Sayings of the holy fathers, sayings and quotes from priests, monks, elders, quotes from the Holy Scriptures. Features and problems of family life of clergy. Archpriest Fyodor Borodin

Archpriest Fyodor Borodin made a report at the closed pastoral seminar “Features and problems of the family life of clergy.” A video of a speech by the rector of the Church of the Unmercenary Saints Cosmas and Damian on Maroseyka went viral and raised many questions. The editors publish text adapted for printing.

– Your Eminence, dear fathers, brothers and sisters, unexpectedly to me, our now deceased dean, Father Dionisy Shishigin suggested and blessed me to make a report, I did it. This report apparently hit a sore point, because over the past month more than 25 clergy thanked me in writing, by phone, or at a meeting for this report. I didn't expect this at all. Today I was asked to repeat it. While I was here, I managed to read the mothers’ comments to him, for which I am very grateful. That’s why I’ll change the text a little and add something. He's emotional.

When I wrote it, I was very worried. The topic is painful. I’m still worried, this is the second time in my life I’m speaking to bishops.

Not only will they not judge you, but they will also praise you for your honesty
I think that everyone present will agree with me that never in its entire history has the Church faced such a crisis in the families of clergy. We all know, although there are no available statistics, how many of our fellow students in theological schools separated from their wives. Among my fellow practitioners over the course of twenty-five years, about ten people were divorced and defrocked.

In our two-clergy church, the statistics are as follows: in 24 years, three clergy destroyed their families and were defrocked. Several priests younger than me in consecration, who created their families before my eyes, came to a complete family impasse, although they have not yet divorced.

Of course, it is clear that the main reason is sin, the terrible fall of the clergyman or his wife, or both. Mothers reproach me in the comments that I confuse the effect and the cause, that I do not indicate this. I just don't talk about it. This goes without saying. The source of divorce is sin, and everything else is just reasons.

If we still talk about the reasons, then the main one is the general crisis of the family, as Bishop Anthony said in a previous report. Many of us were raised in single-parent families by divorced parents - there is no experience, no behavioral scenarios for serving a spouse, for resolving family conflicts, for raising children.

We, our wives and children, like everyone else, experience enormous anti-family pressure: heroes of news and films, articles and social networks fornicate, cheat, get divorced and abandon children. We even have the head of state getting divorced on live television - it’s hard to imagine a more severe blow to the institution of the family. This whole constant background of life tempts a person. Our children spend much more time in this infonoise, where divorce and fornication have become the norm, than in communication with their parents. This creates tolerance for sin, unfortunately, as something that is already so abundant that it is pointless to fight against it.

Any person, a former priest too, who left his family, can easily find a community of people like him via the Internet. In this community, he will not only not be judged, but will also be praised for his honesty. Thus, the barrier of public censure, which previously could have kept a clergy family from falling apart in times of crisis, was broken. These are external reasons. It is impossible to eliminate them. They can only be resisted by constant work, prayer and deepening into one’s spiritual life. By building your home church, cordial communication, talking through all emerging problems and disagreements.

The priest's children grow up without a father, and his wife turns to the wall and roars
But this crisis of clergy families also has church, internal reasons that can and must be overcome. Firstly, this is the lack of free time among clergy, first of all, the lack of at least two normal days off for many.

The working day of a priest is not standardized. He often leaves home early in the morning while his wife and children are still sleeping; returns in the evening after service, confession and conversations with people, when his children are already asleep. The working day, which includes duty at the temple, turns into a 12-hour day.

Mandatory duty, which in itself, combined with a series of services, is very difficult to combine with weekends (just sit down and look at the clergyman’s weekly schedule). It often does not leave the opportunity to visit the sick at home on these days and to perform other extra-church requirements and obediences. They have to be rescheduled for the weekend.

All clergy carry out extra-church obedience. Often for the abbot, serving in a prison or a meeting of those in charge, teaching in religious schools, and so on, is an irritating factor that he simply ignores.

The cleric has to change positions with the serving brethren and compensate for the replacement again through days off.

There are priests who carry out administrative service in the structures of the patriarchate and vicariate, answer letters, and work as censors on the publishing council. After working for five days on weekdays, they begin Saturdays and Sundays, which for any clergyman are days of joy, but also of maximum load. Such clerics never have days off.

I can give an example of advanced training courses. With the blessing of the clergy, I went to the first conscription, which was held in the Novospassky Monastery. The schedule was as follows: five days a week from 9 am to 6 pm, the sixth day - Saturday - until three in the afternoon. Obviously, the schedule was drawn up by some monk, to whom the bishop, the abbot of the monastery, gave the following obedience: “Make a schedule.” By the end of two months of study, my wife was in terrible shape!

Such an exhausting schedule is catastrophically dangerous for any person, but if a monastic risks only his health, then a family priest risks his family.

Yes, we all took the oath, we will do whatever we are blessed with, unconditionally. If necessary, we will get sick and die during these obediences, we are ready for this, of course. But divine grace, always “weak, healing and impoverished, replenishing,” was not accepted by wives and children at our ordination. They may not be able to stand it.

On his only day off, the priest simply sleeps and comes to his senses; in fact, on this day he is also absent from the family. So a priest I know has six children and one day off. His wife, a former parishioner of ours, tells me with tears: “Children are growing up without a father, as if he were in prison or at war. We don’t see him at all; he sleeps on his days off.” I will repeat the key phrase: “Children grow up without a father.” This is about the children, not about the father, about their fate, and not about the fate of the priest.

And the wife is at home, she is tired of the children and household chores, many of which should have been resolved a long time ago. Most modern girls are not even ready for three children, either physically or mentally. What can we say about families with five, six and eight children?

The husband comes and falls on the bed exhausted. There are no au pairs, and there are no grandparents in most modern families either. Resolve the issue with doctors and teachers, take you to school, pick you up from school, three parent-teacher meetings in a week, do homework and cook food for a large family. This to the dentist, this to the orthopedist, this to the speech therapist, and all this with a baby in her arms or pregnant - and all without the help of her husband. This is the reality of a large urban priestly family. Fatigue, irritation, resentment, and disappointment accumulate.

I know a priest whose wife once just lay down and stopped doing anything, she couldn’t get up - she turned to the wall and roared, she had no strength. There was a mental breakdown. Children are running around, father has to go to church, no one has canceled anything. The irritated abbot is already calling, he doesn’t want to hear anything, because he has only one child, he doesn’t understand.

And the priest leaves his family for a successful project
What consequences does this have for the cleric’s family? Catastrophic. Joint prayer ceases, that is, the most important thing in which the home church is realized disappears; neither the wife nor the children pray with their father almost ever. I repeat, if he lives far from the temple, he leaves when the children are sleeping and arrives when they are sleeping. The priest's family, most days of the week, does not have the main thing that ordinary church families have: common prayer.

The worst consequence of such a work schedule is the lack of communication with my wife and children, which nothing can replace. Year after year, moving away from his wife, the priest can come to the destruction of his heartfelt connection with his wife, on whom, first of all, the whole family rests. Often the situation is aggravated by the fact that at the parish the priest is surrounded by veneration and obedience, but at home everything is not the same, and they stop listening to him. We can say that parish life is a successful project, where everything worked out for him, and the family is unsuccessful, because he cannot decide there. And the priest leaves the family further and further into a successful project, where he is on the podium in the rays of glory, and everything worked out for him.

But his future wife did not marry Father John, but Vanya; she fell in love with just a man. She changes, he changes. A family is two people in constant development and change, and not just a priestly family, any family. In order to cope with this, you need to talk and communicate a lot, spend time together, do some things together, but this does not happen, and the relationship begins to collapse, of which there are a huge number of examples. Relationships with children suffer the most; they cannot be built without spending time together with their father, without common games and joyful activities that are interesting to children - it is impossible, this is the law.

Let us remember the prophet Samuel, the Lord revealed to him his will about the whole people, and the children grew up worthless. There can be only one reason, besides their free will - lack of time together. Even for the family of the great prophet, this law applies, what can we say about us sinners.

We all know that a heartfelt, let me emphasize, a heartfelt connection with a baby is built through physical contact. If dad doesn't hold, cuddle, and kiss his baby every day, there won't be that close bond. The part that should be formed in infancy is born through affection. If the father cannot do this due to his workload, this connection will not exist, and it will be even more difficult to build it further.

“We don’t pray together with dad. We have breakfast, lunch and almost always dinner separately. Lessons and school without him. On Sundays, dad is not there at all.” A mother and children are in the church closest to the house, neither talking to their father, nor listening to a fairy tale, nor a book, this happens extremely rarely. Even if a cleric has two full days off, they never coincide with schoolchildren’s days off, since they fall on weekdays (this is not a solvable problem, I understand, but this also needs to be taken into account).

The priest almost cannot go somewhere with his children to relax. Vacation in many dioceses is never given for a month. In Moscow it is given, thank God! In many dioceses, two weeks and then another week, or just two weeks. Even if you have a benefactor who will pay for a trip to the seaside so that you can rest and your wife can rest, you will not have time to rest during this time.

And he hears: “Get a divorce, sacrifice your family”
A priest from one fairly large Central Russian metropolis tells me: “Not only do they give me only two weeks, I also have to justify myself, as if it were a crime, that I am leaving for these two weeks somewhere. They can call me at any moment.” Moreover, in this diocese, when a priest comes to the bishop and says: “I have problems with my wife.” He hears one standard answer, the meaning of which is: get a divorce. This is the result. Why? Because the answer is this: sacrifice your family, the main thing is the priesthood. You have to sacrifice them, it's bad, but it's true.

