Os três diálogos e o relato do anticristo

by Vladimir Sergeyevich Solovyov

Os três diálogos sobre a guerra, o progresso e o fim da história universal, com um breve relato sobre o anticristo é o título desta última e mais célebre obra de Vladimir Soloviev. Ele apresenta o problema do mal na história e supõe, numa descrição ficcional, os grandes conflitos e guerras que precederiam o advento do anticristo. Elabora, ao fim, uma narrativa das realidades últimas do Novo Testamento, sobretudo do Apocalipse de São João. Seu objetivo é apresentar uma escatologia radicalmente oposta ao progressismo e ao humanismo, a fim de convencer e reconduzir as almas enganadas. O autor evidencia, então, a face do anticristo na modernidade secularizada, que, com uma nova doutrina, leva ao esquecimento de Cristo, revelando a natureza diabólica de seus pretensos valores de filantropia, paz, progresso, bem-estar e pluralismo.

Genres: Philosophy, Fiction, Russia, Religion, Russian Literature, Short Stories, Theology

168 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1900

About the author

Vladimir Sergeyevich Solovyov (Russian: Владимир Сергеевич Соловьёв) was a Russian philosopher, theologian, poet, pamphleteer and literary critic, who played a significant role in the development of Russian philosophy and poetry at the end of the 19th century and in the spiritual renaissance of the early 20th century.

Reviews

[BlackOxford · Rating 5 out of 5]

The Coming Man

All doctrinal religions have the same problem: the Eternal Word of God is indistinguishable from the rather more transient words of Man. Put another, more practical way: if morality is divinely directed, we are all in deep trouble because when morality is derived from doctrine, the devil may well be speaking. If morality isn’t applied to the voices of revelation instead of vice versa, evil appears as good. Morality subservient to revelation provides the opening for The Coming Man, that slick talking, best-selling, inspirational huckster with a self-proclaimed direct link to heaven.

Mystics like Solovyev know this as a fundamental if unspoken principle. They mistrust language, and the responses that language elicits. They understand that language is defective, that it cannot represent reality much less divinity. Whenever language is used to claim ‘truth,’ it is always used falsely. The Coming Man may make a plausible argument; he may touch hearts; he may unify constituencies. But he can only do this through the abuse of language as something more than it is.

The message of the mystic is always simple and simply behavioural: be kind. But even this primitive message is trapped by language. Those who are unkind point out that we don’t know what kindness means in specific circumstances, that we must define and codify its essentials and apply these intelligently to the problems at hand. So as soon as the mystic’s message is discussed rather than acted upon, it is lost. The Coming Man can dispose of him with a glance.

When morality is subject to divine revelation, it quickly degenerates into economics. The Invisible Hand of Adam Smith is a presumption not a conclusion. As Max Weber suggested, it is not accidental that capitalism arose out of Protestant Christianity. If God is beneficent, his will should not be anticipated or impeded by commercial restraints. Each individual has an absolute duty to listen to the voice in his head. God will ensure, as Leibniz theorised, that the voices are coordinated. The result is not just the greatest good for the greatest number; it is the Good tout court. This is what The Coming Man preaches so effectively.

Many read Solovyev’s story as a prediction of forthcoming events in the 20th century, and marvel at his prescience. This is misdirected, if not downright silly. The fact that he is wrong as a seer as often as he is right is conveniently ignored. Like all mystics, he read his times not the future. And he read his times in terms of what he knew of the past. And what he knew of the past was the co-optation of primitive Christianity by the decaying Roman State. His is a tale of what could have been not what would be. What could have been was a Christian religious community not only independent of the state, but even more importantly independent of divisive doctrine.

The Coming Man is an avatar of Constantine the Great (although he could well be confused with Trump). It is he who calls together a Council of the various Christian sects at Jerusalem in Solovyev’s tale. And it is he who decides upon the language by which they will all be unified under his leadership - just as Constantine had done in the 5th century. With his direction doctrinal conformity triumphs over ethical solidarity. What matters is not kindness as expressed in the Beatitudes, but correctness of religious confession in the manner of St. Paul.*

The rebellion against the The Coming Man for Sol0vyev comes not from Christians, who laud his linguistic achievement in uniting their sects, but from the Jews, who recognise his bad behaviour (among other things The Coming Man is uncircumcised). Judaism, of course, is an ethical religion of behaviour not of doctrinal faith. It is a religion in which ethical and spiritual concepts emerged together. It is also a religion whose mythical heroes are mystics not theologians. One such mystic, Job, makes it clear that Judaism stands firmly against The Coming Man, even if he claims to be divine. Job argues with God; he doesn’t passively accept what he has to say. Neither does Solovyev.

