Count Leo Tolstoy, the Russian author, philosopher, and religionist, writes an interesting and instructive article in The Independent upon the subject of his recent excommunication from the Russian church. The article is in the nature of a reply to the Synod's decision and is also explanatory of Tolstoy's religious views. Inasmuch as the questions involved are general, and the case of Tolstoy, in some sense, international in its scope, it is of sufficient interest to all, including Christian Scientists, to warrant a brief study of the situation. It is more than probable that by this action in Tolstoy's case, a wave of religious thinking has been set in motion, the far-reaching effects of which in Russia and elsewhere, can now scarcely be conjectured.
The Count complains that the decision of the Synod is illegal in that it does not correspond with the church rules according to which such an excommunication may be pronounced. "If," says the Count, "it is but a declaration that he who does not believe in the church and its dogmas, does not belong to the church, such a declaration can have no other purpose than to seem to be an excommunication when it is not so in fact."
He further avers that the decision, as made, was an incitement to bad feeling and bad action, since it called forth among unenlightened and unreasoning people anger and hatred toward him, which went so far as threats of murder.
One of his correspondents writes: "Now you have been anathematized and will after death go to eternal torment, and die like a dog. May you be anathema, you old devil! May you be damned!" Another reproaches the Government for not having yet incarcerated him in a monastery, and fills his letter with invective. A third writes: "If the Government will not get rid of you, we will ourselves force you to silent;" and the message ends with maledictions. "I can find means," writes a fourth, "to exterminate you, you blackguard!" and indecent abuse follows.
He thus quotes from the Synod's decision: "The universally known writer, Count Tolstoy a Russian by birth, orthodox by baptism and training, seduced by pride of intellect, has insolently rebelled against God and his Christ and all his inheritance, and has openly before the whole world forsworn the Orthodox Church, his mother, which nurtured him and brought him up."
He also says: "It is also said that I 'disown God, the Creator and Preserver of the world, worshiped in the Holy Trinity, also the Lord Jesus Christ, the God-Man, the Redeemer and Saviour of the world, who suffered for us men and our salvation, who rose from the dead, and the immaculate conception of our Lord Christ in his humanity and the virginity, before and after the birth of Christ, of our most pure Lady.' "
In view of these severe strictures and anathematisms, it is worth while to inquire what the Count's religious views are. In his article he thus speaks of the doctrine of the Trinity: "That I reject the inconceivable Trinity and the fable of the fall of the first man,—a fable which has no sense in our times, the sacrilegious story of a God born of a virgin and redeeming mankind, is quite true. But the God-spirit, God-love, the One God, the source of everything, I not only do not reject, but, on the contrary, I do not acknowledge anything really existing besides God, and I see all the meaning of life in the fulfilment of the will of God as expressed in the teaching of Christianity."
As to eternal punishment he thus defines his belief: "It is also said of me: 'He does not acknowledge the future life with its rewards and punishments.' If the hereafter is to be understood in the sense of the second Advent, of hell with eternal torment and devils, and a paradise with constant bliss, then it is quite true that I do not acknowledge such a future life. But eternal life with reward and punishment here and everywhere, however, I do acknowledge to such an extent that, standing as I do at my age on the verge of the grave, I must very often make efforts not to wish to die in the flesh, that is, to be born to a new life, and I do believe that every good action increases the good of my eternal life, while every evil deed diminishes it."
As to the church sacraments he admits his rejection of them, considering them formal and inefficacious.
As a final summing up of his religious belief the Count briefly says: "Here is what I do believe: I believe in God, whom I understand as Spirit, as Love, and as the source of everything. I believe that he is in me, and I in him. I believe that the will of God has been expressed in the clearestand most intelligible way in the teaching of the man Christ, to conceive of whom as God and to pray to him I consider the greatest sacrilege. I believe that the real happiness of man consists in the fulfilment of God's will, while the will of God consists in men loving one another, and therefore acting toward others as they wish that others should act toward them, as it is said in the Gospel that in this consists all the law of the prophets. I believe that the meaning of every man's life thus consists in increasing love within himself; that that increase of love leads the individual man to greater and greater happiness in this life, and will give after death the greater happiness the more love there is in the man. At the same time it helps on more than anything else the establishment in the world of the kingdom of God, that is such a structure of life that discord, deceit, and violence which now reign will be replaced by free consent, truth and fraternal love among men. I believe that there is only one means for the progress of love—prayer, not that public prayer in temples which was directly forbidden by Christ (Matthew, 6: 5—13), but the prayer the example of which was given us by Christ; prayer in solitude, consisting in the renovation and strengthening in our consciousness of the meaning of our lives, as also of our dependence on God's will alone."
In conclusion, the Count thus defines his feelings and his position: "I do not say that my religion is the only one true for all times, but I do not see any other one more simple, clearer, more responding to the requirements of my intellect and my heart. If ever I should learn of such an one I should immediately adopt it, because truth is the only thing God desires. But I cannot return to what I have emerged from with such sufferings, as a winged bird cannot return to the shell of the egg out of which it has come. 'He who begins by loving Christianity better than truth, very soon proceeds to love his own Church or sect better than Christianity, and ends in loving himself better than all,' said Coleridge. I went the opposite way. I began by loving my orthodox faith better than my own peace, then I began to love Christianity more than my Church, now I love truth more than anything else in the world."
It is evident that Count Tolstoy is a sincere and conscientious follower of the teachings of Jesus as he best understands them, and that while following such teachings to his best understanding he holds his mind open to such further revelation of divine Truth as may come to him. It is also evident that he is a firm believer in the Fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man, which is the great essential of religion and the goal of a true Christianity.
It seems incredible that such a man should be excommunicated from and anathematized by any Church claiming the life and teaching of Jesus Christ as the basis of its doctrine, and that such religious conceptions as those held by Tolstoy, should be condemned as un-Christian and unchurchly.
As we have said, there is a vital significance involved in this event, and its effect upon the future history of religion in Russia, as well as in the world, cannot now be predicted.
Discriminating minds will have no difficulty in drawing some striking analogies between Tolstoy's experiences and their own. Nor will religious reformers fail to recognize the fact that he is but meeting the same spirit of intolerance and bigotry that characterized their own advanced thought and reformatory work.
Christian Scientists will readily see how nearly akin to the persecution of Tolstoy has been that waged against Christian Science by some religionists of the United States. If the carnal mind, in the name of Religion and the Church, could have full sway, it would indeed be dangerous to adopt into daily life and make practical the real teachings of Jesus.
Fortunately stereotyped and ceremonial religion is becoming less and less able to dictate, while the truer and better conception of the Christianity of Christ is becoming more and more potential and operative.