I have no words! Instead of healing, the situation is pushed even further.
Separate household burdens, separate religious services, raising children without a father - what awaits such a family? The worst thing happens - the family ceases to be a joint activity, in fact it simply ceases and, accordingly, a source of joint joy.

In the absence of regular, joyful, interesting communication, in the constant absence of the father at home, in his exhaustion and fatigue, in the tension of his relationship with his mother, which children unmistakably feel, in the impoverishment of love between them, a severance of the heartfelt connection with a teenage child is almost inevitable. As a consequence, the father is rejected by the end of adolescence and, most often, with a departure from faith and church.

De-churched priests are a terrible temptation for our parishioners. Just like the mothers, Vladyka, you are absolutely right. Everything the father preaches is called into question. If my father failed to build a small church, what is he saying from the pulpit, we will still listen. This temptation can turn so many young people away from the church, and can nullify all our youth work simply by sheer numbers. If I meet with the son of a priest who says: “They are lying to you, I know from my father,” there is no point in preaching further. We remember how many popovichs became revolutionaries.

If a wife lives in poverty for 20 years, she may lose faith in the Church
The second reason is our internal, intra-church one, much less terrible, but also very painful. All this is happening against the backdrop of a constant lack of money, which does not allow us to quickly resolve many issues. The car cannot be repaired, there is no money for convenient doctors without a queue, tutors, clubs and sections are often not available. You can’t go to college without tutors now. The larger a cleric’s family, the more acute this issue.

Recently I spoke with one priest with many children, nine children, I asked him about his salary, he said: “Like everyone else. Can’t a rector who has two children simply count his expenses for children and multiply by five? Add a salary, what is he waiting for? When will the cleric’s mother not be able to stand it and will have a mental breakdown, or when will she lose faith in the church?”

You see, if a priest’s wife lives in such exhausting, humiliating poverty for 20 years, she may lose faith in the Church, she will say: “You preach to us that this is a community of love. Where?" His rector recently raised his salary from 30 to 50. What is it like in Moscow for a family of 11 people per 50 thousand - it’s just ridiculous, you know? Funny. They have nowhere to get money; now they don’t give money when they demand it.

We all go and give communion to elderly people who once went to our church; you can still leave money there, because they have nothing to buy medicine with. If once every three or four months you consecrate something and they give you something, that’s all. Gone are the 90s, when they gave money for needs, now this is practically no longer the case. Maybe someone else has different statistics, but this is mine.

What is he waiting for? When will the priest become drunk or withdraw into complete cynicism? And there is a lot of this. Why do we have such ruthless indifference to large families? Humiliating, not even poverty, but poverty - this is how many clergy with many children live now. You can endure this for a year, two, ten, but not your whole life.

Another very important thing is that the children of priests do not want to live like this. I have heard many times from the daughters of priests: “I will not marry a seminarian, because, firstly, I do not want my husband to be transferred. Okay, still in Moscow, another metro station, but if you serve in some big Russian city, which is united with a diocese, and your husband was taken and transferred 400 km or 300 km away. The school is here, and the husband is there, there are no roads. I don’t want to not see you.”

The late Patriarch Alexy II repeatedly pointed out at diocesan meetings that a cleric should not have more than two days off, but it is possible to ensure that there are no less than two days off. Strictly monitor family clergy in this matter, especially clergy with many children, exempt, if a priest has more than five children, from any additional extra-church obediences, monitor salaries. You can pay your parish for an au pair, cook or nanny for such a family, or find volunteer helpers on a charitable basis.

A priest I know has one adult son, and his cleric has seven children. At some point, the latter said: “To save my family, I need two months of vacation.” And the abbot secretly lets him go, leaving him with almost no rest. Honor and praise to such a person, this is mercy. Unfortunately, this phenomenon remains the exception.

I consoled my mother for two hours, gave money for ice cream - and this saved the family.
What could you suggest? We need to work with seminarians. When I graduated from seminary in 1992, most of my fellow students were chaste, they did not know what a woman was, and they approached building a family on a patristic basis. It's different now.

About 7-8 years ago I talked with one seminarian, then with another, I was faced with completely discouraging information that many seminarians (this is at the Moscow Theological Seminary!) Believe that only a mother should be a virgin before marriage, and a priest , the seminarian can afford connections. That's it, you see. Of course, this cannot but affect his future family life with great sorrow. We need to talk about this, we need to fix it.

What else can you offer? Vladyka, forgive me, you have blessed, I offer. It seems to me that the bishop should meet separately with the wives of priests, without their spouses, and ask questions. In parts, and not with everyone at once, because if this is a hall in the Cathedral of Christ the Savior, then no one will stand up and say anything. We need to meet and ask what problems there are, talk, console, strengthen.

A priest I know 15 years ago had a huge number of extra-church obediences - the restoration of three churches on it. At a certain moment, his wife said: “That’s it, I can’t do it anymore,” and went to Vladyka Arseny. I asked her later: “Well, so how?” She joyfully says: “Vladyka pushed back his chair, leaned on his elbow, looked at me carefully, smiled and said: “Well, go ahead, tell me.” For a long time, two hours, there was a line of those who had signed up sitting there, and he talked to me, consoled me, strengthened me, explained, then asked: “Do you like ice cream?” - "Yes". And he gave me money for ice cream.”

He brought her out of the impasse she was in. He removed some of the obedience from her husband. In this family, the problem was not lack of money, but the complete lack of time between the priest and his wife and children.

She came out completely inspired. Here is an archpastoral conversation with a woman, a mother, who was on the verge of breaking up with her husband. On time if you catch it. This family still exists. This is a wonderful priest, the rector of a large Moscow church. Vladyka Arseny simply saved her with this conversation.

I am not familiar with the practice of rural parishes, I am talking about urban ones - it is important to carefully monitor that the clergy have days off. What can be done? You can simply collect the list and analyze it. Moreover, you need to ask not the abbots, but the clergy themselves, because the abbots may not notice or take into account a lot.

Look, call the rector and say: “Please tell me why this priest had no day off this week, and last week he had only one day off. What are you waiting for?". Moreover, it is necessary to convince and force the abbots to count extra-church obedience, for example, teaching at St. Tikhon’s University, as a working day. We all know many cases when the rector does not want to admit it, he needs the priest to serve, he says: “These are your problems. Do you want to teach? Go on weekends and that’s it.”

Provide some benefits to clergy with five or more children. What benefits could these be? Exemption from duties in the temple. Believe me, if a priest has five or six children, he will not rest during this time, he will spin like a squirrel in a wheel.

Exemption from some extra-liturgical obediences. To have these days off.

Organizing tangible financial and household assistance for large families on a regular basis.

I can offer this criterion: if, after passing through adolescence, all your children go to church, and are ready to confess even to you, when there is no other opportunity, and even mother is ready to do this, when there is no other opportunity, as an exception, that is, she continues to trust you as a priest, only then will it be possible to breathe out and start taking care of my grandchildren.

You can’t breathe out before that, because those years that we spent without communicating with children, they can shoot out at 17 and 20 years old. It seems to me that if some measures are not taken, in a few years we will have not just a wave, but a tsunami of divorces in the families of clergy, or extinguished families, you can call it that, when there is no joy, they just live together, because otherwise he will lose his job and have nothing to support his family. What can such a priest teach his parishioners? Unclear.

Exempted from obedience due to family reasons
I had such a case, excuse me, I’ll tell you about myself. When my wife gave birth to her seventh child (I now have eight), she developed a blood clot on her leg; it did not need to be operated on, it did not threaten the heart, and there was no possibility. The wife is lying down, there are no grandparents, no helpers. Thank God, I had two weeks of vacation left, which I timed for the birth. Then my fathers let me go a little. She couldn't walk, she couldn't get up at all, there was such pain. Kitchen, homework - everything is on me. She lies with the baby, everything else is on me. When I had this problem with my wife, I was still obedient to the patriarchate. I could bear everything else, but I feel like I can’t bear it anymore.

I went to Vladyka Arseny. It was quite funny, I'll tell you about it. I came, decided on parish issues and said: “May I have a personal question?” He says: "Yes." I begin to tell how I live: this, that, that (despite the fact that one of my sons was seriously ill and a separate adult had to take care of him all the time, but this is impossible). The Lord tenses up, looks at me like this, clenches his hands and says: “What do you want?” I say: “Please release me from obedience to the canonical commission.” He’s like: “Phew! Certainly go".

Perhaps he thought that I would ask for the staff, because from the situation that I described, he had such eyes - he did not know how I lived. You see, no one knew, and no one should know. But he understood the situation and said: “Please.”

The only time in the 25 diocesan meetings that I attended as a priest, I heard the words “so-and-so was released early from obedience due to family reasons.” And it was about me. Before the end of three years of obedience, I was released. I am eternally grateful to Vladyka for this. I don’t know if I could withstand that load and not break down. If you have serious problems, go to him, he will listen, and, despite the fact that he has no family, he will understand.

But this does not happen everywhere. If we do not begin to solve this problem, this wave of divorces and ruined families will be a monstrous temptation for both believers and non-believers.

Archpriest Fyodor Borodin. Photo by Anna Galperina

After another controversy, which this time flared up around , I, first of all, felt very bitter. Once again I see how my brothers and sisters in Christ insult each other, and this is done by people who have been in the church for a long time.

