2026-06-30

LA LITERATURA NOS ACERCA A DIOS

 

How Studying Literature Brings Us Closer to God

A School Teacher Talks About Timeless Issues

There are some teachers of literature whose teaching instantly draws you to study Pushkin and Dostoyevsky’s works in-depth, and, more than that, to come to church for a visit and become a churched believer. Nikolai Lobastov, who has such an amazing talent, is an experienced teacher and the author of A Rural Teacher’s Notebook. Our guest spoke about his experience of inspiring students to study Russian classical literature and helping them discover the Orthodox faith.

About our guest: Nikolai Lobastov is a teacher, writer, and a graduate of St. Tikhon’s Orthodox University. In his book, A Rural Teacher’s Notebook, he speaks about Russian literature and Christianity. He resides in the town of Lyskovo, Nizhny Novgorod Region.

    

Nikolai Alekseevich, when you tell teenagers about Russian classical literature, what is their reaction?

I enjoy the lessons I have with high school students. They have an open and truly receptive nature. They are actively searching for truth, just as they are concerned with the problems of love and death. It will always be like that at all times. Teenagers ask tough questions, they listen and willingly join the discussions. I like it when there is a dialogue. There is one particular feature in my teaching style. I discuss the Russian classics through the Gospels and the Orthodox faith, just as I tell my students about the writers’ spiritual quest or how the issue of religion was expressed in their works.

Yesenin wrote these wonderful lines: “The soul feels sorrow for the heavens, for it’s a stranger in these lands.” Pushkin has expressed the thought differently: “Genius should aspire to reach the skies.” This yearning for perfection was the reason why Russian writers were drawn to write. Once you touch on these ideas, your audience will react with enthusiasm.

Still, we often hear that our children are not interested in reading or learning about Eugene Onegin1

—Christ is One and the Same today, tomorrow, and forever. He is the measure of things. Eternal values are the same at all times. The painful and bleeding questions that classical literature touches upon will remain unsolved until the end of time. The teacher’s job is to understand from what angle the heroes of Pushkin and Lermontov should be analyzed and where he is to place emphasis. During Soviet times, any main character, be it Onegin or Pechorin, was made a revolutionary of sorts, and the most advanced among students were really bored. If you introduce Onegin and Pechorin as the bored sophisticates of the aristocracy, it won’t leave anyone excited. It is a shame if the teaching of classics does not incorporate the hot topics of today’s life. When the teacher assists his students in resolving vital questions, it will result in a much more exciting experience.

How can we discuss the characters from the classics? Eugene Onegin preaches hedonism and freethinking; he needs nothing and cares about no one. “Enjoy life to the fullest,” as we would say today. At the same time, he is incredibly bored, suffering from “existential melancholy.” It is somewhat similar to the Western path of individual development where man creates a cult of freedom and puts himself in the center of the universe. Tatiana, to the contrary, “with her Russian soul,” personifies traditional values and adherence to the Divine commandments. She lives in harmony with her conscience, and duty is more important for her than passions.

What interesting details can you share about Pushkin, and how would you describe his religious sentiment?

Let’s look at the following detail from the poet’s biography. Pushkin arrived at his exile in Mikhailovskoye in 1824. He resided there for two years in company with his elderly nanny. Beginning from 1825, Pushkin no longer writes parodies on religious matters and abandons his former passions of Voltairism and Byronism. He writes to his friends: “There is nothing wiser than staying at your country estate and watering a cabbage patch.” The capital city’s sinful passions, such as cards, society gossip, or wine no longer excite him. One can say that village life has transformed him. He is surrounded by Russian-speaking people; he learns to honor the traditions of his ancestors. He becomes interested in Svyatogorsky monastery, the pilgrims, Abbot Jonah, reading the Bible and the holy fathers. All of these activities illuminate the soul. Pushkin sent a request to a priest, his acquaintance, to serve the Eucharist for the commemoration of the faithful departed for Byron.2 While in Mikhailovskoye, he composes his famous poem, “The Prophet”, which refers to the biblical story of Prophet Isaiah’s vision of seraphim in “We’re mired by thirst for sacred things.” Pushkin skillfully expresses the idea of how God grants the gift of prophecy to His elect so that they can deliver His will to mankind.

