Summary

The proposed Manual for the first time in Russian scientific and educational literature sets out a common history of Christianity, which is considered from the point of view of the historical dynamics of Church organizational and doctrinal unity. The general logic of the material exposure is determined by issues that seem to authors fundamental for specific historical periods: «What (vol. l, pt. 1), how (vol. 1, pt. 2), and where (vol. 2, pt. 1) to believe in order to be saved – or does it even need to believe? (vol. 2, pt. 2)».

Volume 1 of the Manual covers the period from the foundation of the Church to the formation of the prerequisites of the Protestant Reformation – the time of sharp doctrinal discussions that had significant implications on the organizational structure of the institutional Christian Church.

Part 2 of this volume in a broad historical context highlights the issues related to the development of Church orthodoxy and the formation of various deviations from it. Throughout the millennium considered dogmatic differences introduce an element of instability in the universalist claim of Christianity, which in the orga­nizational field brought to many Church divisions on confessional lines. The main question of the period: «How to believe in order to be saved?»

IV-VI centuries was the time when Christianity had moved from position of persecuted by all «forbidden» religion to position of an equal initially, and then – the state religion of the Roman Empire. Paganism was finally disappearing. It was the time of significant changes in the organizational structure of the Christian Church, based on the principle of hierarchy: strengthening of the system of terri­torial administration with sole episcopal governing of dioceses with the recogni­tion of the leading role of Church Councils (Ecumenical and Local) as the top col­legiate Church government institutions.

At the same time the unity of the Church doctrine and organizational structure was threatened by early heresies – i.e. deviations from the general Church doctrine, touched the very Christian faith (Donatism, Arianism). Direct threat to the organi­zational unity of the Church represented the teachings of the Alexandrian presbyter Arius on όμοια – subordination of God the Son to God the Father, on which basis appeared some influential Church groups opposed to the bishops, who professed and developed the «orthodox» doctrine, consecrated by Church tradition. Later, in V-VI cent., the main issues of concern to the Church were questions about the connection of the divine and the human in the hypostasis of God the Son, and, re­spectively, on the content of the incarnation of the Logos (Word of God).

The I^st and II^nd Ecumenical Councils and a number of Local Councils in the IV cent., which condemned the Arius’ doctrine, played a crucial role in the pre­cise formulation of the Church doctrine of the faith, which was recognized as the only correct (orthodox) expression of the truths about God and man passed out in

Scripture. The orthodox doctrine of the Trinity (the doctrine of the consubstantiality of the Persons or hypostases) was formulated, which was approved and ac­cepted by the entire Christian Church. The Creed was composed – a concentrated expression of the orthodox teaching of the Church. At the IV^th Ecumenical Coun­cil the orthodox Christian faith («Nicene-Constantinople Creed») was finally for­mulated, which became the basis of Church unity. On this basis the V^th and VI^th Ecumenical Councils condemned heretical teachings and their adherents (includ­ing the dead, for the first time in history), and Trullo (or Quinisext) Council took a number of important Church administrative provisions, including the definition of canon law sources. VII^th Ecumenical Council, confirming the veneration of icons, put an end to the iconoclastic heresy, suddenly galvanized the Church in the VIII-IX centuries.

The state played active role in the eradication of heresies and prevented the for­mation of parallel Church hierarchy – at the heart of this policy was the idea that the condition of the state depended on the «way of worship», which was responsi­ble for not only the Church but also the secular authorities.

However, despite the fact that Christian theology, in contrast to the antique classical tradition, in which the spheres of religion and politics were closely inter­twined, demarked competence of ecclesiastical and secular authorities (in the com­petence of the latter profane affairs were included, and Church was devoted to spir­itual ones), some elements of the socialization of the state were retained. The idea appeared of climbing the imperial power directly to God, regardless of the Church.

During V-VI cent, in the Christian East formed the ideal of Church-state re­lations based on the coexistence of imperial power («the Kingdom») and Church hierarchy («the Priesthood») as the two equal dignity of institutions operating in­dependently each in its field for the benefit of the people. However, separation of the fields of activities of the civil authority («the Kingdom») and the Church hier­archy («the Priesthood») was provided by the principle of symphony, and did not mean separation of the State from the Church. Since the time of Justinian Ortho­dox faith was considered mandatory for all officials of the empire and Church can­ons were granted the status of empire laws.