* Interestingly, even the confession of the ‘name of Jesus’ results in supernatural action to strike down the confessors. Although they are later found to be alive, Solovyev is ambiguous about the spiritual worth of even this linguistic expression.

[María Carpio · Rating 4 out of 5]

Es un 4.5. Se trata de una especie de diálogo platónico (un tratado filosófico con contexto dramático) en el que se revela una narración distópica sobre la Parusía (segunda venida de Cristo) y la previa llegada del Anticristo. Esto tanto en sentido figurado como literal (aunque más simbólico que nada), en el que Soloviev deposita una visión profética de Europa en el siglo XX, tomando en cuenta que esta obra fue publicada cerrando el siglo XIX. Lo que en boca de cinco personajes reflexiona Soloviev abarca desde la política hasta la espiritualidad en tres diálogos y un último relato que cierra la unidad de sentido de todos los diálogos. El origen del mal, la guerra, el pacifismo, el bien aparente versus el verdadero bien, y el vacío y sinsentido en el que la sociedad secularizada occidental se ha sumergido. La necesidad del ecumenismo como solución a la división político-ideológico-espiritual de Europa. Aquí hay una Unión Europea distópica, surgida luego de una invasión oriental. Luego, la venida de el superhombre, que cree ser el verdadero mesías, quien logra convertirse en el Emperador de esa nueva Europa. Este hombre, el "hombre nuevo", busca el ecumenismo y exhorta a todas las iglesias cristianas a unirse bajo el gobierno del Papa Católico. Pero SU Papa Católico, que resulta ser un taumaturgo.Tras algunas muertes y resurrecciones, insurrección de los judíos, y una guerra, finalmente se establece la paz, claro, con la llegada del verdadero Cristo. Este relato es contado por uno de los personajes, el Señor Z, especie de avatar de Soloviev, para graficar que no todo lo que parece bueno es bueno. El falso bien (que hoy podría identificarse con el "buenismo"). Ello porque según uno de los interlocutores, el Anticristo del relato hacía el bien (al alentar el ecumenismo) pero odiaba a Dios.

Dos datos extra: Soloviev se oponía al pensamiento de Lev Tolstói (y este libro casi va con dedicatoria a él). Soloviev creía en El ecumenismo y aseguraba que la solución para Rusia era que la Iglesia Ortodoxa Rusa se uniera de nuevo a la Iglesia Católica Romana. Y finalmente, Dostoievski se inspira en Soloviev para crear el personaje de Aleksei (Aliosha) en Los hermanos Karamázov.

[G · Rating 5 out of 5]

Cuento apocalíptico de espíritu eslavo, es decir, extremista. Parusía hardcore de una especie rara de escritor, un Newman ruso. La forma literaria es tan extraña como el contenido. Me imagino una película de este libro, pero filmada en lenguaje formalista. Rayos fulminantes, el cielo rojo. Los truenos despiertan volcanes. La mujer vestida de sol. La tierra se traga la bestia. También podría ser una película de Ed Wood Jr. Los pasajes de la posesión diabólica al comienzo del libro parecen escritos por Dostoievski, al que Soloviev llamó el Dante ruso.

[Ines · Rating 5 out of 5]

CAPOLAVORO!!!!

[Fer de Uña · Rating 5 out of 5]

Esta obra del genial filósofo ruso Soloviev me ha dejado con una sensación extrañísima, una mezcla de desasosiego e inquietud, pero curiosamente ha acrecentado mi Esperanza.

La obra consta de dos partes claramente diferenciadas; la primera parte la constituyen tres diálogos, en los que Soloviev conduce al lector a través de una reflexión sobre el bien, la paz, la verdad, el progreso, la historia... a través de varios personajes: un general, representante del viejo orden, cristiano corriente y práctico; un político, agnóstico y relativista; un noble, representante de un cristianismo descafeinado y connivente con el poder; la anfitriona, una señora de ideas tradicionales contaminadas por su poca base; y el señor Z, que representa el propio Soloviev. A pesar de estar escritos en el siglo XIX, se pueden ver reflejadas en todos ellos las ideas que, por desgracia, son cada vez más imperantes en nuestros tiempos: buenismo, pacifismo, progresismo, etc.

La segunda parte es el relato del Anticristo. A pesar de ser una parte claramente diferenciada de la obra, los diálogos conducen y sientan las bases para esta. En esta parte se narra el ascenso y triunfo en la historia del Anticristo, tal y como se imaginaba Soloviev que sería. Lo más inquietante de todo es que buena parte de los hechos que profetizó el ruso se está cumpliendo, a veces incluso de manera literal. La obra abrirá los ojos a muchos cristianos, porque los acontecimientos actuales se están precipitando de tal manera que es difícil negar su carácter profético. Afortunadamente la obra finaliza con Esperanza, claro, dado que lógicamente el triunfo del Anticristo es acontecimiento previo a la Segunda Venida; de ahí la mezcla de sensaciones que causará al lector.