The Lord said: “For every idle word that people speak, they will give an answer on the day of judgment” (Matthew 12:36) That is, even for neutral, non-offensive things. And for insulting, for humiliating another person, how will we answer before God?

The Internet has turned out to be an area of ​​communication where, as it seems to a modern Orthodox person, the commandments do not apply and one can do things that in real life we ​​would never allow ourselves to do. But this is not so, and everything said remains with us forever. And if we do not repent and change, we will not escape the answer.

Therefore, whether we agree with our opponent or disagree, we still must talk to him, as if we were talking in real life, and even in church.

“Whatever you do, in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ” (Col. 3:17), says the apostle. Is it possible to swear and insult your interlocutor in the name of Christ? Even if the interlocutor is wrong?

“By this everyone will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another” (John 13:35) - this is the main missionary commandment. Seeing how Christians treat each other with care and love, other people will want to become just like them. This is what happened with the first Christians, when those around them, seeing their relationship with each other, said: “Look how they love each other.”

And with our verbal battles and insults we alienate, push people away from us and seduce them.

Children were an undesirable result of sexual intercourse

The second thing I would like to say is that the prophet Hosea has strange words: “For the Ephraimites, the glory [of childbirth] will fly away like a bird: there will be no birth, no pregnancy, no conception.” (Hos. 9:11). The same thing is happening to us, to our country today. Why? The concept of “the glory of childbearing” no longer lives in the hearts and heads of people. “Glory” is a multifaceted, capacious biblical concept, something that glorifies a person before God, something that is glorious in the eyes of God.

For us, childbearing has ceased to be “glory”, but has often become an undesirable result of sexual intercourse. People enter into these relationships wishing with all their might that conception would not occur. And even if it does happen, birth very often still doesn’t happen. Babies killed in the womb number in the millions and no one even knows how many there are. Our country is populated by women and men who destroyed their children through abortion.

Of course, for our society, soaked in the blood of murdered babies, poisoned by this terrible sin, everything related to childbearing is hateful, a thorn in the side. The negative attitude towards childbearing, which began in Soviet times, is now passing from generation to generation.

Because what needs to be supported, what needs to be helped, what needs to be admired is disgusting. In the Book of Proverbs of Solomon there are words: “He who walks in the straight path is an abomination to the wicked” (29:27).

Childbearing is holy in the eyes of God, this is one of the ways of saving a woman (the Apostle Paul speaks about this (1 Tim. 2:15). For a sinful person, everything related to childbirth, upbringing, including feeding, causes irritation and disgust.

This attitude towards childbearing is often found in churches, because the same people who make up our society as a whole go there.

Photo: tatarstan-mitropolia.ru

Shame on the men who judged a tired woman

The attitude of a normal Christian towards childbearing should be careful. In Rus', a pregnant woman was called not idle. This is a very accurate name. If a man lies on the sofa during the day, he is a slacker and a parasite. And if a pregnant woman lies down on the sofa, she will still continue to work. She works even when she sleeps: it is colossal work to bear a child.

Then comes childbirth. I was present at births several times, and once it happened that I even had to deliver them. And every time I saw how my beloved literally walked along the edge of life and death. One birth was so difficult that I was afraid of losing her.

After childbirth, as after a long operation that takes place without anesthesia and is accompanied by severe pain, the woman does not receive time for rehabilitation, but begins to work immediately. No days off, no lunch break, and often no sleep at night. Moreover, a woman may be so exhausted by childbirth that she will not have the strength to get out of bed. And if she has other small children, then you can imagine how difficult it is for her. The husband cannot be around all the time - he earns a living.

If such a person, thirsty for church life, comes to church, then all the parishioners should simply begin to help him.

I don’t understand at all how, not even a Christian, but just a decent person, after reading an article in which a woman who recently gave birth writes “my legs are giving way”, there is a desire to condemn her rather than help.

If we see a person whose legs are giving way - whether he is an elderly person or not, are we going to start scolding him?!

I am especially ashamed of the men who condemned the tired woman with a small child in the temple for their behavior.

The reaction of a Christian man to a woman with a child, no matter whether it is his wife or not, whether it happens in a church or on the street, is first of all help.

And we offer weaning to a mother with many children

Going to church for a mother with many children, a mother with small children, every Sunday is a feat. Imagine, everyone needs to be dressed, and quickly, so that the first person dressed doesn’t sweat and catch a cold on the cold street. We need to think about what to take with us in order to feed the older children after communion. Then it’s time to get to the temple, often using several types of public transport.

The temple has a problem where to put the stroller - there is no room anymore. It’s cramped in the vestibule of the church; there’s nowhere to hang your clothes or your children’s. The baby needs to be fed; he cannot go long without food. And then, after the service, this mother needs to drink tea somewhere, so as not to faint, and so that her body continues to produce milk.

A mother and child room is available in many shopping centers, and, unfortunately, is very rarely found in churches, even in recently built ones. This speaks about our attitude to the “glory of childbearing.” This issue is not considered at the Councils; there are no special circular letters or instructions. Because we don’t see this as a problem, but it’s an acute one.

And everything can be solved very simply: if there are no rooms, then you can fence off a small space with a screen, put a chair there, a changing table, bring a kettle, tea bags, sugar. It would be enough. Well, if there is a Sunday school, then during services this room can be provided for mothers with children.

The problem of mothers and small children visiting church is a very acute one, because the entire organization of our liturgical life since Soviet times has been geared towards a parish consisting of individual elderly people. Each of them can calmly come and confess on Saturday, and calmly receive communion on Sunday.

There were only a few children in churches in Soviet times. And until now, churches are not designed for families to come there. And when it comes, it is perceived as something abnormal, because it interferes.

The worship service is structured in such a way that a nursing mother or a mother with many children simply cannot participate in it. The child cannot “last” the entire service. This means that the priest either must go out and confess to the mother after the “Our Father” before communion, or there must be a second priest in the church who confesses during the service.

Unfortunately, in churches they often say: “Come to the all-night vigil or before the service begins.” Well, a mother with many children or a mother with a baby cannot come before the start of the service!

And all these points need to be thought through by the abbot. Also, his task is to tell everyone directly from the pulpit who wants to discuss the mother, her children, criticize, etc., that this is absolutely forbidden to do this. If all the conditions I said above are met, then mothers and babies will immediately start going to church.

Our faith does not imply the possibility of Christian life without participation in the Eucharist. When I hear arguments that a mother will be able to start receiving communion when the children grow up, I am surprised - such a misunderstanding of Christianity! Excommunication from the Church is, in fact, excommunication from communion. It turns out that we are offering weaning to a mother with many children! My eldest son is 25 years old, my youngest daughter is three years old. So, according to this logic, my wife should be excommunicated from the Church for more than 30 years?!

If you asked a question in Greece about whether it is possible to feed a baby in church, simply no one would understand you: it goes without saying that any Christian in any condition can come to church and partake of the Body and Blood of Christ. Sometimes he just needs help. Unlike Russia, in Greece the tradition of families going to church was not interrupted, and therefore a pregnant or nursing woman in church is perceived as absolutely normal. This doesn’t surprise anyone or irritate anyone.

Unlike our churches, where the very fact of the presence of children is often annoying.

All eight of my children behave differently in church.

“You bear the weaknesses of the weak with the strong” (Rom. 15:1), “Do not owe anyone anything except mutual love.” (Rom. 13:8), “Be kind to one another with brotherly love” (Rom. 12:10), the Apostle Paul gives us direct instructions.

And this love and tenderness should be directed towards the most vulnerable members of the parish. This includes mothers with a small child and mothers with many children.

Moreover, the parish should have a service to help large families. In our church, many parishioners come to large families once or twice a week and help in the kitchen or cleaning the house, or take the children to classes.

Both a mother with a disabled child and a mother with two small children may need help. The rector’s job is to tell him that such and such people need help, maybe someone will help look after the restless baby while the mother is confessing, and then, another day, he will come to her house and peel the potatoes...

And what they say with condemnation: “A woman is proud that she has children, requires special attention”... But what do you care about that, because these are her personal feelings, not even sins. How can a mother who has given birth to a child not admire him? Of course, she wants everyone to look at him. It may be wrong and intrusive, but it is still a lesser sin than our condemnation.

If the women standing in the temple at one time themselves gave birth to as many children as the Lord gave, and their husbands did not abandon them, but raised all the children given by God, then I assure you that everyone would rejoice at the children in the temple.

A man who raised many of his own children is always happy to see strangers, they do not irritate him.

As for the child’s behavior in church... I immediately remember this story: in the cell of St. Seraphim of Sarov, a child was running around and playing around. Mom was very shy and tugged at him. To which the monk said: “Leave him, he’s playing with the angels.”

There are children who stand calmly from the very beginning, but there are others who cannot, and not because they are bad, ill-mannered or dissolute. They are simply organized differently from a mental point of view. All my eight children behave differently, both at home and in church. We can only correct their behavior. By the way, in order to teach a child to behave in church, you need to take him there. And if a mother is faced with the fact that she and her children cause hostility among the majority, then how will she teach them the correct behavior in the temple?

The task of the temple is to offer the child a taste of what life is like with God, in His grace. Then he will still make the choice himself. But if he grows up without worship or grows up and sees that he causes hostility among the surrounding parishioners with his presence, then how can he then make the right choice? Are those who judge not afraid of taking on such responsibility?

While we live on earth, the Lord will not leave us without people and circumstances that educate and humble us. If we remove children from the temple, then, I assure you, something else will appear that will irritate and tire us.

