How does the Orthodox Church relate to Freemasonry? Psychology: between practical benefits and spiritual harm

Dear readers, on this page of our website you can ask any question related to the life of the Zakamsky deanery and Orthodoxy. The clergy of the Holy Ascension Cathedral in Naberezhnye Chelny answer your questions. Please note that it is better, of course, to resolve issues of a personal spiritual nature in live communication with a priest or with your confessor.

As soon as the answer is prepared, your question and answer will be published on the website. Questions may take up to seven days to process. Please remember the date of submission of your letter for ease of subsequent retrieval. If your question is urgent, please mark it as “URGENT” and we will try to answer it as quickly as possible.

Date: 06/22/2015 10:54:44

How does the Orthodox Church relate to Freemasonry?

answers Zheleznyak Sergey Evgenievich, religious scholar, assistant dean for missionary work

Good afternoon How does the Orthodox Church relate to Freemasonry, taking into account that upon entering the Masonic society, and in the future, each Freemason continues to profess the religious views with which he came to the lodge, and his great attention to his religion is welcomed? Thank you in advance for your response!

Hello!

There is no single conciliar definition regarding Freemasonry in Orthodoxy, but there are statements definitely against Freemasonry both in our Russian Orthodox Church and in others, for example, in the Greek Church.

Before I give these statements, I would like to point out how Freemasonry positions itself in relation to religion and, in particular, Christianity. The connection with religion in Freemasonry is indicated by the entire (or almost all) Masonic ritual and Masonic tradition. And here we can note a more noticeable connection with Judaism and Kabbalism than with Christianity. Initially, Freemasonry was a religious and political association. But in the last century and a half, this movement has increasingly severed its ties with traditional religion (and sometimes with religion in general).

Freemasonry is not a completely rigid, monolithic structure. Masonic lodges scattered throughout different countries of Europe and America often hold quite different views on religion, while at the same time general Masonic views and positions remain united.

You are partly right that Freemasonry does not prohibit the professing of religious views. But there is a fair amount of outright deceit in such a position. The declared religious tolerance in modern Freemasonry is rather PR and a way to lull vigilance. Scientologists also preach religious tolerance, but when a person begins to profess their views, the adherent’s attitude towards religion changes noticeably. The same is true in Freemasonry.

Well, now the Masonic judgments about religion.

“If in the old days masons were obliged to adhere in each country to the religion of that land or that people, now it is considered more appropriate to oblige them to have the only religion in which all people agree - leaving them, however, to have their own special (religious) opinions , - that is, to be good, conscientious people, full of sincerity and honest rules" (Book of Rules, James Anderson (XVII-XVIII centuries) James Adams is the founder of symbolic Freemasonry; interestingly, he is a priest of the Scottish Presbyterian Church.

I.V. Lopukhin (XVIII-XIX centuries), author of the “Moral Catechism of True Freemasons,” writes: “What is the Goal of the Order of True Freemasons?— Its main Goal is the same as the Goal of True Christianity. What should be the main Exercise (work) of true Freemasons? “Following Jesus Christ.”

Russian Freemasons remained associated with Christianity for quite a long time (at least nominally), were baptized, sincerely believed in God, and did not break with Orthodoxy. In Russia in the 17th and early 18th centuries, there were virtually no attacks or demarches against Orthodoxy and religion in general, which cannot be said about Western Europe. In the West, Freemasonry begins to rebel against religion quite early. For this reason, the Roman Catholic Church is taking, in particular, the following steps to protect its flock. In 1738, Pope Clement XII declared the excommunication of Roman Catholics from the Church if they joined the Masonic lodge. In the 20th century, this excommunication was officially repeated.

Here are the statements of Western Masons of far from the lowest degree (degree of initiation):

In 1863, at a congress of students in Liege, Freemason Lafargue defined the goal of Freemasonry “as the triumph of man over God”: “War on God, hatred of God! All the progress is in this! We must pierce the sky like a paper vault!”

The Belgian Freemason Kok declared at the International Masonic Congress in Paris “that we need to destroy religion,” and further, “through propaganda and even through administrative acts we will achieve the fact that we can crush religion.”

The Spanish revolutionary Freemason Ferrero, in his catechism for primary schools, writes: “God is only a childish concept caused by a sense of fear.”

“Down with the Crucified: You, who for 18 centuries have kept the world bowed under Your yoke, Your kingdom is over. No need for God! - says Freemason Fleury.

Some may say that this is only the private judgment of individual Masons. But here are the definitions of not individual individuals, but entire Masonic lodges:

“Let us not forget that we are anti-church, we will make every effort in our lodges to destroy religious influence in all the forms in which it manifests itself” (Congress at Belfort in 1911)

“Public education must first of all be freed from any spirit of clergy and dogmatism.” (Grand Orient Convention, 1909)

“We will energetically support freedom of conscience in everyone, but we will not hesitate to declare war on all religions, for they are the true enemies of humanity. Throughout all centuries, they have contributed only to discord between individuals and nations. Let us work, let us weave with our quick and dexterous fingers a shroud that will one day cover all religions; in this way we will achieve throughout the world the destruction of the clergy and the prejudices inspired by them” (Convention of the Grand Lodge of France, 1922)

“We can no longer recognize God as the goal of life; we have created an ideal that is not God, but humanity.” (Grand Orient Convention, 1913)

“We need to develop a morality that can compete with religious morality.” (Grand Eastern Convention, 1913, Ray of Light magazine, book 6, p. 48).

In the end, purely satanic self-confession also appears: “We are Freemasons,” says Altmeister of the Broklin Lodge “Lessing,” “we belong to the family of Lucifer.” The magazine of the Great Orient of Italy contains a hymn to Satan, which reveals the true essence of the order of Freemasons (brothers of freemasons): “I appeal to you, Satan, king of feasts! Down with the priest, down with your holy water and your prayers! And you, Satan, don’t step back! In matter that never rests, You, the living sun, the king of natural phenomena... Satan, you defeated God and the priests!”

Russian philosopher N.A. Berdyaev says the following about Freemasonry: “Freemasonry, first of all, has an anti-church and anti-Christian character (...). Now anti-Christian humanism prevails in Masonic ideology.”

Finally, I bring to your attention the judgments of the hierarchs of the Orthodox Church.

Metropolitan Anthony (Khrapovitsky): “Under the banner of the Masonic star, all the dark forces are working, destroying national Christian states. The Masonic hand took part in the destruction of Russia."

In 1932, the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia anathematized Freemasonry.

The Council of Bishops of the Greek Orthodox Church in 1933 gave the following definition of its attitude towards Freemasonry: “Unanimously and unanimously, we, all the bishops of the Greek Church, declare that Freemasonry is completely incompatible with Christianity, and therefore the faithful children of the Church must avoid Freemasonry. For we have unshakable faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, “in whom we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of His grace, which He has abundantly bestowed upon us in all wisdom and understanding” (Ephesians 1:7-8), which we have revealed to us. and the truth preached by the apostles “not in persuasive words of human wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and Power” (1 Corinthians, 2, 4), and we partake of the Divine sacraments, by which we are sanctified and saved for eternal life, and therefore we should not fall away from the grace of Christ , becoming participants in alien sacraments. It is not at all fitting for any of those who belong to Christ to seek outside His deliverance and moral improvement. Therefore, true and genuine Christianity is incompatible with Freemasonry.”

Our present Patriarch Kirill, while still a metropolitan, also spoke negatively about Freemasonry as a secret organization that preaches exclusive submission to its leaders, a conscious refusal to disclose the essence of the organization’s activities to the church hierarchy and even in confession. “The Church cannot approve the participation of Orthodox lay people, much less clergy, in societies of this kind.”

I believe that this answer is sufficient within our limited framework. Trust in the Lord God and our Savior Jesus Christ, do not look for any new “revelation” - everything necessary for our salvation, as well as for the peaceful good life of all people on earth, was already given and revealed 2 thousand years ago. Do not be offended: “Then many will be offended, and will betray one another, and will hate one another; and many false prophets will arise and deceive many; and, due to the increase of iniquity, the love of many will grow cold; he who endures to the end will be saved” (Matthew 24:10-13).

Without understanding everything that happens in the Church, without basic knowledge about Orthodoxy, a truly Christian life is impossible. The “Orthodox Life” portal looked into what questions and erroneous judgments newcomers have about the Orthodox faith.

The myths are dispelled by the teacher of the Kyiv Theological Academy Andrei Muzolf, reminding: those who do not learn anything risk remaining a beginner forever.

– What arguments exist in favor of the fact that the only right choice on one’s spiritual path should be made in favor of Orthodoxy?

– According to Metropolitan Anthony of Sourozh, a person will never be able to perceive Orthodoxy as a personal faith if he does not see the light of Eternity in the eyes of another Orthodox. One modern Orthodox theologian once said that the only important argument in favor of the truth of Orthodoxy is holiness. Only in Orthodoxy do we find the holiness to which the human soul strives - “Christian” by nature, as the church apologist of the early 3rd century Tertullian says about it. And this holiness is incomparable with ideas about the holiness of other religions or denominations. “Tell me who your saint is, and I will tell you who you are and what your church is,” - this is how a well-known saying can be paraphrased.

It is by the saints of a particular church that one can determine its spiritual essence, its core, because the ideal of a church is its saint. Based on the qualities the saint possessed, one can conclude what the church itself calls for, because the saint is an example to be followed by all believers.

–How to treat saints and shrines of other religions?

– The holiness of Orthodoxy is the holiness of life in God, the holiness of humility and love. It is radically different from the holiness that we see in other Christian and non-Christian faiths. For the Orthodox saint, the goal of life was, first of all, the struggle against one’s own sin, the desire for union with Christ, and deification. Holiness in Orthodoxy is not a goal, it is a consequence, the result of a righteous life, the fruit of unity with God.

The saints of the Orthodox Church considered themselves the most sinful people in the world and unworthy even to call themselves Christians, while in some other confessions holiness was an end in itself and for this reason, willingly or unwillingly, gave birth in the heart of such an “ascetic” only to pride and ambition. An example of this is the lives of such “saints” as Blessed Angela, Teresa of Avila, Ignatius of Loyola, Catherine of Siena and others, who were canonized by the Roman Catholic Church, and some of them were even canonized as Teachers of the Universal Church.

The canonization of such saints is the glorification of human vices and passions. The real Church cannot do this. What should be the attitude of Orthodox Christians towards such “saints”? The answer, I think, is obvious.

–Why is the Orthodox Church so intolerant of other religions?

– The Orthodox Church has never called its followers to any intolerance, especially religious, because any intolerance can sooner or later develop into malice and anger. In the case of religious intolerance, hostility can easily be redirected from the religious teaching itself to its representatives and supporters. According to Patriarch Anastasius of Albania, “the Orthodox position can only be critical in relation to other religions as systems; however, in relation to people belonging to other religions and ideologies, this is always an attitude of respect and love - following the example of Christ. For man continues to be a bearer of the image of God.” St. Augustine warns: “We must hate sin, but not the sinner,” and therefore if our intolerance leads to anger at this or that person, then we are on the road leading not to Christ, but from Him.

God acts in all creation, and therefore even in other religions there are, albeit weak, but still reflections of that Truth, which is fully expressed only in Christianity. In the Gospel we see how the Lord Jesus Christ repeatedly praised the faith of those whom the Jews considered pagans: the faith of a Canaanite woman, a Samaritan woman, a Roman centurion. In addition, we can recall an episode from the book of the Acts of the Holy Apostles, when the Apostle Paul arrived in Athens - a city like no other, replete with all possible religious cults and creeds. But at the same time, the holy Apostle Paul did not immediately reproach the Athenians for polytheism, but tried, through their polytheistic inclinations, to lead them to the knowledge of the One True God. In the same way, we should show not intolerance, but love towards representatives of other faiths, because only by example of our own love can we show others how superior Christianity is to all other faiths. Our Lord Jesus Christ Himself said: “By this everyone will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another” (John 13:35).