[dely · Rating 3 out of 5]

Solovyov ha scritto questi tre dialoghi e il racconto dell'anticristo come risposta a Tolstoj e alla sua concezione di cristianesimo. Ci va giù molto pesante arrivando al punto di dire che la "religione" di Tolstoj sarà quella dell'anticristo.
In passato avevo letto alcuni libri di Tolstoj e avevo apprezzato soprattutto quelli in cui parla di religione, anzi, di cristianesimo. Per me Il regno di Dio è in voi è stata una lettura stupenda, meravigliosa, da consigliare a chiunque. Nella mia ignoranza non ho notato un minuscolo dettaglio che però non è sfuggito a Solovyov, ovvero che Tolstoj priva il cristianesimo di Cristo. Ciò significa che non si tratta più di cristianesimo, ma di una religione nuova. Effettivamente, ora che ci ripenso, Tolstoj aveva letto e amava la Bhagavad Gita, ha mantenuto un'amicizia epistolare con Gandhi con cui condivideva il concetto di non-violenza, aveva la sua comunità in cui si viveva di ciò che si coltivava. Ora che Solovyov mi ha aperto gli occhi, posso dire che l'interpretazione del cristianesimo di Tolstoj mi era piaciuta così tanto proprio perché aveva attinenze con l'induismo e lo yoga. Tolstoj aveva indubbiamente solo buone intenzioni e si rifà soprattutto al concetto di "ama il tuo prossimo come te stesso", era contrario alla guerra e al servizio militare, era per la disobbedienza civile, etc. In due parole, è stato il precursore degli hippie! Per la carità, non faceva del male a nessuno, anzi, voleva una religione del "volemose bene", buttiamo giù le frontiere, siamo tutti fratelli. Sono concetti apprezzabili, però non è più cristianesimo se togli di mezzo Gesù Cristo. Ecco, secondo Solovyov Tolstoj avrebbe fatto meglio a dare un nome a questa sua nuova religione piuttosto che confondere le persone spacciando le sue opinioni per un'interpretazione dei vangeli.

Come si evince dal titolo, il libro contiene tre dialoghi. Questi avvengono tra un generale, un politico, un signor z, un principe e una signora. Ognuno esprime la propria opinione su concetti che erano stati trattati anche da Tolstoj e ne nasce un dibattito che va avanti per tre dialoghi. Nel racconto finale, invece, si ha la venuta dell'anticristo, che secondo Solovyov è (all'apparenza) una brava persona, un filantropo, vegetariano e ambientalista, che ha una visione ecumenica del mondo. Ama tutti, aiuta tutti, si fa voler bene da tutti e in questo modo riesce ad ingannare (quasi) tutti con la sua aria da buonista e pacifista.

[Stephen · Rating 3 out of 5]

Vladimir Sergeyevich Solovyev (1853-1900) was a Russian theologian, philosopher, poet, and literary critic. His photograph in Wikipedia looks very much like the photograph of a 19th century Russian theologian, philosopher, poet and literary critic. He was born and baptized in the Russian Orthodox Church, renounced Orthodoxy, and embraced Roman Catholicism, supporting the reunion of Eastern and Western Christianity as well as Papal supremacy. Others have described him as a mystic and that trait is certainly evident in The Tale of the Anti-Christ. His writing reminded me (albeit in translation) of British author Charles W.S. Williams. Drawing upon Saint John of Patmos' visions in the Book of Revelation, Solovyev imagines the coming of the Anti-Christ in the 20th century. The Anti-Christ is ever so attractive: a a pacifist, a spiritualist, a philanthropist, a pacifist, a vegetarian, an environmentalist, a defender of animal rights, and an ecumenist. He is able to reduce the Gospel to Christless humanitarian cultural action. His depiction is too accurate not to be upsetting. Solovyev is a “Russian figure of extraordinary depth,” St. John Paul II said during his Angelus of July 30, 2000. Italian Cardinal Giacomi Biffi led a papal retreat for the Pope and top Vatican officials in 2007 in which he used Solovyev's Anti-Christ as the basis from which to develop his themes. I'm not at all sure that I fully understand it but I am glad that I read it.