For the Western Church the early Middle Ages and the Renaissance were, on the one hand, a period of the formation of its internal organizational structure, based on «the papal ecclesiology», and on the other – the time when this structure was tested for durability under the influence of both external (the claims of the secu­lar authorities on the primacy in relation to the Church) and internal factors (un­dermining the unity of the Church within the Church). Withal the dogmatic side, Western Christianity was practically unaffected by the above mentioned events (with the exception of early-medieval heresies).

Early-medieval period was marked by the efforts of the papacy aimed to get out of the «protectorate», established over the Roman See first by the Byzantine court, and then the Franks. The struggle for liberation from the tutelage of the imperial powers led to the gradual establishment of the Papacy as an independent political force and the formation of the Papal State in Italy. One important instrument for strengthening the Roman Church administration was ordering Papal election pro­cess with the strengthening role of the clergy in it (especially the cardinals of the Roman Church) and minimizing the possibility of external pressure on the electors.

Furthermore, during VII-VIII cent, the Roman Church managed to expand sig­nificantly the area of her influence, uniting Germanic peoples of England, Gaul, Spain and Italy with the Latin people by common ecclesiastical order.

As a result of missionary work (targeted at dissemination of doctrine among non-Christian peoples, carried out by specially authorised representatives of the clergy), Christianity was actively spreading in the East and the West.

Christianity was attached to the British Isles, guided by the Roman Church. The spread of Christianity in Eastern Europe was a lengthy process, associated primar­ily with the development of cultural and economic ties with the various Christian centers. With adoption of Christianity the perception of governance models inher­ent to the Byzantine Empire took place at different levels.

The question of jurisdiction of new Church structures was directly linked to the political situation and the-political orientation of the rulers. Nevertheless, Chris­tian values penetrated the culture (first-the culture of ruling elites and the urban population, and then – of ordinary people), in spite of the politicization of the pro­cess of Christianization. Christianity significantly changed ideas about the world, mythological consciousness was superseded by historical one, while Sacred His­tory emerged as a constant object of reference.

The temporary decline of the Papacy in the IX-X cent, was overcome with the active participation of the monks (Cluny movement). The reforms were aimed at the liberation of the Church from secular control, cleansing her of abuses, raising educational and moral level of the clergy, the unification of worship order and the establishment of the Church-organizational power vertical, on top of which stood the Pope.

In the Gregorian reforms the idea of the political supremacy of the Pope over half of the world was formalized and theologically formulated (according to the principle «first See is not subject to anybody’s court», from which it was conclud­ed that the Pope possessed a universal jurisdiction and infallibility). On this basis, the idea appeared that the Western lands would be turned into fief possession of the Church of Rome, and their rulers – became vassals of St. Peter.

In historical perspective, the theology of «Papal supremacy» was the basis of a long conflict between the secular and spiritual authorities in Western Europe, from which, after all, the Papacy came with serious political losses.

The struggle between the Papacy and secular authorities in Europe was com­prehended in theology as the task of establishing a harmonious relationship be­tween sacerdotium (spiritual power directed to the dispensation of the spiritual life of the people) and the imperium (political power, aimed at ensuring the stabil­ity of the external conditions of life of the Christian power – political, economic, civil) in order to ensure unity and stability of the universal monarchy by means of organic synthesis of the spiritual and secular government.

European church unity, organizational core of which became the doctrine of Pa­pal supremacy, was formed within the confrontation between the Catholic Church and secular authorities, which made serious claims to the organizational rule over the local (national) Churches (investiture controversy, Pragmatic sanctions).

An important role in this process was played by the formation of national states, accompanied by philosophical and theological rethinking of the fundamental con­cepts related to organisational and political structure of society and the Church’s place in it (declericalisation and sanctification of the secular power). This process unfolded under conditions of general predominance of the religious ideology and within the Catholic dogmatics.