–Why does God allow evil to happen?

– The Holy Scripture says: “God did not create death and does not rejoice in the destruction of the living, for He created everything for existence” (Wis. 1:13). The reason for the appearance of evil in this world is the devil, the highest fallen angel, and his envy. The Wise One says so: “God created man for incorruptibility and made him the image of His eternal existence; but through the envy of the devil death entered the world, and those who belong to his inheritance experience it” (Wis. 2:23-24).

In the world created by God there is no such “part” that in itself would be evil. Everything created by God is good in itself, because even demons are angels who, unfortunately, did not retain their dignity and did not persist in goodness, but who were nevertheless initially, by nature, created good.

The answer to the question of what evil is was well expressed by the holy fathers of the Church. Evil is not nature, not essence. Evil is a certain action and state of the one who produces evil. Blessed Diadochos of Photikis, an ascetic of the 5th century, wrote: “Evil is not; or rather, it exists only at the moment when it is committed.”

Thus, we see that the source of evil lies not in the structure of this world, but in the free will of creatures created by God. Evil exists in the world, but not in the same way as everything that has its own special “essence” exists in it. Evil is a deviation from good, and it does not exist at the level of substance, but only to the extent that free beings created by God deviate from good.

Based on this, we can claim that evil is unreal, evil is non-existence, it does not exist. According to St. Augustine, evil is a lack or, rather, a corruption of good. Good, as we know, can increase or decrease, and the decrease in good is evil. The most vivid and meaningful definition of what evil is, in my opinion, is given by the famous religious philosopher N.A. Berdyaev: “Evil is a falling away from absolute existence, accomplished by an act of freedom... Evil is a creation that has deified itself.”

But in this case, the question arises: why did God not create the universe from the very beginning without the possibility of evil arising in it? The answer is: God allows evil only as a certain inevitable state of our still imperfect universe.

For the transformation of this world, it was necessary to transform the person himself, his deification, and for this, the person had to initially establish himself in goodness, show and prove that he is worthy of those gifts that were placed in his soul by the Creator. Man had to reveal the image and likeness of God within himself, and he could only do this freely. According to the English writer K.S. Lewis, God did not want to create a world of obedient robots: He wants only sons who will turn to Him only out of love.

The best explanation of the reason for the existence of evil in this world and how God Himself can tolerate its existence, it seems to me, are the words of Metropolitan Anthony of Sourozh: “God takes full responsibility for the creation of the world, man, for the freedom that He gives, and for all the consequences to which this freedom leads: suffering, death, horror. And God’s justification is that He Himself becomes a man. In the person of the Lord Jesus Christ, God enters the world, clothed in flesh, united with us by all human destiny and bearing on Himself all the consequences of the freedom bestowed by Himself.”

–If a person was born in a non-Orthodox country, did not receive an Orthodox upbringing and died unbaptized–is there no salvation for him?

– In his letter to the Romans, the holy Apostle Paul writes: “When the pagans, who do not have the law, do by nature what is lawful, then, not having the law, they are a law unto themselves: they show that the work of the law is written in their hearts, as their conscience testifies them and their thoughts, now accusing, now justifying one another” (Rom. 2:14-15). Having expressed a similar thought, the Apostle asks the question: “If the uncircumcised keeps the statutes of the law, will not his uncircumcision be counted as circumcision to him?” (Rom. 2:26). Thus, the Apostle Paul suggests that some non-Christians, by virtue of their virtuous lives and the fulfillment of the Law of God written in their hearts, may still be honored by God and, as a result, be saved.

About those people who, unfortunately, could not or will not be able to accept the Sacrament of Baptism, St. Gregory the Theologian wrote very clearly: “Others do not even have the opportunity to accept the gift [of Baptism], either, perhaps, due to their infancy, or because some coincidence of circumstances completely beyond their control, due to which they are not worthy to receive grace... the latter, who have not accepted Baptism, will not be glorified or punished by the righteous Judge, because although they are not sealed, they are not bad either... For they are not everyone... unworthy of honor is already worthy of punishment.”

Saint Nicholas Kavasila, a famous Orthodox theologian of the 14th century, says something even more interesting about the possibility of saving unbaptized people: “Many, when they had not yet been baptized with water, were baptized by the Bridegroom of the Church Himself. To many he sent a cloud from heaven and water from the earth beyond expectation and thus baptized them, and recreated most of them in secret.” The quoted words of the famous theologian of the 14th century secretly indicate that some people, finding themselves in another world, will become partakers of the life of Christ, His Divine Eternity, since it turns out that their communion with God was accomplished in a special mysterious way.

Therefore, we simply do not have the right to talk about who can be saved and who cannot, because by committing such gossip, we assume the functions of Judge of human souls, which belong only to God.

Interviewed by Natalya Goroshkova

Why does the Orthodox Church have such a sharply negative attitude towards homosexuality? I’m not talking about gay pride parades; I don’t understand it myself, although I live with a woman. How are we different? Why are we more sinful than everyone else? We are people like everyone else. Why is this attitude towards us? Thank you.

Hieromonk Job (Gumerov) answers:

The Holy Fathers teach us to distinguish between sin and a person whose soul is sick and needs treatment for a serious illness. Such a person evokes compassion. However, healing is impossible for someone who is blind and does not see his distressed condition.

Holy Scripture calls any violation of the Divine law sin (see 1 John 3:4). The Lord Creator endowed man and woman with mental and physical characteristics so that they complement each other and thereby form a unity. The Holy Bible testifies that marriage as a permanent life union between a man and a woman was established by God at the very beginning of human existence. According to the Creator's plan, the meaning and purpose of marriage is joint salvation, common work, mutual assistance and physical union for the birth of children and their upbringing. Of all earthly unions, marriage is the closest: they will be one flesh(Gen. 2:24). When people have sex outside of marriage, they pervert the Divine plan for a blessed life union, reducing everything to a sensory-physiological beginning and discarding spiritual and social goals. Therefore, the Holy Bible defines any cohabitation outside of family ties as a mortal sin, because the Divine institution is violated. An even more serious sin is satisfying a sensual need in an unnatural way: “You shall not lie with a man as with a woman: it is an abomination” (Lev. 18:22). This applies equally to women. The Apostle Paul calls this a shameful passion, disgrace, lewdness: “Their women replaced natural use with unnatural; Likewise, men, abandoning the natural use of the female sex, were inflamed with lust for one another, men committing shame on men and receiving in themselves the due retribution for their error” (Rom. 1: 26-27). People living in the sin of Sodom are deprived of salvation: “Do not be deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals“Neither thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Cor. 6:9-10).

There is a sad repetition in history. Societies experiencing periods of decline are struck, as if by metastases, by some especially dangerous sins. Most often, sick societies find themselves engulfed in massive greed and depravity. The offspring of the latter is the sin of Sodom. Massive depravity ate away at Roman society like acid and crushed the power of the empire.

To justify the sin of Sodom, they try to bring “scientific” arguments and convince that there is an innate predisposition to this attraction. But this is a typical myth. A helpless attempt to justify evil. There is absolutely no evidence that homosexuals are genetically different from other people. We are talking only about spiritual and moral illness and the inevitable deformation in the psyche. Sometimes the reason may be childhood depraved games that a person has forgotten, but they have left a painful mark on the subconscious. The poison of unnatural sin that has entered a person can manifest itself much later if the person does not lead a correct spiritual life.

The Word of God, sensitive to all manifestations of human life, not only says nothing about innateness, but calls this sin an abomination. If this depended on certain neuroendocrine characteristics and sex hormones, which are associated with the physiological regulation of human reproductive function, then the Holy Scriptures would not speak about the unnaturalness of this passion, it would not be called shame. Isn’t it blasphemous to think that God can create some people with a physiological disposition to mortal sin and thereby condemn them to death? The attempts to use science as justification are evidenced by the facts of mass distribution in some periods of history of this type of debauchery. The Canaanites, residents of Sodom, Gomorrah and other cities of Pentaipolis (Adma, Zeboim and Zoar) were completely infected with this filth. Defenders of the sin of Sodom dispute the idea that the inhabitants of these cities had this shameful passion. However, the New Testament directly states: “Like Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around, like them committed fornication. those who went after other flesh, having undergone the punishment of eternal fire, were set as an example, so it will certainly be with these dreamers who defile the flesh” (Jude 1: 7-8). This is also obvious from the text: “They called Lot and said to him: Where are the people who came to you for the night? bring them out to us; we know them” (Gen. 19:5). The words “let us know them” have a very specific character in the Bible and indicate carnal relationships. And since the angels who came had the appearance of men (see: Gen. 19: 10), this shows how disgusting depravity everyone was infected with (“from young to old, all the people”; Gen. 19: 4) the inhabitants of Sodom. Righteous Lot, fulfilling the ancient law of hospitality, offers his two daughters, “who have not known man” (Gen. 19:8), but the perverts, inflamed by vile lust, tried to rape Lot himself: “Now we will do worse to you than to them.” "(Gen. 19:9).

Modern Western society, having lost its Christian roots, is trying to be “humane” in relation to homosexuals, calling them the morally neutral word “sex minority” (by analogy with a national minority). This is actually a very cruel attitude. If a doctor, wanting to be “kind,” inspired a seriously ill patient that he was healthy, only by nature not like others, then he would be little different from a murderer. Holy Scripture indicates that God “condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to destruction and turned them into ashes, setting an example for those who would become wicked” (2 Pet. 2:6). It speaks not only of the danger of losing eternal life, but also of the possibility of being healed from any, even the most serious and inveterate spiritual illness. The Apostle Paul not only severely rebuked the Corinthians for their shameful sins, but also strengthened their hope with examples from their own midst: “And such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God” (1 Cor. 6:11).

The Holy Fathers point out that the center of gravity of all passions (including carnal ones) is in the area of ​​the human spirit - in its damage. Passions are the result of man's separation from God and the resulting sinful depravity. Therefore, the starting point of healing must be the determination to “leave Sodom” forever. When the angels were leading Lot's family out of this city of vile depravity, one of them said: “Save your soul; don’t look back” (Gen. 19:17). There was a moral test in these words. A farewell glance at the corrupt city, which had already been sentenced by God, would indicate sympathy for it. Lot's wife looked back, because her soul had not parted with Sodom. We find confirmation of this idea in the book of the wisdom of Solomon. Speaking about wisdom, the author writes: “During the destruction of the wicked, she saved the righteous, who escaped the fire that descended on five cities, from which, as evidence of wickedness, there remained smoking empty earth and plants that did not bear fruit in due time, and as a monument untrue souls are a standing pillar of salt (Wis. 10: 6-7). Lot's wife is called an unfaithful soul. Our Lord Jesus Christ warns his disciples: “On the day that Lot came out of Sodom, it rained fire and brimstone from heaven and destroyed everyone... Remember Lot’s wife” (Luke 17: 29, 32). Not only those who through their experience have looked into the abyss, but also all who justify this vice, need to constantly remember Lot’s wife. The path to real fall begins with the moral justification of sin. One must be horrified by the eternal fire, and then all liberal speeches about the “right” to what the Lord said through the mouth of the sacred writers will seem false: “The perverse is an abomination to the Lord, but He has fellowship with the righteous” (Proverbs 3:32).

It is necessary to enter into the grace-filled experience of the Church. First of all, you must (without delay) prepare for general confession and go through it. From this day on, we must begin to do what the Holy Church has prescribed to its members for centuries: regularly participate in the sacraments of confession and communion, go to holiday and Sunday services, read morning and evening prayers, observe holy fasts, be attentive to yourself in order to avoid sin. ). Then God’s all-powerful help will come and completely heal you from a serious illness. “He who has come to know his own weakness from many temptations, from bodily and mental passions, also comes to know the infinite power of God, who delivers those who cry out to Him in prayer with all their hearts. And prayer is already sweet to him. Seeing that he cannot do anything without God, and fearing a fall, he tries to be relentlessly close to God. He is surprised, reflecting on how God delivered him from so many temptations and passions, and thanks the Deliverer, and with gratitude receives humility and love, and no longer dares to despise anyone, knowing that just as God helped him, he can help everyone, whenever he wants” (Reverend Peter of Damascus).

