly the greatest ingenuity is needed so that in one
a small mention can allow so many ridiculous perversions.
Let's figure it out now. Firstly, Mayferkant, instead of Maferkant,
mentioned by Yaroslavsky is not a writer at all, but a city in Syria. Secondly,
there never was any "Mayferkant called Maruta", but there was Maruta
Mephos, from the name of the city in which he lived, by the way, five hundred
more than a year later than the Gospel events. Thirdly, Maruta was not
a hack, as Yaroslavsky qualified him, and one of the most
talented writers of that time, who were highly valued by Goethe, Byron,
Hugo and others. His work "Syrian Monisto" was translated into
many European languages, as well as into Russian (from English), and was published in
publication of Gospolitizdat. Fortunately, the employees of this publishing house,
Apparently they didn’t read Yaroslavsky. Like this, who lived in the first century AD
the Jew Maferkant was turned by our atheists into a Syrian who lived in
half a thousand years later, and at the same time declared a hack without guilt.
In total, according to calculations by an expert on Roman history,
literature, Academician I.V. Netushil, the number of completely reliable evidence of
the resurrection of Christ exceeds 210; according to the calculations of modern scientists - 230,
for to the data of Netushil we must also add those historical monuments that
were discovered after the publication of his work.
It is significant that anti-religionists invariably shy away from
debates with serious scientists on the topic of the resurrection of Jesus Christ. IN
In Leningrad, the “union of the atheists” did not dare to debate with academician Tarle,
Academician Rostovtsev, Academician Kareev, Academician Uspensky and members-
correspondents of the Academy of Sciences Egorov and Gauthier, and in Odessa - with
Professor Parkhomenko.
Of course, the resurrection of Christ is the main, most important event, after
which everything else in religion is of secondary importance. IN
in fact, since Christ has risen, that means He is God. Currently for
The fact of the resurrection is undeniable for every even knowledgeable historian. Not
only major, but also simply conscientious historians no longer express
no doubt about it.
Doubts about the resurrection were dispelled mainly after the most important
finds, of which there were many. The first ones date back to the nineteenth century, and
the latter to the present day. The enormous importance of the latest finds [from Qumran]
so great that they were even reported in the press, although only a few
component parts. These are the oldest Jewish texts. They literally shocked
the whole world.
It is highly significant that among our anti-religious
there has never been a single not only major researcher, but even
an ordinary scientist. Who, exactly, are our leading “writers”?
Gubelman (under the pseudonym of Yaroslavsky);
Schneider (under the pseudonym Rumyantseva);
Friedman (under the pseudonym Kandidova);
Edelstein (under the pseudonym Zakharova);
Epstein (under the pseudonym Yakovleva), served as head of the department
anti-religious literature in the central council of the militant union
atheists;
Rakovich, Shakhnovich, Skvortsov-Stepanov and other active leaders
of this union: D. Mikhnevich, M. Iskinsky, Y. Kogan, G. Eilderman, F. Saifi,
A. Ranovich, Y. Ganf, M. Sheinman, M. Altshuler, V. Dorfman, Y. Vermel, K.
Berkovsky, M. Persits, S. Wolfzon, D. Zilberberg, I. Grinberg, A. Schlieter.
What can you say about them?
Emelyan Yaroslavsky is usually put in first place. For example, I take
the first volume of the second edition of his works, dedicated to anti-religious
propaganda, I skip the first three pages devoted to his biography and not
related to science. On page four it says that Christ is not
could have been born, because, according to the Gospel, He was born under Herod, and this Herod
died 50 years earlier. Here Yaroslavsky mixed different Herods. There were
Page 5 says the Bible is a mishmash
various fictions collected from different peoples of those times. As proof
he refers to the once popular, but rejected by scientists, opinion about “two
Bibles", since in the first chapters of the Bible the name Elohim appears, and in the following
Jehovah. Whoever first stated this fact was not dealing with
Hebrew text, and with translations from it. But in other translations,
made directly from the original, this discrepancy is absent. IN
in the Hebrew text the names Elohim and Jehovah are synonymous, just as in
Russian: God, Lord. And if in the Gospel in one place it says God, and in
God is a friend, this does not mean that the book was written by two authors. So in
all four Gospels.