Often young priests “poke” elderly parishioners, forbid parishioners to receive communion without reason, and can cause real pain to people. Archpriest Fyodor Borodin, rector of the Church of Cosmas and Damian on Maroseyka (Moscow), discusses the limits of the power of a priest.

Photo: tatarstan-mitropolia.ru

A priest must earn self-respect

– Can a priest not allow a person to receive communion because, for example, he did not read the rule?

– A priest can only deny permission if a person commits some kind of mortal sin.

In all other cases, the priest does not have the right to deny access to communion. This was enshrined in pre-revolutionary synodal decrees of the first half of the 18th century. Moreover, if my memory serves me right, then these synodal decrees say that the issue of preventing a person from receiving communion due to sins should also be decided by the ruling bishop.

Technically, this decree is impossible to implement, but it is clear that it was born of a situation where priests allow themselves too much.

Alas, we are faced with such a picture when a priest does not allow a person to receive communion without any canonical reasons, and this sometimes painfully wounds the person’s soul.

This is what happened to my mother when she was not allowed to receive communion, and for the first time in her life she was preparing to begin the sacrament. She had a very difficult period in her life. The family broke up, I remember how she lost 16 kilograms in a month. She came to the church, which was not closed, and there was such a crowd of people there that she had to push her way to communion. When she finally realized that the Chalice was being taken away and began to push through, the priest who administered communion saw her and said: “You are not allowed.” And he went with the Chalice to the altar. He was too lazy to turn his face to this suffering, grief-stricken woman and teach her the Body and Blood of Christ. Although she fasted, and confessed, and read the rule.

It was a terrible experience for her. Thank God that this did not turn her away from the Church.

– That is, the priest in such cases essentially abuses his power?

– Often a priest simply does not understand the nature of the power that rank gives. The nature of the priest's authority is likened to Christ's authority. And the power of Christ is to die on the cross for people. This power was fully explained by Him at the Last Supper, when the Lord, like a slave (because only slaves washed the feet of guests), washed the feet of His disciples.

Let us remember the reaction of the holy apostles. They were categorically against it. They can be understood. They were scared. This should not have happened; their Teacher could not wash their feet. But He insisted and then explained: “So, if I, the Lord and Teacher, washed your feet, then you should wash each other’s feet. For I have given you an example, that you also should do the same as I have done to you.” (John 13:14-15).

This is precisely about the power of the priest. The apostles were so against it also because Christ carried out the previous leadership of that community in a completely different way. First, He led them unconditionally; He did not consult with them. He didn't listen to their opinions. He was definitely a Teacher for them. And, moreover, He was very strict with them. He did not indulge their mistakes or passions. And it is enough to remember the words that He says to the Apostle Peter: “Get behind Me, Satan!” (Matt. 16:23). Perhaps these are the harshest words in the Gospel. He addresses the most devoted, the eldest of His disciples.

This model of behavior between teacher and students was completely broken by Christ at the Last Supper by washing his feet.

The priest in relation to the parishioners must be guided by both. And washing one’s feet should always be implemented as a principle of serving parishioners.

But a priest must earn and earn respect for himself as a teacher. He has no right to insist on it.

When a priest pokes an elderly parishioner

– It happens that a priest addresses a person “you” who is almost twice his age...

– When a young priest, who graduated from seminary yesterday, “pokes” an elderly parishioner who is old enough to be his grandmother and calls her “you”, points out to her her usually imaginary sins, I feel sorry that his father is not around to give him a good spanking . Because a person who has not learned to be simply polite cannot be a priest of God. This is unacceptable, simply disgusting. I can't find another word.

A priest is a person who must first become an impeccable Christian. And an impeccable Christian is a person who must first learn to be a good, decent and well-mannered person. But a well-mannered person cannot be a boor.

So, you can’t be a rude person and be a good Christian. Moreover, you cannot be a rude person and be a priest.

Recently my twenty-two-year-old son said: “Dad, I don’t want to be a priest.” I don’t put pressure on any of my sons; they will decide this issue themselves, but I asked: “Why?” And he told me that he witnessed the following episode in a church near Moscow.

A young priest, a strong, stately man, about thirty, sits on a bench in the church after the service. A grief-stricken old woman approaches him to talk. The eyes are all teary. And, sobbing, she begins to talk about how her husband drinks, her son drinks, her daughter’s family is falling apart, also because of drunkenness, she is not given grandchildren, they go out and don’t study.

In general, the entire fabric of life in her hands crumbles away from her loved ones and from herself. And this priest loudly, for the whole church to hear, answers her, of course, using “you”: “Yes, it’s all your fault. It's all because of your sins. Go repent! Aren `t you ashamed. Why did you come to me? You need to look at yourself."

I think that sooner or later this priest himself will run into his own grief, and if he does not change by this time, no one will console him, no one will support him. In order not to understand that a person is feeling bad, and at the same time talk so boorishly from top to bottom - you have to have such a heart, such a callous soul!

All this shocked my son so much that he said: “I’m scared even at the thought that I could suddenly become like this. I don’t want to sin so badly.”

This manner of judging immediately, immediately denouncing everything, often without any experience, kills people’s trust in the priesthood. It is no coincidence that in Greece, for example, a very small number and only experienced and elderly priests have the blessing of the bishop to confess. Because if a priest does not have enough humility to understand his place, then the consequences of the pain that he can bring to people from his complacency, pompousness, and self-confidence can be simply terrible.

We all know many cases when the accusatory words of a priest became an excessive burden for a person, bent him to the ground and trampled him into terrible despondency.

I know the story about how a “meeting” with a priest in a temple was the last straw for a young man, after which he committed suicide. I don’t know which priest we’re talking about, I don’t want to accuse anyone of such a grave sin, but the fact remains that a person came to the temple with the last spark of hope... After the priest “accepted” him, there was no hope left...

- What to do?

– It is no coincidence that the age limit for ordination is 30 years. It is no coincidence that the Apostle Paul says: “Lay hands hastily on anyone” (Tim. 5:22). That is, it is impossible to ordain a person without testing him.

A person must have certain life experience. And specifically spiritual life. He must have time to be humbled by this experience before his consecration. Why is the Apostle Peter given the keys to the Kingdom of God? Because Christ knows that he will betray and will be forgiven. And here is a symbol of spiritual power - these keys of Christ can be given to such a person. And to the other apostles, because they also abandoned Christ and returned to Him.

When a person is young, when it seems to him that he can easily move mountains, when he has not yet learned his weaknesses as a Christian, he has the illusion that since he serves the liturgy, he has power over people, the power to decide how they should be, because he knows how to do it right. And this, unfortunately, is not the case.

Vladyka Anthony (Bloom) magnificently said that in the sacrament of ordination a person is given the grace of sacred rites, but wisdom is not given.

You have to be a very smart person to get involved in someone else's fate. But not everyone has this gift - the gift of spiritual wisdom. Some preach, some serve, and there are confessors. And if you understand that you are not a confessor, you do not have this gift or do not yet have this experience, just say that from Scripture, from the canons, from the Commandments of God, I would give such an answer, but I cannot insist.

The priest loses the habit of thinking that he might be wrong

“It’s hard for a priest not to break down if the parishioners themselves are almost staring into their mouths and listening to every word as if it were the truth...

– Yes, it has been said many times that demand creates supply, and some parishioners themselves seek spiritual unfreedom. Indeed, it often happens that a person really wants to hold someone else responsible for those decisions that God requires of him personally. Yes, there are people who ask the priest for a blessing on all everyday questions.

And there are priests who succumb to this and are happy to accept such leadership of people. But there are very few priests, literally a few, who can really lead like that. Most often, such “leadership” is simply a misunderstood, in my opinion, priesthood, implicated in the lust for power.

As a priest, I may have offended or alienated a large number of people over the years. They left silently, without quarreling or arguing. They simply disappear from view. And those who remain are ready to agree with me. And I may have the illusion that I am always right, because I am surrounded by people who confirm this. This is a great temptation for a priest. Because the priest loses the habit of thinking that he might be wrong.

A Christian is, first of all, a free person. And the task of the confessor, the task of the priest, is to try to make sure that every parishioner knows how to use his freedom correctly, so that the person knows how to make the right decisions. That is, the task is exactly the same as that of parents. Our task, as parents, is to raise our children and teach them how to use their freedom correctly, to do the right thing without making mistakes.

If a priest makes decisions for his parishioner or parishioner for many years, he will not teach him to be free as a Christian.

The Apostle Paul says: “You, brethren, have been called to freedom, provided that your freedom is not an excuse to please the flesh, but serve one another through love.” (Gal. 5:13)

A priest can only testify to how he understands what it means to act correctly as a Christian in a given situation. And then the person must act on his own. And this should be manifested in everything. Including in preparation for communion. The priest must help a person grow up so that he himself knows how to properly prepare for communion.

I remind you that the conditions without which you cannot receive communion are the following: First, right faith. The second is the desire to receive communion. The third is a broken heart. And the fourth is, if possible, peace with everyone, the fifth is the absence of mortal sins. In addition, it is required to observe the Eucharistic fast (except in situations where a person needs to take medication) and marital abstinence the day before. Canons and fasting are not a necessary condition for communion. They are only tools for acquiring heartfelt contrition.

And so, at the beginning of the journey, we offer a person well-known, well-functioning tools. Such as the three canons, fasting, akathist... Then the person himself must understand what helps him meet Christ more correctly. And if a person has been going to church for 10-15 years, and still does not feel what helps him and what does not help him and clings to one single rule, then this is a bad indicator for him and for his confessor.

