Missionary leaflet why Orthodoxy is the true religion. Why is Orthodoxy the true faith? There can only be one true faith

Many people, in search of truth and correct faith, come to Orthodoxy. After going through a life path full of searches, suffering, worries and disappointments, they eventually find their home. For them, the Orthodox faith is the end of searches and wanderings, they have come home. What steps were taken along the way and what were the stopping points?Each such point is a special moment in the spiritual development of a person, when some truth is comprehended.

1. The truth of the Lord God.

Everything around us has a Creator. Someone, everything that we see and feel, created and is the cause of all existence. Everything around us, every thing has been created by someone. It follows from this that the world was also created by someone. It cannot be that someone has created every thing around us, but the world, so beautiful and so wise, was accidentally created by itself. It is clear that there is a Creator of the world and that this Creator is omnipotent, all-knowing and generally special, and of course it is the Lord God.

2. The truth of the invisible world.

We are surrounded by a visible and invisible world. We all see and feel the visible world. The invisible world is divided into two parts. The first part is the world that can be felt not in a direct way, but indirectly; that is, with the help of some tools. Thus, many things invisible, people understood and felt. For example, electricity, radio waves, atoms, etc.

But there is also a second part of the invisible world - this is the invisible world that people do not understand and do not see. This is pretty obvious too. Almost every person, sooner or later, is faced with phenomena that are completely inexplicable in a scientific way. For example, a premonition of the future, a prayer heard, etc. All this says that of course there is some kind of invisible world; a world that we cannot explain in a scientific way.

3. The truth of the other world.

After death, the souls of people continue to live. There are many testimonies, especially during the war, about incidents proving that the human soul is immortal and that it continues to live even after death. There are cases that before dying, a dying person sees deceased relatives and acquaintances about whose death he did not know. He sees them and says: "Are you here too?" Then there are many cases when a dying person, especially a righteous one, dies quietly, calmly and even with a smile; as if he is seeing something particularly good.

From physics we know that nothing can disappear, but only changes its appearance.

4. The truth of a personal God.

Many believe in "some" deity, the Creator of the Universe, but not in a personal God, with whom one can have a personal relationship. That is, in God, who knows each of us, is interested in us, cares about us and to whom you can pray. According to Christian teaching, the Lord God knows everything about us, loves us and always directs us to good. It is called Divine Providence .

That this is true, there is a lot of evidence. The many prayers that have been heard are proof of this. This happens to every believer. Due to our weakness and sinfulness, we usually forget such miracles.

So one day, so as not to forget, one God-loving Orthodox person decided to write down all the prayers, miracles and Providence of God he had heard in his life. Having written down everything he could remember, he was amazed that there were so many prayers heard and completely inexplicable phenomena - miracles. It became clear to him that not only the Lord God exists, but He hears us sinners, listens and often when our requests are consistent with His will, then He fulfills our prayers. He is our Father, He loves us, and He cares about us. Each believer can confirm this for himself if he remembers and writes down all the prayers he heard and all the miracles in his life. He, too, will be amazed at the many prayers and miracles he will hear.

Recently, an American psychiatrist doctor confirmed in his book about the existence of Divine Providence with facts from his practice. You had to have the courage to make such a statement and defend it. Observing the accidents, he drew attention to the fact that quite incredible incidents often occur. For example, after an accident in which the car completely turned into a cake, a person climbs out almost without any damage. If a person dies in this case, then this is natural, but if he is pulled out of the car of a cake, and he is alive and well, then of course it is a miracle. The name of this author and the title of this book is: M. Scott Peck, MD. The Road Less Traveled. 1978. Simon and Schuster, New York, NY. 318 pp.

So in this book there are such thoughtsthat completely inexplicable cases occur more often than is predicted by the mathematical theory of probability, that is, that it was just an accident.

So, the abundance of prayers and miracles heard in our personal life proves that the Lord God certainly listens to us, knows us and helps us walk the road to good.

5. Everyone has a part of the truth.

But what about the fact that in other religions there are often correct and good teachings?

The answer to this is this: even in the wildest religion, say, among cannibals, they also have some correct teachings. In every confession, in every worldview, in every philosophy, in every political trend, there is some grain of truth. All these teachings were not invented by completely insane people. This means that they all have some grain of truth. But how much of the whole teaching is true and what is not is another question. We will try to answer this question below.

6. There can be only one true faith.

Is there such a faith where everything is 100% true? Logically, if there is such a belief, then there can be only one. There cannot be two faiths that, in all their teachings, are 100% true. If this were so, then it would not be two faiths, but one, since they teach the same in everything, it means that they are identical.

In order to more easily solve this problem, you can imagine every truth that some faith teaches as a white ball, and every delusion as a black ball. Thus, the entire teaching of any faith, philosophy or political doctrine can be imagined as a vessel with white and black balls. Some have more blacks than whites, others have more whites, and still others have almost all whites. Only one faith can have all the marbles white. This means that only one faith can be 100% true and only one faith can be truly divine.

The conclusion from this reasoning is that there can be only one true faith.

7. Teaching of the Orthodox faith.

The main task of the Christian faith is to instill in a person kindness. Christianity cleanses a person from sin , brings him closer to holiness - sanctifies him.

Christianity in the first place defined what it means to be a good person. In paganism this was not known and if it was not quite. Now, to be a good person meant to be kind, truthful, honest, decent, calm, quiet, loving. That is, the qualities of a "good person" are equal to those of a Christian.

8. The advantage of the Christian faith over others.

As mentioned above, Christianity sanctifies a person. Other religions do not make this a central concern. It is precisely because of this, Christianity is the purest and noblest faith .

9. History of the Christian Church.

The beginning of the Christian Church comes from Jesus Christ. Her teaching has remained unchanged for all these centuries. Miracles, purity of Christian teaching compared to the pagan world, resurrection of Jesus Christ, rapid spread, all this proves the divine principle of the Christian Church. From this it follows that since the Church is divine, then it must be true.

10. Influence of Christianity.

Christianity has had a positive impact on the whole world and under this influence the world has completely changed. Relationships between people have become more human. Christianity taught that a person should be appreciated for his spiritual qualities - that is, whether he is good or not. Wealth, social status and beauty are not important .

Christian ideals, Christian views on life, with their moral perfection, gradually defeated pagan ideals and views. The world was gradually rebuilt according to the Christian ideal.

11. Teaching of the Orthodox faith.

The Orthodox faith is the purest, most unchanged Christianity. She teaches kindness, mercy, forgiveness and love. The Orthodox not only lives according to the commandments of the Law of God, but he also engages in spiritual self-education. That is, he gradually and purposefully develops Christian qualities in himself and gets rid of sinful habits.

12. The Orthodox have the fullness of their faith.

There are many trends among the Christian Churches and Christian communities, and they all insist that they are true. Is it so?

The Orthodox have the fullness of their faith. It is felt everywhere; in the temple, in books, prayers, etc. The heterodox do not have such beauty, icons, saints, hymns, such confession, fasting, such communion, depth, spiritual literature and holy fathers.

It is a well-known thing that sometimes when a Protestant comes to an Orthodox church for the first time, he feels the so-called cultural shock. He is so shocked by the difference between what he is used to and the new that he feels that he is in shock.

There is a case when a Protestant was present in 1966 in San Francisco at the funeral service for Archbishop John (Maksimovich) of Western America and San Francisco and Shanghai, the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia (ROCOR). Everything that happened at the funeral service of this great saint influenced and shocked him so much that after that he began to gravitate towards the Orthodox Church. He began to read Orthodox spiritual literature and later converted to Orthodoxy and not only converted, but also became a very active and good priest (Father Aleksey Yang).

Taking into account the full breadth and depth of the Orthodox faith and spiritual poverty and lack of completeness of teaching in Protestant communities, it is of course clear that they cannot be the True Church.

Considering the well-known behavior and usurpation of power of the Roman Church and its popes, it is also clear that the Roman Church is not the True Church.