Universalist pretension of the early Church to integrate within herself a whole society is replacing by the search of the medieval Church for a worthy place in a secular society.

Using the system of concordats concluded with the rulers of European coun­tries, the Holy See could achieve a temporary balance, which meant the complete supremacy of the spiritual power of the Pope over the national Churches and at the same time a certain degree of subordination of the latter to secular authorities.

An organizational unity of the Catholic Church which had been achieved, was greatly shaken by the events that took place within her. «Avignon captivity of the Papacy» and «Great Western Schism» were important factors cast doubt on the pos­sibility of the Holy See to carry out direct management of European Christianity.

The humanism of the Renaissance was preparing minds to the ideological rev­olution associated with the revision of the Church’s teachings. «Secularization» of the clergy (especially higher) converted the higher clergy into the «spiritual lords», more related to the management of the property and the organization of the eco­nomic process than to the execution of proper ecclesiastical functions, and the low­er clergy – into the sort of exploited estate. «The Renaissance Papacy» became the apotheosis of «secularization».

The answer to these challenges were, on the one hand, attempts of internal Church reforms (Cluny movement, institutional reforms of Avignon period, etc.), on the other – search for ecclesiological model, which would limit the unilateral authority of the pope and would allow to organise the collective participation of all members of the Church in solving general Church problems (Conciliarism, Gallicanism, and others).

At the same time, the reform attempts were reduced, as a rule, to the organ­isational and administrative, canonical and financial requirements; the situation in the dogmatic, liturgical and pastoral areas of Church life was usually not seri­ously discussed.

Renaissance produced, in addition to a number of economic, geographic, fi­nancial and other material factors, the powerful ideological impulse that came into conflict with the ideology of medieval European society. If in the Middle Ages, the main feature of the public ideology was its total religiosity, however to the begin­ning of the Renaissance (that developed in a whole in the framework of a religious world view) a new balance between humanitas and divinitas, mystical and ratio­nalist methods of analysis and synthetic perception of the world order, between science and theology began to be established. Different ways of social behaviour were generating.

Renaissance produced a complex impact on the Christian Church – both material and ideological. In terms of ideology in response to Renaissance humanism the concept of Christian humanism was developed. In terms of organisation of material existence of the Church the Roman Curia and general Church consciousness were struggling to find adequate answers to the reformist appeals of the period (it should be borne in mind that under the reform of the Catholic Church was understood all the need for organizational changes in the current model of Church government, which was formed in the Middle Ages as a result of «papal ecclesiology»). «Renaissance Papacy» achieved success in suppression of conciliarist trends and strengthening «the papal ecclesiology», but the price of that victory was a flare Reformation in Germany.

The negative impact of the Renaissance environment on hierarchy was expressed in the «secularization of the Church», blossom of nepotism, simony and concubi­nage, reducing the educational and moral level of the clergy, the loss of traditional piety in personal and Church-society life. The Catholic Church became too rich and too committed to worldly passions. Furthermore the Renaissance popes were more interested in their influence on political processes than in the strengthening of the internal structure of the Catholic Church and the arrangement of her liturgical life.

In the IX century the foundation of the events was laid that led to the tragic split-the division of the Latin and Greek Churches, which both parties consider schism, laying the blame for it on the opposite side, which is considered as sepa­rated from the true Catholic Church. Each side believe that its doctrine is strict­ly orthodox.

Provocative role in the Church-organisational conflict played the Roman Church, which not only introduced into her doctrine a number of innovations in comparison with the orthodox teachings of Seven Ecumenical Councils, the most fundamen­tal of which for the Eastern Church in the history turned out to be pneumatologi­cal (the doctrine of the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son – Filioque) and ecclesiological (the doctrine of Papal supremacy), but also made a number of attempts to introduce these innovations in the East, sometimes by very rigid methods (Cardinal Humbert’s mission).

In response the Eastern Church for a number of reasons, both theological and political, and even psychological (personal characteristics of the Patriarchs Photius and Michael Cerularius), took an uncompromising position. As a result, the rigidity of the positions of both sides made impossible the theological dialogue to resolve contentious dogmatic, liturgical and ecclesiological questions.

