Who has not heard about St. Isaac's Cathedral -the largest Orthodox church,onefrom the symbols of St. Petersburg? It was built by the architect Auguste Montferrand, built for a very long time, from 1818 to 1858. Taking into account the local features of the soil, more than ten thousand piles were driven into the base of the foundation. Now this method of soil compaction is quite common, but at that time it made a huge impression on the inhabitants of the city. Granite for the columns of St. Isaac's Cathedral was mined in quarries on the coast of the Gulf of Finland, near Vyborg. Nikolai Bestuzhev wrote about the transportation of these granite monoliths:

"They got down to business with their usual mechanics: they tied the ship more tightly to the shore - they put wagons, logs, boards, wrapped the ropes, crossed themselves - shouted a loud cheer! - and the proud colossi obediently rolled from the ship to the shore, and rolling past Peter, who, seemed to bless his sons with his hand, lay down humbly at the foot of St. Isaac's Church.

Now St. Isaac's Cathedral - an architectural monument, is under the jurisdiction of the State Museum of the same name "St. Isaac's Cathedral", has been functioning as a museum since 1948. The drum colonnade of St. Isaac's Cathedral is one of the most attractive places for tourists. An observation deck is arranged on the dome, from where a stunning panorama of the central part of St. Petersburg opens from a height of 43 meters.

The church consistently demanded that the cathedral be returned to its fold. After repeated requests and denials in January 2017, the governor of St. Petersburg, Georgy Poltavchenko, nevertheless stated that the issue of transferring St. Isaac's Cathedral to the use of the Russian Orthodox Church had been resolved, but the building would fully retain its museum and educational function. On the website of the city committee of property relations of St. Petersburg, an order was published according to which St. Isaac's Cathedral should be transferred to the Russian Orthodox Church no later than the first half of 2019. Until March 1, 2017, Smolny and the budgetary institution of the State Museum-Monument "St. Meanwhile, the St. Petersburg Union of Museum Workers regarded the transfer of St. Isaac's Cathedral to the Russian Orthodox Church as the liquidation of the museum, about 160 of its employees may lose their jobs. Protests, rallies, signature collections began ...

People's concern is natural, because it is not just an ordinary Orthodox church but about the largest museum. This fact requires taking into account the interests of both believers and many tourists, the museum community and simply caring people. Therefore, do not rush to resolve this issue, and even more so do not politicize it. It is necessary to act very carefully, without fail - taking into account the opinion of the Petersburgers themselves. At the same time, as S. M. Mironov, head of A Just Russia, recalled, on November 19, 2010, the State Duma adopted the Federal Law “On the Transfer to Religious Organizations of Property for Religious Purposes in the State or municipal property". Therefore, the transfer of the cathedral to the gratuitous use of the Russian Orthodox Church is carried out on a legal basis.

At the same time, there is a risk that the transfer of the cathedral into the hands of the church will put an end to the work of one of the most successful museums in Russia. In 2016, the museum "St. Isaac's Cathedral" earned 800 million rubles, received about 4 million visitors. The proceeds went both to his own restoration and to restoration work in other temples in the city. The transfer of the cathedral was authorized by the governor of St. Petersburg Georgy Poltavchenko after a personal appeal to him with this request by Patriarch Kirill, without the consent of Vladimir Putin.

Probably, it was worth bringing the issue of the fate of the cathedral to public discussion, during which all issues would be worked out and clarified in detail. For example, will there be free access to the temple, including the colonnade of the cathedral? What will happen to the unique museum collection? What will happen to the museum staff? If a clear decision had been worked out in advance on all these issues, adequately taking into account the interests of all parties, there would have been no conflict.

The "Political Culture Foundation" conducted a survey on Isaac in February in St. Petersburg. The transfer of the cathedral to the Russian Orthodox Church is supported by 17.8% of respondents, 57.1% of respondents are against it, with 42% saying that they are "categorically against". Like this. I personally don't like this idea either. After all, Russia is a secular state. The Church is already given enough buildings throughout the country. Wouldn't it be better for the Russian Orthodox Church to build a new church somewhere in St. Petersburg? And let St. Isaac's Cathedral remain a museum...

An initiative group of opponents of the transfer of St. Isaac's Cathedral to the Russian Orthodox Church has prepared an application for a referendum on the status of the temple. The defenders of the museum propose to ask the townspeople the following question:

“Do you agree that St. Isaac’s Cathedral, the Church of the Savior on Spilled Blood, and the Peter and Paul Cathedral belonging to the monuments of history and culture of federal significance and owned by St. ceremonies?

Those. whether to leave everything as it is, not to transfer Isaac to the Russian Orthodox Church? I will ask this question to users of Maxpark and I. Divine services are now held in the cathedral.

“Do you agree that St. Isaac’s Cathedral, the Church of the Savior on Spilled Blood, and the Peter and Paul Cathedral belonging to the monuments of history and culture of federal significance and owned by St. ceremonies?

On January 10, the governor of St. Petersburg, Georgy Poltavchenko, announced that St. Isaac's Cathedral would be transferred to the use and maintenance of the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC). However, he added that the temple will have museum functions. The decision caused a mixed public reaction, some experts fear that the new status will limit the access of tourists to it.

We tried to figure out why so many disputes arose around the transfer of the temple to the Russian Orthodox Church.

Who is in charge of the cathedral now?

St. Isaac's Cathedral in St. Petersburg has been a museum since 1931. The building is owned by the city and managed by the St. Petersburg State budget institution Culture "State Museum-Monument" St. Isaac's Cathedral ".

In 1971, the museum included the Church of the Resurrection of Christ (Savior on Spilled Blood), in 1984 - the church in the name of St. Sampson the Hospitable, and in 2004 - the concert and exhibition hall "Smolny Cathedral".

If there is a museum, what does the ROC have to do with it?

On June 17, 1990, Patriarch Alexy II held the first divine service in the church after the closure in 1928.