Thus, using the analytical by elimination method, one can prove that The Orthodox Church and the Orthodox faith are the True Church and the true faith, and all truth is of divine origin.

13. The influence of the Orthodox faith.

The Orthodox faith not only re-educates the Orthodox, but it gradually influences positively the whole society. It affects the entire culture of the people: character, life, writing, literature, history, legislation, statehood. The Romans, Greeks and others already had a culture before the advent of Christianity. For Russians, almost everything began with Christianity.

It is interesting how faith does not affect the entire culture of the people, and even the language. So, for example, in the Russian language there is the word education, re-education and self-education. These words are the words of the Russian people, whose culture is based on the Orthodox faith. In the Orthodox faith, education, re-education and self-education are the most important and most basic concepts. In English, there are no words education, re-education and self-education. Since this is the language of Protestants who have little to say about self-education, then these words are not.

14. Ascetic teaching.

Among the Orthodox Churches, although they are all equal components of the Orthodox Church, there is a difference in their depth and spirituality. The strongest and most condensed Orthodoxy is ascetic (ascetic) Orthodoxy. The word asceticism can be defined as an exercise of spirit and body, will and thoughts.

In ascetic Orthodoxy, feat is associated with spiritual self-education and stands out more clearly than in non-ascetic. Here there is no pride, there is joy in Christ, spiritual literature is read, fasts are observed with love and joy, there is warfare with their sinfulness and passions, confession is associated with the sacrament, divine services are not shortened, sermons talk about the struggle with our passions, there are faces that differ their holiness, elders exist, there is no pursuit of change, etc.

On the Necessity of Spiritual Feat for Spiritual Development Archbishop Theodore, rector of the Moscow Theological Academy in 1911, wrote:"Feat, effort and struggle are inevitably combined with the task of moral improvement. It is the same as saying that diet is a necessary element and accessory of a person's physical recovery and treatment. so for a spiritually sick person - with a sin - on the way to salvation, a well-known diet is necessary, a regime that somehow puts him within a certain framework. "(Archbishop Theodore, The Meaning of the Christian Feat, 1976, p. 52).

Each of us sins a lot every day and has sinful habits, that is, passions. But how to start fighting our passions; with the smallest sinful habit or the biggest? This question is answered by Metropolitan Vitaly, First Hierarch of ROCOR, exactly according to the experience and teachings of the Holy Fathers, in his 1988 Lenten Epistle:"... Each of us has some kind of dominant passion, like a certain main spiritual root, against which it befits us to take up arms with all the forces of our souls ..."(Orthodox Russia, No. 5 (1362), 1/14 March 1988).

15. Asceticism and other faiths.

Metropolitan Anthony (Khrapovitsky) of Kiev and Galicia (later the first First Hierarch of ROCOR) wrote about the strongest, most condensed Orthodoxy:

"...the moral perfection of the person is the goal of Christian life, and not just the knowledge of God (as the Protestants believe) or the improvement of the Church (the papists), for which, in their opinion, God himself gives man moral perfection as retribution. "

"Moral perfection is achieved through self-directed, complex work on oneself, internal struggle, deprivation, especially self-abasement."

"And at the root of all delusions lies the lack of understanding of the simple truth that Christianity is an ascetic religion , what Christianity - the doctrine of the gradual extermination of passions, of the means and conditions for the gradual assimilation of virtues; These conditions are internal, consisting in exploits, and - outside of the given, which is contained in our dogmatic beliefs and grace-filled sacred acts, which have the same purpose: to heal human sinfulness and lead us to perfection. "("How does the right. Faith differ from Western confessions (Mit. Anthony (Khrapovitsky) (1911) (ДД-16.3р)).

Conclusion

The Orthodox Church and Faith are not only divine, holy, most noble, but also true. It is a great honor and happiness to belong to the True Church and the Faith. For this love shown to us by the Lord God, we must thank Him and do everything possible from ourselves so as not to lose this gift. This, of course, imposes on us the duty to get to know and study our faith more deeply, to observe the commandments of the Law of God, to pass on our knowledge to our family and friends, and to help the Orthodox in every possible way in their holy work.

Spiritual leaflet "The Way Home. - The Truth of the Orthodox Faith"

(Or why Orthodoxy is the true doctrine of God.)

"For the time will come when they will not accept sound doctrine, but according to their own whims they will choose for themselves teachers who would flatter the ear; and they will turn their ears away from the truth and turn to fables."
(2p. Tim. 4: 3.4).

These words were written by the Apostle Paul almost 2000 years ago and they find confirmation in the entire history of mankind.
Often people are easily ready to accept teachings, religions that directly contradict human conscience, reason, which carry the beginnings of pride, cruelty and madness.

There are several reasons for this.

But the main one is one.

The word flattering is pleasant for our narcissism, and everyone listens to it with pleasure. Most of the people have deviated from the correct concepts, and it is more convenient to choose the evil, rather than agree to the good.
Christianity (without distortions) is a very uncomfortable religion for our pride, selfishness and the evil that, to one degree or another, is in each of us. All our "old nature" rises up and resists the commandments of God.
Christianity is a reproach to our conscience, because conscience distinguishes between good and evil much more clearly than our mind.

Below are some facts that I hope will encourage you to learn more about Christianity (Orthodoxy).
In other religions and teachings of men, you will not find such evidence of the truth of the teachings.

1 ... Most of the direct witnesses to the life and preaching of Christ, were martyred when they preached Christianity among the nations.
The apostles witnessed the events described in the Gospel. Tell me, if the events described in the Gospel are deceit, who, knowing this, will voluntarily go to torment and death for a lie?

The Apostle Paul answered this question.

"For we have announced to you the power and the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, not by following cunningly devised fables, but by being eyewitnesses of His majesty." (Gal. 1: 14-16).
They testified to what they spoke with their lives and blood.

2 ... Jesus Christ was executed as a criminal. His disciples were severely persecuted.

The largest Roman historian Tacitus Publius (55-120) writes - “Their killing (Christians) was accompanied by mockery, for they were clothed in the skins of wild beasts, so that they would be torn to death by dogs, crucified on crosses, or those doomed to death were set on fire in a fire. the onset of darkness for the night illumination. For this spectacle, Nero provided his gardens; then he gave a performance in a circus, during which he sat among the crowd in the clothes of a charioteer or drove a team, participating in a chariot competition.

Pliny the Younger (62–114), when he was appointed ruler of Bethany, found many Christians there. He reported the results of his judicial investigations to the emperor around 110 AD. in the next letter: “I have never been present at the investigations in the case of Christians: therefore, I do not know how and to what extent they should be punished or how to conduct an inquiry. I very much hesitated whether it was necessary, when passing a sentence, to make a difference between ages, or not to distinguish a tender age from adults, whether to forgive the repentant, or to a person who was a Christian, renunciation does not work, and the name itself should be punished, even in the absence of a crime related to the name. So far, with those who were brought to me as Christians, I have followed this course of action. I asked them themselves if they were Christians; he asked those who had confessed a second time, and a third time, threatening them with execution, he ordered the obstinate to be taken to execution. I had no doubt that whatever the essence of their recognition, they should, of course, be punished for their unyielding stubbornness and stubbornness. "

Under some emperors, there were attempts to completely exterminate Christianity. And so on for 300 years. Only in 313 the emperors Constantine and Licinius issued the Edict of Milan proclaiming the free confession of Christianity.

Try to put yourself in the shoes of the Christians of the first three centuries.
Would you become a Christian knowing that you would be executed for accepting it?

How could Christianity spread?

Why did people, seeing such terror, embrace Christianity?

All Christian truths: about God-Love, about the Trinity of one God, about the Logos as the second Hypostasis of God, about the Incarnation, about Christ the Savior crucified, about the Resurrection, etc., are unique in nature. They are deeply different from both the Old Testament Jewish religion, and even more so from other religious teachings of the era of the emergence of Christianity.