The culmination of the conflict that led to the actual separation of the largest at that time (in number and canonical territory) denomination from the unified Catho­lic Church, became the Crusades. During their activity was shown the Church ex­pansionism of the Roman See (the policy of «ecclesiastical colonization»), which stimulated response rejection by Greek Church.

During the creative impulse in the West, accompanied by a significant change in the alignment of political forces, the Renaissance Papacy completely lost the East first ideologically and then politically. It was unable to mobilize Europe to help the Christian Byzantine Empire that had fallen under the authority of the Muslim Otto­man Empire. The idea of a crusade for the liberation of the same-faith Greeks from Islamic oppression failed. Attempts to expand the scope of institutional influence of the Holy See, subjecting the papal supremacy Eastern (Orthodox) Church, based on Catholic dogma (unionism), also did not have tangible results: papacy focused these attempts on the principles, unacceptable to the Greek Church, – on advanc­ing to the East the canonical ideas of papal primacy, on imposing Latin dogmatic «innovations» to Greeks (with the Filioque, purgatory and other dogmas, adopt­ed after the VII^th Ecumenical Council), and rejected by the East because of their inconsistency with the dogmatic teachings of the Seven Ecumenical councils, and on the transition to the Latin type of worship.

The idea of the union itself, as the only approach acceptable to the Roman Church in the issue of the Church’s unity, was counterproductive in dealing with the Local Orthodox Churches. At the same time, in the East also appeared ideas similar to «papal ecclesiology» of the Roman Church, which also produced nega­tive impact on the Latin-Greek Church relations.

Thus, in the face of a common danger threatening not only the Byzantium, but also Europe itself, the Christians of East and West not only failed to unite: on the contrary, the contradictions between them only deepened.

With the rise of Islam in VII cent, and the beginning of an armed attack of the Islamized people of the territory of the Byzantine Empire, the Eastern Orthodox patriarchates of Jerusalem, Alexandria, Antioch and other Church organization­al structures (e. g. Cyprus or Sinai Archdioceses) found themselves in the position of one of the religious substrates (which became smaller and smaller with time) in the alien and very aggressive religious and cultural environment with very signif­icant potential for assimilation. Over the history their fate was shared by eastern Monophysites (Copts, Syro-Jacobites, the Armenian Church) and the Nestorians, and after the fall of Constantinople in 1453 – by the Ecumenical Patriarchate. Un­der these conditions, the preservation of religious identity also meant the preser­vation of national identity.

Church structures under Muslim power were the only national centers for the Christians in the conquered territories. They were specially legalised by Muslim authorities (pacts with Arab rulers, and berat and farman system in the Ottoman Empire), included in the system of the Islamic state power and served as the or­ganising center for the unification of the Christian population in the state manage­ment purposes.

At the same time the Ecumenical Patriarchate had a significant influence on the policies of ancient Eastern Orthodox Patriarchate (Jerusalem, Antioch and Alexan­dria) and the Church of Cyprus: the Patriarchate of Constantinople during the Ot­toman rule continued imperial idea of Byzantium, the idea of the universal Chris­tian Empire centered in Constantinople and ruled in diarchist way by the emperor and the patriarch. In fact, the Patriarchate took over the administrative functions of the abolished imperial power.

The problem of preservation of religious and national identity was one of the grounds of refusal by the Eastern Orthodox Churches of the union with the Latin Church. The reason was the lack of a wide influence of Catholic missionaries in the territory of the Orthodox East.

The public domination of other confessions (Muslim authority, and the Catholic Austro-Hungarian Empire rule of Slavic Orthodox nations) became a factor stimu­lating the national-patriotic movement, one of results of which in the ecclesiological sphere was a gradual loss of the universalist spirit of The Orthodox Church with the growth of national consciousness, which required the establishment of nation­al Churches independent from the Patriarchate of Constantinople. This way were seen the prospects for the preservation of national historical and cultural tradition.