What a poignant character of Monk Pimen has Pushkin presented in his drama, “Boris Godunov”, which was also written during his exile in Mikhailovskoye! Pushkin’s main character, as an elder and chronicler, admits that “once God delivered him to the monastery,” he found blessedness. Pimen, by the author’s plan, is the essence of such Christian virtues as piety, meekness, wisdom, and diligence. The teacher may subtly place special emphasis on him to spark children’s interest in learning more about Christianity.

School children of today are characterized by the so-called iGen mentality. They are used to receiving everything in a concise and attractively packaged way. The teacher should be capable of keeping them focused and fascinated by talking about the most relevant things, using colorful details and memorable examples.

What do you think about online learning?

—It is the end product of a pragmatic approach where man is perceived as a consumer or a tiny cog in a giant wheel. It creates an idea that education is a commodity, just as is the intellect and the competencies. When education is judged based on its marketability then online learning is a convenient tool. However, education is not only the transfer of knowledge from teacher to student. The teacher’s personality, intonation, gestures, and eye expression are just as important in the learning process. You know, it is akin to taking a seat next to a holy man. No words needed, just one look at him and you get an intuitive understanding of the most valuable things.

If liberal ideology prevails in education, online learning will score a victory. It has proven its convenience for both the government and the economy. At the same time, the notion of individuality will become obsolete and irrelevant.

What books about family values can you recommend?

Certainly, it would be Captain’s Daughter, Pushkin’s short novel with a skillful depiction of Masha Mironova’s family, love, and the faithfulness of her parents to one another. Another one that comes to mind is Goncharov’s The Precipice. The character of Granny is wonderful there— her relationship with her grandchildren. This book sets priorities straight when it comes to building a family. Turgenev’s depiction of the older Bazarovs is excellent. Despite their somewhat incidental appearance in the novel, they were poignantly portrayed as a truly devoted couple. Turgenev as an ingenious master of the pen masterfully depicted their love towards their son as well to one another. However, it is hardly possible for us to imagine nihilist Bazarov as a family man, much less cradling a baby. Vasily Rozanov wrote about it. “The progressives” of the nineteenth century no longer considered the family as a valuable asset. In the second half of the nineteenth century, the most coveted topic of literary discussion was about lust being greater than marriage. Every writer, beginning with Turgenev, wrote about it. Think of Anna Karenina from Tolstoy’s novel or Ekaterina Kabanova from Ostrovsky’s play. Or, we can look at the writers of the so-called Silver Age, or Alexander Blok and his poetry. Every new collection of poems he had published was dedicated to a new love interest. The writers of this type looked for inspiration in passions. They thought, family life with the mother-in-law and five children under one roof—what was there to write about?!

Dostoevsky, on the other hand, once life had chastened him, was able to combine literary success with happy family life. A lot of Slavophiles were able to combine both as well. Aksakov, Khomyakov, or Kireevsky were known to have had admirable families.

During Soviet times, the writers could not place such a strong emphasis on passions in their works as marriage was now called “the nucleus of society.” It so happened that Soviet literature, with the countryside writers in particular, brought the issue of family back into focus.

How did you become a Christian?

—My grandmother was a woman of faith and prayed for all of us. In the Soviet times, she used to host the Orthodox faithful in her home, and I remember how they sang the church hymns. The local authorities tried to prohibit such gatherings. But my grandmother said: “I am not going to listen to anyone.” So, she never paid attention to anyone and celebrated all major church feasts at her home. When I was around ten or twelve years old, she gave me the Gospels to read. Later, as I was growing up, everything that had to do with my grandmother was pushed to the sideline. I grew up during the 1970s known for the prevailing policy of state atheism. It was a time when I neither saw a priest nor opened the Bible. Then, perestroika came and it sent us all reeling. That is when I asked the ultimate question: What do we live for? If there is no communism, what can we expect in the future? You find the answers once you start asking the questions. Literature, my favorite subject at school, helped me to ask those questions. My favorite schoolteacher was Lira Mikhailovna, and she was the literature teacher, of course.

Is it the search for the meaning of life that brought you to Church?