[Antonio Gallo · Rating 4 out of 5]

Ho letto soltanto "Il Racconto dell’Anticristo". E' un testo che continua a inquietare per la chiaroveggenza con cui ci rivela il volto – o, meglio, uno dei volti – dell’Anticristo nell’epoca moderna. Il suo Anticristo irrompe in una storia umana desacralizzata, svuotata di orizzonti trascendenti, agendo nel vuoto, in una frammentazione orizzontale di religioni, culture, popoli, accogliendo ogni aspetto del reale ma spogliandolo al tempo stesso del suo significato essenziale. In questo senso l’Anticristo di Solov’ëv, portatore di un’ideologia conciliatrice, ‘inclusiva’, capace di una quasi infinita capacità di allontanamento dalla Verità, appare particolarmente attuale e minaccioso oggi, nell’odierno deserto del senso e dei valori ....

La figura dell’Anticristo è presente, da quasi duemila anni, nelle culture di matrice giudaico-cristiana, e quindi anche nella tradizione musulmana, come immagine potente del male travestito da bene, e quindi ancora più pericoloso perché ingannatore. Sono sempre pochi gli eroi positivi che riescono a smascherarlo — cioè a vederlo con occhi diversi da quelli che lui stesso ha manipolato — e sono gli stessi che riusciranno a cacciarlo definitivamente dal mondo ...

[Timothy Hayes · Rating 3 out of 5]

The most interesting thing about it is, that it was written in 1900.

[Fernando José · Rating 4 out of 5]

Muy recomendable.

[Patafisico · Rating 4 out of 5]

Obra sorprendente, por su actualidad y lo premonitorio de muchos de sus planteamientos, más allá del fondo y de la proposición teológica que lo inspira y lo recorre de principio a fin, la lucha del Bien contra el Mal. Solovyov se anticipa en sus diálogos a cuestiones troncales que gobiernan la sociedad europea del siglo XXI: una Europa ya concebida como una unión de Estados, una concepción del progreso que se mira con cierto pesimismo, el significado de la guerra en estos tiempos, la amenaza de la alteridad o, desde su perspectiva local, el lugar de Rusia dentro de esa ecuación, entre otros asuntos que hoy se podrían corroborar como hechos probados o cuestiones que conciernen directamente a nuestro siglo.
Descubrí, por cierto, a Solovyov a partir el filme de Christi Puiu, Malmkrog (2020), adaptación de estos diálogos y recomendable complemento a una obra que gana contemporaneidad por momentos y que nos arroja también a reflexionar sobre el sentido de la Historia.

[LUIZ CARLOS · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excelente alegoria.

Apesar de usar uma visão dentro de sua época, o texto antevê acontecimentos muito parecidos com o que vivemos na atualidade, de maneira rasa: a união da Europa, a ascensão da influência da cultura oriental, no momento liderada pela China, o ideais politicamente corretos, então inimagináveis, mas aqui (no texto) subliminares.
Importante fonte para analisar o nosso momento, através de uma alegoria carregada de distopias. Recomendo.

[Tom Willis · Rating 4 out of 5]

"Holy Father, keep them in your name, which you have given me, that they may be one, even as we are one."

It may take the reign of the Anti-Christ to bring about Christian unity.

But I hope not.

[Alessandro · Rating 2 out of 5]

Un libro scritto in stile teatrale, con personaggi che dialogano. Noioso, anche se scritto molto bene. Ma terribilmente noioso, quindi non si può andare oltre le due stelle. Non vedevo l'ora che finisse.

[Peter Nguyen · Rating 4 out of 5]

I was made known of this work through Pope Benedict XVI’s biography. A short read with foresight into the two World Wars of the 20th century, socialism, and a One World Order.

Solovyov’s writing reminds me of Benson’s Lord of the World and Lewis’ Screwtape Letters. Some themes I enjoyed that were presented in Tale of the Anti-Christ include: how satan slowly draws souls into abandoning Christ, and the necessity of Christian unity.

“[The Anti-Christ] believed in Good, but the All Seeing Eye of the Eternal knew that this man would bow down before the power of Evil as soon as it would offer him a bribe — not by deception of the senses and the lower passions, not by the superior bait of power, but only by his own immeasurable self-love. This self-love was neither an unconscious instinct nor an insane ambition.”

“[The Anti-Christ] is not essentially evil. All the meaning is in that… He can be explained by a single proverb, ‘All that glitters is not gold.’ You know too well this glitter of counterfeit gold. Take it away and no real force remains — none.”

[George · Rating 5 out of 5]

informative of worldview during particular time period

Highly informed by cultural biases of the time and political sentiment steering history towards a hypothetical trajectory. This writing provides insight into the juxtaposition of mysticism and realism as seen by religious individuals.