The dogmas of the Christian doctrine are neither the result of a logical conclusion from the previous ideological attitudes, nor the fruit of any "refinement" of the corresponding forms of consciousness. This raises two questions.

First: what is the source of these completely new and surprising in their depth of truths, especially if we take into account that their preachers were the nowhere studied Carpenter's Son and His disciples - non-bookish and simple people?

Second: what kind of geniuses were these illiterate people who were able to "come up" with so many fundamentally new religious ideas?

All this objectively speaks of some special, unnatural nature of their origin.

Friedrich Engels, one of the "geniuses" of Marxism, the founders of the materialist understanding of history, carefully studied Christian history - and concluded that Christianity, having emerged on the world stage, came into sharp conflict with all the religions around it. (A.I. Osipov).

4 ... The Bible contains a large number of fulfilled prophecies. They are in the Old and New Testaments. For example, the Old Testament, written over a thousand years, contains more than three hundred predictions about the Messiah, which were fulfilled in Jesus Christ. A number of prophecies Christ Himself, as a man, could not fulfill in any way.

To the Objection that these prophecies were written during the life of Jesus or after His resurrection and, therefore, are being fulfilled retroactively.

The answer is:

If you are not satisfied with 450 B.C. As a completion date for the writing of the Old Testament, consider the following: The Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, was begun under King Ptolemy Philadelphus (285-246 BC). Obviously, if in more than 200 years B.C. Since work began on a Greek translation, the Hebrew text was written earlier than this time. In other words, between the prophecies of the Old Testament and their fulfillment in Christ lies at least 250 years.

5. Interesting facts about Christ can be found in two world religions.

In Judaism.

In the Hebrew sacred texts, there are 332 clear prophecies that were literally fulfilled in Jesus Christ, as mentioned earlier.

But there is one interesting point here.

There are two texts of the Old Testament:
The Septuagint is a translation of the "seventy elders" into ancient Greek, made in Alexandria at the end of the first millennium BC. e. Its authenticity was confirmed by the Qumran manuscripts found in 1947 in caves 10-15 km from Jericho, containing all the texts of the Old Testament.

This undistorted text contains the Bible of Cyril and Methodius in the Church Slavonic language used by the Russian Orthodox Church in the liturgical process.

There is an even later distorted text - Masoretic.

Jews who did not accept Christ and seeing how quickly Christianity spreads, in the 1st century they were forced to rewrite their sacred texts because they testified about Christ.
Innovations have distorted the meaning of the sacred texts. On its basis are written - Talmud, Kabbalah; Latin Vulgate; Synodal translation of 1876; all books published by the Russian Bible Society and sects.

From the above, a simple conclusion can be drawn.

Introducing deliberate distortions in the Old Testament, those people confirmed one simple truth - Lies always expose themselves by what they think to harm the truth, and meanwhile they reveal the truth more clearly.

In Islam.

The name Isa (Jesus) is mentioned in the Quran many times.

According to the Muslim doctrine, the conception of Jesus (the prophet Isa) happened without a father from a virgin.

Islam recognizes the ascension of Jesus (the prophet Isa). True, to our great regret, the death of the cross and the resurrection are denied.

Also, according to Islamic doctrine, at the end of time, before the End of the World, Al-Masih ad-Dajjal (false messiah, antichrist) will appear. His dominion of ad-Dajjal will last for several years, after which Isa will appear from heaven and crush the Dajjal.

From this we see that Islam recognizes the virgin birth of Jesus! His ascension! And victory over Satan on the day of judgment!
Is this possible for a simple, mortal person? Draw your own conclusions.

All the facts that are given above, of course, are not the main thing, but there is something to think about.

Reading the Gospels, we see the absence of an admixture of human wisdom (philosophy) in it. We will find that God's law is really good and brings only good to man. Christianity provides answers to all the basic questions in human life.

You no longer in any religion will not meet the beauty that Christianity (Orthodoxy) reveals to a person!

You just need to look around and at your life carefully. Truth bears witness to itself.

Where is Christianity preserved without distortion by people?

To understand this issue and not be unfounded, I strongly advise everyone to refer to the original source. Read what the Gospel says, the apostles, the disciples of the apostles and the holy fathers (people who have reached Christian perfection) of the first centuries, and everything will immediately fall into place.

From reading you will also, firstly, get great benefit for yourself, and secondly, you can later easily understand where the truth is and where the lie is! Do not be ignorant in the matter of faith and do not allow yourself to be deceived by people who take advantage of your ignorance and cleverly replace the truth with a lie!

Perhaps the following can be said about the current state of Christianity.

To our great misfortune, true Christianity is imperceptibly removed from the earth.
The present state of the Church and Christianity is the most woeful everywhere. It is obvious that the deviation from the Orthodox faith is universal among the people. There is no cure or healing for this ulcer. For today's Christians, for the most part, life is opposite to Christ, not conforming. Christ lived in humility - Christians today love to live in pride and splendor. The passion for money crept into all classes and dignities, drowned out and suppressed all good motives and all sacred duties.

Holy Scripture testifies that Christians, like the Jews, will gradually begin to cool down to the revealed teaching of God; they will begin to ignore the renewal of the human nature by the God-man, forget about eternity, turn all attention to their earthly life: in this mood and direction they will engage in the development of their position on earth, as it were, eternal, and the development of their fallen nature to satisfy all damaged and depraved requirements and wishes of soul and body. Of course: the Redeemer, who redeemed man for a blessed eternity, is alien to such a direction. Monasticism will participate in the weakening of Christianity: a member of the body cannot but take part in the weakness that has struck the whole body. Ignatius (Bryanchantov)

What is Orthodoxy?

Orthodoxy is the worship of God in spirit and in truth. There is no Orthodoxy in the teachings and speculations of men: they are dominated by a false-name reason - the fruit of the fall.

WHY IS ORTHODOXY - THE TRUE FAITH?

LECTURE BY PROFESSOR A.I. OSIPOV ON BASIC THEOLOGY,
READ AT SRETENSK SCHOOL SEPTEMBER 6, 2000

Now all of us are in such a life situation when we can in no way separate ourselves by any walls from the world around us. What is the situation around us? You and I now live in a world of religious pluralism. We have found ourselves in the face of so many people, each of whom offers us their ideals, their own norms of life, their religious views, that the previous generation, or even my generation, probably would not envy you. It was easier for us. In general, the main problem facing our generation was the problem of religion and atheism.

You have something much larger and much more complex, if you like, this is only the first step: is there a God or not? Well, okay, man became convinced that there is God. So what is next? And who should he be? And why does he need to be a Christian, tell me, why not a Muslim? Why not a Buddhist? Why not a Hare Krishna? I do not want to list, now there are so many of them, you know better than me. Why, why, and why? Well, after going through the jungle and jungle of this multi-religious tree, he becomes a Christian. I understood everything, Christianity is the best religion, the right one.

What is it? Who should I be? Orthodox, Catholic, Pentecostal, Lutheran? Again, countless. This is the situation facing our modern youth now. If once it was so easy, you know, on the sly, now with full force. Each of the representatives of new and old religions, from representatives of non-Orthodox confessions, perhaps, trumpets much more about themselves, and has much more opportunities to speak in the media than even we, Orthodox.

So, the first thing we stop at is this pluralism. And today I would just like to very briefly, concisely walk along this ladder. The ladder that stands in front of every modern person, and to see, at least in the most general, but fundamental lines, why after all a person should, not only can, but really should, if he is reasonable, become not just a Christian, but an Orthodox Christian.

First problem: between religion and atheism. We have to meet at conferences, very significant ones, with people who are really educated, have not slipped on the surface, people are really scientists, not top-sighted, and we have to constantly face all the same questions. God. Who is God? Why do they believe that He is? Even why is He needed? If there is a God, then why does He not appear from the rostrum of the United Nations and declare Himself? Even such things are being offered now. What can be said on this issue?