A year later, the community of the temple was registered, which, until recently, performed divine services in agreement with the museum management. During worship, the entrance to the temple is free.

In the summer of 2015, the St. Petersburg diocese turned to the governor of the city, Georgy Poltavchenko, with a request to transfer St. Isaac's Cathedral to it for free use. At the same time, the diocese promised not to impose restrictions on visiting the cathedral and make admission free.

The appeal also concerned the buildings of the ensemble "Smolny Monastery", which house the faculties of the St. Petersburg state university, as well as the Church of the Savior on Blood and St. Sampson Cathedral.

Then the city authorities refused the ROC's request. In April 2016, Metropolitan Varsonofy of St. Petersburg and Ladoga addressed the Prime Minister of the Russian Federation Dmitry Medvedev with a repeated request to transfer the cathedral to the Church.

Does the ROC have grounds for such requests?

The basis is the law "On the Transfer to Religious Organizations of Religious Property in State or Municipal Ownership", signed by the President in 2010.

According to the document, religious organizations, including the Russian Orthodox Church, received the right to return to their ownership or free use of churches that were closed after the October Revolution of 1917. Including those in which museums were subsequently opened.

If everything is legal, what's the problem?

Some deputies of the Legislative Assembly of St. Petersburg, the head of the Committee for Culture of St. Petersburg Konstantin Sukhenko, as well as the director of the museum, Nikolai Burov, opposed the transfer of the cathedral to the Russian Orthodox Church.

How much does restoration cost

For the restoration of the colonnade of the Kazan Cathedral in St. Petersburg in 2015, the city authorities allocated 93 million rubles.

Continuation

The museum management and other opponents of the transfer of the temple indicate that the museum currently supports itself at its own expense. So, in 2015, the museum's revenue amounted to 728 million rubles. Its closure and the introduction of free admission will lead to the fact that all the costs of the restoration of the cathedral may fall on the city's budget to the detriment of others, including social programs.

If the diocese retains a paid entrance and uses the proceeds for restoration, the budget will still lack funds due to the peculiarities of taxation of religious organizations.

Also, in the event of the closure of the museum, about 400 employees will be left without work. According to museum director Nikolai Burov, the Church will not support programs for the blind, the children's department of the museum.

Among other objections to the transfer of the cathedral is that its building never belonged directly to the Church, had a special status and was not a parish. After the consecration in 1858 and until 1883, the building was under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of the Imperial Court, from 1883 to 1917 - the Ministry of the Interior Russian Empire. They carried out all the economic management of the cathedral. Funds for the maintenance of the temple were allocated by the State Treasury according to the estimates of the above ministries. The synod paid only the salaries of the junior priests of the cathedral.

Also, critics of the possible transfer pointed out that at present the number of parishioners is less than 1% of the total number of visitors to the cathedral.

However, according to the law of 2010, none of the above objections is an obstacle to the transfer of St. Isaac's Cathedral to the control of the Church.

And what do they think about this in the ROC?

Representatives of the St. Petersburg Metropolis emphasize that "temples built for believers should belong to believers." The Russian Orthodox Church declares that the main purpose of St. Isaac's Cathedral must be restored. At the same time, the funds received from the parish, according to representatives of the Russian Orthodox Church, should be enough to maintain the monument.

The most notorious cases of the return of churches to the Russian Orthodox Church in the last 10 years

The material was prepared with the participation of "TASS-Dossier"

St. Isaac's Cathedral announced the decision to transfer the church to the church, the public discussion around the fate of this museum building does not subside. Some see in this act the restoration of historical justice, others see the growing influence of the church in a secular state. the transfer of the cathedral in the year of the centenary of the October Revolution as a symbol of reconciliation in Russian society. It's just that society doesn't seem to agree with that. This is indicated by the results of this week . More than 35,000 readers of Lenta.ru took part in it. And most of them (87 percent) do not share the opinion of the patriarch. Such results, according to experts, have also been caused by the persistence with which the local authorities and the Russian Orthodox Church approach the solution of this issue.

Sergei Filatov, sociologist, religious scholar:

There is dissatisfaction in society with the behavior of the ROC for a variety of reasons. But there is nothing special to cling to in essence, because some government decisions related to the church, few people are seriously offended. Therefore, the transfer of significant historical objects becomes a kind of catalyst, releasing the indignation and discontent that accumulates in society. I personally was deeply outraged by the transfer of the Ryazan Kremlin - there are many civil buildings, and it was not just one of the best museums of medieval culture, but also a major scientific center for the study of history.

The whole controversy around St. Isaac's Cathedral seems crazy to me, if approached from a practical point of view. In any case, everyone will be allowed in there and services will be held there. It turns out that the conflict itself is due to purely symbolic things - to whom it belongs. And this, most likely, is normal, given that the church today evokes very conflicting emotions in people: they can scold fat priests in Mercedes, but at the same time go to church and light candles. The attitude towards the church in society is ambivalent: very rarely there is complete support, as well as complete denial. But the Russian Orthodox Church must understand that the boorish attitude towards the people irritates citizens more and more. Despite the fact that Patriarch Kirill said that this [the transfer of the cathedral] is an "act of reconciliation", the church is well aware that this is not so.

Ekaterina Shulman, political scientist, associate professor at the Institute of Social Sciences, RANEPA:

The conflict, in the center of which there is a monument of world-historical significance, cannot be either local or local. It is all-Russian and even global - this is the business of all mankind. This is about the scale of coverage of the process and attention to it. And the sharp reaction of our society is explained by a number of factors. At the local level, this appears to be part of an overall crackdown on culture in the city. There, the townspeople also include plans related to the Public Library, and what is happening around, and attacks on exhibitions in the same Hermitage. Taken together, all this looks like a parade of obscurantism, and this is in a city where there is a special attitude to culture, a lot of educated people, and the governor is unpopular.