—Well, somehow I kept searching intellectually. I begen to read a lot of books. I used to go shopping to our major local city of Nizhny Novgorod where I’d buy the Orthodox and philosophy books and then gobble them up. Later on, a wonderful priest from Moscow was appointed to serve at our village church in Prosek. As one of spiritual children of Father Mikhail Trukhanov, Fr. Vladimir Antipin became a rector of the local St. Nicholas the Wonderworker Church. Our priest had started as an altar attendant at the famous Vagankovskoye Cemetery church, working at the same time as a teacher of Descriptive Geometry at Moscow’s Forest Engineering Institute. He then made a conscious decision to leave Moscow for the provinces. He is a highly educated man. Had I not had his helping hand and teaching, there’d be no “A Rural Teacher’s Notebook.” He lives simply, like an ascetic. He is over eighty years old these days and I have been his spiritual son for the last quarter of a century.

What was the most important instruction you received from your spiritual father at the beginning of your life at church?

—Father told me: Every Sunday is for the church.

I’ve had Fr. Vladimir Antipin as my spiritual father for a quarter of a century. Father told me right away: You should be at church every Sunday!

You may stay home but only if you are bedridden. And, for the last 15 years or so, there wouldn’t be a single Sunday liturgy that I missed. We have a strict priest. God commanded us to observe the Lord’s Day. My life at church was the reason why “A Rural Teacher’s Notebook” turned out to have such an austere Orthodox viewpoint. I owe it also to Fr. Vladimir Antipin, our champion of asceticism.

There are people who are baptized yet they stay away from the church. Why?

—I think the main reason is that we crave the comfort of life. On the one hand, we want everyone to come to church. We know from the Gospels that the Lord fed five thousand people with a few loaves, but where did those crowds go next? They witnessed such miracles! But somehow there was practically no one left with the Lord on Golgotha.

A lot of people can complain of having a lack of time these days and how busy they are as in, “I do want to come to church but I just don’t have time for it”. People are tempted differently at various times. Comfort is today’s major temptation. If you live well, you will be in no hurry to come to church. My former students often visit me and ask: “Well, sure, I must go to church. I have been thinking about it for a while. But my life has gotten so busy. Construction, business, work…” We make our own choices, whereas God expects everyone to come to Him.

A new school year is about to begin, how do you feel about it?

—I prefer to look back and reflect on my own experiences at school. We yearned to enjoy friendships once more, as we hadn’t seen our school friends for the whole summer. September 1 is a holiday remembered for the girls’ white aprons, the flowers brought to teachers, the happy faces, and the love we all shared. Life moves forward, so there are some new traditions and then some that we have already lost. The kids talk less and less as they are preoccupied with their gadgets.

I’d like to wish that the development of effective teaching practices of our national pedagogics continued. We trusted our wonderful teachers. We walked hand in hand with them in our lives. I don’t know who taught whom better, they or us. It was as if we were together on a ship sailing along the sea of life. The teacher shouldn’t be turned into a manager but instead, remain a mentor and an older companion in learning.

What is the distinguishing characteristic of a modern child?

A child of today can easily switch back and forth between a teacher and his friends, or the Internet. If he doesn’t like something, he can instantly modify his online contacts. It is so detrimental to us as humans. We cannot exist in chaos and disorder. We live next to our loved ones and we take time to know them. This way, we learn to understand ourselves better. It is very good for us to hang around other people and rub shoulders with them as one team, be it at school, university, or at work.

Tatiana Medvedeva
spoke with Nikolai Lobastov
Translation by Liubov Ambrose

Pravoslavie.ru

10/6/2020

GOGOL Y SU FE ORTODOXA

 

Gogol’s Religious Views in His Book

“Selected Passages from Correspondence with Friends”

Nikolai Vasilyevich Gogol (April 1, 1809–February 21, 1852). Artist V. Savenkov. Oil on canvas. Reproduction/RIA “Novosti”Nikolai Vasilyevich Gogol (April 1, 1809–February 21, 1852). Artist V. Savenkov. Oil on canvas. Reproduction/RIA “Novosti”  

Selected Passages from Correspondence with Friends by Nikolai Vasilyevich Gogol was published on December 31, 1846. The author of this truly Christian book was a deeply religious man, a religious thinker and a publicist who authored several prayers. In his work, Gogol preached repentance and reconciliation between people of different worldviews. This book reflected Gogol’s concern for the fate of the people and the historical future of Russia. In his publicist collection, the great Russian writer came forward carrying the banner of Orthodoxy, Autocracy and Nationality—the three pillars that upheld the Russian state.