Moving on to the next page of Yaroslavsky, we read: “Everything flows, everything
changes, the Romans said." This was what the Greeks said (Heraclitus).
On the next page it says: "Moses' sister Regina laid it..."
in Hebrew.
On another page: “The Jewish book Kabbalah says that a person
gave names to the animals." There is not a word about this in Kabbalah. It is said in that
the Bible itself, of which Yaroslavsky is considered an expert.
distortions. Firstly, there could not be Avestan priests, since Avesta -
Iranian book. Secondly, Rossonak never existed, but Rossiona.
And thirdly, he was not a priest, but a Brahmin, and he was related to Iran,
not India.
On the next page: "The companion of the god Ohrmazd is Ahriman." Ahriman
cannot be called a companion of Ohrmazd, because they act as
irreconcilable antipodes, opponents. In short, the list of Yaroslavsky’s mistakes could
would compose a volume thicker than the volume of his works, so we will limit ourselves
the examples given here. In his acclaimed book “The Bible for Believers and
non-believers" 197 errors were discovered, but he, so to speak, was
specialist in atheism.
But maybe his followers are luckier? Nothing happened.
About Rozhitsin. When he presented his dissertation, even such a soft
and a benevolent scientist, like Academician Buzeskul, advised to remove it from
protection "to avoid complete failure." Rozhitsin moved his dissertation defense to
Leningrad, but the largest historical researchers Tarle, Kareev and Grevs also
advised him to pick her up.
I won’t dwell in detail on the oversaturated anecdotal
in some places books by the most modern anti-religiousists Lenzman and Shenkman.
In general, when familiarizing yourself with our anti-religious literature, everything
the question arises more persistently: what is the opinion of your readers?
For example, Grishin’s article in the journal “Science and Life”. He writes and
the editors let it into print that the Bible erroneously tells about
the presence of Jews in Egypt, this, according to Grishin, is clearly absurd. TO
information of Grishin, as well as the All-Russian magazine, which, apparently,
quite reliable. This historical fact can be learned from all
This is also evidenced by the monuments of Ancient Egypt. For example (Sukhapet): “In captivity
We have as many Israelis as there are grains of sand on the banks of the Nile." And again: "They left
captivity of the Israelites." And in the epitaph of the Egyptian Seph it is said: "You pursued
the people of Judah, leaving our captivity under the leadership of Moses."
And this is only a small part of evidence of this kind.
Based on all of the above, we come to the conclusion that the Russian
anti-religious propaganda is absolutely incompetent in the issue it covers.
References:
Academician A.I. Beletsky
Academician I.V.Netushil
Academician V. Buzeskul
Collected works of E. Yaroslavsky (1 volume, 2nd edition)
"The Bible for believers and non-believers" by E. Yaroslavsky
Newspapers, magazines, notes, brochures related to the issue under consideration.
Our children's writers of the 20th century managed to create hundreds of outstanding world-class works. And I am sure that in the soul of everyone who was born in Russia, the memory of childhood is inextricably linked with at least one of these creations. We can rightfully be proud of the unique domestic writing school and its great representatives. However, remembering the merits of the classics, you should not console yourself with the thought that all Soviet children's literature was limited only to their work. We should not forget about its entire layer, which sets itself only one goal - the propaganda of atheism. Moreover, one should not underestimate the cultural influence of these opuses, even if they were written by less famous authors than S.Ya. Marshak or K.I. Chukovsky.
From a very young age, Soviet people should have known: faith is bad, atheism is good. Funny children's books in which pioneer heroes successfully fought religious fanatics and cunning hypocritical “priests” were entrusted with putting these “simple truths” into a child’s head. Not yet able to critically comprehend what they read, naive children had to look admiringly at their literary comrades and dream of the same adventures.
I didn’t find the books I’m going to talk about in an old, dusty attic. No! All of them have successfully migrated to the digital space, where they continue to live in the form of convenient collections on the websites of the largest online libraries. And they look through them, and read them, and even give them five “stars,” which is absolutely not surprising. After all, sooner or later, post-Soviet nostalgia was bound to spread to other parts of the communist legacy, including anti-religious ones.