This question, it seems to me, is being solved from the standpoint of modern main philosophical thought, which is most easily expressed by the concept of existentiality. Human existence, the meaning of human life. Think about what the meaning of human life can be. Well, of course, only in life. What else? If I’m running out of something, what is the point of my business, if, ultimately, I then cannot get the fruits of this business, take advantage of the results of this business. The meaning of life can only be in life, no one has ever and for ever and ever could count or assert that the meaning of life can be in eternal and final death. Christianity says: man, eternal life awaits you, get ready, this life is a condition and a means of preparing for eternity. That's what you need to do for this, that's what you need to be in order to enter there. What does atheism claim? Believe, man, eternal death awaits you ... Like frost on the skin - what horror, what pessimism, what despair ... Believe, man, eternal death awaits you. I'm not even talking about the justifications that are given in this case. This statement alone makes the human soul shudder - so spare me from such a worldview.

When a person gets lost in the forest, looking for a way, looking for a way home and suddenly, finding, someone asks: "Is there a way out of here?" And he says to him: "There is no way out and do not look, that's it, stay here and settle down as you can." Will he believe him? Doubtful. When he finds another person and he will tell him: "Yes, there is a way out, and I will show you the signs by which you can get out of here." Who will he believe? Absolutely clear. As long as a person still has a spark of a search, a spark of a search for truth, a spark of a search for the meaning of life, until then he cannot, psychologically cannot accept the concept that asserts that, a person, you as a person, and, consequently, all people will face eternal death.

I have just pointed out to you one side, psychologically very essential and which, as it seems to me, is enough for every person with a living soul. It is clear that only a religious worldview, only a worldview that takes as its basis the One Whom we call God, allows us to talk about the meaning of life.

So, I believe in God. We will assume that we have passed the first room. So, having believed in God, I enter the second ... My God, who should I believe? There are a lot of people, and everyone is shouting: "I am the truth." Here is the task ... And Muslims, and Confucians, and Buddhists, and Jews and whoever is not there. We see that there are many of them, Christianity is among them. Here he is, a Christian preacher, in the midst of others, and I am looking for who is right and who is wrong.

There are two ways of approach, maybe even more, but I will name two for you. One of these paths, which will enable a person to choose and make sure that Christianity is a true religion (that is, it asserts that which objectively corresponds to human nature, human quest, human understanding of the meaning of life). This is a method of comparative theological analysis. Quite a long way, here you need to study every religion well. But not everyone can go this way, it takes a lot of time, great strength, if you want the ability, in order to study all this, especially since it will take so much strength of the soul ...

But there is also another method. In the end, every religion is addressed to a person, it claims to him that this is the truth, and not another. The essence of every religion, the essence of all religions, of all worldviews lies in the doctrine of salvation. All worldviews, all religions affirm one simple thing: what we have now does not suit me, and even if it suits me personally, I know that it does not suit many. This does not suit humanity in general, they are looking for something else: more. They strive for somewhere, the present state of affairs does not suit anyone.

The essence of every religion is the doctrine of salvation. And here we are faced with things that already make it possible, it seems to me, to make an informed choice. When we face religious diversity. Christianity, unlike all other religions, asserts something that other religions simply do not know. Not only do they not know, but even reject it with indignation. And this statement is contained in one concept - the concept of sin. All religions talk about sin, if you want even all worldviews, all ideologies. It is called, however, differently, but it does not matter. But Christianity claims that the state in which we are all with you, were born, grow up, are brought up, marry, mature - a state in which we enjoy, have fun, learn, make discoveries, turn to the people and humanity, and so on. Christianity says that this is a state of deep illness, deep damage, we are sick. This is not the flu or bronchitis. The point is not even that we have a mental illness, no, no, we are mentally healthy and physically healthy - we can fly into space, but we are all deeply sick. Christianity claims that this state of our human nature is an abnormal state. It is not the norm at all, the deepest deviation from the norm, we are in a state of profound abnormality. Some strange tragic splitting of a single human being into opposing, as if autonomously existing mind, heart and body took place. Pike, crayfish and swan ... What an absurdity, isn't it? Everyone is outraged: "Am I crazy? Sorry, maybe around me, but not me." This feeling of your wholeness, this feeling, if you like, of your health is the deepest feeling inherent in every person. And Christianity says: "It is here that lies the root, that source, because of which human life, both individually and in all human terms, leads to one tragedy after another."

Other religions do not recognize this. They reject this, they believe that a person is a seed, but healthy. Yes, this seed can develop normally, it can be abnormal. Its development is due to the social environment, economic conditions, psychological factors, due to many things. Yes, therefore, it can be good, it can be bad, but man himself is by nature good. This is the main thesis of non-Christian consciousness. I do not say irreligious, there is nothing to say, there is a man - it sounds proudly. And only Christianity says that this state of ours is a state of deep damage, and such damage that no one on a personal level can heal it. The greatest Christian dogma about Christ as Savior is based on this statement.

This understanding of sin is a fundamental dividing line between Christianity and all other religions.

Now I will try to show you that it is Christianity, and no other religions. Let's turn with you to the history of mankind.

Let's see how it lives, the whole history, at least available to our human eyes. What are the goals? Of course, everyone wants to build the Kingdom of God on earth, to create a paradise. Everyone understands that this Kingdom on earth is impossible without what? Without elementary things: without peace. War? Sorry, this is hell, not the Kingdom of God. No justice. Well, it goes without saying. What is the Kingdom if injustice reigns supreme? Without, if you will, respect for each other, let us condescend to such things. Impossible - that is, everyone understands perfectly well that without these fundamental moral values, without their implementation, it is impossible to achieve any prosperity on earth. Does everyone understand? Everyone understands. Are all smart people? All smart people. What are we doing, all of humanity, all of history? What are we doing? Erich Fromm said well: "The history of mankind is filled with blood." Exactly. Historians, military historians, I think, could best illustrate to us what this story is filled with: wars, bloodshed, violence, cruelty. Everything that contradicts that idea, that goal, that thought towards which everyone seems to be directed: when will it, this Kingdom of God, be? And we do everything exactly the opposite. The twentieth century is already a century of such a humanism, of which the humanists themselves have never dreamed. It seems that we have already reached, it seems, the top of human perfection, and have shown this top. If only previous humanity could look at what happened in the twentieth century. So it would probably shudder. What is the scale of cruelty, injustice, deception. Politics has become a deception in the world.

I am asking the simplest question. Excuse me, can such a clever creature behave? When does it cut and chop itself? If humanity was really smart, if it would really be healthy, if it really was reasonable, it would do everything possible so that there would never be any wars. By destroying every trap, every lead for injustice. History refutes our mind, scoffs at it, ironically: "Look, you are smart humanity, are you healthy? You are not mentally ill, no, no. Therefore, you create a little more and worse than in insane asylums."

It seems to me that this is a very strong fact, from which no one can get away anywhere. And he shows that it is not just a few in humanity who are mistaken, no, no, but (indeed) these are massive cases of insanity, this is a universal abnormality. If we turn now on a personal level, if a person has enough honesty to turn to himself, take a mirror and look at himself.

It is not for nothing that the Apostle Paul said golden words: "Poor man I am, I do not the good that I want, but the evil that I hate." Anyone who comes into contact with himself a little will see what the action of passion is. Why are you chopping, cutting yourself, stabbing and so on, why are you doing this in a harmful way? Indeed, we are in some kind of enslavement, indeed: I do not the good that I want, but the evil that I hate. Here, in the depths of his soul, each person will see what is happening to him and what he is doing if a person takes a closer look at himself. Think about how human psychology can change at the same time, pay attention: the holy fathers, those who acquired special gifts, who were purified, according to the word of the Monk Seraphim of Sarov, "acquired the Holy Spirit." What did they come to? This is generally a psychologically most curious thing. They saw themselves as the worst of all. They, who, even in their thoughts, were afraid to sin. And, it seems, well, they were absolutely saints, they did not sin in anything. And suddenly they declare that they are the most sinful of all. What's this? Some kind of hypocrisy, some kind of disgusting humility? May God deliver.