The all-Russian factor is the accumulating irritation with the public activity of the church. Enough big number Russians recognize themselves as Orthodox in polls, but at the same time, churched people - those who go to church and observe religious rites - usually make up 4 to 5 percent. Even lower is the percentage of people in whom it is church hierarchs who enjoy authority. Orthodoxy is not very typical of the institution of "popular preachers" - shepherds with their own audience, as is the case in Islam, Protestantism and Catholicism.

At the same time, the ROC actively positions itself as an owner, lobbyist, ideologist and educational authority - in this way the church interferes in the lives of people who do not at all revere it as a structure. In St. Petersburg, people did not begin to figure out whether the transfer of the cathedral would lead to the fact that it would be more difficult to get there, but simply heard a familiar note: the Russian Orthodox Church has come and takes a tidbit for itself. From the start of this campaign, the circles that were the flagships of the transition process attracted the least sympathetic public speakers, who also spoke in the most repulsive ways. All positions “for the transfer” were very aggressive, which did not add sympathy, but on the contrary, it resembled a confrontation between culture and savagery. The media presentation was just that.

For supporters of the transfer of the cathedral, this, apparently, was supposed to be a reconciliatory action for the centenary of the revolution - healing the wounds inflicted by it. But in fact it looks like another aggressive takeover. A hundred years ago, the Bolsheviks came and destroyed the churches, and in 2017 the priests came and destroyed the museum. This is an aggressive revanchism in which there is no visible element public good. If this element were present, say, in the restoration of destroyed churches in villages, it would be more difficult to object. But this position was not recognized as wrong, because the degree of religiosity of our society is greatly overestimated. Decision makers do not understand how secular and secular society really is. The city authorities also live in their own world and, it seems, have no idea what exactly annoys people.

Alexander Kinsbursky, head of the sociology of conflict group at the Institute of Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences:

The case with the transmission of Isaac is atypical. The reason for the protest goes beyond the usual - those that cause tension in society, such as non-payment of salaries or the demolition of architectural monuments. The story of the transfer of the cathedral to the Russian Orthodox Church, it seems to me, will not develop, but this event received a response: Peter, Isaac, the Russian Orthodox Church - everything came together. Why Isaac? Because everyone knows him, because the topic was promoted in the press. In addition, there are quite a lot of people in this city who are concerned not only with personal problems. But this is something exotic in terms of protest potential. The role of the church grew even before the transfer of Isaac, so this gesture is unlikely to symbolize the strengthening of this role or something else. Many new churches are being built all over the country, old ones are being transferred, the ROC has a lot of economic privileges that bring great profits. Therefore, it seems to me that this is an isolated case in a series of similar ones, which we will not even know about.

Konstantin Mikhailov, religious scholar, historian:

Among people who call themselves Orthodox and are Orthodox in the sense that they sincerely consider themselves as such, many oppose the transfer of St. Isaac's Cathedral to the Russian Orthodox Church. Most likely, some fatigue from commercial activities churches. Orthodox, who rarely go to church, have a more abstract idea of ​​what it should be like. And these ideas are based on the fact that she should be humble, help the poor, and she should not do business.

It is worth considering the second factor. St. Isaac's Cathedral is still a very important cultural symbol for Russia and St. Petersburg. Despite the fact that people treat the Russian Orthodox Church with respect, respect for the museum business, scientists, scientific knowledge is also large enough. In the case of Isaac, we see not a clash of anti-clericals with clerics, but a confrontation between two figures equally respected by a normal Russian person. The museum community looks in this situation simply less interested in the commercial exploitation of the cathedral.

Yes, the image of a priest with an expensive watch and a car doesn't fit well with the concept of spiritual salvation (although I don't think many Russians see them as fat priests from atheistic agitation). At the same time, the consciousness of the Russian is not at all split - he feels himself a member of the church, regardless of the qualities of the leadership of the church, feels through it belonging to higher powers. Normal parishioners treat ordinary priests, as a rule, well, although many really began to harbor hostility towards the church elite. But their own priest, to whom they go every Sunday, may be much more important to them than a patriarch sitting in Moscow doing some non-transparent business.

If we talk about unchurched Orthodox, then most of them do not think at all about how the clergy live. An ordinary priest for a person who visits the temple only on Easter is a purely virtual figure, little correlated with the real situation and the information background. The parishioner does not think about whether his ethical attitudes contradict the views of the patriarch, because he knows practically nothing about them.

Sergey Firsov, religious scholar and historian, professor at St. Petersburg State University:

In the transfer of St. Isaac's Cathedral there are also problems of an objective nature. More than 400 employees work in the museum, and, of course, the problem of their employment, in my opinion, had to be solved in the context of the issue of legal registration of the cathedral as belonging to the Russian Orthodox Church. Its director Konstantin Burov spoke a lot about the financial difficulties of the museum. In particular, he spoke about a ten-year restoration program for the cathedral, which would be curtailed if it were handed over to the Russian Orthodox Church.

Of course, the issue of transferring the cathedral should be discussed by representatives of different parties - both secular and ecclesiastical. But the difficulty lies in the fact that some do not understand (or maybe do not want to understand) others, despite the fact that it is quite possible to combine a museum and a temple. We can remember that main cathedral Roman, St. Peter's Cathedral, is visited by millions of tourists every year. On the dome you can drink coffee, buy some souvenirs. And it doesn't offend anyone.

The authorities of St. Petersburg twice denied the ROC the transfer of St. Isaac's Cathedral - first in 2015, then in 2016. But the church continued to insist, and Governor Poltavchenko suddenly gave in. How the decision was made to transfer Isaac, what status the cathedral will have and what problems may arise with its financing, RBC found out

Saint Isaac's Cathedral (Photo: Nikita Popov / RBC)

A few days before the new year 2017, the governor of St. Petersburg, Georgy Poltavchenko, invited Nikolai Burov, director of the St. Isaac's Cathedral Museum, to Smolny. Governor said: one of the most famous cathedrals in the country is transferred to the Russian Orthodox Church.