Anastasius (Yannulatos),
Archbishop of Tirana and all Albania

The Orthodox Church lived both in conditions of religious pluralism and in a religiously homogeneous environment. Its relations with other religions were significantly influenced by the socio-political structures within which it existed.

(1) In the first centuries these relations were confrontational, sometimes more and sometimes less acute. In the religious context of the Jewish and Greco-Roman worlds, the Church experienced powerful resistance, even persecution, when it proclaimed the Gospel and proposed new premises for personal and social life in the light of the mystery of the relationship between God and man.

(2) When the time of “Christian” empires came, the attitude of confrontation remained, although its vector changed. In order to achieve socio-political stability, leaders sought religious uniformity, suppressing adherents of other religious traditions. Thus, some emperors, bishops and monks were in the forefront of the destruction of pagan temples. In the Byzantine Empire and, later, in the Russian Empire, the fundamental principle of Christ “who wants to come after Me...” () often forgotten. And if coercion did not reach the same degree as in the West, religious freedom was not always respected. The exception was the Jews, who received some privileges.

(3) In the Arab and Ottoman empires, Orthodox Christians coexisted with Muslim majorities; they faced various forms of oppression from government authorities, overt and covert, which caused passive resistance. At the same time, rather soft rules were in effect in different periods, so that Orthodox Christians and Muslims coexisted peacefully with each other, or simply with tolerance, or achieving mutual understanding and respect.

(4) Nowadays, in conditions of religious pluralism, we are talking about the Russian Orthodox Church and about harmonious coexistence and dialogue between followers of the Church of different religions while maintaining respect for the freedom of every person and every minority.

Historical overview of the Orthodox position

The theological understanding of the relationship of the Orthodox Church to other religions throughout history has been varied.

(1) Turning to the earliest "layers" of theological thought of the Orthodox East, we see that in parallel with the clear consciousness that the Church expresses the fullness of revealed truth about the "economy" of God in Christ through the Holy Spirit, there were constant attempts to understand religious beliefs, existing outside the Christian confession, with discernment and recognition that some revelation of God to the world is possible. Already in the first centuries, when in both theory and practice the clash between the Church and the dominant religions reached its peak, Christian apologists, for example Justin Martyr and, wrote about the “seed logos”, the “preparatory stage for renewal in Christ” and “reflections of the Divine Word ”, which can be found in the Greek culture that preceded Christianity. However, when Justin spoke about the “seed word,” this did not mean that he uncritically accepted everything that was created in the past by logic and philosophy: “Because they do not know all that pertains to the Logos, who is Christ, they often contradict themselves.” The Christian apologist readily applied the name "Christian" to those who lived "according to reason," but for him it was Christ who was the standard by which the theoretical and practical value of earlier forms of religious life were assessed.

After the Crusades, the vitriol of Byzantine polemics against Islam diminished somewhat, and some form of coexistence was proposed. Political and military expediency also required further expressions of goodwill.

(4) Penetrating into Central, South and East Asia, Orthodox Christianity encountered such developed religions as Zoroastrianism, Manichaeism, Hinduism and Chinese Buddhism. This meeting took place under extremely difficult circumstances and requires special study. Among various archaeological finds in China, we see the symbol of Christianity - the cross next to the symbol of Buddhism - the lotus, the clouds of Taoism or other religious symbols. On the famous Xian Fu stele, which was discovered in the 17th century and shows how Christianity penetrated into China, in addition to the cross, you can see images related to other religions: the dragon of Confucianism, the crown of Buddhism, the white clouds of Taoism, etc. This composition, which includes various The symbols perhaps indicate the expectation that the Chinese religions would be brought into harmony with the religion of the Cross and find their fulfillment in it.

(5) In later times, from the 16th to the 20th centuries, the Orthodox, with the exception of the Russians, were under Ottoman rule. The coexistence of Christians and Muslims was imposed de facto, but it was not always peaceful, since the conquerors made direct or indirect attempts to convert the Orthodox population to Islam (kidnapping of children by the Janissaries, pressure in the provinces, proselytizing zeal of the dervishes, etc.). To preserve their faith, Orthodox Christians were often forced to take a position of silent resistance. Deteriorating living conditions, a heavy tax burden and various socio-political lures from the civil authorities left the Orthodox two main options: either renounce their faith, or resist even to the point of martyrdom. There were also Orthodox Christians who were looking for a third way, a compromise solution: outwardly giving the impression that they had become Muslims, they remained faithful to Christian beliefs and customs; they are known as crypto-Christians. Most of them were assimilated in subsequent generations by the Muslim majority in whose midst they lived. The Orthodox gained strength by turning to liturgical life or fueling eschatological expectations. During those bitter years of slavery, the belief that “the end was near” spread. Small treatises written in a simple style were circulated among the people, the purpose of which was to strengthen Christians in their faith. They revolved around the statement: “I was born a Christian and I want to be a Christian.” This laconic confession defines the nature of Christian resistance to Ottoman Islam, which was expressed either in words, or in silence, or through the shedding of blood.

(6) In the vast Russian Empire, the clash of Christianity with other religions and the theoretical position of the Church towards them during the modern era took various forms, in accordance with the political and military goals pursued: from defense to attack and systematic proselytism and from indifference and tolerance to coexistence and dialogue. In relation to Islam, the Russians followed Byzantine models. Orthodox Christians faced serious problems after the onslaught of the Kazan Muslim Tatars, whose state fell only in 1552. In their missionary activities, both within the empire and in neighboring states of the Far East, the Orthodox of Russia encountered almost all known religions: Hinduism, Taoism, Shintoism, various branches of Buddhism, shamanism, etc. - and they studied them, trying to comprehend their essence. In the 19th century, a tendency spread among the Russian intelligentsia characterized by agnosticism, based on the belief that God's providence is beyond what we can describe with our theological categories. This did not mean avoiding the problem, but rather pointed to a special reverence for the terrible mystery of God, characteristic of Orthodox piety. Everything that concerns the salvation of people outside the Church is the mystery of the incomprehensible God. An echo of this position can be heard in the words of Leo Tolstoy: “As for other faiths and their relationship with God, I do not have the right and authority to judge this” .

(7) In the 20th century, even before the Second World War, the systematic study of other religions began in Orthodox theological schools - the subject “History of Religions” was introduced. This interest was not limited to academic circles, but spread more widely. Dialogue with representatives of other religious faiths developed primarily within the framework of the ecumenical movement, the centers of which were the World Council of Churches and the Vatican Secretariat for Other Religions. Since the 1970s, many Orthodox theologians have taken part in various forms of this dialogue. Given this context, Orthodoxy easily and with complete certainty declares its position on this issue: peaceful coexistence with other religions and mutual contacts through dialogue.

Orthodox theological approach to the religious experience of humanity

(1) Regarding the problem of the meaning and value of other religions, Orthodox theology, on the one hand, emphasizes the uniqueness of the Church, and on the other, admits that even outside the Church it is possible to comprehend basic religious truths (such as the existence of God, the desire for salvation, various ethical principles, overcoming death). At the same time, Christianity itself is considered not just as a religious belief, but as the highest expression of religion, that is, as an experienced connection between a person and the Holy One - with a personal and transcendental God. The sacrament of the “Church” exceeds the classical concept of “religion”.

The Christian West, following the direction of thought set by Augustine, came to a double understanding of reality. Thus, a clear distinction is made between the natural and the supernatural, the sacred and the spatial, religion and revelation, divine grace and human experience. The various views of Western theologians on other religions are characterized by this tendency to emphasize the gap and then look for ways to connect what is divided.

The theology of the Eastern Church is characterized, first of all, by the belief that the Trinity God is always active in creation and in human history. Through the incarnation of the Word, through the life and ministry of Jesus Christ, every gap between the natural and the supernatural, the transcendent and the worldly, has been abolished. It is abolished by the Word of God, who took on flesh and dwelt among us, and by the Holy Spirit, who in the course of history brings about the renewal of creation. The Eastern Church leaves room for personal freedom of thought and expression, within the framework of living tradition. In the Western world, discussion of the theological position in relation to other religions largely focuses on Christology. In the Eastern tradition, this problem is always viewed and resolved from a Trinitarian perspective.

(a) In contemplating this problem, attention must be called, first, to the world-wide radiance of the glory of God and His constant providence for all creation, especially for mankind, and secondly, to the fact that all human beings have one source of their being, share a common human nature and have a common purpose. One of the fundamental principles of the Christian faith is that God is incomprehensible, inaccessible in His essence. However, biblical revelation breaks the impasse of the unknowability of the nature of God, assuring us that although the essence of God remains unknown, the Divine presence is effectively manifested in the world and in the universe through Divine energies. When God reveals Himself through various theophanies, it is not the essence of God that is revealed, but His glory; and only man is able to comprehend it. The glory of God of the Trinity embraces the universe and all things. Therefore, all people are able to perceive and assimilate something from the radiance of the “Sun of Truth”, God, and join His love.

The great tragedy of the disobedience of the human race did not become an obstacle to the radiation of Divine glory, which continues to fill heaven and earth. The Fall did not destroy the image of God in man. What has been damaged, although not completely destroyed, is humanity's ability to comprehend the divine message, to achieve a true understanding of it. God has not stopped caring for the entire world He created. And it is not so much people who seek God as He who seeks them.

(b) In Christological dogma we find two main keys to the solution of the problem under consideration: the incarnation of the Word and the understanding of Christ as the “new Adam.” In the incarnation of the divine Word, the fullness of human nature was perceived by God. The theme of the acts of the Word before the incarnation and the acts of the risen Lord is at the center of the Orthodox liturgical experience. Intensified eschatological hope culminates in an amazing expectation, which the Apostle Paul expressed: “...having revealed to us the secret of His will according to His good pleasure, which He first placed in Him [Christ], in the dispensation of the fullness of times, in order to unite all things heavenly and earthly under the head of Christ” (). Divine action has a global dimension - and exceeds religious phenomena and religious experience.

Jesus Christ does not exclude people of other religions from His care. At certain points in His earthly life He spoke with and helped people from other religious traditions (a Samaritan woman, a Canaanite woman, a Roman centurion). He spoke with admiration and respect about their faith, which he did not find among the Israelites: “...and in Israel I did not find such faith”(cf. 15, 28; ). He paid special attention to the feeling of gratitude on the part of the leper Samaritan; and in a conversation with a Samaritan woman, He revealed to her the truth that God is Spirit (). He even used the image of the Good Samaritan to point out the core element of His teaching - the new dimension of love that He preached. He, the “Son of God,” Who at the Last Judgment will identify Himself with the “little ones” of this world (), regardless of their race or religion, calls us to treat every human person with true respect and love.

(c) If we look at foreign religious experience from the point of view of pneumatology, we will open up new horizons for our theological thinking. For Orthodox theological thought, the action of the Holy Spirit exceeds any definition and description. In addition to the “economy of the Word,” the Christian East, with firm hope and humble expectation, also pays attention to the “economy of the Spirit.” Nothing can limit His action: “The spirit breathes where it wants” (). The action and concordant power of God's love in the Trinity exceeds the capacity of human thought and understanding. Everything that is sublime and truly good is the result of the influence of the Spirit. Wherever we encounter manifestations and fruits of the Spirit - with “love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faith, meekness, self-control” (Gal. 5:22-23), - we can discern the consequences of the influence of the Holy Spirit. And much of what the apostle listed can be found in the lives of people belonging to other religions. The statement extra Ecclesiam nulla salus (there is no salvation outside the Church) appeared in the West and was adopted by the Roman Catholic Church. It does not express the essence of the Orthodox theological approach, even if used in a special, limited sense. For their part, theologians of the Eastern Church, both before and now, emphasize that God acts “also outside the boundaries of the visible Church” and that “not only Christians, but also non-Christians, unbelievers and pagans can become joint heirs and members of “one body and partakers of the promise of Him [God] in Christ Jesus” () – through the Church, to which pagans and non-Orthodox people can also invisibly belong by virtue of their faith and the saving grace given to them by God as a free gift, since both have an ecclesiastical character.”(John Karmiris). Thus, instead of the negative expression “outside the Church,” Orthodox thought emphasizes the positive expression “through the Church.” Salvation is accomplished in the world through the Church. The Church, as a sign and as an icon of the Kingdom of God, is the axis that holds and directs the entire process of anakephaleosis, or recapitulation. Just as the life of Christ, the new Adam, has universal consequences, so the life of His mystical body, the Church, is universal in its scope and effect. The prayer of the Church and her care embrace all humanity. The Church celebrates the Divine Eucharist and offers praise to God on behalf of all. She acts on behalf of the whole world. She spreads the rays of the glory of the risen Lord to all creation.