The political independence of the Balkan nations led to the need to transfer the imperial diarchy in the soil of the nation state. In this regard, the emergence of «national Emperor» (tsar, king, prince, etc.) required a «national patriarch», who was supposed to lead the local Church that usually pretended for self-government, independent from Constantinople patriarchal See (autocephaly). At the same time the patriarchs of Local Churches were to receive sanction of their full powers from the Ecumenical Patriarchal See located in the capital of the Ottoman Empire.

In ancient Rus, despite the destruction that had brought the Mongol invasion and the subsequent power of the Golden Horde, the Church retained her political and cultural role, and in many ways was the only institution that preserved the all- Russian importance. Communication with the Ecumenical Orthodoxy, realized through Constantinople, Tarnovo, Mount Athos, became a powerful impetus for the development of Russian spiritual culture.

If during the Arian controversy the separation of the Catholic Church was avoided, the theological controversies in the V cent. Ended up organizationally by separation from the Church some religious groups with doctrines other than the Orthodox, and establishment on this basis of independent Church-administrative structures, which later received the name of the Ancient Oriental (non-Chalcedonian) Churches. A certain role in this process was played by the position of Alexandria and Antioch theological schools, rivalries of the leading patriarchal Sees of the East and of the East and West, and also by political trends that were generated by the imperial authorities.

An example of the consequences of this division was the Armenian Church.

The Apostles Thaddeus and Bartholomew were the first evangelizers of Arme­nia in the I century AD and, according to tradition, were martyred there.

The pagan king Tiridates III had imprisoned St. Gregory the Illuminator for about fifteen years in Khor Virab («deep dungeon») in Artashat. Several years later, a group of Christian nuns, led by St. Gayane and fleeing from persecution in Rome, came to Armenia. King Tiridates was attracted to one of the women, St. Hripsime, who resisted his attempts to possess her. After sentenced to death the Roman wom­en Tiridates was struck by an illness. St. Gregory cured him through the power of God of an incurable affliction and then converted the king. Tiridates proclaimed Christianity the official religion, making Armenia the first Christian country (301).

With the support of the royal family, Christianity was spread quickly throughout Armenia. Furthermore, Armenian missionaries were sent along the neighbor Geor­gians and Albans, who also subsequently established their own national churches.

Without the Gospel in Armenian Christianity couldn’t penetrate into Armenians everyday life. Thus, the invention of the Armenian alphabet (405) by St. Mesrop Mashtots was a focal point for Armenian Christianity. Mesrop Mashtots with the Catholicos St. Sahak I have translated the Bible, and their disciples interpreted a significant number of theological manuscripts into Armenian. The Armenian Bible became the earliest translation of the Holy Scriptures.

The first theological treatises in Armenian was written by Eznik of Kolb, St. Mesrop’s student, and known as «Against the Sects» or «On God». In fact «Against the Sects» was an attempt to defend an orthodox Christian comprehension of God and to fight against various pagan and heretical theories.

In the V century the Persian king attempted to impose Zoroastrianism on all of his subjects. The Armenians refused to renounce their Christian faith and pre­pared to resist. They met the Persian army in Battle at Avarair (451). The Armenian defeat proved a pyrrhic victory for the Persians: Armenia was allowed to remain Christian. The fight against Persians and their Zoroastrianism made the Armenian Church national. Since then the Church became a guardian of the Armenians na­tional identity.

The Council of Chalcedon (451) with its dogmatic definition did not put an end to the controversy concerning the natures of Christ and their relation to each other. The Armenian Church was not represented at Chalcedon council. At the Council of Dvin (507) it refused to accept the definition of Chalcedon council. This even more promoted the independence of the Armenian Church.

Recently after careful scholarship theologians concluded that there are по substantive theological issues to divide the Churches to Chalcedonian and non-Chalcedonian because Chalcedonians as well as non-Chalcedonians just use different technical terms to express essentially the same truth. So the schism was mostly the result of certain political and cultural differences between the various churches.

430–634-period of Persian rule, and 654–851 – period of Arab domination were very hard times for the Armenian people and their Christian faith.

In the IX century sprang up an independent Armenian kingdom of the Bagratids with the capital in Ani which lasted till 1079. These were the relatively quiet, creative times before the Turkic and Mongol invasions that changed Armenian life forever. Armenia was experiencing a renaissance in literature, painting, architecture and theology, of which St. Gregory of Narek (951–1003) towered over. His «Book of Lamentations» was an «encyclopedia of prayer for all nations».