The decision surprised museum workers: until the last moment, the city authorities stubbornly resisted the attempts of the church to get Isaac. First, the vice-governor of St. Petersburg, Alexander Govorunov, spoke out against it, and then, in a rather harsh form, Poltavchenko himself.

The decision to transfer Isaac caused a storm of emotions in the city. Opponents of the initiative began to organize protests, supporters who did not remain in debt - religious processions; and Poltavchenko's own rating dropped sharply, a federal official shared in an interview with RBC the data of closed opinion polls.

“And I even feel sorry for our governor. He could not make this decision on his own. Everything was decided for him, ”the former Smolny official is sure.

Who and how influenced Poltavchenko and what preceded the transfer of Isaac?

Arrival of Barsanuphius

The claims to St. Isaac's Cathedral were first publicly expressed by the Russian Orthodox Church in mid-July 2015. Then the Metropolitan of St. Petersburg and Ladoga Varsonofy (Sudakov) wrote a letter to the governor Georgy Poltavchenko, in which he asked to transfer the cathedral to the church. Varsonofy was a new person for the city: the manager of the affairs of the Moscow Patriarchy and the head of the Mordovian Metropolis, to St. Petersburg by decision Holy Synod it was transferred in March 2014. By sending the metropolitan to St. Petersburg, the synod temporarily retained for him the prestigious status of manager of affairs.

It is believed that it is very difficult to manage the affairs of the church and such a diocese as St. Petersburg at the same time, therefore the position of manager of the metropolitan was temporarily left, a source in the Russian Orthodox Church tells RBC. But he has been in this status for four years. This is because Varsonofy is one of the closest people to Patriarch Kirill, RBC's interlocutor explains.

Varsonofy, who served in the GDR tank troops, was not sent to St. Petersburg by chance: there was a specific task - to get property that the church considers its own, adds a RBC source close to the city administration.

First try

St. Petersburg Metropolis considers St. Isaac's Cathedral, which is part of the State Museum of the same name, to be its "property". The ROC received the right to claim ownership or free use of federal and municipal property in 2010, when the law of the same name “On the Transfer of State or Municipal Property for Religious Purposes to Religious Organizations” was adopted.

But in the case of Isaac, the authorities of St. Petersburg refused Barsanuphius. The command to prepare a rationale for why the cathedral could not be transferred to the Russian Orthodox Church was given to officials after receiving a letter from the metropolitan, two interlocutors close to the city administration told RBC.

In the response (available to RBC, dated September 2, 2015), signed by Vice-Governor Govorunov, who replaced Poltavchenko, who then flew to China, it was said that the St. Isaac's Cathedral museum is one of the most visited in the city and its current maintenance and restoration every up to 200 million rubles are spent annually. It contributes annually up to 70 million rubles to the city budget. If the cathedral is transferred to the use of the diocese, all expenses for its maintenance, restoration and protection will be borne by the owner - the administration of St. Petersburg. An additional item of expenditure, Govorunov explained, would entail a reduction in funding for "other socially significant projects and programs," and this "in a difficult economic situation is unacceptable."

Poltavchenko was not eager to hand over Isaac to the Russian Orthodox Church, two interlocutors close to the administration of St. Petersburg and the leadership of the Legislative Assembly confirm. Firstly, visiting the cathedral by tourists gives serious revenues to the budget, and secondly, the city leadership was well aware that the public would be against the transfer.

In addition, the metropolitan's letter fell on the authorities like a bolt from the blue: Varsonofy did not warn of his intention to send a request, and this outraged the governor, two former employees of the St. Petersburg administration say.

The metropolitan simply did not have the opportunity to consult with the authorities, objected to a RBC source close to the diocese, and Poltavchenko defiantly ignored the hierarch, although Varsonofy tried several times to meet with him.

Georgy Poltavchenko and Bishop Varsonofy of Ladoga (Photo: Roman Pimenov / Interpress / TASS)

Second try

The refusal of officials outraged the Russian Orthodox Church. “We said that the church cannot agree with such an answer, because the law does not provide such a basis for refusal as economic inexpediency,” says a source in the diocese.

Grounds for Refusal to Transfer a Religious Object*

— The purpose of using the object, declared by the religious organization, does not correspond to its activities or the law

— An application for the transfer of property was submitted by a foreign religious organization

- There is a court decision that has entered into force, which provides for a different procedure for disposing of the object

— The property is in the use of another religious organization

* According to the law "On the transfer to religious organizations of property for religious purposes, which is in state or municipal ownership"

The church threatened the authorities with a lawsuit, but in the end took a different path.

For some time, the diocese concentrated on less status churches, which were part of the same museum as Isaac - Smolny and St. Sampson Cathedrals. There were no serious problems here: at the end of January 2016, the Russian Orthodox Church received the keys to the Smolny Cathedral, and in February 2017, the official ceremony of handing over the St. Sampson Cathedral took place.

The diocese returned to the issue of transferring Isaac in the spring of 2016. At the end of March, Varsonofy decided to appeal to the federal authorities: he sent a letter (RBC has a copy) to Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev with a request to "assistance" in the transfer of Isaac to the use of the Russian Orthodox Church.

The metropolitan called the cathedral "historically the main temple of the Russian Empire", which has "tremendous spiritual value" and "is considered the spiritual symbol of our city." The church, assured Barsanuphius, had a great experience of “creating church museums with a special historical and cultural status at churches and pilgrimage services which are entrusted with excursion and educational functions. The diocese planned to use the funds from the excursions for the maintenance and restoration of Isaac.

“The church turned to the prime minister to put pressure on Poltavchenko,” a source close to the city administration is sure. “The law [on the transfer of property for religious purposes] is federal, which is why we decided to involve the federal center.”