Everyday atheism is in demand today: it provides simple and convenient formulas and answers
But what does bringing old Soviet myths back to life entail? What, after all, is the danger of mindlessly reading children's atheistic books? Like any propaganda, they cannot provide an objective picture of the world. This is not the purpose of this kind of literature. Instead, she successfully constructs the image of the Other, the enemy, the embodiment of Evil. And such an enemy becomes a believer, especially a priest. It must be fought by definition, due to its otherness. To put it simply: he is not like us, and therefore dangerous.
Such attitudes cannot bring anything good. They are closer to everyday xenophobia than to a serious and thoughtful position in life. So it turns out that promoted by such books, supported only by the desire to find the Other for the role of “scapegoat”, he himself falls into the category of “everyday”. And today, in the context of the ongoing economic, social and spiritual crisis, everyday atheism could not be more in demand. He does not require his followers to read serious scientific literature, nor to understand the wide range of classics of free thought from Jean Meslier or Pierre Bayle to Ludwig Feuerbach or Karl Marx. Instead, everyday atheism provides simple and convenient explanatory formulas that answer the “damned” Russian questions “Who is to blame?” and “What to do?”: fight religion – save Russia/democracy/the world (underline as appropriate).
Comrades are with you. And with me?
The list of Soviet children's atheistic literature is huge. It’s impossible to list all the books. Let us dwell on only two, which, in my opinion, are excellent examples of such “creativity”. These are “Comrades With You” by Tamara Vorontsova and “Miracle Worker” by Vladimir Fedorovich Tendryakov. Perhaps someone still has these books at home as a memory of their past childhood. Find them, re-read them, and you will see how much of what is written there is still alive in our minds.
“Comrades are with you” is a book about sectarians. Although at first there is nothing to indicate that it will be about them. The girl Ira, who arrived from Moscow to an unnamed Siberian town, spends a cheerful summer with her grandmother, but suddenly terrible stories about sectarians invade her world (not themselves, no, but only stories about them). All her new friends - both adults and children - vying with each other to scare the girl, either with descriptions of children crucified by fanatics, or with other horror stories. One day, Ira finds herself on the banks of a mighty river flowing through the city and meets an unusually handsome and delicate young man. The boy looks into the distance, when suddenly... he makes the sign of the cross. Ira understands: the boy is a sectarian, he needs to be saved.
Such a conclusion today is, of course, comical. Not everyone who is baptized is a sectarian. Moreover, until the end of the book it will not be clear what kind of sect settled on the banks of the great Siberian river. Followers of Brother Athanasius believe in Jesus Christ, are baptized, venerate icons, organize ecstatic devotions and read the Jehovah's Witness magazine “Watch Tower” (apparently a distorted name for “Watchtower”). In such a cocktail of incompatible ideas (as is known, Jehovah's Witnesses do not have icons, they do not consider Jesus Christ to be God, etc.) a new sect is born, known only to Tamara Vorontsova herself. However, painting the image of religious fanatics, dangerous and absurd, the author, in contrast with them, draws models of behavior for both the atheist pioneer and the “good” (acceptable in Soviet atheistic society) believer.
Let me remind you once again: Ira comes to the idea that the boy is unusual only because he crossed himself. This amazes her so much that she cannot get rid of the question: “Why is he being baptized?” It would seem that we are surprised. A girl from enlightened Moscow, from a family of scientists, she has probably simply never seen a believer, and therefore anyone who is baptized is a sectarian for her. But no, assembling a team to save the young man, the girl tells her friends about her experience with religion: “I went to church, prayed - and okay. The boys visited us, and I visited once. Out of interest." So, the girl knows about churches and about prayers, but doesn’t know about the fact that when people pray, they make the sign of the cross? Somehow I can’t believe it...
The girls learned: a “correct” believer should not pray outside of church. Does this remind you of anything?