The new Cilician Armenian Kingdom (Cilicia) was established circa 1080 on the mountainside of Taurus. The Byzantine governor gave to Rouben, relative of Gagik II, king of Ani, the shelter.

The See of the Armenian Catholicos (head of the Church) is not attached to any particular city. St. Gregory the Illuminator and his immediate successors resided at Etchmiadzin but in 485 the See was moved to Dvin and remained there until ear­ly X century. After that the See was moved several times to different cities. One of these cities was Ani, renowned as the city of «a thousand and one churches».

During the reign of Constantine I Cilician an army of Western European Chris­tians Crusaders marched through Anatolia and Cilicia on their way to Jerusalem. In those harsh times по people or nation, with the same enthusiasm, joy and faith came to their aid as the Armenians did, who supplied the Crusaders with horses, provision and guidance.

The Catholicosate of the Armenian Apostolic Church followed its people in taking refuge outside of the Armenian highlands, which had turned into a battleground for Byzantine and Seljuk contenders. Its seat was first transferred to Sebastia (1058) in Cappadocia populated by Armenians. Later, it moved to various locations in Cilicia: Tavbloor (1062), Dzamendav (1066), Dzovk (1116), Hromkla (1149) and at list Sis (1292). The most influential Catholicos during this period was St. Nerses IV Klayetsi (1102–1173), also called Shnorhali («the Graceful»). Nerses, together with Emperor Manuel Comnenos, labored hard to unite the Greek and Armenian Churches. The union, however, was never consummated, the majority of the bishops remaining obstinate.

St. Nerses Shnorhali was the great uncle of St. Nerses of Lambron (1153–1198), who was famous for his activity aimed of Churches unity. He was also the author of one of the best commentaries on the Divine Liturgy of the Armenian Church.

The Catholicos of Cilicia, Grigor VI Apirat proclaimed a union between the Armenian Church and the Roman Catholic Church (1198); however, this had not considerable significance. The situation sorted Armenians to pro-Catholics and pro-Apostolics. The Western Church sent numerous missions to Cilician Armenia to help with rapprochement, but had limited results.

During the XIV century Latin missionaries in Armenia attempted to unite the Armenian Church with the Latin Church. In response to this threat Armenian cler­gymen and theologians defended the doctrines and practices of the Armenian or­thodoxy.

Armenian sovereignty in Cilicia lasted until 1375, when the Mamelukes of Egypt profited by the unstable situation in Lesser Armenia and destroyed it. The Catholicate remained in Cilicia, but because of the peace in Armenia Major many Armenians wished to return the See to its original home in Etchmiadzin. Cathol­icos Grigor Mousabegyantz, however, did not wish to leave Cilicia for Armenia. In in 1441 a new Catholicos Kirakos of Virab was elected at Etchmiadzin. Hence­forth, there have been two Catholicates, the Catholicate of All Armenians in Etch­miadzin and the Catholicate of the Great House of Cilicia. Both Catholicates have their jurisdiction and closely collaborate with each other.

So the chief bishop of the Armenian Church, called the Catolicos, is the head of the Armenian Church and resides at Holy Etchmiadzin. Since ancient times, the Armenian Church recognized as autonomous administrative jurisdictions certain areas outside the geo-political borders of Armenia populated by Armenians. The heads of such Churches were also called «catholicoi». Since the V century, the catholicoi of Caucasian Albania were ordained by the catholicoi of Armenia. The tradition of local catholicates with their geographic boarders has been maintained until our time. After the World War II the Catholicate of the Great House of Cilicia was entitled to establish the jurisdiction over Syria, Lebanon, and Cyprus, regions that belonged to the Catholicate of all Armenians and the Patriarchate of Jerusalem.

Besides catholicates, in the Armenian Church there are also two patriarchates. The Armenian Patriarchate of Jerusalem was established in 1281. The Armenian Patriarchate of Constantinople (Istanbul, Turkey) was established in 1461 to ad­minister the affairs of the Armenian community of the Ottoman Empire.