In his letters to friends, N.V. Gogol offers practical advice of various kinds. Thus, A.O. Smirnova-Rosset, the wife of the Governor of Kaluga and an old friend from his days in St. Petersburg, was advised to learn in greater detail about the life of the provincial city to which her fate has delivered her, as well as the way of life of local government officials and their wives, and also suggests that she engage in charitable activities. To a newly minted landowner he advises to get closer to his peasants who, by the will of God, found themselves under his authority; and so on. His advice focuses on finding ways to use one’s God-given talents and circumstances so that everyone in their respective places can serve the common good. As he hands out worldly advice to his friends, he cites the Holy Scripture like a true Christian, considering it to be the true and faithful guide in every endeavor, be it charitable work or the creation of a literary work.

Nikolai Vasilyevich Gogol at work in his study. Artist: Vasily VolkovNikolai Vasilyevich Gogol at work in his study. Artist: Vasily Volkov  

In the preface, N.V. Gogol complains about his illness (in the spring of 1845 he had a bout of “nervous disorder”, or depression) and adds that he felt so bad that he even made a will in which he wrote:

“Compatriots! I loved you—I loved you with inexpressible love, the one I received from God, for which I thank Him as for the best blessing, because this love brought joy and comfort to me in the midst of the gravest of sufferings… The heavenly grace of God turned the hand of death away from me.”

This powerful bout of illness contributed to his spiritual rebirth as it made him see his past life and work in a different light

Gogol believes that the illness he had endured contributed to his spiritual rebirth and made him evaluate his past life and work in a different light. It became a major turning point in his life. The Church teaches us that sometimes the Lord sends afflictions to edify us, because illness truly gives a man the chance to get away from the vanity of this world, to analyze how one spent his life, and see the mistakes of the past; illness is a lesson in humility.

“Oh, how much we need our infirmities! Of the many benefits I have already derived from them, I’ll point out just one for you: Whoever I am now, I’m still a better man than I was before… I cannot find words to thank our Providential God enough for my illness,” Gogol writes.

After recovery, his religious feeling grew more intense.

In Gogol’s time, the Russian Church was being attacked by Western clergy who accused our Church of lifelessness. “They told lies, because our Church is life,” Gogol wrote. In his opinion, the Russian Orthodox clergy, with “dignified calm,” is preparing to give a worthy response to such attacks.

“I know full well that in the depths of the monasteries and in the silence of the cells, the compelling writings in defense of our Church are currently in the making… They take their time and, knowing what is required of such matter, they do their work with deep calm, in prayer and self-edification, driving out of their soul anything that is passionate, that resembles an ill timed, delirious fever, elevating their soul to the height of heavenly dispassion it was designed to have—all in order to be in a position to talk about such a subject…”

Based on some of the Gogol’s statements, it becomes obvious that already at the end of the first half of the nineteenth century, religion ceased to be a priority for the “enlightened” Russian society.

“The society (privileged circles—M.T.) is unable to meet directly with Christ. It is far removed from the heavenly truths of Christianity. It is frightened of them.”

After that, he continues with inspirational verses about the Orthodox Church:

“We possess a treasure that is priceless… Like a chaste virgin, this Church alone has been preserved without blemish in its original purity from the times of the Apostles. This Church alone, with its profound dogmas and even its slightest external rites, as if has descended directly from heaven for the Russian people, and She alone is capable of solving all of our points of confusion and answering all our questions. She alone can work an unheard-of miracle in the sight of all Europe, forcing every class, rank, and position in our country to enter their lawful bounds and limits, and, without changing anything in the state, enable Russia to astonish the whole world with the harmonious orderliness of the same system that up till now has frightened everyone—this is the Church that we fail to know!.. With our lives we must defend our Church, which is Life; with the fragrance of our souls we must proclaim its truth.”

The author of Selected Passages… speaks of the Church as the propitiator of all things in Russia

Gogol discusses this further in his letter to V.A. Zhukovsky, where the author of Selected Passages… speaks of the Church as the propitiator of all things in Russia.

“It is now preparing to come into its own and shine its light over the whole earth. It contains everything that is necessary for a truly Russian life through and through, from the affairs of the state to simple familial relations, giving energy and direction, and a lawful and true way to everything. For me, even any suggestion to introduce a new practice in Russia while bypassing our Church and without asking for Her blessing, is insane. It is absurd to implant European ideas even in our thoughts, until such time as She blesses them with the light of Christ.”

