THE PRINCIPLE OF THE JUSTICE OF PUNISHMENT IN THE CANON, SECULAR AND TRADITIONAL LAW
the constriction of the legal system in Russia consisted of diverse institutional arrangements: canon, secular and traditional law. Each of them relied on their own historically developed soil. This construction is kept on the general principles of development that gave it stability and relative stability. One of the fundamental principles was the principle of justice. However, the ideas of justice in the Russian public consciousness were different and eventually formed a mosaic philosophy of punishment. Religious dogmatism was based on the Eastern Christian ideals and norms of Scripture, ecumenical, and local church councils. Justice had moral nature, which resulted in the establishment of the doctrine of Christian (Orthodox) ethics. The idea of justice permeated all Christian doctrine and bound man with God. Turned to the human consciousness, it put the individual before the moral choice not to do things that would be contrary to the biblical commandments. Justice in Christianity is infused with love for God and neighbor. Therefore, the idea of canon punishment steeped in mercy. Literally, it meant that a person had to admit his own guilt and make a voluntary choice in bearing all the burdens of enforcement. People's perceptions of justice based on pagan traditions and community, where relationships within the society were much taboo and are subject to the nature of self-preservation. They just believed everything that helped communities to survive were just, all acts that are counter to the collective interest were considered unjust. The dividing line between justice and injustice carried in this case had a more mundane and concrete character, with its inherent attributes of household violence, expressed in hard combat all attempts to break the age-old taboos. The severity of the punishment of violators considered as a natural state of society, so that it survived. Therefore the justice war associated with the interests of the society and allowed the most severe forms of punishment. State doctrine perceived justice from the perspective of law and progress. State much more quickly reacted to social changes, trying to legislate a new model of social relations. Perception of justice in this case is significantly deformed arrangement of political and class forces in society. With formal recognition of the Christian virtues state represented by the political elite in practice to build their own sense of justice, which reflected the interests of the already not just society, but only its individual layers. Accordingly, when sentencing was taken into account and class accessory and social status of the perpetrator. Thus, the three structures (religious, traditional and state) had their own ideas of justice, which eventually determined the different understanding of crime and punishment. Conflict and clashes between them were inevitable. Originally the church came into conflict with paganism, then the state with the church. Not all that the state has recognized as the crime is also related to the national consciousness. People's perception could freely justify and even encourage the actions of their fellow villagers, while the law regarded them as a crime. Contradictions in the understanding and implementation of justice can be easily detected in the modern Russian legal culture despite the fact that the modern state has become more civilized and tries to avoid social conflicts. Article submissions may be used in the special legal courses, preparation of materials for lectures on the history of state and law, theory of law, penology.