A little over two weeks after the metropolitan's appeal, on April 10, 2016, Medvedev instructed the Ministry of Economic Development, the Ministry of Culture and the government of St. Petersburg to consider the appeal and "report an agreed position" (a copy of the document is at the disposal of RBC).

Poltavchenko did not delay the answer. At the disposal of RBC was his letter addressed to the head of the Ministry of Economic Development Alexei Ulyukaev dated May 18, 2016, in which the governor took a tough stance. “The transfer of the cathedrals to the free use of the diocese will lead to the virtual liquidation of one of the most popular and visited museums in St. Petersburg,” the governor writes.

Varsonofy's application "caused a wide public discussion", the majority of citizens were categorically against the transfer of the cathedrals to the diocese, Poltavchenko said. If the decision to transfer the cathedrals to the church is taken, it will be "a direct violation of the statutory rights of citizens" and "the primacy of human rights over the rights of a religious organization," he insisted.

The governor called St. Isaac's Cathedral the only museum in the country that exists entirely through its own activities, without subsidies from the state budget. In the case of the transfer of Isaac, the obligation to finance its maintenance, protection and restoration will be entrusted to the government of St. Petersburg, and this “in the conditions of the city budget deficit” is not justified, Poltavchenko emphasized. He proposed to return to the issue of the transfer of Isaac after the permanent sources of funding for the cathedral were determined.

The RBC government office confirmed that the governor then considered the transfer premature. The Ministry of Economic Development, which collected reviews from departments for Medvedev and prepared an “agreed position”, indicated that the issue of transferring the cathedral was under the jurisdiction of the city authorities, because the temples are owned by St. Petersburg.

Requests for Barsanuphius

Together with a letter about Isaac, the metropolitan sent the prime minister and two others (available to RBC): "to assist" in the transfer of the Savior on Blood - the last, fourth temple from the museum and part of the premises of the former Smolny Monastery, where the faculties of political science, sociology and international relations of St. Petersburg University.

The metropolitan justified the need to transfer the Savior on Blood by the fact that due to the work of the museum, the time and days of services are limited, and this hinders the development of the local parish. It was necessary to transfer the premises of the former Smolny Monastery because the diocese “for the organization and development of full-fledged activities” needs “premises for non-liturgical purposes” next to the Smolny Cathedral, previously transferred to the Russian Orthodox Church.

Poltavchenko's position regarding the transfer of the Savior on Blood was the same as for Isaac: it is premature to give the church to the Russian Orthodox Church. The Ministry of Economic Development, as in the case of Isaac, advised the city authorities to decide. Thinking about how to dispose of the premises of the former Smolny Monastery, which are in federal ownership, Poltavchenko suggested to Moscow. But no applications from the Russian Orthodox Church were received by the Federal Property Management Agency, the Ministry of Economic Development noted.

The role of the patriarch

The appeal to Medvedev turned out to be pointless. After the conversion of Barsanuphius, the Moscow Patriarchate began to seriously discuss the topic of the transfer of Isaac. In the fall of 2016, Patriarch Kirill joined the process and the issue began to be discussed “at all levels,” emphasizes RBC’s interlocutor in church circles.

Echoes of the discussions reached St. Petersburg: “On the sidelines, there was constant talk that the church had not given up the desire to get a cathedral and that a search was underway for transfer options,” one of the deputies of the Legislative Assembly tells RBC.

Back in September, Poltavchenko said that Isaac would not be transferred, recalls a source close to the city administration in an interview with RBC. But at the end of December 2016, the governor invited Nikolai Burov, director of the St. Isaac's Cathedral Museum, and announced a decision to transfer the cathedral to the use of the Russian Orthodox Church, museum spokeswoman Maria Morozova tells RBC.

The decision to transfer Poltavchenko made after a meeting with the patriarch in December 2016. There were no other significant events that could affect the governor, the source of RBC in the museum circles of St. Petersburg believes.

The Patriarch visited the city from December 17 to 19, according to the website of the St. Petersburg Metropolis. Two receptions were held in his honor - a church reception, in the St. Petersburg diocese, and a secular one, on behalf of Poltavchenko, at the state residence K-2 on the banks of the Malaya Nevka, an interlocutor close to the diocese and an official of the city administration told RBC.

Publicly, not a word was said about the transfer of Isaac at the reception at the residence, an official who attended the social event told RBC, and confirmed another guest. But on the same evening, the patriarch and Poltavchenko met privately, two other interlocutors from the city administration say. Then they agreed: Isaac will be handed over to the Russian Orthodox Church.

Soon oh decision learned the media. Fontanka reported on the upcoming transfer, citing its own sources, on December 30, and after the New Year, Poltavchenko himself confirmed this information to TASS. “The issue has been resolved,” he said. The museum will work, and the church plans to maintain the cathedral, the governor stressed.

The governor began to change his attitude towards the transfer of the cathedral after the patriarchate joined the case: he realized that this was not just the desire of Metropolitan Barsanuphius, a source in church circles tells RBC.

RBC's source in the Russian Orthodox Church and two interlocutors close to the Kremlin say that the patriarch agreed on the transfer of Isaac with the president. High-ranking officials of the presidential administration, in particular, the first deputy head of the administration, Sergei Kiriyenko, did not know about the decision, says one of RBC's interlocutors. According to him, the consent of the head of state was received in December. However, RBC failed to officially confirm this information.

Putin's press secretary Dmitry Peskov told RBC that it is "not the president's prerogative" to coordinate the transfer of religious objects. Putin's last official meeting with the head of the Russian Orthodox Church in 2016 was on November 22: the president congratulated him on his 70th birthday. On December 1, the Patriarch listened to Putin's message to the Federal Assembly, and on December 28, he took part in a New Year's reception in the Kremlin, where Putin was also . ,>

Governor's mistake

How the decision to hand over Isaac was reportedPoltavchenko and who did it is unknown. directly with the governor the president did not discuss the transfer of Isaac, RBC was a federal official in February.