Because all people are different. Some people need to read the Holy Scriptures before communion. For some, only the Psalter. For some it’s the Gospel. Someone should just say the Jesus Prayer. And someone should just stand in silence in the holy corner. And now, at this period of his life, in the state in which he is, this will best prepare him for the communion of the Holy Mysteries of Christ. And he himself must know what helps him prepare, and what hinders him and devastates his soul.

Therefore, when a young priest, who recently began his Christian spiritual path, says to a person who has been going to church for 50 years: “You are not ready,” this is strange. This is the same as a medical school graduate coming to the hospital explaining to a surgeon with 30 years of experience that he is performing the operation incorrectly.

Here you just need to treat yourself with humility. Parishioners respect a priest who can say: “I don’t know the answer to that question. I don't have all the answers. This is where it seems to me, but I could be wrong.” And the absolute, constant self-confidence of people rightfully repels people from the priest.

A priest must get used to the fact that people will disagree, argue, and perhaps speak impudently to him. And this is useful for him, because everyone needs to humble himself. But to earn such authority that it is truly obeyed from a good, kind and free heart in the parish is possible only through decades of zealous service, immersion in personal prayer and a repentant, contrite heart.

The Lord will humble the powerful priest

– What should a person do if he was not allowed to receive communion because he “didn’t read the rules”, “he’s often on Facebook”, or something else that clearly doesn’t relate to mortal sins?

“It seems to me that we need to tell the abbot about this and discuss this situation.” Why should a person endure all this if a priest violates his authority? After all, a priest is also a brother in Christ.

I have a wonderful story about an elderly woman who had already died, who lived a very difficult life and suffered the loss of her husband after the camps. They themselves came to arrest her several times, she was saved only by a miracle... And then, in her sixth decade of life, she began to become a church member. And somehow I came to a service in a Moscow church that was not closed.

At confession, the young priest, who was old enough to be her grandson, again on “you”, loudly so that other people could hear, which is also unacceptable, says: “When was the last time you received communion?” The woman replies: “I took communion a month ago. But today is my Angel Day, and I also want to take communion.”

In response, the priest loudly says: “Don’t you want to burn in hell? Aren't you afraid to burn in hell?" And this elderly woman had a lively character, a sharp tongue, therefore, without hesitation, she answered: “Where am I going before my dad gets into hell?” He choked, looked at her and said quietly and in “you”: “Okay, go and take communion.”

– What should a person do if there is one powerful priest in a temple, and this temple is the only one (say, in a village)?

– Accept this as a test from God. Such a priest, perhaps, should be pitied and prayed for, because an overbearing priest is so abnormal that, obviously, the Lord will one day greatly humble him. There will come a period in his life when he will have to see all his selfishness and pride broken.

In the sacrament of unction there are these words: “All our righteousness is like a ruble laid down before You, Lord.” Rub is rags, dirty, smelly clothes that are so bad that they have even been thrown off. And the priest should be the first to understand this about himself.

A priest who does not know how to repent will not teach people anything at confession. A priest who does not know how to pray will never teach anyone any prayer.

Therefore, a real confessor is a person who, firstly, regularly confesses himself, and secondly, who prays very deeply. And external beautiful, correct words that we can take from preachers, from the holy fathers and quote, they are good and beautiful.

But the priest will have authority only when they are confirmed by his own experience. And people feel it very well. Just as, for example, a person who seeks prayer always feels whether the choir of mercenaries is singing or whether the faithful parishioners of the temple are singing, for whom the spoken words are precious.

The same can be said about a priest: how he confesses, what he says in confession, whether he empathizes with a person, whether he accepts him in his heart, whether he loves him, whether he prays for him - people immediately feel this. Therefore, you can sometimes see that 40 people go to confession to this priest, and two to this one.

Photo: VK/Simbirsk Metropolis

Respect the other person's choice

– If the priest is categorically against what the parishioner likes in his life. It is clear that we are not talking about sins, but, say, about love, say, for street art, or punk rock, or something else?

– A priest must have a fairly broad outlook. A priest is a person who must be able to see a parishioner in movement from godlessness to God, from non-church life to church life. And in this movement, to immediately demand from a person that he understand everything at once and immediately break everything that is dear to him, of course, is unreasonable. Sooner or later, a person himself will give up the excess, but this may take years and decades.

Well, love for street art is not an obstacle to communion. A priest must know the limits of his power. The priest doesn’t like street art; for example, he loves the academic art of the first half of the 19th century. If he knows how to appreciate art, he will respect the other person's choice.

– So what should a priest do if parishioners ask: “Should I send my child to kindergarten?”, “Should I move in with my parents?” and so on?

– Just say: “I think about this this way, this is what I think about this, this is where I would act this way.” But this is purely my opinion and I cannot decide for you. You must decide for yourself, and this is the will of God, so that you learn to resolve these issues yourself.”

If a person goes to church for the first time, perhaps he really needs help in making a decision in many ways. But, gradually, it is necessary to cultivate and educate his will. Of course, it is good to be nourished by such a confessor as Father Kirill (Pavlov), Father John (Krestyankin). When you come to a person, you haven’t even opened your mouth yet, but he may already have answered many of your questions. This is good, but they are the exception. There are only a few of them in the Church. And now there are fewer and fewer of them. And the fact that there are so few of them is also the will of God.

God made us free and if a priest encroaches on this freedom, he is opposing the will of God. Here we can draw an analogy with a family. The husband is the head of the family. But, he must earn authority for himself and build a relationship with his wife in this way, without forcing her, without torturing her, without throwing quotes from the Holy Scriptures at her like grenades, so that she herself understands that if the husband insists, then he must obey him.

How can a wife learn this? If a husband knows how to obey his wife when she is right. If a wife knows that her husband is capable of this, then it is much easier for her to obey him when he insists. Because she understands that this is not out of passion. We priests very often act according to our passions. In a parish, a priest may be offended, not talk to someone, bring some closer to him, push others away, listen to some gossip. And this is completely inconsistent with the spirit of the Church, but is a projection of the passions that rage in the soul of the priest. Because if these passions did not exist in him, then neither gossip nor everything else would simply be appropriate in the parish and would not develop.

That is why we need a priest who conquers the passions within himself, who fights them.

It is also, of course, very useful when we, priests, read the prayer before confession: “Behold, child, Christ stands invisibly, accepting your confession,” to remind ourselves once again that it is Christ – the Creator and Owner of everything. And so a man came to Him, and not to the priest. And the priest is only a witness. The priest can remain silent all the time and speak only when something in the dispensation, or in the action, or in the intention of a person does not correspond to the Gospel, the Commandments of God.

The priest must say: “You know, dear, you can’t do it like this.”

Let’s say a person comes to me for confession and says: “I want to receive communion. I haven’t been unfaithful to my wife throughout Lent.” If I remain silent in this situation, then he will think that after Easter he can return to this sin. Therefore, in this situation, I was forced to say to such a person: “Dear, you still have to make a decision for yourself. If you leave this sin altogether, then you can receive communion. And if you don’t leave, then you still can’t receive communion.”

And in general, all of us, priests, must remember that the Venerable Mary of Egypt, after 16 years of a terrible, depraved life, was allowed to receive communion. She did not fast for three days, she did not read the canons and took communion after her repentance.

Most likely, her whole appearance, all her clothes, the smell of perfume - everything was thought out by her to evoke lust. This was her life. And in this form, only with repentance in her heart, she came to the monastery on the Jordan, where the strictest ascetics lived. Probably the priest who carried out the Chalice was forced to talk to her. I suppose life is silent about this. But he probably asked her. And if he didn’t ask, then he probably saw her repentance and allowed her to receive communion. That is, three or four days ago she was still fornicating, but now she was allowed to receive communion because her repentance was so strong. We talked about the fact that the main condition for communion is a contrite heart. The priest saw that his heart was broken. The man was reborn and became different.

Therefore, she could be admitted to communion.

But we, priests, should not have excesses in the other direction. Because if you read the book of canons and select from there those rules that relate to the teaching of the sacrament and refusal, then very often you will find the formulation: “Let both the one who received the sacrament and the one who received the sacrament be punished.” Therefore, for example, if a priest refuses to teach the Holy Mysteries to a person who is living in fornication or who has had an abortion, then such a priest must be understood that he is doing the right thing.

Or, let’s say, a church person repents that he has sinned by committing adultery. If the priest immediately admits him to communion, it may not be useful for this person now. He needs to do some penance. Not the canonical seven years, but maybe three months. The Holy Fathers say about Holy Communion that fire burns straw and hardens iron. Now this man’s soul is like straw, and if in such a state he is allowed to take communion, then perhaps this will give rise to destructive cynicism in him, that everything is possible, that he will be allowed in anyway.

Photo: VK/Simbirsk Metropolis

You have to humble yourself before a person

– Did you have a test of power in your youth?

– I did not want to become a priest early, but I was ordained at the age of 24 with the urgent blessing of the bishop and was very afraid of the responsibility that the rank imposes. So I kept myself in check.

Once, I perhaps expressed my opinion too strongly to one woman that she should not marry the man who proposed to her. It seemed to me that I was saving her from trouble. And to this day I am ashamed of this, not because I was wrong or right in everyday terms, but because this was the area in which, according to God’s will, she herself had to make a decision, and I invaded this. She still made the decision, but I had authority and expressed my opinion too strongly. And it’s still hard for me to remember this.