Here people who, even in their thoughts, were afraid to admit a lie, could not say that. When Pimen the Great said: "Believe me, brethren, where Satan will be cast, I will be cast there," he was not a hypocrite. And he said this with all his soul, he said what he really saw. When Sisoy the Great was dying, and his face lit up like the sun, it was impossible to look at him, and he begged God to give him some more time to repent. Forgive me, the man was not a hypocrite, but spoke from the bottom of his heart. What is it that happens to a person, what can happen to a person? We seem to be overwhelmed with all kinds of filth, and I, you know, feel like a very good person. I am a good person, but if I ever do something bad, it’s only because you can be sure. Everyone around me is to blame, I'm the only good one. The saints say that no one is to blame except them.

So this is what I want to show. Christianity claims that man, by nature, in his present state, is deeply damaged. Unfortunately, we do not see this damage. The most amazing blindness, the most terrible, the most important, which is present in us, is the invisibility of our disease. The most terrible disease, because when a person sees his disease, he will begin to heal. He goes to doctors, he seeks help. When do I see myself healthy? I'll send you there myself. This is what Christianity points to. This is the root of even the very damage that is present in us. And that it is, this damage, this is unambiguously evidenced by both the history of mankind and the history of the life of each person individually, and, first of all, for each person, his personal life.

I will say that the statement of only this fact, this single statement of the Christian faith about the damage to human nature shows me which religion I should turn to. To that religion, which reveals my diseases, and indicates the means of their cure, and not to that religion, which covers them up. He says: everything is healthy and good, everything is fine, you have nothing to be treated. Just create the best conditions: economic, social, political, cultural and everything will be ok. Tomorrow you will die, we will take you to the cemetery.

Christianity points to the main disease, Christianity provides ways to cure it, therefore I choose Christianity, and not those religions that flatter my pride, they say that I am the best in the world.

Well, okay, we got to Christianity. Glory to You, Lord, I finally found the true faith. I went into the next room, and there was again a lot of people. The Catholic shouts my best faith, the best in the world, if you don't believe - look how much is behind me. There, you see, there are Orthodox Christians, only some 170 million, well, Protestants 350 million, and we are Catholics, 45 billion. True, someone squeaks there: no, the truth is not in quantity, but in quality. But in general, the situation is serious. Where is true Christianity?

I'll tell you this, there are several methods of analysis here. The seminary has always offered us a method of comparative study of dogmatic systems. In particular, Catholicism, Protestantism, and, of course, Orthodoxy. This is a noteworthy, trustworthy method, but it seems to me not good enough and not accurate enough. Here we argue with the Catholics, for example, about the "primacy of the Pope." We have had such meetings with Catholics more than once. I have participated in many meetings, and from the side of the Roman Catholic Church there has always been a delegation from the Vatican. I will tell you that it will be difficult for a person who does not have a good education, does not have sufficient knowledge. Just figure out who is right and who is wrong. They use such sometimes psychological, powerful methods that you cannot imagine. Well, imagine in the Vatican: "Pope? Oh, such nonsense is the primacy of the Pope, such nonsense, what are you !? This is the same as your Patriarch."

And we begin a discussion with him, and he says this to everyone, he does not even hesitate to speak to the professors, who probably know a little at least. Psychological impact. This is in those cases in which they feel that it is very difficult to prove here, they even try to create the atmosphere itself. So the comparative method is not very simple. Especially when you are faced with people who are not only knowledgeable, but also cunning.

The comparative method, it seems to me, suffers from the flaw that it requires a very thorough study, good knowledge, before a person can really himself, not trust someone, some professors, but can be convinced for himself. In this case, there is a completely different path, which unequivocally says that Catholicism is really a religion of delusion. Catholicism is wrong, Christianity is wrong, it leads a person to the wrong place. And this method, the method of identification, lies on a different path. This is a method of research, study of Catholic spirituality and its comparison with Orthodox spirituality.

Here, in all its strength, in all its brightness, and at times, murderous brightness, all the madness is revealed, in ascetic language all the "grace" of Catholic spirituality. you know, sometimes I give public lectures, and different people gather there. And sometimes they ask the question: "Well, how do you know that Catholicism is wrong? How is it different? "And many times I was convinced that it is enough to quote a few sayings of Catholic mystics, so that sometimes they simply say:" Thank you, now everything is clear to us. Nothing else is needed. "

Indeed, the Church is judged by the saints. Tell me who your saints are, and I will tell you what your Church is. Saints are the ideal. This is the norm of life that we should be guided by. This is not a rank or title at all. This is the norm. These are the people who have shown what is meant by holiness in this Church. Therefore, by the saints, we can best judge the Church itself.

Here the facts are glaring and we can show them. Take, for example, the book "The Revelations of Blessed Angela". What's going on with this blessed Angela. What kind of things she gets, what dialogues she has with the Holy Spirit and with Jesus Christ. In what love these "faces of the holy trinity" are explained to her. "We love all the apostles, but we love no one like you, we were in all the apostles, but we were not in anyone like in you." And she sees herself in the "darkness of the holy trinity." In the very middle, which is not there. And then she sees herself crouching at the rib of Christ and drinking His blood. When "Christ" departs, she starts screaming and screaming. Nun ... Other nuns grab her hands by the legs, quickly carry her away from the church. Shame. A nun, but screams: "Where have you gone? Christ, I have not yet enjoyed You!" What horrors ... Take only this Great Teresa. What is happening there? When Christ appears to Teresa after many, of course, appearances, and says: "Before that I was your God, from now on I and your husband." And Teresa rolls her eyes and faints with delight. You know, this is just some kind of nightmare, just frost on the skin. When she exclaims: "Oh my God, my husband!" But what is it. When she says about Christ: "Beloved." Calls with such a piercing whistle that it is impossible not to hear it, and her soul is exhausted from desire.

I can tell you that there are many of these facts. And I draw your attention, do you know who she is? She was elevated to the dignity of a teacher of the Church by Pope Paul VI. The teacher of the Church is the highest stage in Canonization in the Catholic Church, that is, it is equal to Basil the Great, John Chrysostom, Gregory the Theologian, and saints. When you look at these saints, how they live, you will immediately understand what religion we come into contact with. Pope John Paul II raised again, to the dignity of "teacher of the Church" now "Little Teresa", this Frenchwoman, because the previous year he was in Paris, the youth shouted: "Teresa, Teresa!" He said, "Next year will be." Whom is he building? I was 22 years old. And what kind of pearls are there in her book. The "baby Jesus" appears to her and here are the words from this book: "We looked at each other with him, and we understood everything."

Just think how right was that landowner (about whom St. Ignatius Brianchaninov writes), who, having seen the book "Imitation of Jesus Christ" by Thomas of Kemipis in his daughter's hands, snatched it from her hands and said: "Stop playing with God in novels." ... Unfulfilled natural inclinations, they know, can then manifest themselves as a surrogate, which is called sideways.

You know, this topic is so huge, Catholic mysticism, that you can talk here for a long time. You need to be a person who does not understand anything, or does not want to see anything, so as not to recoil from this mysticism. By the way, you know, I am such a person that sometimes I ask for trouble, this is, unfortunately, such a property of my nature. I tried sometimes to do such things in Russian-Catholic dialogues. The last time was in Minsk two years ago. I have inserted in my report one quotation from St. Ignatius Brianchaninov, where he calls the Catholic saints crazy. No more, no less. The delegation was led by a cardinal - everything was as it should be. There are bishops, theologians, yes, I thought they would all be indignant and pounce on me. And I just need it. That's exactly what I wanted. What do you think? I was amazed - what they didn’t argue about, but they avoided this question. And I realized that they are sinning against the truth. They see a lie, they cannot answer it. They understand this, understand that this is charm and move away from it. And this is already, I can tell you, this is already a disaster. Because this is already a conscious step. This is what concerns Catholicism, with Protestantism, it seems even easier.