(2) This theological position encourages us to treat the other religious experiences of humanity with respect and at the same time with reason. Having studied the great religions, both academically and through research trips to countries where they exist today, and as a participant in many dialogues with intellectuals representing other religions, I would like to make the following observations.

(a) The history of religions shows that, despite the differences in the answers they give to the main problems - suffering, death, the meaning of human existence and communication - they all open the horizon towards a transcendental reality, towards Something or Someone , existing on the other side of the sensory sphere. As the fruit of humanity's aspiration towards the "Holy", they open for human experience the path leading to the Infinite.

(b) In dealing with certain religious systems we must avoid both superficial enthusiasm and arrogant criticism. In the past, disordered knowledge about various religions led to “negative fantasies.” Today, receiving fragmentary information about them, we run the risk of arriving at “positive fantasies,” namely the idea that all religions are one and the same. There is also another risk: based on what we know about one of the religions, geographically and theoretically closest to us, to create a generalized idea about all the others.

In our time, efforts aimed at deciphering the sacred symbols of other religions, as well as studying their doctrines from sources available to us, require a highly critical approach. As systems, religions contain both positive elements that can be understood as “sparks” of divine revelation, and negative elements – inhuman practices and structures, examples of the perversion of religious intuition.

(c) Religion is an organic whole, and not a set of traditions and cult practices. There is a danger in such a superficial reading of the phenomenology of religion, which leads to the identification of elements present and functioning in different contexts. Religions are living organisms, and in each of them the individual components are in connection with each other. We cannot tear out certain elements from a particular religious doctrine and practice and identify them with similar elements in other religions in order to create simple and “beautiful” theories.

(d) If we recognize the presence in foreign religious experience of innate values, even “seeds of the word,” we must also recognize that they have the potential for further growth, flowering and fruiting. concludes his brief reflections on the "seminal logos" with a statement of a fundamental principle - and, strangely, this is not sufficiently noted by those who refer to his views. He emphasizes the difference between the “seed” and the fullness of life contained in it. He distinguishes between innate "ability" and "grace": “For the seed and some likeness of something, given according to the measure of acceptability, are a different matter; and the other is the very thing of which the communion and likeness are given by His [God’s] grace.”(Apology II, 13).

(e) Since man retains the image of God even after the Fall, he remains the recipient of messages emanating from the Divine will. However, he is often unable to comprehend them properly. Let us draw an analogy, albeit imperfect, with modern technology: a television set that is poorly installed or faulty produces altered picture and sound compared to those sent by the transmitter; or the distortion is caused by defects in the transmitting antenna.

Everything in the world is in the sphere of influence of God - the spiritual Sun of Truth. Various aspects of religions can be understood as “accumulators” charged by the rays of Divine truth coming from the Sun of Truth, life experiences, various sublime ideas and great inspirations. Such batteries helped humanity by providing the world with imperfect light or some reflections of light. But they cannot be considered as something self-sufficient; they cannot replace the Sun itself.

For Orthodoxy, the criterion remains the Word of God itself - the Son of God, Who embodies in history the love of the Trinity God, as it is experienced in the sacrament of the Church. Love, which was revealed in His person and His action, is for the Orthodox believer the essence and at the same time the apogee and completeness of religious experience.

Dialogue with people of other religious beliefs – the right and duty of “Orthodox witness”

(1) The Orthodox position can be critical of other religions as systems and as organic entities; however, in relation to people belonging to other religions and ideologies, this is always an attitude of respect and love - following the example of Christ. For man continues to be the bearer of the image of God and desires to achieve godlikeness, since he possesses - as innate components of his being - free will, spiritual intelligence, desire and the ability to love. From the very beginning, Christians were obliged to be in dialogue with people of other religious beliefs, testifying to their hope. Many of our most important theological concepts have been shaped by this dialogue. The dialogue belongs to the church tradition; he was a major factor in the development of Christian theology. Much of patristic theology is the fruit of direct and indirect dialogue with the ancient Greek world, both with religious movements and with purely philosophical systems, which sometimes led to antitheses and sometimes to synthesis.

With the spread of Islam, the Byzantines sought an opportunity to enter into dialogue with Muslims, although this search did not always elicit a response.

Today, in the grandiose metropolis called Earth, in the midst of new cultural, religious and ideological ferments, dialogue becomes a new opportunity and challenge. We are all concerned with human achievements and strive for a global community of peace, justice and brotherhood, and therefore each person and each tradition must offer the best of what they have inherited from the past and, in the light of experience and criticism from others, cultivate the healthiest grains of truth, which he has. Dialogue can contribute to the transfer of new grains from one civilization to another, as well as the germination and development of those grains that lie lifeless in the soil of ancient religions. As noted, religions remain organic entities, and for the living people who experience them, they are “living organisms” capable of development. Everyone has their own entelechy. They experience influences, perceive new ideas that come from their environment, and respond to the challenges of the time.

Various religious leaders and thinkers are discovering elements in their traditions that respond to the new demands of society. Thus, Christian ideas find their way through other channels and develop in the contexts of other religious traditions around the world. In this regard, dialogue is critical.

From such a perspective, the new questions posed by the recent technological and electronic revolution and the new challenges shaking the world community can be viewed more constructively: for example, the demand for world peace, justice, respect for human dignity, the search for the meaning of human existence and history, the protection environment, human rights. Although at first glance this all seems like "external affairs", a deeper look from a religious point of view may well give rise to new ideas and new answers to the questions posed. The doctrine of the incarnation, which abolishes the gap between the transcendent and the mundane in the Person of Christ, has a unique value for humanity, for it is impossible in any non-Christian anthropology.

“Orthodoxy, entering the third millennium with confidence, with the consciousness of fidelity to its tradition, is alien to anxiety, or fear, or aggression, and it does not feel contempt for people of other religious beliefs. The Primates of the Orthodox Churches, who gathered for the solemn concelebration in Bethlehem on January 7, 2000, emphatically emphasize: we are drawn to other great religions, especially to the monotheistic religions of Judaism and Islam, with the readiness to create favorable conditions for dialogue with them in order to achieve peaceful coexistence of all peoples... The Orthodox Church rejects religious intolerance and condemns religious fanaticism, no matter where it comes from.” .

In general, the Church stands for the harmonious coexistence of religious communities and minorities and for the freedom of conscience of every person and every nation. We must enter into interreligious dialogue with respect, with reason, with love and hope. We must try to understand what is important to others and avoid unproductive confrontation. Followers of other religions are called upon to explain to themselves how they can interpret their religious beliefs in new terms, in the light of new challenges. Genuine dialogue generates new interpretations on both sides.

At the same time, we have no right, in an effort to be polite, to underestimate the significance of difficult problems. Nobody needs superficial forms of interreligious dialogue. Ultimately, the core of the religious problem remains the search for a higher truth. No one has the right - and it is not in anyone's interest - to weaken this force of human existence in order to achieve a simplified conciliatory consensus of the type of standard agreements that are concluded at the ideological level. In this perspective, the essential contribution of Orthodoxy is not to suppress its own characteristics, deep spiritual experience and conviction, but to bring them to light. Here we come to the delicate question of the Orthodox mission or – as I proposed to say thirty years ago – “Orthodox witness”.

(2) In any truly spiritual communication we always reach a critical point when we are faced with a real problem that creates differences. When the Apostle Paul met with the Athenians in the Areopagus, after dialogue () he moved on to direct testimony (17, 22-31). In his speech he spoke of the general religious basis, and then turned to the very essence of the Gospel: the significance of the person and work of Christ. This proclamation was completely alien to the ancient Greek worldview and contradicted not only the sophisticated polytheism of the common people, but also the sophisticated atheism of the Epicurean philosophers and the pantheism of the Stoics.

Having rejected the idea of ​​a closed, self-sufficient cosmological system, autonomous and impersonal, Paul began to preach the action of a personal God, who created the universe out of nothing, provides for the world and decisively intervenes in history. In contrast to the idea of ​​the individual living automatically, the emphasis was placed on freedom and love, which are manifested in communication between God and man. With this paradox, which for the Athenians bordered on the absurd, Paul introduced a new type of thinking. He proposed a radical revision of Greek wisdom through the acceptance of Christ as the center of creation, the One who communicates real existence to the world. Until this time, the Greek intellectuals' understanding of man was limited to the idea of ​​a thinking being, aware of himself and his environment through the development of his mind. For Paul, the fundamental, turning point for humanity - its metanoia (change of mind, repentance) - must be directed towards the love of God, who is inaccessible to reason, but revealed in the crucified and risen Christ. Here we have a clear example of understanding and respecting ancient religious ideas and at the same time surpassing them in the truth and power of Christian revelation. Orthodox “witness” (or mission) means precisely the witnessing of experience and confidence. We confess our faith not as an intellectual discovery, but as a gift of God's grace. To neglect the duty of such personal witness is to reject the gospel.

Personal knowledge of the “love of Christ that surpasses knowledge” () remains the most profound Christian experience and has a direct bearing on authentic Christian mission and evangelization. Love releases inner strength and opens up new horizons in life that the mind cannot imagine. The feeling characteristic of an Orthodox Christian that he is united with all humanity, and the love he feels for every person, compels him to inform every neighbor about the greatest good that has been revealed to him.

The gifts of God cannot be selfishly kept to oneself - they must be available to everyone. Although certain actions of God may relate to a certain people and a certain person, they nevertheless affect all mankind. If we are convinced that the highest human right is the right to transcend the animal and intellectual levels of existence through participation in the loving relationship of the Trinity God, we cannot reserve this conviction for ourselves. For this would be the worst of injustices. However, all this does not mean that preaching to another can be accompanied by violence, that it can serve as a cover for achieving other goals, political or economic. This is not about imposing anything on others, but about testifying to confidence, to personal experience. It is significant that in the first centuries Christians spoke about martyrdom - about witness-martyrdom, about witness often at the cost of life. Everything that is peculiar to the human race should be used, but each person should remain completely free in the choice, which ultimately he himself makes. Respect for the freedom of every human person will always be the basic principle of Orthodoxy.

The Church, being the “sign” and sacrament of the Kingdom of God, the beginning of a new humanity transformed by the Holy Spirit, must be given to the whole world. It should not be a closed community. Everything she has and everything she experiences exists for the sake of humanity as a whole.