And so, it seems to me, I saved myself from this. He didn’t get involved, didn’t marry, didn’t divorce people.

– How can young priests resist the temptation of great power?

– You have to humble yourself before a person. Christ humbles himself before each of us. We come to Him in such sinful filth, and He listens to each of us. We want Him to love us, so that He does not see our sins. We say: look here, don’t look there. We say: “Do not cast me away from Your face,” and next to it: “Turn Your face away from my sins.” Like a small child: “Look here, don’t look there.” We ask Him to disidentify us from our sins.

We must treat parishioners in the same way.

And in general, remember that man is a great shrine, the most important icon of God, a treasure, this is the whole universe.

And suddenly this person, this value of God, comes up to you and asks you something with trust. And you should not be a source of tears, sorrow, trouble for him. And even when you are forced to talk about something tough for a person, that this is impossible, that this is impossible, you still need to do this not with a rude, patronizing intonation. This must be done with love and humility.

Of course, a person has less freedom in marriage. But that's all. Otherwise, people in the family, on the contrary, are much happier. After all, happiness is when you love and you are loved. It is much easier to implement this in a family. Probably, the survey in question was conducted among people who were far not only from the Church, but also from the Christian understanding of life in general. These very sad survey results are yet another evidence of the deepest crisis in the Russian people’s understanding of what the institution of family is.

It seems to me that the main wealth of a person on earth is the people who love him. The more of them, the richer the person. A family is just such people: a wife who was not there, but now she is; children who never existed, and now the Lord has given them to you. If a person loves only himself, then, of course, it is harder for him in the family. It is not the family that makes a person unhappy, but the inability to love.

Recently I took a closer look: which of my parishioners and acquaintances looks happy? It turned out that these are people who work in the field of Christian service to others, for example, in the Marfo-Mariinsky monastery or in orphanages. They receive very little - not only money, but also gratitude. And the eyes glow.

The Lord said: “It is more blessed to give than to receive” (Acts 20:35). You can say this: it’s happier to give than to receive. That is, a person who knows how to give, has a taste for it and finds joy in it is happier than one who only knows how to take and seeks joy in this.

The less a person knows how to give and serve others, the less happy he is, no matter how much money, cars, yachts and houses he has. Happy is the one who realizes his ability to give and serve - and we know how many happy poor people there are and how many unhappy rich people there are. This is an axiom, we can no longer talk about it.

It is the misunderstanding of the nature of family that makes people feel unhappy. And if a believer thinks so, if family life with its worries instead of joy drives him into depression, it means that he has made a mistake somewhere in the structure of his family. If this happens to you, then you are doing something wrong.

If you look at the Orthodox theology of the family - and it is almost all contained in the words of the Sacrament of Wedding - then it talks about glory, and honor, and joy. In the Sacrament of the Wedding, the priest says that husband and wife should have the same joy that Holy Queen Helen had when she found the Life-Giving Cross. Can you imagine how happy she was?

If this is not the case, then there is a failure somewhere inside you. The causes of despondency are, as we know, inside a person, and only the reasons for despondency are outside. The main reason for despondency is always pride and selfishness. A humble person does not lose heart in any situation; this is an axiom of Christian spiritual experience. If a person becomes despondent, it means that somewhere there was exaltation. If family life does not give satisfaction, it means that I am not getting what I thought, how I imagined I should receive.

But in fact, family life is a constant step beyond oneself. You get to know the world and God through the eyes of your loved one, everything opens up to you from the other side. You should not try to squeeze another person “under you.” Friend - from the word “other”. To be able to be friends is to be able to accept another person as different, not as you think he should be. The ability to hear and understand this is the beginning of the journey, and then it’s work.

If you feel unhappy, you must say: “Lord, grant me to see my sins.” Because you didn’t receive the gifts that the Lord was ready to give you—you didn’t do enough, you weren’t ready, you didn’t live up to it.

Of course, it happens that the second spouse behaves ugly. A family is a big, big log that is carried at two ends. If at the other end they let go, then you won’t be able to hold on either. Sometimes a family falls apart because of another person. But did you do everything yourself? Have you humbled yourself? Did you listen? Modern man, unfortunately, does not know how to do this at all.

I once talked to a man whose family was starting to fall apart. Both he and she are believers, parishioners of our church, married, and churchgoers. According to him, his wife was to blame for everything. For an hour and a half I tried to get through to the person so that he could see his part of the guilt, but nothing worked. And then I asked: “When you got married, did you even want to make her happy?” He looked at me in surprise: “Oh, I didn’t think about that.” If a person gets married to become happy himself, and not to serve, then this is a dead end. Even if a person serves in anticipation of a reward, but does not receive the reward—happiness—it means that this service is not yet entirely pure, although it is happening.

Of course, family is incredibly difficult. But an excellent way to overcome many difficulties is daily prayer together. Even if a husband and wife quarrel or something goes wrong between them, if in the evening they force themselves to get up for joint prayer, then what we expect from the family will be revived. The small Church will be restored as a union of people united by the presence of the Holy Spirit. Through this you can overcome everything.

It is no coincidence that in traditional cultures, for example in the 15th century, parents could introduce a young bride and groom immediately before marriage, in an arrangement or at an engagement party, and I think there were fewer unhappy marriages and divorces. And there were generally more happy people than there are now. I know many such families in our time - mostly priestly, where people before marriage not only did not live together, as is now customary among secular people, but they practically did not know each other. But the confessor gave his blessing - they got married, and I am a witness: these are happy families. The century is no longer the 15th, but the 20th and 21st, but the mechanism for achieving happiness is still the same: happiness lies in service.

Yes, there are things that cannot be tolerated. Adultery and drunkenness cannot be tolerated. They destroy and kill the home Church. You can come to terms with everything else, although it is very difficult, because modern man is not ready for this.

One priest I knew told me how a well-groomed lady came to him, accompanied by a security jeep. The children study in London, she has everything, but she is disappointed in life and has nothing to do. Father suggested this and that, but she replied that she had already tried praying and fasting, but nothing helped. And the priest replied: “You sit in your jeep with security, go to the Tver region, for example, to some orphanage. Look how the children live there.” She snorted and walked away. And three months later she returned: a completely different person, her eyes glow. She said that at first she was offended by the priest, and then she thought: since nothing helps, then she should try this too. I went to the orphanage, started helping, and attracted all my friends from my Rublevka. She began a new life.

The mechanism is always the same, given by God, not invented by people: “It is more blessed to give than to receive.” Serve others and you will be happy.

“Soon it will be 25 years that I have been a priest. Over the years, about 15 people with whom I was acquainted at various times were deprived of their holy orders. The reason is the same everywhere - family breakdown, fornication... A priest who has committed even one fall dies like a priest. Inevitably. It’s like “an injury incompatible with life,” Archpriest Fyodor Borodin reflects on why cooling occurs and people leave the Church. The conversation was led by Oksana Golovko.

And the harlot says: “You are a priest! I won't be with you"

- Today there are frequent conversations and public confessions of people who are disillusioned with the Church. How should we treat them?

- “The lamp for the body is the eye. Therefore, if your eye is clean, your whole body will be full of light” (Matthew 6:22). The way I perceive the surrounding reality, whether I see dark or light in it, testifies to the purity or impurity of my heart. The church is like a huge multi-story building, where there are upper floors, from where there is a beautiful view and the sky is nearby, and there are basements.

And each person chooses where in the Church he will live. If a person is looking for its Master - Christ - in the Church, looking for prayer, he will meet the priest who will help him on his way, and will meet the same brothers and sisters. And for him the Church will be the real Church of Christ.

And if a person comes to the Church with a dark, crafty eye, if he looks for shortcomings everywhere, if he does not think of fighting the sin of condemnation, then he will encounter precisely this reality of the Church. And he will believe that this is the Church. He will get angry and irritated when people say: “No, the Church is not that, the Church is the abode of the Lord, Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit.” Unfortunately, there is almost nothing you can do about this. Because if a person is determined to judge and see dirt, he will see it. Sooner or later such a person leaves the Church. After all, he did not meet Christ there.

There is an ancient patristic parable in which an elder tells a young monk about how three people ended up in the central city square at night. And they saw a man, wrapped in a cloak, sneaking from shadow to shadow past the square, trying to pass it unnoticed. One thought that he was a fornicator who was returning from his sin, the second thought that he was a thief who had robbed someone. And the third thought that he was a lover of solitary prayer, who was looking for a place for this and wanted to hide his exploits. The elder said to the disciple: “Everyone saw what was close to his heart.”

If you have met Christ and loved Him, then no one can separate you from Him.

The life of the holy righteous Alexy Mechev tells that there was a time, nine years, when the abbot mocked him, small and unsightly in appearance, all the time. He shouted at him, scolded him, humiliated him, beat him. If Father Alexy had seen the Church in this, he would have deposed himself, perhaps he would have written a book called “Confession of a Former Deacon”... But he did not do this. Because of man's sins, he did not stop seeing Jesus Christ in the Church. And therefore he became a great saint.

But as for any Christian who leaves the Church or becomes disillusioned with it, this is still the result of either the grave sin in which a person lives, or the result of cooling. Each of us must daily put ourselves before the face of God and daily restore this connection, remember that no external activity by itself will restore this connection, without our own effort and desire. If this does not happen for a long time, then the inner fire in a person goes out.

- And when priests publish such “confession”, how can one not be disappointed by these stories?

A priest, unfortunately, is just as susceptible to these temptations as any layman. Yes, maybe even more. Because no one checks the priest. No one watches him pray and confess. The priest must seek confession. Most of the priests I know regularly go to confession, much more than the mandatory twice a year.