Pyotr Geller. Nikolai Gogol and Vasily Zhukovsky visit Alexander Pushkin in Tsarskoye Selo (fragment). 1910. Image: pouchkin.comPyotr Geller. Nikolai Gogol and Vasily Zhukovsky visit Alexander Pushkin in Tsarskoye Selo (fragment). 1910. Image: pouchkin.com  

The society of the time voiced criticisms towards the clergy for their withdrawal from public and political issues and that the government limited their participation in public life. In his “Letter to Ct. A. P. T…” Gogol expresses his opinion on this issue: our priests are not to be a part of meetings and “promenades,” as

“The clergy are facing many temptations, even many more than us… Our clergy have two legitimate spheres where they meet us: Confession and sermons… It is good that they differ from us even in their clothing. Their garments are beautiful and dignified. This makes sense: they are made in the image and likeness of the garments worn by the Savior Himself. It is necessary that even by wearing those very clothes they should carry with them an eternal reminder of Him Whose image they are to present to us, so that even for a moment they don’t forget and lose it among the gaiety and vain demands of society; because of them will be required a thousand times more than of any of us. They are to hear unceasingly that they are akin to a different kind of people, and are superior, as well.”

In his “Letter to Sh…v,” entitled “A Christian Goes Forward” Gogol writes that a true Christian must struggle with his shortcomings to the end of his days, that “the further he goes, the smarter he becomes” (in other words, older—M.T.).” Only those “who have not neglected their inward education” possessed intelligence… As for wisdom, we “can receive it from Christ alone.” It “is the work of divine grace from heaven… and you can’t receive it in any other way than by praying about it day and night.” When man finally receives wisdom, the “heavenly life begins for him and he perceives all the wondrous sweetness of being a disciple.” Man becomes a disciple of everything and everyone, and “the whole universe will be before him like an open book of teaching.” Man must strive to find Christ through His Church, and, by way of repentance, to restore the image of God in himself.

“A Christian will show, above all, his humility, his chief banner, and by that alone one can learn he is a Christian,” Gogol writes in another letter.

He admonishes S.P. Shevyrev:

“I don’t even know if there exists a reproach that you wouldn’t reproach yourself with, if only you could look close enough… In any case, never take your eyes off yourself…. Take care of yourself first, and then others; become more pure in your spirit first, and only then try to make others more pure.”

This statement is in keeping with the famous revelation of St. Seraphim of Sarov about the acquisition of the Holy Spirit as the goal of Christian life.

Gogol believed that everything is founded on moral principles. Christ was his moral ideal. He wanted to bring people to Him by correcting their weaknesses by way of cleansing the soul of each individual from impure thoughts and deeds. In his letter on Dead Souls, Gogol wrote:

“So much is lurking at the bottom of our souls: all that nothingness, pitiful self-love, or our delicate, wretched ambition, that we should be constantly pierced, stricken, beaten by all available means, and yet we should continually thank the hand that strikes us.”

“Thanks to the heavenly love of God,” as Gogol himself put it, he was made worthy to see his own sinful passions with which he waged unceasing struggle.

“I am like a vessel that contains all kinds of filthy things, and in such a great number that I have not encountered in anyone else before. God made me an all-round person. He also planted several good qualities in my soul from birth, but the best one of them, for which I can’t thank Him enough, was the desire to be my absolute best.”

A lot of spiritual effort was spent by this true Christian to know his soul and to eradicate his passions

One can become his absolute best only if he joins in the church life in Christ. Much spiritual effort was spent by this true Christian to know his soul and to eradicate his passions. Gogol confesses to a friend:

“I love good, I am seeking it and I am dying for it; but I do not love my abominations… I do not love those abominations of mine that distance me from good. I am at war with them and will I keep up the fight, I will drive them away, and God will help me in this.”

Gogol seriously considered leaving the vanity of the world and retiring to a monastery.1

“There is no other rank so lofty as that of a monk, and may God someday make us worthy to put on the plain cassock of a monk, so desirable to my soul, and of which a mere thought gives me joy. But it cannot be done without the call of God. To have such right to abandon the world, one should know how to give up the world.”

The Optina elder Fr. Makary, known for his clairvoyance, did not bless him to step on this path.