No, the girl is embarrassed not by the fact of the sign of the cross, but by its public demonstration. In the USSR, open public expression of one’s religiosity outside the walls of a church, mosque, or synagogue entailed severe punishment, and therefore anyone who dared to do so was seen as a product of another world and in the young mind of the girl immediately received the label of a sectarian. A similar mythology (“a correct” believer will not pray outside of church, otherwise he is dangerous) has become so ingrained in the mass consciousness, so widely replicated in children’s and adult literature, that it is still often found: “Pray in your churches, but don’t take it out into the street. Live in the ghetto and be glad that you are at least alive.” To pray in the soul, but openly, not to be baptized in public - this is the permitted form of Soviet religiosity.
But why, according to Vorontsova, are sectarians so dangerous? Probably, with their fanaticism, reaching the point of self-mutilation: “They have such a faith: to sacrifice themselves to God.” However, the metaphysical Other actually turns out to be too close, because fanaticism and sacrifice are also characteristics of Soviet (communist and atheistic) ideology. ““Pig,” she cruelly called herself. - Selfish and pig.<…>“Oh, what a pig,” she thought, swallowing cold water. Her teeth ached, but she kept drinking, as if she was punishing herself for her returning fears...” No, this is not an act of self-torture by one of Brother Afanasy’s followers, that’s what Ira herself thinks when, due to an attack of nightmares, she accidentally wakes up her grandmother. Yes, and strange believers, as it turns out later, do not burn themselves or mutilate themselves. This means that this is not the point, this is not the main reason for the conflict between sectarians and atheists.
Violence is everywhere and for everyone. And the believer is beaten because he is incapable of violence, which means he is different and dangerous
“Comrades Are With You” paints an ugly picture of universal violence against anyone who differs from the majority. Here, both Ira’s friends “let go”, giving jabs to one of the members of their company - the overly talkative Shurik of the BBC, and the city hooligans, led by the dude Zhorka. The relationship between the local doctor and his nurses is built on violence, even if only verbal, (“With a bouquet in his hands, he (the doctor. – N.H.) quickly rushed along the corridor and, bursting into the quiet staff room, shouted right in Lucy's face(italics mine. – N.H.): “Are you filling the hospital with weeds?! Do you arrange secret meetings?! I will not let it! I’m a doctor here!”) Perhaps the only ones who do not cause direct violence to Another are sectarians, which becomes the main reason for their misunderstanding and rejection. One of the scenes in the book: Zhorka mercilessly beats the “thin young man” Zhenya. A group of girls (Ira and her friend Katya) arrive in time and fight off the young sectarian from the hooligan. A conversation ensues.
“Don’t be angry with her,” Irinka turned to Zhenya again, not paying attention to Katka’s words. “She’s angry at Zhorka, not at you.”
- And him too. That’s why they beat him, because he’s like a wet chicken...”
Just think about it: they beat him because he is a “wet chicken”! That is, it is precisely his inability to be an actor of “small violence” (T. Tolstoy’s expression), which permeated the entire Soviet society, that causes reproach. At the same time, Katya, dissatisfied with the young sectarian, fully complies with generally accepted social attitudes: she can not only punish the offender, but also slaps her friend Shurik in the face, who does not even think of attacking her. The only sectarian who directly threatens someone with violence is the nameless mother of the girl Marina, one of the youngest followers of Brother Afanasy’s community. And it was after her threats that the mother immediately changed her attitude towards the company of young atheists. Thus, the author himself unconsciously shows what role violence plays in the world of the book.
Hostage to freedom
“Violence” can be called one of the characters in another atheistic children’s book – “Miracle Worker” by Vladimir Fedorovich Tendryakov. Despite the fact that the story by V.F. Tendryakova looks no less like propaganda than “Comrades are with you,” in which the author manages to penetrate deeper into the very nature of the relationship between Soviet believers and atheists. Here society, represented by the teacher Praskovya Petrovna, is fighting a much stronger enemy than the naive sectarians. Here the enemy is smart Orthodox Christians who know how to live according to Soviet laws (including the unwritten law of “minor violence”). This is how their “ideologist” Father Dmitry is depicted in the story:
“This priest not only gets along well with Soviet laws, he also gets along with modern views on life. Try to dig into him: he is both for progress and for world peace, and from the very first push he is probably ready to shout “anathema” to foreign capital. He is submissive in everything, agrees with everyone and only wants little: so that Rodya Gulyaev (boy, main character. – N.H.) believed in the Almighty, was tolerant of all evil, recognized heavenly and earthly powers. Because of this “small” thing, the war begins. And here the gray-haired old man, now playing with a metal cigarette case with an image of the Kremlin tower on the lid, is Praskovya Petrovna’s enemy. Here he sits opposite, looking tenderly, smiling politely. It would be interesting to know one thing: does he himself realize that they are each other’s enemies (sic!), or not?.. It’s hard to guess.”