Armenian monks and nuns have played an important part in maintaining of the Holy Land sites. The Armenian presence in Palestine is attested from as early as the IV century. Over the centuries, the Armenians founded more than 70 mon­asteries and nowadays are serving as the guardians of the Holy Sites. The Arme­nian Quarter covers 1/5 of the old city of Jerusalem and the Armenian Patriarch­ate is in charge of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher with the Greeks and Latins.

The Armenian Rite is an independent liturgy used by both the Armenian Ap­ostolic and Armenian Catholic Churches and contains elements of Syriac, Byzan­tine and Jerusalem rites. The liturgy is patterned after the directives of St. Greg­ory the Illuminator – founder and thus patron saint of the Armenian Church. The Armenian rite is usually devoid of icons, and has a curtain concealing the priest and the altar during parts of the liturgy as the reminiscent of the early apostolic times. The same relates to use of bishop’s mitre and unleavened bread baked the same day. There is по mingling of water with the wine. Certain ancient rites, for­merly used also in the Latin rite, have been maintained: the blessing of the water for baptism on the day of the Epiphany; the rite of Opening the Door after Palm Sunday vespers and the solemn blessing of the fields and the four corners of the earth. Armenian Rite has a choral nature and uses splendid vestments and its mu­sic is one of the most fascinating of the East.

An important factor contributing to the theological and partly organizational consolidation of Christians of various denominations became early-medieval here­sies. The terms «heresy» and «heretic» changed its meaning over time. In practice, the «heresy» was called religious movement, openly preaching the doctrines and forms of worship, different from those in the «official» Church who denied con­temporaneous to them «official» Church and forms of piety that she uses.

The emergence of the medieval European heresies was due to a complex set of reasons: religious, social and political, as well as – and perhaps to a limited ex­tent-the influence of the «Eastern» Bogomil heresy. Thus the available evidence does not allow to speak with confidence about the immediate continuity between medieval European heretics and early-Christian dualistic teachings.

If the first early-medieval «heretics» became isolated in their nearest environ­ment, from the beginning of the XII century «unorthodox» preachers were starting to spread their views among the broad masses of believers, covering large areas.

Common elements of the «heresies» of Spirituals, Waldenses, Cathars, Lol­lards, Hussites, and others/were criticism of the contemporate official Church from the standpoint of the Gospel and a desire to shift the center of Christian worship from material objects towards a more spiritual experience of faith. Put forward re­quirements to set the Scripture as the sole source of authoritative knowledge; the existing «visible» Church with her rites and practices, and most importantly-with her «earthly» possessions was denied (to a greater or lesser extent); the question of Church reform by lay efforts was also raised. To most movements anticlericalism was peculiar – i.e. recognition that some (or all) religious rituals and sacraments, which were effectuate in the «official» Church by ordained clergy, could be per­formed by the worthy laity; some characterized Donat ism – i.e. the denial of the sacraments effectiveness which were committed by sinful priests.

The ideology of the later movements – the successors of early-medieval here­sies (Neolollards, preserved Waldenses, modern Hussites, etc.) became more per­sonal: they did not insist on the reform of the Church, and sought rather to avoid involvement in her life.

Christian worship, which arose from Jesus Christ testament and originally ex­isted as a substrate in the depths of Judaic community in Jerusalem was formalised over time as an independent religious worship with specific ordinances, rites and rules of their fulfillment.

During IV-XVI centuries the process of liturgical unification unfolded in the Universal Church (the centers of it became the most important Sees: Rome and Constantinople; similar processes were developing in the «non-Chalcedonian» Churches), and the formation of the main liturgical types of the West and the East came to the end. The systematic worship of the Christian Church became a form, which assumed a number of tasks:

– proper liturgical task: to commit sacraments and rites as ways of mystic or mystical-and-real communication with God;

– pedagogical problem: to teach the truths of faith, formulated in the liturgi­cal texts, melodically fixed, illustrated by temple painting, and manifested in the imagery system of the architecture and interior of the church building;

– organisational objective: systematic approval inside and manifestation out­side of the confessional and structural unity of the Church.