No matter what Gogol wrote about, he always directed his reader’s attention to God. In a letter to V.A. Zhukovsky, “On the lyricism of our poets,” Gogol writes that our native poetry is all imbued with spirituality, because, like the Russian soul, it feels its connection with God.

“There is something special in the lyricism of our poets that poets of other nations do not possess; namely, something akin to biblical… to the supreme triumph of spiritual sobriety.”

This is especially evident when our poets write about their beloved Russia, as if they feel

“the supreme Providence, which is so clearly seen in the fate of our Motherland… Russia, more than others, feels the hand of God in everything that becomes a reality in it and senses the approach of another Kingdom.”

Gogol has his own vision of a writer’s vocation. He urges the poet N.M. Yazykov:

“Kneel before God and ask Him for wrath and love! Wrath against what destroys man and love for the wretched soul of man, which is being destroyed from all sides and which he is destroying himself.”

Gogol’s God-given talent as a writer and his religious gifts placed a great responsibility on him, which Gogol himself felt.

“God created me and He didn’t hide my predestination from me. I certainly wasn’t born to epoch-making work in the literary field… My job is the soul and the lasting work of life.”

However, he mistakenly considered art as a force capable not only of morally influencing life, but also of transforming the world. Towards the end of his life, Gogol had doubts about the usefulness of his writing profession and about the educational function of belles-lettres.

Gogol did not approve of revolutions, seeing in them only destruction and chaos. He recognized the legitimacy of the existing institution of government; for him, the legitimacy of autocratic power was indisputable. At the same time, he pinned his hopes on the wisdom and humanity of a Christian monarch.

“A state without a plenipotent monarch is the same as an orchestra without a bandmaster,” Gogol argues. “The monarch, as the Lord’s Anointed, is obliged to lead the people entrusted to him toward the light in which God dwells… Only there will the people be entirely healed, where the monarch fully perceives his supreme authority to be God’s representation on earth, as God is love Himself… No other Imperial House has ever been founded so remarkably as the House of Romanov. Its very founding was already a feat of love… Love has entered our blood and we have been made kinsmen of the Tsar.”

Gogol echoes the thought of the holy Apostle Paul that there is no power but of God (Romans 13:1) and so the Tsar is to be honored as the Lord’s Anointed who will be accountable to God for the country and its people entrusted to him. Elsewhere Gogol criticizes social ills: bribery, injustice, lawlessness—and calls on his countrymen to save Russia from them. He says that the government continues to issue decrees aimed at eradicating evil from society, but, as a rule, these decrees aren’t executed, because those who are called to serve the people care only about their personal interests, and the public good doesn’t interest them.

The main idea of his homilies was the necessity to build the life not only of every man, but also of the whole society and the state according to the commandments of God. It is impossible to solve a single problem of Russian life without Orthodoxy; it is the way to improve life on earth. Therefore, from the peasant to the highest officials and the Tsar himself—everyone must honestly and selflessly fulfill their duty towards Russia, working, each in his own field, for the good of the Motherland.

Society had a mixed reaction to the publication of the new book by Gogol, who considered it the most useful and the best of his works, “a truly practical book.” The Holy Hierarchs Philaret (Drozdov) and Innocent (Borisov), and Archimandrite Theodore (Bukharev) 2 spoke favorably about it. The writers F.V. Bulgarin, P.A. Vyazemsky, and A.A. Grigoriev expressed their appreciation. The democratic camp, led by the critic V.G. Belinsky, sharply condemned Selected Passages from Correspondence with Friends detecting in it nothing but praise for the Tsar and serfdom. Belinsky first wrote a small review, published in Sovremennik (“The Contemporary”, 1847, Vol. 1, No. 2), in which, for censorship reasons, he only expressed his negative attitude toward Gogol’s work. In response, Gogol sent him a letter where he wrote that the critic had misunderstood him because he had not delved deeper into the content of the book. Then Belinsky, who was abroad at the time where he no longer feared censorship, wrote his famous “Letter to Gogol,” in which he excoriates the writer for his alleged apology of serfdom and autocracy.3

Boris Lebedev. Critic Vissarion Belinsky and Nikolai Gogol (fragment). Postcard from the series “V.G. Belinsky in drawings by B. Lebedev.” Moscow: Art, 1948Boris Lebedev. Critic Vissarion Belinsky and Nikolai Gogol (fragment). Postcard from the series “V.G. Belinsky in drawings by B. Lebedev.” Moscow: Art, 1948  