There is only one attitude: a believer is absolutely Other, he will never be able to become part of a “normal” society
The enemy may not even realize that he is an enemy. It is such by definition, by its ontological status. Under no circumstances can he be a normal member of society. And here the very essence of any such atheistic literature is revealed. Behind all the rational arguments there is hidden only one attitude - a believer is absolutely Other, he will never be able to become part of a “normal” society. This is exactly what teacher Praskovya Petrovna strives to convey to grandmother Rodya Gulyaev: to the grandmother’s question: “Lord! But can’t he believe in God and live like everyone else?” – the teacher confidently answers: “That’s it, it’s impossible. The time of Panteleimon the righteous has passed.”
It is the grandmother - the old woman Grachikha - and the school teacher who are the main antagonists of this book. The main conflict is between them. The rook is old (“old woman”, “grandmother”), the author directly indicates that she is over 60 years old. But what is the age of her ideological “enemy”? Unknown. It only says that Praskovya Petrovna has been working at school for “thirty years”, “since the founding of the collective farm,” and we can assume that she is no less than 50. But nowhere is she ever called either an old woman or a grandmother. Old age in the book is not age, but an ideological characteristic, an entry in a personal file. Old age is a connection with religion, which “the future threatens with decay and oblivion.” And again, as in the story “Comrades Are With You,” the author lets it slip. In the teacher’s pathetic monologue, we hear the true reason for such a tireless struggle:
“We, Praskovya Petrovna, are not pulling anyone’s ears towards the Orthodox faith,” he (priest) said. – N.H.) with dignity. “Our duty is just not to turn away from people.”
– If you pulled your ears, then our conversation would be simpler. You exist, that's enough. But no matter how you pretend, no matter how you reassure yourself that your goodness and your faith will be reconciled with ours (sic!), you still know: the future threatens you with decay and oblivion. Don't take this as a personal insult."
Atheism is precisely faith for Praskovya Petrovna; she knows this herself and therefore cannot allow other faiths to interfere with her “missionary work.”
However, like any war, the struggle with believers on the pages of V.F. Tendryakova has her own laws - the law of verbal and physical violence. And here it turns out that believers understand it no worse than atheists. One day, the behavior of the teacher, expressed in the classical techniques of “hate speech” - “hate speech”: the introduction of false identification of believers, false attribution, etc., encounters open aggression from believers, in particular the asocial element Akindin Poyarkov.
Under these conditions, realizing that she is losing, the school teacher asks for help from the district committee, where she is asked to take extreme measures.
“Kuchin (party organizer. – N.H.) sat, large, ruffled, looking at his large hands thrown out on the table.
“I see only one way out here.” This boy must be very carefully separated from his parents. For a while until their intoxication passes.”
The current situation can best be described by the term proposed by the Italian philosopher Giorgio Agamben - “a state of exception.” It is important to understand that such a state, which in Russian rather corresponds to the concept of a state of emergency, is not a special form of legal reality, but is already beyond its limits. To first take a child and then apply legal standards to this is complete lawlessness.
But what about the boy? What does he want? Nothing. Relax and be a child: “catch a seasoned, overwintered frog, tie a thread to its leg, put it into the lake, watching how it goes, rejoiced at freedom, deep into the darkness of the opaque water, and then take it and pull it back out - you’re naughty, my dear.” Now you work with us as a diver, tell me what you saw in the water.”
No matter how ridiculous Rodka’s desire may sound, it is what he really wants. And most importantly, Rodka Gulyaev clearly does not want to be in the center of an adult conflict, which he does not even really understand. He is neither an atheist nor a believer. He carries the pioneer tie in his pocket, as well as the cross that his grandmother gave him. Rodka is simply a child who finds himself in the grip of two self-identifications, and society (not believers, namely Soviet, atheistic society) does not allow him to combine them. It is important to note here that the boy is not against wearing a cross, but one thought constantly drills into his head: if they see the cross, they will laugh.