Orthodox "witness" begins in silence - through participation in the pain and suffering of others, and continues in the joy of proclaiming the Gospel, which culminates in worship. The purpose of witness is always to create Eucharistic communities in new places so that people celebrate the mystery of the Kingdom of God in their own cultural context, spreading the glory and presence of God where they live. Thus, Orthodox witness is personal participation in the spread of the new creation, which has already been accomplished in Christ and which will come to its fulfillment in the “end times.” In order to evangelize the world, the Orthodox Church does not need to use violence or dishonest methods, which have sometimes distorted the essence of the “Christian mission.” She respects the individuality of man and his culture and uses her own methods - liturgical life, the celebration of the sacraments, sincere love. The Orthodox mission cannot be limited to participation in the organization of education, provision of medical care and provision of funds for external development. It must convey to everyone, especially the poor and downtrodden, the belief that each person has a unique value, that, since he is created in the image and likeness of God, his destiny is something greater - to become a “Christ-bearer”, to partake of the divine glory, to achieve deification. It is the basis for all other expressions of human dignity. The Christian faith offers the highest anthropology, beyond any humanistic vision. To accept it or not is a matter of free choice and responsibility of people. Followers of other religions sharply criticize various Christian missions when they see that missionary activities are accompanied by arrogance and pride or are associated with non-religious interests, including the interests of state power. At the same time, it would be wrong to identify the Christian mission in general with errors characteristic of some part of Western Christianity or one historical period (for example, the period of colonialism). Harsh criticism is directed at “Christians,” not at Christ. Everything will change in the world if we Christians live and act and measure our mission, following in the footsteps of Christ. The power of God often manifests itself through the paradox of the absence of worldly power and can only be experienced in the sacrament of love, in outer simplicity.

We need constant honest self-criticism and repentance. This does not mean limiting the Orthodox witness, which will lead to a colorless dialogue, but rather a free acceptance of the logic of love, always the revolutionary logic of Christ, who “exhausted himself” in order to come and inhabit a special human reality. Following the pattern of His life and death in ongoing personal transformation “from glory to glory” (). The goal of the Orthodox is not to limit or minimize their “witness,” but to live in accordance with their calling: to follow Christ.

“Those who lived in accordance with the Word (reason) are Christians, even if they were considered atheists: such among the Hellenes are Socrates and Heraclitus and the like, and among the barbarians - Abraham, Ananias, Azariah and Misail, and Elijah and many others; to retell their actions or names would, I know, be tedious, and this time I will refrain from doing so.”(Apology 1, 46).. Source of knowledge. Part II. About heresies.

Theodore Abu Kurakh. Against the heresies of the Jews and Saracens.

Anastasios Yannoulatos. Byzantine and Contemporary Greek Orthodox Approaches to Islam. – Journal of Ecumenical Studies, 33:4 (1996), pp. 512-528.

Apart from missionary notes and general works on the history of the Church, we do not have a systematic study of this issue. Our topic includes the work of Bishop Chrysanthus, rector of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy, “Religions of the Ancient World in Their Relation to Christianity” (St. Petersburg, 1878). In it, he cites the views of the Church Fathers on paganism and develops some theological considerations regarding the non-Christian world, primarily the ancient one.

Novel "Anna Karenina", VII.

For more on this theological position, see: Anastasios (Yannoulatos). Emerging Perspective of the Relationships of Christians to People of Other Faith – An Eastern Orthodox Christian Contribution. – International Review of Mission, 77 (1988); Facing People of Other Faiths from an Orthodox Point of View – Holy Cross Conference, 3rd International Conference of Theological Schools: Icon and Kingdom: Orthodox Face of the 21st Century. – The Greek Orthodox Theological Review, 58 (1993).

John Karmiris. The universality of salvation in Christ. – Praktikatis Akadimias Athinon. 1980. Vol. 55 (Athens, 1981). pp. 261-289 (in Greek); See also: The salvation of God's people outside the Church. - Right there. 1981. T. 56 (Athens, 1982). pp. 391-434.

Emperor John VI Cantacuzene (d. 1383) notes: “Muslims prevented their people from entering into dialogue with Christians, of course, so that they could not gain a clear knowledge of the truth during the interview. Christians are confident in the purity of their faith, and in the correctness and truth of the teachings that they adhere to, and therefore they do not create any obstacles for their people, but each of them has complete freedom and power to discuss the faith with whomever he wants.”(Against Muslims).

An interesting observation in this case was made by the French thinker Rene Girard from Stanford University in California: “The value system created by [Christianity] 2,000 years ago continues to operate regardless of whether more people join this religion... Ultimately, everyone joins the Christian value system. What do human rights mean if not the protection of innocent victims? Christianity, in its secular form, has taken such a dominant position that it is no longer perceived as one of the religions. Real globalization is Christianity!”

From the joint message of the heads of the Local Orthodox Churches in the year of the 2000th anniversary of Christianity.

If there is a class of people who are capable of loving a select few to the point of self-sacrifice, then there are much more numerous people who love no one but themselves, do not strive for anyone, do not yearn for anyone and absolutely do not want to lift a finger for anyone.

The class of people who truly love their neighbors, who look at every person as if they were their neighbors, just as the Merciful Samaritan looked at the Jew beaten by robbers, is an extremely small class of people.

Meanwhile, the Lord, wanting to confirm this view of people towards each other, wanting to spread this all-encompassing love between people, said a word that revealed the greatest meaning of this love, giving it such a meaning, such a height that would force people to cultivate it in themselves in every possible way.

Describing the Last Judgment, the Lord speaks of the conversation that will take place there between the terrible Judge and the human race.

Calling to Himself the good part of humanity, those who actually embodied this all-forgiving, tender, warm, caring love for people, the Lord will say to them:

“Come, blessed ones of My Father, inherit the Kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. You became hungry and gave Me food; you became thirsty and gave Me a drink; beh is strange, and you know Mena. Naked and clothed Me, sick and visited, I ran in prison and came to Me.”

They will ask when they saw the Lord in such a position and served Him. And He will answer: “Amen, I say to you: since you have created only these least of my brothers, you have created for Me.”

So, the Lord says that He Himself accepts everything that we do for people, thus putting Himself in the place of every unfortunate, sick, imprisoned, weak, suffering, offended and sinner, in the place of every person whom we pity with our impulse hearts and to whom we will help. It is also impossible not to pay attention to the fact that the Lord did not say: “Because you did it to one of these little ones in My name, you did it to Me.” He says only one thing: that everything done for a person, He accepts as done directly for Him.

This is the height He gives to the feat of love, mutual human help and favor... This is how He facilitates this feat by telling us: “When there is a person in front of you who needs to be helped, no matter how little you are attracted to him, no matter how He did not seem unpleasant and disgusting to you, say to yourself: “Christ lies before me, helpless, unhappy, requiring help; “Can I not provide this help to Christ?”

And if we force ourselves to look at every person we approach in this way, then, firstly, the world, crowded with people with their endless shortcomings, will seem to us populated by Angels and our heart will always be full of quiet, concentrated happiness in that feeling, that at every step of our lives we serve, help, console, and alleviate suffering directly to Christ.

It was necessary to see that the commandment that one must love one's neighbor as oneself caused outbreaks of discontent.

I love individual people, many say, but I cannot love and do not understand love for humanity. I love by choice, by vague desires, by commonality of views, by the qualities that captivate me in people, by their nobility... but how can I love such a multifaceted huge creature as humanity? Can I look at a brother, treat him like a being personally dear to me, someone who arouses in me disgust, a disgusting feeling, whom I can only despise and hate... not to mention the fact that more Some people at least didn’t exist for me. I love a few, I hate others, I am completely indifferent to the rest, and you can’t ask for more from me.

But let a person who reasons in this way ask himself, are there such traits in his character that he would be as pleasing to God as some of the people he has chosen are pleasing to him personally? What would have happened if the Lord had reasoned towards him the way he reasons towards most people, what would have happened if the Lord had treated him with perhaps well-deserved hatred or only with indifference?

The Lord, whatever he may be, showed towards him an equally great act of His immortal love.

The Lord, who makes everyone equal in His love, the Lord, who illuminates with the rays of His sun, who sends His gifts to both the good and the graceless, the Lord, who commands us to seek those perfections with which He Himself shines - the Lord expects us to look at other people just as He looks at them Himself.

There is some kind of wild horror in the fact that we, sinful, disgusting creatures, cannot treat people with even a small fraction of the condescension with which He, the source of perfection, the most radiant Shrine, treats us and all of them. ...

* * *

And first of all, the wrongness of our relationships with people lies in our constant condemnation. This is perhaps the most common and worst of the flaws in human relationships.

The horror of condemnation consists, first of all, in the fact that we assign to ourselves new rights that do not belong to us, that we seem to be piled on that throne of the Supreme Judge, which belongs only to the Lord alone - “Vengeance is mine and I will repay.”

And may there not be a single judge in the world except the terrible, but also merciful Judge - the Lord God!.. How can we judge, who do not see, do not know and do not understand anything? How can we judge a person when we do not know what heredity he was born with, how he was raised, in what conditions he grew up, what unfavorable circumstances he was surrounded by? We don’t know how his spiritual life developed, how the conditions of his life embittered him, what temptations his circumstances tempted him with, what speeches the human enemy whispered to him, what examples influenced him - we don’t know anything, we don’t know anything, but we undertake to judge!

Examples of such persons as Mary of Egypt, the mother and source of debauchery, as thieves who repented, starting with the one who hung at the right hand of Christ on the cross and before whom the doors of paradise were first opened wide, and ending with those numerous thieves who now shine in the crowns of holiness: All these people show that it is terrible to pronounce premature and blind erroneous judgment on people.

Anyone who condemns people shows his lack of faith in Divine grace. The Lord, perhaps, allows people who will later become great righteous people and His great glorifiers to sin, in order to protect them from the worst evil - spiritual pride.

There is a story about a quarrel between two monastery elders. Both were already frail, having lived a life close to seclusion, they could not quarrel in person, and, having quarreled over something, one sent his cell attendant to the other. The cell attendant, despite his youth, was filled with wisdom and meekness.

It used to be that the elder would send him with the order: “Tell that elder that he is a demon.”

The cell attendant will come and say: “The elder greets you and ordered to tell you that he considers you an Angel.”

Annoyed by such a soft and affectionate greeting, that elder will say: “Tell your elder that he is an ass.”

The cell attendant will go and say: “The elder is grateful to you for your greetings, greets you in return and calls you a great sage.”

Thus replacing the words of abuse and condemnation with words of meekness, peace and love, the young sage finally achieved that the anger of the elders completely disappeared, as if it had melted, scattered, and they were reconciled with each other and began to live in exemplary love.

So we do: by condemnation, abuse, ridicule, and rude treatment of people we will not do anything, but will only harden them, while quiet kind words, treating the sinner as a great righteous person, will most likely bring the most inveterate person to repentance and cause a saving revolution.

There was such a person who breathed love, condescension, and forgiveness - Elder Seraphim of Sarov. He was so affectionate that when he saw people approaching him, he first beckoned them to come to him with words, then suddenly, not mastered by the pressure of the holy love that filled his soul, he quickly headed towards them shouting: “Come to me, come.”

In every person he saw the Son of God standing behind him, he honored, perhaps, the barely smoldering, but nevertheless in every person the spark of Divinity that was certainly present, and when he bowed to everyone who came at the feet, kissed the hands of those who came to him, he bowed to them , as children of God, for whom the Lord shed His blood, as for the great purpose of the Lord’s sacrifice...

Without judging people himself, Father Seraphim did not tolerate condemnation from others. And when, for example, he heard that children began to condemn their parents, he immediately covered the mouths of these condemners with his hand.

Ah, if only we could adhere to the same holy rules of love and condescension in our mutual relationships!

Why is this not so? Look at our morals.

Someone is sitting visiting. They are friendly and affectionate with him, they try in every possible way to show him that he is pleasant and even necessary for these people. They say they miss him and ask him to come back soon. And as soon as he walked out the door, his cruelest condemnation began. They often invent and slander him various fables, which they themselves do not believe, they drag others in, and when one of these others appears, they exclaim:

Oh, how glad we are to see you! Just ask Ivan Petrovich - just now they remembered you!..

But as they recalled, this, of course, will not be said.

A person enters some large society: how many suspicions are about him, how many sidelong glances are directed at him! Does anyone succeed in life: “This man makes amazing progress with his impudence.” Does anyone sit in their place in life, not moving or improving: “What a mediocre person. It’s clear that he’s unlucky, who needs people like that!”

Wait, you who kill people with the word - “Who needs it?” He is needed by God, who suffered for him and shed His blood for him. You need him so that, avoiding the terrible sentence for the mortal sin of your condemnation, you can show other feelings on him and, instead of condemning him, feel sorry for him and help him.