Despite the agreement, the public statement of the head of St. Petersburg on the transfer of the cathedral came as a complete surprise to everyone. “Poltavchenko did not coordinate his statement with anyone. It was assumed that the official transfer of Isaac would be announced later, ”says the interlocutor in church circles. When exactly it was planned to announce the transfer, he did not say. But the patriarchate wanted this story “to the last not to go into the public space,” says a source close to the Russian Orthodox Church.

Poltavchenko, agreeing to the transfer of the cathedral, made the decision that he was advised to take, says a source close to the Kremlin. Another thing is that the governor had to correctly present him: to hold public hearings or organize an appeal to him by respected people of the city. “In general, to create at least the appearance of a discussion with people. But he did not do this, ”the interlocutor of RBC states.

The decision to transfer Isaac was opposed by representatives of the opposition and cultural figures. Several protests took place in St. Petersburg, some of which were attended by deputies of the city legislature. The coalition against the transfer included Yabloko, A Just Russia, PARNAS, Open Russia, and the Party of Growth. President of the Union of Museums of Russia and CEO Hermitage Mikhail Piotrovsky asked the patriarch to withdraw the request for transfer. The rating of Poltavchenko himself collapsed: the fall was 5-7%, depending on the districts of the city, a federal official told RBC.

Patriarchal Cathedral

St. Isaac's Cathedral after the transfer of the Russian Orthodox Church will have the status of a patriarch, the church initially wanted to give it a special status, Abbess Xenia (Chernega), head of the legal department of the Moscow Patriarchate, told RBC. “[Therefore] it was no coincidence that the participation of His Holiness [in the process of handing over the cathedral]. It is quite natural that he turned to the governor, supporting the initiative of Bishop Barsanuphius,” she argues.

The fact that Patriarch Kirill turned to the governor of St. Petersburg Georgy Poltavchenko with a request to transfer the cathedral to the church was said at a press conference on January 12 by the city's vice-governor Mikhail Mokretsov and Bishop Tikhon (Shevkunov). The patriarch sent a letter to the governor in December 2016, Poltavchenko's press service told RBC.

There are several cathedrals that have the status of patriarchs in Russia, for example, the Naval Cathedral in Kronstadt, says Chernega. These include the Epiphany (Elokhovsky) Cathedral in Moscow, the Assumption Cathedral in the Moscow Kremlin, the Ascension Military Cathedral in Novocherkassk (Rostov Region) and others.

The powers to manage the patriarchal cathedral belong to the primate of the Russian Orthodox Church, a source in church circles explained to RBC, although such a cathedral has a dean, or rector, who "carries out the current management of liturgical and other activities." Local bishops also participate in the management of patriarchal cathedrals.

St. Isaac's Cathedral, most likely, will have a dual subordination, Archpriest Vladimir Vigilyansky, rector of the Church of the Holy Martyr Tatiana at Moscow State University, told RBC. “The patriarch is the rector of many stavropegic [independent of the dioceses] monasteries, for example, on Solovki and Valaam. And churches in other regions can be the same, stavropegial,” Vigilyansky emphasized.

The patriarchal church differs from other churches in that it does not have a parish council, Archdeacon Andrey Kuraev explained to RBC. “Take, for example, the temple of the patriarch in Gelendzhik. This temple does not have a parish service load. If the patriarch comes, he serves there,” he said.

In matters of financing patriarchal churches, "the Moscow Patriarchate has no rules." “As the patriarch wishes, so be it. But in general, from the point of view of financing, it does not happen that money comes from the central patriarchal budget for the maintenance of any church. From there, money can only go to the maintenance of the patriarchal residences,” Kuraev said.

Symbolic year

If the matter of transferring the cathedral to the Russian Orthodox Church has been decided, then the timing of the transfer is still being discussed.

From the very beginning, the Russian Orthodox Church hoped that St. Isaac's Cathedral would be transferred to it for use in 2017, says a source in church circles.

In 2017, not only the centenary of two revolutions is celebrated, it is also the anniversary of the beginning of the persecution of the church, another source in church circles explains the significance of this year. It was in October 1917 (November according to the new style) that the Bolsheviks killed the first priest, John Kochurov, in Tsarskoye Selo. “2017 is a special year for the church, and His Holiness quite rightly drew attention to this. It would be great if Isaac was handed over to the Russian Orthodox Church, of course, subject to all conditions, precisely in 2017, ”says the interlocutor of RBC.

The Patriarch mentioned 2017 as a symbolic year for the transfer of Isaac at a meeting of the Supreme church council February 17 this year. "The transfer of St. Isaac's Cathedral in St. Petersburg in the year of the centenary of revolutionary events is intended to become a symbol of the reconciliation of our people," the primate said. Governor Poltavchenko also spoke to Nikolay Burov about the need to transfer the cathedral in 2017, says a RBC source close to the city administration. Burov himself, according to him, suggested the first quarter of 2019: “This is the most realistic timeframe to calmly deal with all museum objects.”

Formally, the wishes of the director of the museum were taken into account. At the end of December last year, the City Committee on Property Relations (KRO), after meeting with him, drew up a schedule for the transfer of the cathedral to the church, hoping that the process would be completed in 2019. This document was not coordinated with the ROC, its representatives learned about the paper from the media, two sources in the ROC said. At the same time, at the end of December, the director signed an agreement to refuse the operational management of the museum, a source close to the city administration told RBC.

In the Russian Orthodox Church, they wanted to see the cathedral already by Easter, which this year fell on April 16, a high-ranking federal official told RBC. Transfer to the celebration of the main Orthodox holiday agreed at the level of the patriarchate, confirms a source in church circles, it would be symbolic, he adds. The idea, the interlocutor says, was supported by the governor.