The author’s tone seems vaguely disgruntled and rushes as opposed to erudite and introspective.

[Amira Litmanowicz · Rating 4 out of 5]

A prophetic book in many ways. Soloviev, in Platonic style, writes three dialogues, explaining in a slow and intelligent way the background for the story of the Antichrist. In many ways I felt like I was reading today's newspaper on the subject of war. Who or what is the Antichrist? A book surprises you not only with the foreshadowing but with the way it ends.

[Debra · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a short story published in the year 1900. It is an interesting of the coming of the anti-Christ and how he enthralls the world. Not all of it, however. It is kind of chilling because it is of things to come. I hope it is soon.

[Edison Vaz Wolf Cliff]

Campinas, SP; Ecclesiae 2001. Trad do Espanhol: Eduardo Emanuel Ferreira Leal & Sabryna Thais Silva Nogueira.

[Jeremy · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fascinating. Antichrist as one who attempts to unite the church...gotta give credit to Solovyov for his storytelling ability.

[Beata Horała · Rating 5 out of 5]

Niesamowite. Wybitne dzieło. Jednak też przerażajace.

[Sandralena Hanley · Rating 4 out of 5]

Some of the imagery is very believable in our times.

[João Cirilo · Rating 5 out of 5]

Livraço. A forma literária (e poderia ser outra forma?) é interessantíssima, muito inteligente e muito bem feita.

Soloviev só pode ter recebido "inside information" dos céus.

[Andrew · Rating 5 out of 5]

Prophetic

[Lu · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excelente Libro!!

[ola · Rating 4 out of 5]

3,5

[Denis Vasilev · Rating 4 out of 5]

Версия прихода к власти и свержения Антихриста и прихода Христа

[Y · Rating 4 out of 5]

A short story framed as two people reading a story written by someone else. It is a prediction of events in the 21st century (two hundred years in the future at the time), when China conquers Europe, Europe overthrows the Chinese regime and forms the United States of Europe. A young man, full of pride, is chosen by the Devil and writes a groundbreaking book on politics and society. His fame gets him elected President of Europe. His rule is so enlightened most of the civilized world join the Union.

He then has the Catholics, Orthodox and Protestants form an ecumenical council. A couple priests realize he is the Antichrist when he cannot make a declaration of faith and they are struck dead. He spins it to be that they were met with divine vengeance and they fall in line. They all recognize papal authority and elect the Antichrist’s candidate, Apollonius.

He moves his capital to Jerusalem. The Jews revolt and attack him and simultaneously Jesus comes with earthquakes and lightning and begin the thousand year reign.

It was interesting to see the perspective from an 1800s Russian author on what the end of times could look like.

[Elizabeth Garduño · Rating 3 out of 5]

The world achieves peace and harmony under the command of a 'superman' who considers himself the true son of God.

The story is interesting and leaves you pondering, but something I didn't know is that it is a story within a story.

It's a story that reads one of the characters from another book, that's why at the beginning and end there is character dialogue that doesn't seem to make sense.

Now it is added to the list of pending to read the complete book “Three conversations and the short story about the antichrist”, I hope that reading the complete text will clarify many doubts.

*****************************

El mundo alcanza la paz y la armonía bajo el mando de un 'superhombre' que se considera el verdadero hijo de Dios.

La historia es interesante y te deja reflexionando, pero algo que yo no sabía es que se trata de un relato dentro de otro relato.

Es una historia que lee uno de los personajes de otro libro, es por eso que al inicio y al final hay diálogos de personajes que no parecen tener sentido.

Ahora se agrega a la lista de pendientes leer el libro completo "Tres conversaciones y el Breve relato sobre el anticristo", espero que leer el texto completo aclare muchas dudas.

[Nathan · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was a profound book that led me to reflect on my own desires, as well as the world’s desires for what we should want in a leader. The leader did not rule through tyranny, but disarmed us through desire—slowly bending Him into the shape of our appetites. I began to see not only how the Antichrist deceives the world, but why we would want him to deceive us. I started to question whether I longed more for comfort than sanctity, influence more than humility, or beauty without the Cross. My own desires seemed to align more with the Antichrist than with the saints who resisted him unto martyrdom. The book revealed not merely a future threat to be wary of, but a present disposition I must uproot in myself. I realized that my attachments to the world—its comforts, praises, and ambitions—can become fertile soil for the Antichrist’s logic. The faith cannot be a cloak for my desires; it must be a total abandonment to the will of God, even unto death.

With the death of Pope Francis weighing heavy on my heart as a Catholic, I pray that Peter’s successor does not indulge any of my base desires and reigns with the fervor of a true king. May he wear the tiara well.