He is needed in the general plan of God's economy. The Lord created him, and it is not your business to condemn the One who called him to life and who tolerates him, just as He tolerates you, perhaps a thousand times more worthy of condemnation than this man.

Your heart boils with indignation when you see how distorted our mutual relationships are, how we cannot do anything in the simplicity of thought and the nobility of Christian love.

Look how many different measures this man has for meetings, conversations and dealing with people, how many different tones, ranging from sweet, searching, as if he is crawling in front of the one he is talking to, to arrogant, rude and commanding.

I was told about one official, who considered himself a liberal, that he said to his boss, to whom he owed a lot: “You know, by the fact that you brought me to this place, I am so obliged to you that I am ready to do whatever you want. I assure you, if you asked me to clean your boots, I would do it with pleasure.”

He was surprisingly sweet towards the people he was looking for, flattering them as best he could; he treated people he didn’t need with boorish self-confidence; towards people who needed him, he was rude and arrogant.

Meanwhile, we should have only two tones, two attitudes: a filial-slave, enthusiastic, reverent attitude towards Christ and an even soft one, alien to ingratiation, on the one hand, impudence and arrogance, on the other, indifferent to all people.

There is a lofty concept in England, which in Russia is understood completely differently than in this country of remarkable character development. This is the concept of "gentleman". In English, a “gentleman” is a person who will not knowingly do anything to another that could offend that other person or cause him any harm or trouble. On the contrary, this is a person who will do everything he can for everyone, and to the extent that he can.

It is in this concept of gentlemanliness, of course, that true Christian attitudes towards people lie. Meet with a person in order to provide him, at least by constraining oneself, with help and sympathy; and if you don’t do him a favor, then at least look at him kindly and with disposition - this is a truly gentlemanly act.

And the Englishman will return, hurrying somewhere, from his road, to show the way to you, a visiting foreigner; he will stand for a long time and give you the explanations that you ask him, he will take on the trouble of checking in the luggage of the lady he meets - in a word, as they say, he will be torn to pieces in order to serve you.

And whether you are rich, noble, beautiful and interesting, or whether you are bad, poor, no one needs you, his treatment of you will be equally even and pleasant.

* * *

Often the kindness that we show to people requires heroism from us, requires the exertion of our strength, requires that we deprive ourselves of something for these people. But a kind person, in addition to this difficult good, will find many occasions to apply his kindness where this kindness, having brought a very significant benefit to a person, will not require any work or deprivation from him.

We heard about some very profitable enterprise, which we ourselves, perhaps, could not enter into, and we told about this enterprise to a person who had sufficient funds for it - so we helped the person without working at all.

Is there any merit in such a thing? Yes, of course there is. This merit lies in the good will, in the care with which we treated the person, in our determination to be useful to him.

Imagine that a person entered a large, unfamiliar society of people who were higher than him. If this person is also shy, he goes through extremely unpleasant moments. And there will be someone who will notice how constrained he is, how uncomfortable he is, and will come up to him and speak to him kindly - and then the person’s constraint disappears, and he is no longer so afraid.

After the first, the second will approach him - and the ice that he felt in this company seems to have cracked. It may be the other way around. There may not be a single sympathetic person, and a newcomer to this society will feel unpleasant, embarrassed and false until the end of his stay in it.

Often even one kind look, an approving smile, or a casual word is extremely helpful to a person who is embarrassed about something. But not all people understand the importance of mutual assistance, mutual favors and approval. And some people, who consider themselves almost righteous, snap when they need to provide even the slightest service to another.

I once had to be present at a quarrel between two spouses of different mental moods, who were completely unsuitable for each other and who soon had to separate.

It was in the huge Pavlovsk Park, where it’s so easy for someone who doesn’t know how to get lost. These couple were walking when a out of breath lady approached them and asked:

How can I get to the station? I only have twenty minutes left before the train. I'm terribly afraid of being late.

The young husband, who knew the park very well, realized that if you start explaining to her in words, she will certainly go astray and you need to walk with her for about five minutes to bring her to a place where there is a straight and clear road. He immediately said to the lady:

Let me accompany you,” and quickly went with her.

His wife, who constantly made scenes for him, raised her eyes to the sky indignantly, and when he returned five minutes later, having taken the lady to the right place, she began to reproach him for having treated her in an extremely impolite and disrespectful manner when leaving her.

She saw her husband twenty-four hours a day and found that to spend five minutes with a person in difficulty was to treat her with disrespect... a peculiar and, of course, wrong view.

* * *

It is strange that in childhood there are some manifestations of senseless, sophisticated cruelty. How much do the so-called “newbies” endure, for example, from their comrades? Indelicate questions, all kinds of injections, kicks, pinches on the arm under the guise of trying the material with questions “how much did you buy it for,” and the same anger of the tormentors, whether the boy will respond to abuse with abuse or timidly press himself against the wall, not daring to resist his tormentors.

But even in this environment of little villains, there are children with a noble innate character, who have managed to make a position for themselves in the class and who stand up for the unfairly persecuted newcomers.

Of course, such noble boys will continue to show the same nobility in life.

There are still such characters who are cruelly offended and worried by any violence of man against man. These people were worried about the injustices and abuses of landowners over peasants during the days of serfdom. These people, arms in hand, will rush to defend the rights of an entire people, trampled upon by another, stronger people. This was the attitude of Russia towards the Slavs of the Balkan Peninsula for several centuries, since the Balkan states grew up, one might say, on the Russian blood shed for their freedom.

In the very power of man over man there is something deeply dangerous for the soul of the person who has this power.

It is not for nothing that the best people of all centuries were afraid of this power and often abandoned it. Those Christians who set their slaves free when they were imbued with Christ’s covenants, realized, of course, how much wrong there was in ruling over other people, and they themselves, like the great merciful Paulinus, Bishop of Noland, themselves preferred to become slaves than to keep others in slavery .

During the days of serfdom, many blatant lawlessnesses were committed. The peasants suffered many unheard-of, cruel insults from other landowners, who, intoxicated with their power, reached the point of some kind of brutality and often even (the height of sinful depravity) found pleasure in tormenting and torturing their serfs.

Blessed be the name of that tsar who, with a warm heart, understood the terrible torments of the Russian peasantry and, freeing them from serfdom, at the same time freed the landowners from the terrible temptation - power over human souls, the right to use free labor.

The easiest way is to feel sorry for those people whose suffering occurs before our eyes. If we see a person shivering in the cold, barely covered with rags; if we hear a voice barely escaping from this numb body; if timid, hopeless glances are directed at us, it will be strange that our heart is not touched by this voice, that we do not try to help this person with something... But a higher mercy consists in predicting such grief that we do not we see, to go towards such suffering that is not yet in our sight.

It is precisely this feeling that inspires the actions of people who found hospitals, shelters, and almshouses; after all, these people have not yet seen those suffering and in need of their help who will use the houses of mercy founded by them, and, so to speak, feel sorry for them in advance.

It's frosty. Deep evening over quiet Ukraine. In the city of Belgorod, everyone hid in their houses from the cold. Trees with faded branches shine, bathed in the silvery rays of the moon. In the frosty air the quiet tread of a man dressed as a commoner can be heard. But when the moon falls on his face, one can immediately guess that this man is of high birth. He approaches poor huts, carefully looks around to see if anyone sees him, and then, quickly placing on the window sill either a bundle of laundry, or some provisions, or money wrapped in paper, he knocks to attract the attention of the people inside. , and quickly disappears.

This is Bishop Joasaph of Belgorod, the future great wonderworker of the Russian land, making a secret round of the poor before the holiday of the Nativity of Christ, so that they can celebrate this holiday in joy and satiety.

And the next day firewood will be brought to some poor people from the market - this is the saint who secretly sends heating to those who are freezing from poverty from the cold in unheated huts.

* * *

Great mercy towards people and a caring attitude towards them in no way excludes wise firmness and the use of punishment where a person sins. Some researchers of the life of the same great saint Joasaph are perplexed by the fact that, despite his extremely developed mercy, with its most tender and touching manifestations, he, on the other hand, was harsh with those who were guilty. But there is nothing strange or inexplicable about this. The saint preferred that a person should suffer punishment better on earth than in heaven, so that the suffering suffered as punishment would cleanse his soul and free him from responsibility in eternity.

How much wiser was the saint’s view in this regard than the modern view of crime, now expressed very often by judges of conscience.

Recently, crimes have become extremely frequent - among other things, because retribution for them has become extremely insignificant, and because proven crimes very often remain without any punishment.

A person with common sense who has recently had to serve as a juror was simply horrified at the sight of the degree to which we show leniency towards a criminal. There are absolutely outrageous cases in which the jury definitely pushes the people they acquit to new crimes.

I had to be present at a hearing in one case, where several healthy guys were accused of robbing an old woman about seventy years old, attacking her in her room, and cutting out of her skirt one and a half thousand rubles, which she had accumulated through the work of her whole life and represented the only the source of its existence.

A whole gang was organized here, which tried to move her from the house where she had previously lived and where it was not so convenient to commit a crime, to a den where an attack could promise success. The attackers were wearing masks. The whole crime was led by a scoundrel who was in connection with the robbers.

The sight of this helpless old woman, old-fashionedly dressed, with a tattered reticule in her hands, inspired the most ardent, burning regret. And you can imagine that, despite the proven crime, the scoundrels were acquitted.

There they babbled the sacred name of love, and the eloquent lawyer argued that the robbers were hypnotized by the woman, who, by the way, was not found, and acted in a frenzy of love.

In general, this is one of the tricks of the modern legal profession - to say that a person acted under the influence of love and is therefore irresponsible. During the same jury session, another egregious case began deliberation, but was postponed due to the absence of the necessary important witness.

One artel worker, who served in a large bank, embezzled and squandered something like ten thousand rubles. The artel worker, a capable man, was in military service, about forty years old, was married in the village and had children. In the city, he was in connection with a special person who was present at the event as a spectator in an elegant dress and an incredibly large hat. There were rumors that the wasted money was used by him to buy this person a summer house at one of the stations on the Finnish Railway.

As always happens with embezzlement in artels, the wasted amount was replenished with contributions from all other artel members, all married people with large families. You can imagine that voices were heard among the jury that he could hardly be found guilty, since he also acted under the influence of love for this person.

* * *

The question of retribution belongs to one of the main issues. Christianity does not know forgiveness without the guilt being mitigated by appropriate punishment. When the first man fell, God could have forgiven his guilt before Him, but He did not.

Having established the unshakable truth, His indisputable laws, the Lord did not want to violate this truth. And in order for a person to be forgiven, it was necessary to make a sacrifice, outlined, perhaps, before the creation of the worlds. The incarnate God, our Lord Jesus Christ, had to offer the sacrifice of the cross in order to remove from man the curse under which he had brought himself through the fall. Just understand the full force of these words, that Almighty God could not violate the law of retribution established by Him. And since the Fall was so great that no measure, no suffering could atone for the crime he had committed, then in order to atone for this crime, the suffering of the Divine was necessary. The weight of the scales of justice could not rise upward without the greatest burden being placed on another cup, the burden of earthly life, humiliation, the burden of suffering and death on the cross of the Son of God.

This phrase seems terrible and incredible, it seems unpronounceable: the Lord could not forgive a person without demanding an appropriate reward for it, but it is so: he could not.

When a known crime is committed, appropriate retribution must be brought for it. This is the establishment of God's law, which cannot be gone against, which cannot be violated. And the punishment must be in accordance with the suffering that this crime causes to another person.

Imagine that some scoundrel encroached on the honor of a young girl or an undeveloped child: crimes that, precisely because of their low punishability, are currently encountered with amazing frequency.

In the morning, the mother let go of her cheerful, joyful, healthy child, and a few hours later, at the whim of the scoundrel, a tortured half-corpse returns to her, with a crumpled, wounded soul, with an indelible shame, with a painful memory for the rest of her days.