After the return of Poltavchenko from vacation, March 5, the administration of Governor Burov to prepare for the transportation of museum objects from the temple until mid-April. It was decided to move the exhibits to the storerooms of the State Museum of the History of St. Petersburg, and to unite the museums. The museum workers were against it, since the deadlines were unrealistic, and reported this in March at a meeting in the city administration, Domin Mansurov, curator of the St. Isaac's Cathedral Museum, told RBC.

After RBC that Isaac could be handed over by Easter, the museum management stopped rushing, three sources in the Legislative Assembly and an interlocutor close to the city administration said. By that time, the latter was already beginning to understand that they would not have time to organize the transfer by this date, the federal official clarifies in an interview with RBC.

The Russian Orthodox Church continues to expect to receive a cathedral this year, says a RBC source in church circles. The authorities of St. Petersburg are discussing the transfer of Isaac by July 12, the Day of Saints Peter and Paul, a source close to the Ministry of Culture told RBC, and confirmed by an interlocutor from the Russian Orthodox Church. On this day, the patriarch always comes to St. Petersburg to lead the service in the Cathedral of Saints Peter and Paul in the Peter and Paul Fortress.

The transfer can also be timed to coincide with the church-state holiday Day of Family, Love and Fidelity (Memorial Day of Saints Peter and Fevronia in the Russian Orthodox Church), which is celebrated on July 8, a source close to the Ministry of Culture told RBC. If it is not possible to transfer in the summer, this can happen in the fall, the interlocutor admits. Bureaucracy and presidential elections can slow down the process.

spaces with transmission

After the decision to refuse the transfer by Easter and leaks in the media, officials closed down: museum workers are not invited to meetings about the future of the cathedral, says a source in the St. Isaac's Cathedral museum. Burov confirms that he knows nothing about what is happening around the temple. The church is also not involved in discussions, says a source close to the diocese.

Many different interests are intertwined around Isaac: in the environment of the same Poltavchenko, there are those who are still against the transfer;

Some people in the Kremlin, such as Sergei Kiriyenko, are also against the transfer of the cathedral, especially on the eve of the presidential elections, says a federal official. Protests over the transfer of Isaac have hit the ratings of the St. Petersburg governor, and if the tension continues until the election, this could affect Putin's results, another federal official explains Kiriyenko's displeasure.

“Do you know how it happens? They promised you something upstairs, they said, yes, it’s good [get Isaac for use]. And they didn't go into details. When it comes to practice, various nuances arise and the process stalls, ”a source in church circles described the situation.

Such a nuance can be called the legal registration of the transfer. The church has not yet sent the city authorities the application required by law. Since the cathedral will be patriarchal, it will most likely come from the Moscow Patriarchate, and not from the local diocese, says Abbess Xenia.

The Russian Orthodox Church formalized its claims to the council only in a letter from the patriarch. The fact that it was sent to Poltavchenko was said at a press conference on January 12 by Vice-Governor of St. Petersburg Mikhail Mokretsov and Bishop Tikhon (Shevkunov). The patriarch sent a letter to the governor in December 2016, Poltavchenko's press service told RBC, but they refused to provide a copy or state its content, citing the private nature of the correspondence. RBC received a similar response from the Synodal Department of the Russian Orthodox Church for the relationship of the church with society and the media.

In the case of Isaac, the museum objects of the cathedral must first be described, and then an agreement should be signed for the transfer to the use of the church of those that cannot be taken out, Abbess Xenia explains to RBC. There are 62 such objects, she specified and Burov confirmed. The agreement between the museum and the Russian Orthodox Church must be approved by the Ministry of Culture. After it is concluded, the church will apply for the transfer of the cathedral to its use. This procedure - first the museum valuables, and then the building - was proposed by officials: it is set out and follows it in the schedule of the KIO and the ROC, said the abbess of RBC.

Information that the museum funds will be first described and an agreement approved by the Ministry of Culture will be concluded was also cited by Vice-Governor Mokretsov, who oversees the KIO, at a January press conference. “The next step is the execution of a document that will be an agreement for the free use [of the cathedral building],” he concluded.

But in March of this year, the position of officials changed: at a court hearing on the suit of opponents of the transfer of Isaac to the use of the Russian Orthodox Church, which took place on March 13, they spoke differently. According to a representative of the KIO, “an application from a religious organization [for the transfer of the temple] in the prescribed federal law order was not filed" and "the decision cannot be made in his absence".

The approach, when an application for a religious object is submitted last, is beneficial to the ROC, Ilya Elkin, head of the legal support department at PetroJust (serves cultural organizations in St. Petersburg), tells RBC. The transfer of museum valuables on the basis of an agreement with the Ministry of Culture gives the ROC the opportunity to assert that the department has agreed on the entire transfer process, including buildings, since the objects located in it have already been transferred: “Therefore [the church can argue] that the process cannot be stopped at the level of organs the power of the subject, ”the lawyer explains the logic of the ROC. The city authorities, he continues, can use the agreement with the Ministry of Culture as an explanation that everything has already been decided for them and they are only implementing the decision of higher authorities.

From a legal point of view, it would be correct to simultaneously apply for both the building and museum values, but in the case of Isaac, this condition is not met, the lawyer states.

financial question

How Isaac will be financed is also not yet clear. The church promises that it will maintain the cathedral at its own expense. “I assure you that the church will have funds,” the patriarch promised in February. Entrance to the cathedral will be free, but there will be a fee for excursions and sightseeing of the city from the colonnade. These funds will be enough "to ensure the current repair and restoration work" in the amount of ten recent years, assured the patriarch.

However, it is still not clear whether all the expenses for the maintenance and restoration of the cathedral will really fall on the ROC.

Vice-governor Mokretsov admitted in January that part of the funding could be taken over by the city. "St. Isaac's Cathedral," he recalled then, "is an object of federal significance, so the city must be responsible for maintaining it in proper form." For example, the restoration of the Trinity Cathedral and the Buddhist temple on Primorsky Avenue is financed from the city budget, the vice-governor specified.