Here, it seems to me, even dogma is enough. Now I will confine myself to just one statement of Protestantism. "To the believer, sin is not counted as sin." When you say to them, but forgive me, and demons believe and tremble, and who writes about this? Apostle. What are you saying? Here is the question they confused. They called the tenth floor the first, or vice versa. Everything is mixed up in the world, they have forgotten what kind of faith saves a person. It is not the belief that Christ came 2000 years ago, everything is in order, and did everything for us. Confused, and even how confused. Orthodoxy decisively declares that faith saves a person, but what kind? Not mental faith, as St. Theophanes, that state of a person, which is acquired by the correct, I emphasize, the correct Christian life, thanks to which he is convinced that he cannot eradicate a single passion in himself. With God, it turns out, maybe he himself cannot. Only when I am drowning do I need a Savior, and when I am on the shore I do not need anyone. A correct Christian life, it just shows to a person those diseases that are present in each of us. They show him that he himself, without God, cannot heal them. From here, seeing himself drowning, he turns to Christ. Christ comes and helps him. This is where living saving faith begins.

This is how Christianity begins for a person, and not just religion, not just faith in God. I told you everything, I don't know anything else. You can ask questions.

In disputes with Catholics, using the comparative method, we give different arguments, but in fact, in the Lives of St. Demetrius of Rostov sometimes find phenomena that seem to resemble Catholic mysticism. And now sometimes just apocrypha are written.

The correct question, I can answer you this with the following:

First, regarding the Lives of St. Dmitry of Rostov: it is no longer a secret that St. Dmitry Rostovsky, unfortunately, took Catholic materials, and without sufficient censorship, not critically, unfortunately he used them. You must understand that the era in which Dmitry Rostovsky lived was an era of very strong Catholic influence. You know the Kiev-Mohyla Academy at the beginning of the 17th century, the Moscow Theological Academy at the end of the 17th century. Look what was there, you can't even imagine under what strong influence the Catholic and then Protestant all our theological thought, our theological educational institutions developed. Why are they so scholastic? Schools must be in the monastery, everyone must pass through the monastery. So, indeed, in the Lives of St. Dmitry of Rostov there are materials in which he did not critically place there. If the Catholics had pointed this out to us now, I would have answered, sorry, we are denying these things, and you are denying what Teresa did? Father Seraphim Rose said that all hagiographic sources, that is, hagiographic sources, were extremely damaged or spoiled. Sources that are after the XI century.

Alexey Ilyich, now we are publishing the Lives of the Saints by Archbishop Philaret Gumilevsky, how do you feel about this author?

The most positive attitude towards him. Thank God that you have taken up this edition. Archbishop Filaret (Gumilevsky) is an absolute authority in both historical and theological science. His Lives, with their precision, clarity of presentation, lack of the slightest exaltation, I think, are best suited to a modern person who is accustomed to looking at everything critically. I think that your publishing house is making a great gift to both scientists and ordinary readers.

Dear Alexey Ilyich, you were known as a staunch opponent of the canonization of the Royal Family. Has your attitude changed after canonization?

Of course it has changed. I humble myself before the conciliar decision of the Church.

LECTURE BY PROFESSOR A.I. OSIPOV ON BASIC THEOLOGY,
READ AT SRETENSK SCHOOL SEPTEMBER 13, 2000

At the present time, we are all in such a life situation when we cannot separate ourselves from the surrounding world in any way and by any walls. What is it like? We live in a world of religious pluralism. We have found ourselves in the face of so many preachers, each of whom offers us their ideals, their own norms of life, their religious views, that the previous generation, or my generation, perhaps, would not envy you. It was easier for us. The main problem we faced was the problem of religion and atheism.

You have, if you will, something much bigger and much worse. There is a God or there is no God - this is only the first step. Well, well, the man became convinced that there is God. So what is next? There are many faiths, what should he become? Christian, why not Muslim? Why not a Buddhist? Why not a Hare Krishna? I do not want to list further, now there are so many religions, you know them better than me. Why, why, and why? Well, okay, having passed through the jungle and jungle of this multi-religious tree, a person became a Christian. I understood everything, Christianity is the best religion, the right one.

But what kind of Christianity? It has so many faces. Who to be? Orthodox, Catholic, Pentecostal, Lutheran? Again, countless. This is the situation facing today's youth. At the same time, representatives of new and old religions, representatives of non-Orthodox confessions, as a rule, declare much more about themselves, and have much greater opportunities for propaganda in the media than we, Orthodox Christians.

So, the first thing that modern man stops at is a multitude of faiths, religions, worldviews. Therefore, today I would like to quickly, very concisely walk through this suite of rooms, which opens up in front of many modern people seeking the truth, and see, at least in the most general, but fundamental features, why a person should, not only can, but really should, on reasonable grounds, become not just a Christian, but an Orthodox Christian.

So the first problem: "Religion and Atheism". We have to meet at conferences, very significant ones, with people who are really educated, really scientists, not top-sighted, and we have to constantly face the same questions. Who is God? Does He exist? Even: why is He needed? Or, if God exists, then why does He not come from the rostrum of the United Nations and declare Himself? And such things can be heard. What can you say to this?

This question, it seems to me, is being solved from the position of the central modern philosophical thought, which is most easily expressed by the concept of existentiality. Human existence, the meaning of human life - what is its main content? Well, of course, first of all in life... How else? What is the point I experience when I sleep? The meaning of life can only be in awareness, "eating" the fruits of one's life and activity. And no one has ever been able and will never count and assert that the ultimate meaning of a person's life can be in death. This is where the impassable dividing line between religion and atheism lies. Christianity asserts: man, this earthly life is only the beginning, condition and means of preparation for eternity, get ready, eternal life awaits you. It says: this is what you need to do for this, this is what you need to be in order to enter there. And what does atheism claim? There is no God, no soul, no eternity and therefore believe, man, eternal death awaits you! What horror, what pessimism, what despair - frost on the skin from these terrible words: man, eternal death awaits you. I'm not even talking about those, to put it mildly, strange justifications that are given in this case. This one statement makes the human soul shudder. - No, spare me such a belief.

When a person gets lost in the forest, looks for a way, looks for a way home and suddenly, finding someone, asks: "Is there a way out of here?" And he replies: "No, and don't look, settle down here as you can," - will he believe him? Doubtful. Will he start looking further? And finding another person who will say to him: "Yes, there is a way out, and I will show you the signs, signs by which you can get out of here," - will he not believe him? The same thing happens in the field of ideological choice, when a person finds himself in the face of religion and atheism. While a person still retains the spark of the search for truth, the spark of the search for the meaning of life, until then he cannot, psychologically cannot accept the concept that asserts that he as a person, and, therefore, all people awaits eternal death, to "achieve" which, it turns out that it is necessary to create better economic, social, political and cultural living conditions. And then everything will be oh, kay - tomorrow you will die and we will take you to the cemetery. Just great"!

I have just pointed out to you only one side, psychologically very essential, which, it seems to me, is already enough for every person with a living soul to understand that only a religious worldview, only a worldview that takes as its basis the One Whom we call God , allows you to talk about the meaning of life.

So, I believe in God. We will assume that we have passed the first room. And, believing in God, I enter the second ... My God, what do I see and hear here? The people are full, and everyone shouts: "Only I have the truth." Here is the task ... And Muslims, and Confucians, and Buddhists, and Jews and whoever is not there. There are many among whom Christianity is now found. Here he is, a Christian preacher, in the midst of others, and I am looking, who is right here, who should I believe?