Most priests are well aware that they will simply fade away if they do not confess often.

When a priest grows cold and at the same time encounters some passions in the Church, primarily his own, then it overwhelms him, captures him, and he loses the ability to see the Lord Jesus Christ in the Church. And he himself says: “I don’t understand what I’m doing here.”

Unfortunately, a priest often cools down due to his own grave sins, including drunkenness and fornication. Still, the majority of clergy who lost or renounced their rank, no matter what they declared, faced exactly this. Because the canon is very strict. A priest who has committed fornication cannot perform the Divine Liturgy.

Soon it will be 25 years that I have been a priest. Over the years, about 15 people with whom I was acquainted at various times were deprived of their holy orders. The reason is the same everywhere - family breakdown, fornication. Two of them were banned from serving due to a conflict with the clergy, but still a year later they ended up with other women.

A priest who makes even one fall dies like a priest. Inevitably. It's like "injury incompatible with life."

I write this with pain; and most of them are very good people, some are still dear to me, but, apparently, betrayal does not come alone. And betrayal of the priestly oath attracts betrayal of your wife.

I had to take confession from one priest over a certain period of time. He lived in another city. There, for obvious reasons, he did not confess, but came to Moscow.

His family fell apart, he fell into fornication and simply hired prostitutes. And in order to have money, he “bombed” at night and worked as a driver on the road. In civilian clothes, a very short-haired, handsome, fairly young man. And so he says: “I once put a harlot in my house. We drove off with her and began to negotiate. She looks at me and directly shouts: “You are a priest! I won’t be with you.”

He begins to deny and say that everything is wrong. But she continues to scream and almost jumps out of the car while it’s moving, it’s unclear how she didn’t crash. That is, the professional harlot felt the grace of God that the priesthood gives. And he no longer felt it in himself. He did not react to my words that I could not read the prayer of permission and that I needed to go to the bishop.

The most amazing thing is that I saw how the priest in him gradually died, how he began to be afraid to perform the Divine Liturgy, and during the service they stopped coming to him for confession. He simply could no longer perform priestly duties.

The most famous case when a priest refused to serve is the example of Alexander Osipov, the famous fighter against the Church during the Khrushchev era. This is a former teacher and professor of the former Leningrad Theological Academy and Seminary. The reason that he stopped seeing Christ in the Church was his sin, incompatible with priestly service, and his second marriage.

Further, in front of a person leaving the Church: a former monk, a novice, a priest, there are two roads. The first road is to remain a lover of Christ, a lover of the Church and move on, through repentance to salvation, for which there is always hope, no matter how deeply a person has fallen. The second way is self-justification.

Recently, the second path, thanks to the Internet, has become very attractive and easy, because you can always lay out your vision of the situation, find people like you, who have the same situation, who have the same view of the Church, and be in their eyes justified. Then criticism of everything in the Church begins, a distorted view of the Church, full of hostility, hatred, when a person does not see good in anything, but only sins.

It is better not to read such texts, since, according to the purpose of their writing, they are almost always biased. You will dirty your soul, and you will not know the truth. “Anonymous” or “former” will assure that everything, absolutely everything is bad. But this is a view distorted by the sin of apostasy.

I heard the story of a banned priest about how he was banned by a “tyrant” metropolitan at the libel of a dean - a “monster”. In horror, I called my friend, who serves in the same diocese, in the same deanery. He, the rector of the beautiful large parish that he built from scratch, is extremely surprised. He says it's not like that at all. When he finds out where I got the information from, he says: “You should have seen how this former priest behaved at any meeting. I have never encountered such rudeness." It turns out like in the joke: “Maryivanna, why did you throw the doormat into the pot of borscht again?” Answer: “You are evil, I will leave you.”

No one, no circumstances, no misbehaving bishop or dean, or anyone else can deprive a priest of faith, except himself.

Because the priest himself once decided to accept holy orders, it was he who took the Pledge into his hands at the ordination, it was he who was told that “you will answer on the day of the Last Judgment.”

The Apostle Paul, anticipating the end of his earthly life, says very important words: “I have finished my course, I have kept the faith” (2 Tim. 4:7). Even he had to fight to maintain his faith.

Priests and laity plowed, exhausted from fatigue

Nowadays they often talk about the opportunities missed by the Church in the nineties and 2000s. Don't you think that it was necessary to engage more with people, to communicate openly with them?

It doesn’t seem to me that the Church has missed out on any huge number of opportunities.

Let's just remember how the late Patriarch Alexy answered these questions. He said that it is difficult to demand from a person who has recently been beaten for a very long time that he gets up, straightens up and works well. The Church approached the nineties in a completely tormented state. It’s not just that normal preaching was prohibited just recently - there were times when any sermon, even delivered in a church, had to be agreed upon in advance with the Commissioner for Religious Affairs.

And his representative stood with a typewritten copy in the temple and checked it. If a priest deviated from the agreed text, he could suffer greatly for it. It was impossible for him to openly preach to people, and he was forbidden to talk to young people.

My future wife, while still a schoolgirl, if she wanted to approach the confessor in church and ask some question, she had to do it, hiding behind a column, so that the elder standing on the choir could not see.

That is, the Church did not and could not have had the skill of wide open communication with people.

There was no literature. My mother, in order to let people read the Gospel, copied it by hand about fifteen times.

Traditional families of priests were almost unique. So there was almost no one to learn from. When a wave of completely unprepared people poured into the Church and became priests, it turned out that there were still very few of them. That is, so little that in the nineties any priest served simply to the point of exhaustion.

Both priests and laymen - church workers - in the nineties and zero years plowed as best they could, exhausted from fatigue. Many clergy sacrificed their communication with their wives, communication with their children, and almost always their health, to church building. I remember one summer with only two days off. I'm not talking about vacation.

At the age of 23, I became the rector of a church that needed to be restored - it’s like appointing a medical school graduate as the chief physician of a hospital. And there were a majority of people like me, because the churches were given away, but there were no priests.

Once I had to serve in the winter in the church in the name of the Forty Martyrs of Sebaste. And the temple was in such a state that, in order not to freeze at all, everyone took turns standing at the only fan heater that was in the temple - on the choir. The Holy Gifts froze in the Chalice, but how in a new way we then felt the feat of the saints freezing in Lake Sebaste!

Now it’s a shame to hear the widespread reproach that we were dealing with bricks, not souls. Because that's not true at all. In those conditions, we were primarily concerned with worship and people, preaching and confession. We preached wherever we could, including going to schools and institutes. At the same time, they were engaged in the restoration of temples.

I taught in public schools for 17 years for free on my days off. I drove fifty kilometers because I live in the Moscow region. And it was hard, but happy.

I immediately went to other schools, institutes, where the opportunity was given, where I was invited, one-time or systematically, without hesitation.

- But in the end, not everyone heard and accepted the sermon - what are the reasons?

If we say that we didn’t do something, then the main reason is not that we were hampered by poor organization or something like that. Sin prevents preaching. The main source of failure in our preaching is, on the one hand, that we do not show Christ, and on the other, that people do not want to hear about Him.

We must understand that if a person wants to hear about Christ, he will hear about Him. In Soviet times, the so-called “funny Bible” of a Czech cartoonist was published, which contained parodies of stories about the days of creation from the Book of Genesis. And people bought this book in order to take from it at least those quotes that the author criticized. So they sought God.

The fact that society has not completely become Christian is a matter of the totality of the choices of the people who make up this society. Because over the past 25 years, anyone could pick up the Gospel; everyone in our country has heard about Christ.

As for the intelligentsia constantly criticizing the Church, I remember the words of Christ: “We played the pipe for you, and you did not dance; We sang sad songs to you, and you did not weep” (Matthew 11:17).

Too many people who are far from the Church know exactly what it should be, what and how it should do. When the Church begins to do something wrong and something different, as those “experts” decided, they begin to get annoyed and scold her. So it was with Christ Himself. Only those who did not impose their vision on Him, but were ready to learn and listen, remained disciples. After His resurrection, He appeared to about 500 people - that’s all the disciples during the three years of His preaching. And this is from Christ Himself!

Therefore, one should not be embarrassed by the fact that a small number of people have entered deeply into church life. And the rest, having lingered at the entrance for twenty years, decide to disidentify themselves with the Church. This had to happen sometime.

Either a person turns around and leaves, or a person grows into the Church and begins to understand that the main thing they do here is the salvation of the soul, and the rest is secondary or alien.

And let's not forget about one eternal vice of our intelligentsia - to always be against any system if you have entered it. I remember how in the early 90s they ordained one wonderful church worker as a deacon. After the consecration, he could no longer call the Patriarch Patriarch. Only by last name. I could no longer confess to the abbot. He entered into an open conflict and lost his rank. Critics call the Church abusively - a “system,” but without an earthly system, a community of millions cannot exist.

Even if a dozen holy ascetics gather, they look for an abbot. They understand that they need him. Even on Makovets, at the request of the disciples of Abba Sergius, a system arises. Not for him, for them.

When you meet an intelligent, well-read person who has read everything except the Gospel, you understand that he is simply not interested in this and you can preach to such a person from morning to evening for at least a whole year - to no avail. He just doesn’t want to, he doesn’t care what’s written there. But it doesn’t matter because he knows very well that he will have to change. After all, this is the choice of the people themselves.

Believers today remember that then, in the nineties, when they prayed in dilapidated churches, where the wind was blowing, everything was different, brighter, sharper than now, in decorated and warm churches. Is it really?