Bishop Tikhon (Shevkunov) spoke in the same spirit. “As for the global restoration, some part [financial responsibility] will be borne by the state, some by the community. But the current restoration and maintenance will fall on the shoulders of the community,” he promised. The responsibility of the city and the church will be fixed in a special agreement between the Russian Orthodox Church and the city, says a RBC source in the church. The document is intended to regulate the use of the temple - the preservation of the museum, repairs, etc. “There is a legal opportunity for the city to participate in the operation of the cathedral, because the city remains the owner of Isaac. He cannot absolutely distance himself, ”the interlocutor argues.

But even if the church manages to at least partially leave the financing of Isaac outside the city, the question of where to get money for the maintenance of the cathedral still remains.

The fact is that the diocese lives on contributions from its parishes, the rector of one of the churches tells RBC. The amount of contributions depends on the profitability of the temple, explains the interlocutor. There are parishes that pay hundreds of thousands of rubles in contributions a month, and there are those that pay much less: first of all, the profit depends on how much a passageway the temple occupies. The main income, according to the priest, is the sale of candles, fees for prayers, requiems, funerals, commemorations, weddings and baptisms. In the whole country, deductions to dioceses range from 10 to 50% of the income of churches, RBC found out earlier.

Now the expenses of the St. Petersburg diocese go to the maintenance of the city Theological Academy, the diocesan hospital and general diocesan needs. After the transfer of Isaac, a new expense item will appear that will need to be covered somehow, and contributions from parishes are one of the potential sources of funds for the diocese. As a result, the amount of contributions after the transfer of Isaac may be increased, the interlocutor of RBC fears. At the same time, he believes that a full-fledged parish in Isaac is unlikely to develop: the temple is located far from densely populated residential areas.

The community will take shape as soon as an experienced person appears who will create it, another interlocutor of RBC in church circles objects: a Sunday school will open, people will not be lazy to spend half an hour or an hour getting to the cathedral. “A community cannot fail to emerge in a world-class temple,” he believes.

Another option for content is through a special fund. Such a control scheme at the Moscow Cathedral of Christ the Savior, explains a source close to the Russian Orthodox Church. The co-chairs of the fund are Patriarch Kirill and Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin, and among the trustees there are many status church figures, federal and metropolitan officials. The Moscow authorities annually allocate funds for the maintenance of the temple: the money goes to maintain engineering systems and care for the territory, the foundation’s website says.

The church will try to negotiate with St. Petersburg patrons so that they financially support the maintenance of Isaac, says an interlocutor of RBC, close to the Russian Orthodox Church. But while there are few who want it, he complains: everyone understands that this is an expensive pleasure. According to the plans of the city authorities, it was planned to spend 3.5 billion rubles on the restoration of the cathedral until 2028.

With the participation of Yulia Sapronova, Maria Istomina, Irina Parfentieva, Polina Khimshiashvili

In December 2016, Georgy Poltavchenko made one of the most controversial decisions - to transfer St. Isaac's Cathedral to the ROC. This caused a flurry of discontent, which has not subsided to this day. Now that Poltavchenko is no longer governor, things may change. Or not.

On the evening of October 3, Russian President Vladimir Putin invited Georgy Poltavchenko to leave the post of governor. The ex-mayor will go directly from Smolny to the ships - Alexander Beglov will temporarily take his place in the St. Petersburg government.

The reshuffling of local government promises other changes as well. One of the most topical issues: what will happen to St. Isaac's Cathedral. Georgy Poltavchenko has repeatedly said that the decision to transfer him Orthodox Church- final. But with his departure, Smolny's position may change. However, it seems not worth counting on this under Alexander Beglov. Acting Governor of St. Petersburg gravitates towards the Orthodox Church no less than Poltavchenko. In 2011, he was awarded the Order of the Holy Right-Believing Prince Daniel of Moscow, 1st Class, for his attention to the Russian Orthodox Church. Twice he was awarded Reverend Sergius Radonezh I degree. Once for help in restoring the Kronstadt Naval Cathedral, another time for supporting the Trinity-Sergius Lavra.

On the Field of Mars in St. Petersburg, an action was held against the transfer of St. Isaac's Cathedral to the use of the Russian Orthodox Church. Photo: Baltphoto/Andrey Pronin

Activists from the organizing committee of the "Stand up for Isaac's" campaign took the news about the new governor doomed.

“This situation does not inspire optimism for me either. The interim is “good” because it is possible to carry out unpopular decisions through it for the remaining year before the elections, since it is still temporary. And, as you understand, Isaac is far from the only problem that concerns the people of St. Petersburg,” one of the activists expressed concern.

St. Petersburg authorities officially announced the transfer of St. Isaac's Cathedral to the ROC in January 2017. Responsibilities for the maintenance of the cathedral will be transferred to the church. Georgy Poltavchenko also stressed that Isaac will retain his museum and educational function.

This, however, did not please the townspeople and museum workers. They regarded Poltavchenko's decision as the liquidation of the museum. A series of protests swept through the city. Some of them were collected, according to information from different sources, from 1.5 thousand to 5 thousand people. Smaller scale actions continue to this day. Individual pickets are held by the activists of the “Let's Defend St. Isaac's Cathedral” group several times a month. The last one was October 1st.

Public organizations and deputies of opposition factions, including Boris Vishnevsky and Alexei Kovalev, tried to resist the transfer of Isaac. Parliamentarians insisted on holding a referendum. There were also attempts to challenge the legitimacy of Poltavchenko's decision through the courts. None of this brought results.

The governor continued to insist on the transfer of the cathedral to the church. In support of his decision, Orthodox activists held a procession in February 2017.

It is noteworthy that against this background, Nikolai Burov, who opposed the transfer, resigned as director of the St. Isaac's Cathedral memorial museum. His place was almost taken by the writer Irada Vovnenko, later she was replaced by Yuri Mudrov.