How can you cry for mercy to such a person? How can a mother's feeling, in comparison with the destruction of her daughter's fate, come to terms with the fact that this man, having been politely placed in the dock, will be politely interrogated and then, perhaps, announced that he acted in the heat of passion, especially if he was intoxicated? .

I think that kind but fair people would demand the most severe punishment for such a person, from whom, as they say, the blood would freeze in his veins, so that the person who made the unfortunate girl and her loved ones suffer so insanely would suffer even worse.

I think that there would be fair, virtuous, but harsh in their truth, people who would gladly drive nails into the body of a scoundrel with their own hands, so that, as they say, others would be disgraced, in order to protect other girls from such things with the horror of punishment. assassinations and other villains from such violence.

Nowadays, crimes of dousing with sulfuric acid are horrifyingly common. Then a young student, the only son of a millionaire engineer, was doused in the face with sulfuric acid by an old chorus girl who had tired of him with her pestering, and the unfortunate man was left disfigured, with an eye barely half saved and the other one dead. The interested groom, who was rejected by a rich bride after she exposed his low soul, drenches her until she is blind. Then the clerk, serving for a rich merchant and who made a marriage proposal to his daughter, a young student, and was refused, pours sulfuric acid on this girl, and at the same time, along with her, her sister.

Let us now see whether the paltry modern punishments for such horrendous crimes are commensurate with the misery they cause.

Personally, I would rather be executed than doused with sulfuric acid. Just imagine: a girl at the best time of her life, rich in hopes, striving for knowledge - suddenly blind, helpless, useless to anyone, with a face that a few days ago shone with beauty, and now represents a complete ulcer, which the closest people cannot look at without shuddering. .

And he, after a polite negotiation with him, will serve several years in prison: five - six - ten - and will return to life again full of strength, with the opportunity to create a happy existence for himself.

Where is the justice? And this easy responsibility only encourages others to engage in the same abominations. And it would seem that the way to stop these incredible crimes would be very simple.

It is only sufficient to establish the law that a person who pours sulfuric acid on another person undergoes the same operation in the same parts of the body. Do you really think that this law will have to be applied? Once or twice, and this crime will be uprooted, because no matter how evil such scoundrels are, they first of all tremble for their own skin and the prospect of being left without eyes or disfigured will undoubtedly subside their ferocity.

By being mindful of such crimes, we commit the greatest evil by proliferating crimes. As was the case with the robbery of an old woman by hefty robbers, we deliberately forget about the helpless victim of the crime, an honest, working victim, pitying the frenzied scoundrels, parasites and dirty tricks.

* * *

There is a good that must be given the strange name of “harmful good.”

This is a good thing that we agree to out of regret for a person, and we are not able to subordinate this regret to the voice of reason, and it only brings harm to a person.

The category of such goodness includes, first of all, the pampering of people - whether it be the pampering of a small child, a teenager, an adult man, an empty-headed lady begging her husband for money that he cannot give at his own expense, for those excessive outfits that she demands from empty and dangerous feminine swagger.

In one family, a two-year-old girl was excessively pampered. She had a lot of elegant dresses, all kinds of shoes, an innumerable number of hats, umbrellas, not to mention toys. At home they didn’t know how or how to please her; they fulfilled her every whim.

Several times a day the girl was capricious and cried - this happened carefully every time she dressed - after sleep, and also when she went to bed in the evening.

She would calm down only if they gave her candy or gave her something. Looking at this madness, I was involuntarily horrified that her parents were so spoiling her in preparing for her in the future. Firstly, they undermined her nervous system with these repeated cries and whims a day, with which she earned, so to speak, the constant fulfillment of her fantasies. And most importantly, they were preparing the saddest fate for her in the future.

Already now, in these infant years, she was the manager of the entire house, in the morning she prescribed what dress she would wear in the morning and what she would change into later. She got absolutely everything she wanted. And in such pampering she had to spend all the years of her life in her parents’ house, not knowing any refusal.

But then that real life was supposed to come, which is rather too cruel than soft, which gives nothing for nothing, in which everything is gained by battle and which in most cases destroys our best dreams one after another.

What terrible suffering later threatened the life of this utterly spoiled creature! Was it possible to hope that her fantasies would all be fulfilled in life as exactly as their unreasonable parents fulfilled them? How could one be sure that everything she wanted in life would come true? Was it possible to guarantee that she would be given everything to which she stretched out her hands? And who could promise that if she loved someone, they would answer her with the same love?

This one circumstance, so important in a woman’s life, threatened her with the greatest complication.

In general, it was crazy for her parents to indulge her in everything, instead of encouraging her to think about the struggle of life, about the trials ahead of her, about how rarely fate gives a person what he dreams of, no matter how sometimes these dreams may seem simple, easily accessible, legal.

To accustom a child to struggle, to accustom him to the fact that for higher reasons he refuses what he wants, and for the same reasons knows how to do what he does not want and what is extremely unpleasant for him, is the main task of proper education.

To break character, to contribute to the fact that everything in life subsequently seems shrouded in dark clouds, and all people seem to be personal enemies - this is what the reckless pampering of children and indulging them in everything leads to...

And here is another example of how dangerous it is to fulfill all sorts of people’s requests without reasoning.

It is known that Russian youth have recently adopted the disgusting habit of living beyond their means.

Before the officer has time to serve in the regiment for several months on a salary sufficient to keep himself in line with his rank, he already has large debts.

In guards regiments, where expenses are higher, parents usually, in addition to the salary the youth receives, give them a monthly allowance. But, sufficient for a prudent life, it is insignificant for the expenses that young people begin to afford.

Do you know,” says one of these officers, “the last time I dined in a good restaurant with my friend, how much did they charge me for a small bowl of fruit? Twenty-five rubles, and the whole bill came out to sixty.

Meanwhile, this young man received from his father, who had no other means except a seven to eight thousand salary, an allowance of fifty rubles a month, which was already difficult for his father, since he had three more adult children on his hands and all of them helped.

With such inappropriate expenses, the son fell into debt, which the family paid off twice for him - something like three and a half thousand.

In addition, he borrowed left and right from his acquaintances, from richer comrades. At the same time, he was very unscrupulous.

Some acquaintance, who lives by his own labor and has nothing extra, will give him thirty or forty rubles under his oath promise that tomorrow he will have a paycheck and that he will return everything from this paycheck to him tomorrow evening. Or he will beg a friend, when he does not have money, to borrow for him.

He will borrow for a day, but he will have to pay for it himself.

To the horror of his family, he became involved with one of those ladies who live at the expense of others, and this increased his expenses. He was not shy with government sums and one day he came early in the morning to a comrade with the good news that he had squandered the recruits’ money entrusted to him, that his immediate superior had already asked him several times to present this money and that he finally ordered him to present it that same morning, on nine o'clock. If he had not done this, a major official scandal would have occurred.

The comrade had no money at home at that time; he had to borrow from several people at such an early hour in order to cover this crime.

Several close acquaintances, a few days later, were talking about this, and one of them, an elderly man, distinguished by a big heart, but also by strict, definite views, said:

I don’t know, maybe I’m wrong, but it seems to me that you shouldn’t have helped him out... According to everything that I know about him, he is an incorrigible person, and the constant services that all his acquaintances provide him are to their detriment , only give him the opportunity to burrow deeper and deeper. A major catastrophe in the form of exclusion from service, in which he is, however, completely useless, alone could bring him to his senses. He would finally understand that he couldn’t live like this anymore and that he had to make a sharp turn. As a capable person who can work well, if he doesn’t go on a spree, he could still get back on his feet.

In the end, this officer had to leave military service and accept a modest place in the civilian service. He broke with his family when his lady forced him to marry herself, and completely left the circle in which he was born.

Fate, as they say, bewitches a person. He bore a good, honest name, had good abilities, influential family and acquaintances, was pleasant in conversation and, distinguished by himself, had sufficient support for service in the guard, for his simple disposition he was loved by the comrades of the privileged institution where he was brought up... And what was the purpose of all this? I am sure that the fatal significance in his life was that first extra ruble that his parents gave him when he began to beg from them against the monthly money allotted to him, the first piece of paper he borrowed from his friends, while he always had enough, to support yourself with dignity.

It is in Russia that parents must be especially strict with themselves when it comes to pampering their children. It happens that all the children are hard-working and modest, but one is a carouser, and before you know it, he has already incurred debts. And then, to save, as they say, family honor, to pay off these debts, shamelessly increased by usurers, the family wealth is used, the sisters’ dowry is spent, the entire way of life of the family changes... Why? Why should many suffer because of the folly of one?

It was as if, in a Christian way, they pitied one, but at the same time offended many and, in essence, crowned vice and shamelessness by punishing virtue.

* * *

In the broad question of our attitude towards our neighbors, an important aspect is our attitude towards the lower ones.

There is nothing worse than if a person is seriously convinced that he, being nobler and richer than another, is much higher than this other person; may be impolite with him, may command and dispose of him.

Firstly, these people themselves are digging a hole for themselves, so to speak. After all, if I make such a difference between myself and a person standing below me, then how should I expect that another person standing above me would make the same difference between me and himself as much as I consider myself superior to that other person? the person I despise.

Thus, I must convince myself in advance that people who are much superior to me should already consider me a complete scum and insignificance...

How flattering all this is for me!

We, especially in Russia, as a relic of serfdom, have preserved some kind of attitude towards lower people, which can only be called boorish.

In foreign lands, servants do not allow you to talk to them the way we talk to them. There is no such custom of speaking to lower people on a first name basis.

Let us remember here, by the way, the remarkable opinion of Elder Seraphim of Sarov on this important issue. He found in general that it was impossible and unnecessary for people to say “you” to each other, that this was a violation of the Christian simplicity of human relations. But Elder Seraphim assumed and considered it natural that all people would begin to speak “you” - and the servant would say “you” to the master, and the commoner would say “you” to the nobleman... But with us it’s just the opposite.

One foreigner who came to America allowed himself to speak rudely to the servant he hired and received a firm rebuke from him.

Let me advise you,” said the servant, “since you do not know American morals, not to treat servants in America in this way.” Otherwise, you will not find anyone who would agree to serve you for a long time... If you do not know or do not want to do what you invited me to help you with, if I agree to this help you, then I think you should first Just be grateful for this and treat me kindly... It’s a pity that you in Europe look at this differently.

It would be a good idea for all of us to learn this lesson from the American servant.

In fact, what a service all these cooks, maids, footmen provide to us, and the extent of this service is clearly visible when suddenly you, even for a day, are left without them: then everything goes topsy-turvy, and you are helpless.

But how do we treat them?

Their personality does not exist for us - a sad remnant of the views of those times when people were considered tens, hundreds and thousands of “souls”.

Nowhere, as in Russia, are people so poorly placed. In Europe, no servants will fit in the kitchen. There is no custom in large houses to have basements for servants. In England, in rich mansions, the top floor is reserved for them. They, like gentlemen, have their own baths, do not eat on the go, casually, but have strictly defined hours for their meals. They sit down decorously at a table covered with a white tablecloth, with dishes from a separate set, and none of the gentlemen would think of disturbing them during this meal, just as the gentlemen themselves do not have the custom of disturbing their guests during their meals.

Except for holidays, they have the right to go out in the evenings.

This seems insignificant on the surface. But this is a brilliant example of the Christianization of human relations.

In general, our attitude towards the people subordinate to us cannot but cause bitterness in the souls of those just people who witness such treatment. These compassionate and just people firmly remember the words of Christ that the Angels of these humiliated people always see the face of the Heavenly Father. Let us add that, probably, these Angels are telling God about the insults that these lower ones suffer because of the cruelty of these higher ones.

Elder Seraphim of Sarov, a contemporary of the abuses of serfdom, was deeply grieved by the grief of the serfs. Knowing that one general had bad managers and poor peasants, the elder persuaded that same Manturov, who became impoverished to build the Diveyevo church, to go to this estate as a manager. And Manturov in a short time raised the well-being of the peasants.