The cross on the boy’s chest is a sign of illness: “he’s itching now, he needs to be hidden, like a bad sore.”
“Under my shirt, under my faded pioneer tie, a copper cross burns the skin on my chest. Sit in class and remember that none of the kids have it... Play during breaks, remember, if you fiddle around so that your shirt doesn’t come undone: if they see it, they’ll laugh...”
Fear of society in the person of village boys and classmates is the main justification for Rodkin’s atheism.
And even the intervention of the village teacher does not bring healing to the boy. During the conflict, the teacher even manages to take the boy away from home for a while, but even when he finds himself at Praskovya Petrovna’s, he feels like “a prisoner, not a prisoner, but something like that.” The author, of course, writes that this is Rodka’s salvation, that he will be better off here. But through all these lines there is a hint of falsehood. Well, a person cannot, having escaped the clutches of mortal danger, and this is exactly how religion appears in the story, feel like he is in prison. Or maybe? If we remember that the canvas of the story is a maximally militarized reality, where there are “enemies” all around, then you can immediately guess who in these conditions is able to feel “like a prisoner.” Of course, a hostage. Unlike a prisoner, he may be treated very well, but he is not promised freedom. So it turns out that Rodka is a hostage - a hostage in the war of atheists against religion. And there were thousands of such little hostages throughout the Soviet Union.
I go out alone on the road…
The Khrushchev persecutions became another sad page in the life of the Russian Church. Against the background of the thaw, which smelled the breeze of freedom on Soviet citizens, they looked even more disgusting and hypocritical than Stalin’s. In the context of numerous rehabilitations of various “right-left deviationists,” Soviet politics needed a new internal enemy. They became believers again. They were enemies in the 1930s, they were enemies in the 1920s, and they are now. “You are going the right way, comrades!” – from a poster from 1961, Grandfather Lenin approved of the “old new” Khrushchev course.
But history decreed otherwise, and already in 1984, in the pre-perestroika film “Repentance,” one of the supporting characters seemed to enter into a dialogue with Vladimir Ilyich:
“Tell me, will this road lead to the temple?
– This is Varlam Street. This is not the street that leads to the temple.
- Then why is it needed? What's the point of a road if it doesn't lead to a temple?
And it would seem that the old path has long been abandoned. There is no longer any trace of that state. But the old myths have not gone away. They are still alive in our society and in ourselves. And again we hear about priestly enemies, about the “poison” of religion. But all the newly-minted “teachers” of atheism (or more correctly: “everyday atheism”), like A.G. Nevzorova, administrators of atheist communities on social networks or particularly zealous anti-church journalists do not come up with anything new, reproducing the old Soviet anti-religious narrative over and over again. Even the linguistic clichés that modern fighters against the “religious dope” use were inherited by them from the Soviet ideological machine. So, for example, the same A.G. Nevzorov in one of his interviews says that the Russian Orthodox Church is “a ferocious and extremist organization hiding behind all sorts of cute words.” Isn’t this a paraphrase of the speech of the village teacher Praskovya Petrovna, who sees in the priest a most dangerous enemy, who “looks kindly, smiles politely”? And the words: “I have nothing against your faith as long as you carry it silently” - a pinned post by the multimillion-strong “Atheist” community on the VKontakte network - isn’t it a direct copy of the Soviet attitude “pray, but don’t be baptized”?
Yes, there is heredity. This is also the reason for the rapid popularity of modern everyday atheism. Having only slightly changed its positioning, which was caused by the loss of its former state status, it continues to speak its former language. We have been taught this language for 70 years, including through atheistic children's books. It was they who formed myths about faith in the young reader, replacing in his mind the image of real religion with its sophisticated imitation. It was they who aroused in the souls of the little Octobrists and pioneers the fear of believers: cunning, cruel, fanatical and unprincipled. And, as you know, children's fears are the most persistent. Will our society be able to rid itself of this fear? It should get rid of it.