People tend to feel nostalgic for their youth. And in our church youth too. Of course, these were wonderful years. I myself remember well how breathtaking it was to hear that this monastery had been given away, and the first liturgy would be held here tomorrow.

We, who entered the seminary in 1988, believed that now they would ease the pressure on the Church a little more, and then anything could happen. I remember how my fellow seminary student, who had submitted documents for ordination, walked around and said to himself: “Lord, if only I could serve one liturgy. If only I could perform one liturgy, and then life would be filled with meaning.” And the other, who had already entered the seminary, could not approach the house in the remaining week until September 1 in his hometown: a police squad and a military patrol were waiting for him in turn. In order to either be imprisoned for 15 days, or sent to two months of military training and there forced to refuse to study at the seminary. And then, towards the end of our studies at the seminary, churches began to open. This joy cannot be described in words.

Yes, the church revival was truly like the sun rising after a long night, like spring after winter. Then the time came when the general neophyte had to end and the time of enormous work on oneself began for everyone. It was necessary, in the words of the Apostle Paul, to put off the old man and cultivate within himself a new man in the image of Christ. And this is daily work, for many decades. This is very difficult and not at all as beautiful as coming and taking out years of garbage from the temple. Everything is clear here, but when you deal with your soul, it’s hard and not so outwardly obvious, very long and difficult.

- Now there is much more negativity towards the Church than twenty years ago. Why?

A person’s gaze picks out from a variety of objects what he is looking for. If he wants to see a priest in a Mercedes, he will only see him. And he will not see those who live on the edge or beyond the edge of poverty.

It is enough to read any interview with Father Ioann Okhlobystin and see his answer to the question why he stopped serving - he could not feed his six children. This is a priest, a very famous person who served in the center of Moscow. What happens to others, on the periphery?

Often criticism of the Church is very much simply a matter of self-justification. I literally heard this: “I haven’t gone to church all these years, and today I realized why - when I saw a priest in a Mercedes.” By rejecting the Church, they reject not us, “fat priests,” but Christ; they do not come to us, but to Him.

Yes, we have a huge responsibility and we must be impeccable. Every priest and every layman must remember that in the eyes of those around him he constitutes the Church.

A priest should never be drunk, never, not even once in his life. Because if he is seen at least once, if he seduces even one person, it will be hard for him to answer for it.

Yes, you can't drive expensive cars. Of course, you have to be polite, you can’t be rude. Yes, you need to read, you need to constantly educate yourself.

Our mistakes are our mistakes. But, through any mistakes of any clergy, if a person loves Christ, he will come to His Church. Because this is His Church, and not the church of “fat priests in Mercedes.” And such a person will not care at all how the priest sins. He will think about his joy of meeting Christ and about his sins.

A person who loves her should criticize the Church

-Who can criticize the Church?

I think that only a person who loves her and treats her like a mother can constructively criticize the Church. Only such criticism will benefit us, the members of the Church. Although it is useful to humble us. It’s useful for me personally because I’m a proud person.

Although I have never driven a Mercedes, and even if they give it to me, I won’t go. But yes, unfair criticism keeps me on my toes.

I remember the time of my belief - high school. 1982-1985, when I internally learned to resist the state ideology of atheism. In this sense, it’s easier for me: I have something to remember and just restore the skill.

The Lord allows criticism so that we don’t relax. Criticism is also useful so that we, believers, can train our intellect so that we can defend our faith.

But something can be changed in the Church only through criticism of inner pain, through criticism from someone who loves, who has been in the Church for twenty, thirty years...

And when it comes from outside, it sounds strange. For example, they say: “The Church receives money from the state.” And no one remembers that for 25 years the Church has been restoring property that is not its own at its own expense. There is a society, and society has architectural monuments, and the whole society is responsible for these monuments. Even non-believers of this society are responsible for ensuring that monuments are preserved. It is not for them to decide that most of these monuments are temples. This is what our ancestors decided.

But society in the early nineties easily shifted the problem of preserving its monuments, its heritage onto the Church. And all this time we have been working hard, maintaining and restoring what does not belong to us. Now some churches have begun to be transferred into the ownership of the Church.

Why, when the Church receives some crumbs of money to restore state property, does swearing begin?

Why doesn’t the Church always give an appropriate assessment to those who speak and do unacceptable things in its name, because this negatively affects its reputation?

The Church has a centuries-old practice of not doing anything hastily. Because if you do things hastily, you cannot get out of the context and look at the situation from the outside. It seems to me that the Church should not work in the rhythm of presenting news on the Internet, when something happened half an hour ago, and a comment an hour later.

But it is clear that the dialogue on behalf of the Church should be conducted by people who have the appropriate cultural level, preferably with a first higher secular education. The wisdom of the leadership is to put precisely such people in the press services and send them to negotiations.

Unfortunately, any small reason, any inappropriate statement can be blown up into national news. We live in this new reality. We must get used to being fully responsible for our words, get used to the fact that we live as if under a glass bell, where spotlights are directed at us from all sides, and any action can be inflated to the point of discussion throughout the country. So a clergyman needs to think carefully before saying anything.

People have become more cynical, but they are looking for depth

- Today you can hear from priests that the Church has more formal work, is this true?

Unfortunately, this is partly true. It’s just that if you start some new business in Russia (for example, catechesis, which should be carried out in every parish, or missionary service), it is impossible to complete the work or make any changes to it without systematic reporting, since this is the most accessible form of feedback communications.

It's another matter if reporting becomes an end in itself. Then she kills the real deal. If, for example, they demand that there be a youth leader in the parish, but there is no youth leader. And so, for example, I call a person and say: “Listen, be a youth leader, because they demand of me. Go to meetings." In this situation, he will simply lose trust in me, because youth is usually uncompromising, but here I am forced to offer him to fake it.

So such things are very dangerous when reporting can begin to live by its own logic and kill lives. I remember the story of one priest who said that he had a huge number of young people in his parish; his bishop gave his blessing to formalize the youth movement. And when he began to formalize it, everything was empty.

For example, it is difficult for me to find someone responsible for youth work, because we have a lot of young people and children in the parish, but they are all included in common life. I cannot formalize them into a separate movement and I think that this is wrong in the situation of our particular parish.

In any reporting, it seems to me that we must be very careful and sensitive to the fact that all situations are different.

- Is there something in the Church that obscures Christ from us today?

If I seek Christ, no one can shield Him from me. There are only reasons around me, the reasons for the loss of Christ will always be within me. This is an ascetic axiom. The cause of any sin is inside me; sin is born in my freedom. No one can lose contact with Christ for me, no one can lose faith for me. Outside they can only offer a reason.

And as for trials, let us remember the words of the Apostle Paul: “All things work together for good to those who love God” (Rom. 8:28). And if God sends difficulties to his servants, it means he considers them necessary.

Where does the arrogance of believers, including priests, come from regarding the “baptized but not enlightened” people, and is it necessary to fight this?

We must learn to accept people and turn every opportunity into an occasion for preaching. If a person came to church to light a candle for someone, one must understand that he did not come to me, to the priest, but came in search of God. The fact that I know much more about God (as I self-confidently think) is not a reason for me to rise above this person.

In general, the temple is the meeting place of Christ with man. And the priest is the person who serves this meeting.

This means that this movement, if it is directed towards the Lord, perhaps not yet formalized or misunderstood, or maybe even a little stupid, somehow funny, needs to be picked up, supported and moved a little further towards Christ. Say something nice, smile, give a book, tell something.

Very little is needed for a person to understand that a priest is someone with whom one can talk. Next time he comes, he will ask deeper questions.

Our temple is located on Maroseyka Street, and excursions come to us. Without asking permission, people may start taking pictures and making noise. It would seem, what can be done? Sternly say: “Who blessed you to take photographs here? Who blessed you to preach in this church? Come on, get out of here!” But this will be a missed opportunity. So I cling to her, approach her and politely suggest: “Let me tell you about this temple, I am the abbot here.” Even an anti-church guide cannot refuse.

And you start: “Come here, please. But such and such an icon, its history. But these are the people. Dostoevsky often visited our church when he was in Moscow. The Botkins were our elders...” People suddenly discover all this for themselves and blossom.

I repeat, we must use any step a person takes towards God to pick him up and guide him further. Remember how the Apostle Paul praised the Athenians for being godly people? Although from the point of view of both a devout Jew and a Christian, it was a wicked pagan city. But the apostle first saw the good in them, and then began to preach.

- Are the people who came to faith in the nineties different from those who come now?

Wonderful people have come and are coming to God. Christ is the same yesterday and today. And the soul, if it longs to touch Him, like a deer to a source of water, is still the same as it was a thousand years ago, or a thousand and a half years ago. These are the tormented, sin-disfigured souls of His sons and daughters beloved by God.

But there are still differences. On the one hand, people have become more cynical. On the other hand, many people are looking in the Church not for the external and ritual, but for answers to the most pressing questions about salvation, looking for conversations about how the Church lives in its depths.

- How have you yourself changed over the years?

The Lord leads any person, including me, through life and teaches humility. My strength has diminished with age. When I was young, it seemed like I was about to move mountains. Now I understand that I can do very little.

My task is to catch the moment of my cooling and bring myself back to that perhaps inexperienced, but sincere burning that was at the beginning. Ask yourself: “Fedya, where is that boy, that aspiring priest?” And try to get back to him. To serve the Liturgy again in the same way, with the fear of God.