The elder reprimanded the landowners for their heartless and rude attitude towards the peasants and deliberately, in front of the gentlemen who came to him with their servants, treated the serfs with tenderness and affection, sometimes turning away from the gentlemen themselves for this purpose.

In modern disagreements between masters and servants, much of the blame lies with the servants. The fragrant type of the former devoted faithful servants, loving the family they serve and living in the interests of this family, is disappearing almost without a trace.

Remember Savelich, a kind nurturer and friend of Grinev’s mischievous youth, the groom of the “Captain’s Daughter”; Evseich - the glorious nurturer Bagrov-grandson of S. T. Aksakov, Natalya Savishna from “Childhood” by Count L. N. Tolstoy, nanny Tatyana Larina from “Eugene Onegin”; the ascetic nanny Agafya from Turgenev’s “The Noble Nest”, who formed in her pet, Liza Kalitina, her noble, harmonious, integral worldview.

How far these fragrant images are from modern Russian reality!

What an abyss separates this nanny Agafya with her important thoughts about eternity, with her stories about how the martyrs of Christ shed their blood for the faith and how wonderful flowers grew on this blood: what an abyss separates these Agathias, Savelichs, Evseichs from the current brawlers, irritable and unhappy servants.

What an ulcer this is, this dishonesty of theirs, with which the owners must be in constant struggle, constantly on guard. They deceive in the most blatant way. When they are caught in theft, they swear such oaths that it’s simply scary to listen to: “God destroy me, may I not leave this place, if I have profited from your penny... so that I don’t see the light of God... they swear on their heads loved ones” - and they obviously lie.

The servants do not value their place at all, not at all getting used to the family - not getting used to the house, as even the most crafty, ungrateful and vile of domestic animals - cats - get accustomed to.

They change places not because they are dissatisfied, not because the work is too much or the owners are too demanding and capricious, but simply because they have lived for a long time.

So what! It’s healed: that’s the whole explanation for you.

For people with common sense, it would seem undeniable that if you have lived in one place for a long time, this is how you should live... But no.

Again, we need to look at foreign lands. There servants value their places so much - especially in France - that they often consider changing places not only a misfortune, but also a shame. There, people often live in the same family for decades and die in the same families where they began their service.

With a patriarchal life, a healthy and modest life, devoid of any frills, the servants generally feel much happier: the difference between their life and the life of the masters is not particularly sharp.

But where life has been turned into a continuous frantic holiday, incredibly expensive, where a woman spends thousands and tens of thousands of rubles on her outfits alone, where many thousands are thrown away on one evening in order to throw dust in the eyes of society, where they eat on gold and The master's car is decorated with fresh flowers every day - this way of life, this sinful and criminal luxury fills the lower ones with great envy. The servants begin to foolishly imitate the masters in their squandering, and the secondary servants, whose monthly salary does not exceed twelve rubles, begin to sew silk dresses for themselves with tails.

I once heard a conversation, on the one hand, funny, but on the other hand, tragic in its senselessness, in the perversion of people’s common sense.

One lady had an ugly village girl as her servant, who asked her for a salary in advance in the sixth week of Lent and at the same time constantly asked her to go to the dressmaker.

What is it, Dunya, - asked the lady, - that you have such big business with the dressmaker?

But what about: I’m sewing a dress for myself for communion, I’m going to fast.

Yes, you have a light dress, and a very good one.

Is it really possible to partake in a formal dress? After all, I will be hanging out with my friends. There will also be guys we know who live here locally. They will laugh if one of us appears in an old dress.

And the dress was made: something awkward, with a long train, while Easter was early, and there was nowhere to escape the sticky mud on the streets.

Fuss with the dressmaker is all that this poor girl will take out of her shit, and even a new dress with a long tail.

But if this seems wild to you, then, after all, the ladies themselves are better, with the only difference being that their dresses are more luxurious, more expensive and there is more fuss, but the same attitude towards that Sacrament, which requires complete concentration of the spirit.

Gentlemen roam around in cars - now give the servants a car too. Many maids now make it a condition for their grooms that the bride must have a taxi - otherwise she won’t even go to church.

And so it is in everything: masters set a bad example, and servants follow this example.

If servants steal, it is mainly because their old age is not at all secure.

Some positions, like the position of a cook, have a devastating effect on health, since they stand at a hot stove for several hours in the cold air blowing through an open window, since otherwise it is difficult for her to breathe - this has a devastating effect on health, shortens life, and causes incurable rheumatism .

And what should a servant who has no one close to her do when she gets old - but beg!

It would be fair that families using the work of servants should be subject to at least a light tribute - for example, one ruble a month and more or less, depending on the salary paid to the servants, and thus constitute untouchable capital, from which those who have lost the ability to work the servants could receive a pension or be kept in an almshouse.

Sometimes people seem decent and well-mannered to you, but a sudden glimpse of their attitude towards the servants shatters your assumption.

In one rich house a group was sitting, talking about various interesting issues... They were drinking tea. The recently arrived son of the hostess, an officer of a smart regiment stationed in the vicinity of the capital, rudely interrupted the young footman, who served him something not as he wished.

Donkey, bastard,” he said angrily under his well-groomed mustache.

I noticed how one very well-mannered man who had great influence winced with displeasure. An hour later we walked down the stairs at the same time.

That’s how he was raised,” he said thoughtfully. - I thought that Marya Petrovna’s children were raised differently.

This young officer subsequently had to serve under the command of this gentleman. They said that he somehow did not let him move. And more than once I had occasion to recall that fleeting scene in which this influential man with a subtle soul noticed an unbearable rudeness for him in this seemingly polished, but in essence rude and impudent young man. And since this gentleman equally hated both rudeness and servility - and these two traits are almost always inseparable from one another - he looked with understandable distrust, as an unreliable person, at this two-faced - polite before some and impudent before others who could not resist him - a man...

* * *

In the question of the relationship between superiors and inferiors, one cannot ignore the question of workers and employers.

Human nature pushes a person seeking labor to ask for this labor as dearly as possible, just as it pushes a person who hires another for labor to offer him this labor at the lowest possible price. And usually an average figure is established, which is not unprofitable for both.

But in most cases, power is on the employer’s side, and it is easy for him, as they say, to “squeeze” the employee.

In the village these people are called “kulaks”.

A "kulak" is a person who takes advantage of a person's unfortunate circumstances to enslave him.

Someone needs grain for sowing: he will lend him grain, but so that he returns this grain to him from the harvest in double quantity. For the money you borrow, you will be forced to work twice or three times the prices prevailing in that area.

The category of these people includes those worthless individuals who take advantage of public disasters for their own profit: anticipating an imminent famine, they secretly buy up reserves of grain in order to later resell it at a terribly expensive price.

Of course, such abuses, such use of human misfortune for one’s own profit, is the gravest of crimes. We can say about these people that they drink human blood.

The Apostle James thunders against all such people with terrible threats, and horror penetrates the soul when you think about these threats:

“Listen, you rich people: weep and howl for your troubles that are coming upon you.

Your wealth has rotted, and your clothes are moth-eaten.

Your gold and silver are rusty, and their rust will be a witness against you and will consume your flesh like fire: you have laid up for yourselves treasure for the last days.

Behold, the wages you withheld from the workers who reaped your fields cry out; and the cries of the reapers reached the ears of the Lord of hosts.

You have lived luxuriously on earth and enjoyed; feed your hearts as for the day of slaughter.”

“Let others live” is the motto that Christianity gives for the relationship between master and worker.

You cannot live looking at the labor force of living people as some kind of impersonal mechanical force. No matter how large the enterprise, a Christian owner must see a living soul in each of his many thousands of workers, must treat them with sympathy and modesty.

In a French novel I had a chance to see an excellently observed movement of the soul of a rich man. A young millionaire from Paris travels by night train to the seaside town of Le Havre, where he must board his own yacht for an extended voyage across the seas with the woman he loves.

He doesn't sleep well. In the morning, long before dawn, cutting through the area with coal mines, he sees many black figures of coal miners heading into the mines to work, and when he compares his life, full of all kinds of pleasures, carefree, beautiful, with the limited, working life of these people, being in constant danger of being crushed and suffocated by the collapses of coal and the gas developing in the mines, this essentially good-looking person becomes uneasy...

Some kind of remorse gnaws at him. He feels that at that moment he would be ready to do a lot for these people, but the impulse passes, and his life flows in the same selfishness.

And there are, however, people who carry out - in one degree or another - active assistance to the workers who depend on them.

You, of course, have heard about various auxiliary institutions, superbly equipped in different factories, which arose from the thoughts of the factory owners and are carefully supported by them. There is also a magnificent hospital, a nursery for children, where working mothers can rent out their little children who require care for the entire working day, and artel shops where you can get everything at a cheaper price and of better quality, and reading rooms with light paintings , which can provide such healthy entertainment to the workers and help replenish their meager knowledge, and an almshouse for lonely workers who have lost the opportunity to work, and free schools that prepare knowledgeable specialist workers from the children of workers with a high price for their work, and a funeral fund that makes it easier for the worker’s family in difficult days when the head of the family dies, and various other institutions that the warm heart and resourceful mind of a person who strives to alleviate the situation of a working brother can invent for the benefit of the working people.

To establish a sobriety society in the working environment, to help an outstanding boy prone to invention, with a living spark of talent in him to obtain a higher technical education, to build his own church for a factory remote from the villages: how many countless ways can there be for a hearty entrepreneur to serve his workers.

There are owners whom the workers call “fathers”... What a high title, what happiness for the owner to earn this title from his workers!

But, unfortunately, such a humane attitude of the owner towards the workers is far from the rule, but a rare exception. And we see such cases of the attitude of entrepreneurs towards workers, from which the blood runs cold.

Thus, one cannot without shudder remember the Lena history, where the Lena Gold Mining Partnership, swimming in gold, with its heartless attitude forced the workers to go on strike, which ended in the beating of innocent workers to death.

The attitude of this association towards the workers represents one of the greatest, most blatant mockeries of human rights that has ever been seen. And to this partnership, more than to anyone else, there is attached a terrible curse, which the Holy Spirit, through the mouth of the Apostle, brings down on the ruthless and unscrupulous owners.

In the eyes of the partnership, which received fabulous profits, the workers were some kind of cattle, not people, and they were treated worse than cattle.

They lived in incredible conditions, in disgusting damp dugouts. This area is a lost corner, cut off from the rest of the world for a significant part of the year. The workers were forced to buy provisions at the price set by the partnership from the shops of the partnership, which profited from this and bought obviously rotten, rotten and spoiled goods for next to nothing, so that at an expensive price, as they say - with a knife to the throat, they would force the workers who were in a hopeless situation, since nowhere, like in the shops of the partnership, can one get anything there.

In the eyes of feeling and thinking people, this partnership will remain forever spattered with the blood of the Russian worker, an immortal monument to human abomination and criminal greed.

And if our society were Christian, it would make the life of the criminal leaders of this society impossible. Everyone would turn away from them, despite, or rather, precisely because of this money they looted, this labor sweat and blood turned into gold. They would not shake hands, they would spit in their eyes, they would be loudly called thieves and murderers.

The terrible power of man over man. Once upon a time it was the unlimited power of the master over the worker. Now this is no less severe economic dependence; its types are endless, just as the abuses of this heavy power are endless.

The exhaustion of strength from a worker during unemployed times, the fall of a woman into severe poverty, bought by a rich sensualist, they said that the wives and daughters of Lena workers had to satisfy the whims of local employees - all sorts of rudeness, insults, injustices: all this merges into one terrible ocean of tears, violence , bullying in which the working people are drowning. And the hour of reckoning will be terrible. Terrible is the moment when, at the Last Judgment, these offended, persecuted, humiliated people, at the crown of their suffering and their patience, will point to their oppressors, robbers, offenders and murderers - to that all-seeing Judge, before Whom all excuses and those pathetic justifications with which these the enemies of the people were justified before partial human judges.