At the time of its writing, Belinsky was already a convinced atheist. Although he acknowledges the historicity of Christ and recognizes the Christian doctrine as “the doctrine of liberty, equality and fraternity,” he sharply criticizes the Russian clergy, far-removed, in his opinion, from true Christianity. Gogol replies:

“You separate the Church from Christ and Christianity, the very Church and the very shepherds who by their martyrdom have sealed the truth of every word of Christ, who died by the thousands under the knives and swords of murderers, praying for them. Finally, they exhausted their executioners, so that the victors fell at the feet of the vanquished and the whole world professed this word…”

“A preacher of the Eastern Church,” Gogol continues his thought, “must preach with his life and deeds… I have known many bad priests… But I have also met those whose holiness of life and deeds I marveled at, and I saw that they were the creation of our Eastern Church, not the Western one. Therefore, I certainly did not think of singing praises to the clergy who disgraced our Church, but those who exalted our Church.”

Belinsky considers Russians to be a deeply atheistic people. Gogol raises an objection to him; in his opinion, the Russian people are the most religious in the world, which

“is eloquently testified to by the thousands of churches and monasteries spread all over the Russian land. They are built not by the gifts of the rich, but by the poor mites of the needy, the very people who, as you describe it, speak disrespectfully of God, but who share their last kopecks with the destitute and with God, suffering the deep poverty of which we are so aware—in order to be able to bring eager repentance to God.”

Belinsky angrily scolds Gogol for allegedly praising autocracy in his book. Gogol replies to him:

“You thought you saw lies in my words to the Emperor, where I remind him of the sanctity of his rank and his high duties. What a stern answer will be required of him… He has received a difficult and terrible lot—to care for millions.”

He didn’t call to a struggle, but to self-improvement, preaching Orthodox humility and self-denial

In the eternal question of mankind about the eradication of world evil, Gogol stood on the position of spiritual absolution of human souls, seeing in it a pathway to change social existence for the better. Gogol, a true Christian, could not, like Chernyshevsky, exhort Russia to go “to the axe.” He called not to seek struggle, but self-improvement, preaching Orthodox humility and self-denial. “We all need more humility,” he wrote to Belinsky.

Gogol poured his heart into this legendary book and he took his critic’s merciless verdict on it very hard.

“You looked at my book with the eyes of an angry man and therefore accepted everything in a different way… Your mouth breathes bile and hatred… Why should you plunge into this abyss of politics, in these murky events of today…? You will burn down like a candle, and burn others.”

V.G. Belinsky found himself powerless to understand the novelty of many of the issues raised by the writer. He did not perceive the inspirational patriotic motives of the book, a passionate yearning for the spiritual renewal of man and the perfection of society on the basis of the commandments of the Gospel. Belinsky’s social-reformist views as a revolutionary critic were alien to Gogol, who believed that no social improvement was possible without Christian spiritual education and moral self-improvement. The writer gave advice to his friends in spiritual terms, whereas Belinsky criticizes Gogol from a socio-political standpoint. These opponents deliberated using differing languages. Many of Gogol’s precepts are significant for our time as well, and thus we can confidently assert that our brilliant Russian writer Nikolai Vasilyevich Gogol was proven right in this polemic.

Maria Tobolova
Translation by Liubov Ambrose

Pravoslavie.ru

4/1/2025

1 Gogol’s sister, Anna Vasilyevna, wrote to Vladimir Shenrok, the writer’s biographer, that her brother “dreamed about settling down in Optina Monastery.”

2 Holy Hierarch Ignatius (Brianchaninov) criticized Gogol for his excessive arrogance, excessive pretense to the role of preacher and teacher of life, seeing in this certain symptoms of prelest, or delusion.

3 In Soviet times, the school curriculum included “Belinsky’s Letter to Gogol” where V.G. Belinsky pounced on this classic of our literature in connection with the publication of his book, Selected Passages from Correspondence with Friends. Schoolchildren studied this seething letter, but they never saw Gogol’s text at which it was aimed. Meanwhile, it is known for a fact that you cannot trust a one-sided opinion if you don’t know the opponent’s point of view. The Soviet atheistic authorities were afraid of letting the country’s young generation read the Gogol’s religious book. But even to this day, in my opinion, critics have not been able to seriously explore and comprehend this work by Gogol. This book awaits its researcher.