There are two approaches, there may be more, but I will name two. One of them, which can give a person the opportunity to make sure which religion is true (that is, objectively corresponds to human nature, human quest, human understanding of the meaning of life) is the method of comparative theological analysis. Quite a long way, here you need to study every religion well. But not everyone can go this way, it takes a lot of time, great strength, if you like, appropriate abilities in order to study all this - especially since it will take so much strength of the soul ...

But there is also another method. In the end, every religion is addressed to a person, she says to him: this is the truth, and not something else. At the same time, all worldviews and all religions affirm one simple thing: what is now, in what political, social, economic, on the one hand, and spiritual, moral, cultural, etc. conditions - on the other hand, a person lives - this is abnormal, it cannot suit him, and even if it personally suits someone, the overwhelming majority of people suffer from this to one degree or another. This does not suit humanity as a whole, it is looking for something else, more. Striving somewhere, into the unknown future, waiting for the "golden age" - the present state of affairs does not suit anyone.

Hence it becomes clear why the essence of every religion, of all worldviews is reduced to the doctrine of salvation. And this is where we are faced with what already makes it possible, as it seems to me, to make an informed choice when we find ourselves in the face of religious diversity. Christianity, unlike all other religions, asserts something that other religions (and even more so non-religious worldviews) simply do not know. And not only do they not know, but when faced with this, they indignantly reject it. This statement lies in the concept of the so-called. original sin. All religions, if you want even all worldviews, all ideologies talk about sin. Calling, however, it is different, but it does not matter. But none of them thinks that the nature of man in his present state is sick. Christianity asserts that the state in which all of us, people, were born, are, grow, are brought up, marry, mature, - the state in which we enjoy, have fun, learn, make discoveries, and so on - this is a state of deep illness , deep damage. We are sick. This is not about the flu or bronchitis or mental illness. No, no, we are mentally healthy, and physically healthy - we can solve problems and fly into space - we are deeply sick on the other side. At the beginning of human existence, there was a strange tragic splitting of a single human being into, as it were, autonomously existing and often opposing mind, heart and body - "pike, cancer and swan" ... What absurdity does Christianity assert, isn't it? Everyone is outraged: "Am I crazy? Sorry, others may be, but not me." And it is here, if Christianity is right, and the very root, source, of the fact that human life, both on an individual and on a universal scale, leads to one tragedy after another, is enclosed. For if a person is seriously ill, but he does not see her and therefore does not heal, then she will destroy him.

Other religions do not recognize this disease in a person. Reject her. They believe that a person is a healthy seed, but which can develop normally and abnormally. Its development is due to the social environment, economic conditions, psychological factors, due to many things. Therefore, a person can be both good and bad, but he himself is good by nature. This is the main antithesis of non-Christian consciousness. I do not say irreligious, there is nothing to say, there is generally: "man - it sounds proudly." Only Christianity claims that our present state is a state of deep damage, and such damage that, on a personal level, a person himself cannot heal it. The greatest Christian dogma about Christ as Savior is based on this statement.

This idea is a fundamental dividing line between Christianity and all other religions.

Now I will try to show that Christianity, unlike other religions, has an objective confirmation of this statement. Let's turn to the history of mankind. Let's see how it lives all the history available to our human eyes? What are the goals? Of course, it wants to build the Kingdom of God on earth, to create a paradise. Alone with the help of God. And in this case He is considered no more as a means to good on earth, but not as the highest goal of life. Others are without God at all. But something else is important. Everyone understands that this Kingdom on earth is impossible without such elementary things as: peace, justice, love (it goes without saying, what kind of paradise can be, where there is a war, injustice, anger, etc. reigns?), If you like, respect for each other, let us condescend to that. That is, everyone understands perfectly well that without such fundamental moral values, without their implementation, it is impossible to achieve any prosperity on earth. Does everyone understand? Everyone. And what is humanity doing throughout history? What are we doing? Erich Fromm said well: "The history of mankind is written in blood. It is a history of never-ending violence." Exactly.

Historians, especially the military, could, I think, perfectly illustrate to us what the whole history of mankind is filled with: war, bloodshed, violence, cruelty. The twentieth century is, in theory, the century of the highest humanism. And he showed this peak of "perfection", surpassing all the previous centuries of mankind combined with the shed blood. If our ancestors could look at what happened in the twentieth century, they would shudder at the scale of cruelty, injustice, deception. Some incomprehensible paradox lies in the fact that humanity, as its history develops, does everything exactly the opposite of its main idea, goal and thought, towards which all its efforts were initially directed.

I ask a rhetorical question: "Could such an intelligent creature behave?" History simply mocks us, ironically: "Humanity is truly intelligent and sane. It is not insane, no, no. It just creates a little more and a little worse than they do in insane asylums."

Alas, this is a fact that cannot be avoided. And he shows that not individual units in humanity are mistaken, no and no (unfortunately, only a few are not mistaken), but this is some kind of paradoxical all-human property.

If we now look at an individual person, or rather, if a person has enough moral strength to “turn to himself,” to look at himself, then he will see a picture no less impressive. The Apostle Paul accurately described her: "Poor man I am, I do not the good that I want, but the evil that I hate." Indeed, everyone who, though a little paid attention to what is happening in his soul, comes into contact with himself, cannot fail to see how spiritually ill he is, how much he is subject to the action of various passions, enslaved by them. It makes no sense to ask: “Why are you, poor man, overeating, getting drunk, lying, jealous, fornication, etc.? , you prick, why are you ruining your nerves, psyche, the body itself? Do you understand that this is destructive for you? " Yes, I understand, but I can't help but do it. Basil the Great once exclaimed: "And no more destructive passion than envy was born in the souls of men." And, as a rule, a person, suffering, cannot cope with himself. Here, in the depths of his soul, every reasonable person comprehends what Christianity says: "I do not the good that I want, but the evil that I hate." Is it health or disease ?!

At the same time, for comparison, see how a person can change with the right Christian life. Those who cleansed themselves of passions, acquired humility, “acquired, - in the words of the Monk Seraphim of Sarov, - the Holy Spirit,” came to a state that is most interesting from a psychological point of view: they began to see themselves as the worst of all. Pimen the Great said: "Believe me, brethren, where Satan will be cast, I will be cast there"; Sisoy the Great was dying, and his face shone like the sun, so it was impossible to look at him, and he begged God to give him some more time to repent. What's this? Some kind of hypocrisy, humility? May God deliver. They, even in their thoughts, were afraid to sin, therefore they spoke with all their souls, said what they really experienced. We don't feel it at all. I am filled with all kinds of dirt, but I see and feel like a very good person. I am a good person! But if I do something badly, then whoever is without sin, others are no better than me, and it is not so much I who is to blame, but the other, the other, the others. We do not see our souls and therefore are so good in our own eyes. How strikingly different is the spiritual vision of a holy man from ours!

So, I repeat. Christianity claims that man by nature, in his present, so-called normal, state is deeply damaged. Unfortunately, we hardly see this damage. A strange blindness, the most terrible, the most important, which is present in us, is the invisibility of our disease. This is really the most dangerous thing, because when a person sees his illness, he is treated, goes to doctors, seeks help. And when he sees himself healthy, he will send to them the one who tells him that he is sick. This is the most difficult symptom of the very damage that is present in us. And that it is, this is unambiguously evidenced by both the history of mankind and the history of the life of each person individually, and, first of all, each person's personal life. This is what Christianity points to.

I will say that the objective confirmation of only this fact, this one truth of the Christian faith - about the damage to human nature - already shows me which religion I should turn to. To the one that reveals my illnesses and indicates the means of their cure, or to the religion that gloss over them, nourishes human pride, says: everything is good, everything is fine, you need not to be treated, but to heal the world around you, you need to develop and improve? Historical experience has shown what it means not to be treated.

Well, okay, we got to Christianity. Glory to You, Lord, I finally found the true faith. I go into the next room, and there again the people are full and again shouts: my Christian faith is the best. The Catholic calls: look how much is behind me - 1 billion 45 million. Protestants of various denominations indicate that there are 350 million of them. The Orthodox are the least of all, only 170 million. True, someone suggests: the truth is not in quantity, but in quality. But the question is extremely serious: "Where is it, true Christianity?"

Different approaches are also possible to resolve this issue. At the seminary we have always been offered a method of comparative study of the dogmatic systems of Catholicism and Protestantism with Orthodoxy. This is a method that deserves attention and trust, but it still seems to me not good enough and not complete enough, because for a person who does not have a good education, sufficient knowledge, it is not at all easy to understand the jungle of dogmatic discussions and decide who is right and who is wrong. In addition, there are sometimes used such strong psychological techniques that can easily confuse a person. For example, we are discussing with the Catholics the problem of the primacy of the pope, and they say: “Pope? practically, do not differ in any way from the authority of the statements and the authority of any primate of the Local Orthodox Church. " Although in reality there are fundamentally different dogmatic and canonical levels. So the comparative dogmatic method is not very simple. Especially when you are put in the face of people who are not only knowledgeable, but also striving to convince you at all costs.

But there is another way, which will clearly show what Catholicism is and where it leads a person. This is also a method of comparative research, but research is already a spiritual area of ​​life, which clearly manifests itself in the lives of the saints. It is here in all its strength and brightness that all, in ascetic language, the "charm" of Catholic spirituality is revealed - that charm that is fraught with dire consequences for an ascetic who has taken this path of life. You know that sometimes I give public lectures and different people come to them. And now they often ask the question: "Well, how does Catholicism differ from Orthodoxy, what is its mistake? Isn't it just another way to Christ?" And many times I was convinced that it is enough to give a few examples from the life of Catholic mystics so that the questioners simply say: "Thank you, now everything is clear. Nothing else is needed."

Indeed, any Local Orthodox Church or heterodox is judged by its saints. Tell me who your saints are and I will tell you what your Church is. For any Church declares saints only those who have embodied in their lives the Christian ideal, as seen by this Church. Therefore, the glorification of someone is not only a testimony of the Church about a Christian who, according to her judgment, is worthy of glory and is offered by her as an example to follow, but above all a testimony of the Church about herself. By the saints, we can best judge the real or apparent holiness of the Church itself.

Here are some illustrations of the understanding of holiness in the Catholic Church.

One of the great Catholic saints is Francis of Assisi (13th century). His spiritual self-awareness is well revealed from the following facts. Once Francis prayed for a long time (the subject of prayer is extremely indicative) "for two mercies": "The first is that I ... could ... survive all the sufferings that You, Sweetest Jesus, experienced in Your tormenting passions. And the second mercy ... is so that ... I could feel ... that unlimited love with which You, the Son of God, burned. " As you can see, it was not the feelings of his sinfulness that worried Francis, but frank claims to equality with Christ! During this prayer, Francis "felt yourself completely transformed into Jesus"Whom he immediately saw in the form of a six-winged seraphim, who struck him with fiery arrows at the sites of the sores of the cross of Jesus Christ (hands, feet and right side). After this vision, Francis developed painful bleeding wounds (stigmas) - traces of the" sufferings of Jesus " (Lodyzhensky M.V. The Invisible Light. - Pg. 1915. - P. 109.)

The nature of these stigmas is well known in psychiatry: the continuous concentration of attention on the sufferings of Christ on the Cross extremely excites the nerves and psyche of a person and, with prolonged exercise, can cause this phenomenon. There is nothing gracious here, for in such compassion (compassio) Christ does not have that true love, about the essence of which the Lord directly said: who observes my commandments, that loves Me (John 14; 21). Therefore, the substitution of dreamy feelings of "compassion" in the struggle with one's old man is one of the most serious mistakes in spiritual life, which has led and continues to lead many ascetics to conceit, pride - an obvious charm, often associated with direct mental disorders (cf. Francis's "sermons" to birds, wolf, turtle doves, snakes ... flowers, his reverence for fire, stones, worms).

The goal of life that Francis set for himself is also very indicative: "I worked and I want to work ... because it brings honor"(St. Francis of Assisi. Works. - M., Publishing House of Franciscans, 1995. - S. 145). Francis wants to suffer for others and redeem other people's sins(P. 20). Is this why at the end of his life he openly said: "I do not recognize any sin that I would not atone for by confession and repentance" (Lodyzhensky. - p. 129). All this testifies to the fact that he did not see his sins, his fall, that is, about complete spiritual blindness.

For comparison, let us give a dying moment from the life of the Monk Sisoy the Great (5th century). "Surrounded at the moment of his death by the brethren, at the minute when he seemed to be talking with invisible persons, Sisa, when asked by the brethren:" Father, tell us, with whom are you talking? "- answered:" These angels came to take me, but I pray to them that they leave me for a short time to repent. ”When the brothers, knowing that Sisoy was perfect in virtues, objected to him:“ You have no need for repentance, Father, ”Sisoy answered like this:“ Truly, I do not know whether I have created even the beginning of my repentance "(Lodyzhensky. - p. 133.) This deep understanding, the vision of one's imperfection is the main distinguishing feature of all true saints.

And here are excerpts from the "Revelations of Blessed Angela" (+ 1309) (Revelations of Blessed Angela. - M., 1918.).

The Holy Spirit, - she writes, - says to her: "My daughter, my sweet one, ... I love you very much" (p. 95): "I was with the apostles, and they saw Me with bodily eyes, but did not feel Me like that, how you feel "(p. 96). And this is what Angela reveals about herself: “I see the Holy Trinity in the darkness, and in the Trinity itself, Which I see in the darkness, it seems to me that I stand and dwell in the middle of It” (p. 117). She expresses her attitude to Jesus Christ, for example, in the following words: “I could have brought my whole self into Jesus Christ” (p. 176). Or: “I screamed out of His sweetness and sorrow about His departure and wanted to die” (p. 101) - while she was so furious that she began to beat herself so that the nuns were forced to take her out of the church (p. 83).

One of the greatest Russian religious thinkers of the 20th century, A.F. Losev. He writes, in particular: “Seduction and deception by the flesh leads to the fact that the Holy Spirit appears to blessed Angela and whispers to her such loving speeches:“ My daughter, My sweet, My daughter, My temple, My daughter, My delight, love Me, for I love you very much, much more than you love Me. "The saint is in a sweet languor, cannot find a place for herself from love yearning. And the beloved still appears and appears and more and more kindles her body, her heart, her blood. Christ appears to her as a marriage bed ... What could be more opposed to the Byzantine-Moscow stern and chaste asceticism, if not these constant blasphemous statements: "My soul was received into the uncreated light and lifted up" - these passionate gazing at the Cross of Christ, at the wounds Christ and the individual members of His Body, is it the violent induction of bloody spots on one's own body, etc., etc.? To top it all off, Christ embraces Angela with his hand that is nailed to the Cross, and she, all proceeding from anguish, anguish and happiness, he says: “Sometimes from the closest embrace it seems to the soul that it is entering the side of Christ. And the joy that she receives there, and the insight is impossible to tell. After all, they are so large that sometimes I could not stand on my feet, but I lay and my tongue was taken away from me ... And I lay, and my tongue and limbs of my body were taken away from me "(Losev A. F. Essays on ancient symbolism and mythology. - M., 1930. - T. 1. - S. 867-868.).

A striking evidence of Catholic holiness is Catharina of Siena (+1380), who was raised by Pope Paul VI to the highest rank of saints - the "Teacher of the Church". I am reading a few extracts from the Catholic book by Antonio Sicari "Portraits of Saints". Quotes, in my opinion, do not require comment.

Catherine was about 20 years old. “She felt that a decisive turning point was about to take place in her life, and continued to pray earnestly to Her Lord Jesus, repeating that beautiful, tender formula that had become familiar to her:“ Combine marriage with me in faith! ”(Antonio Sicari. Portraits of saints. T. II. - Milan, 1991. - S. 11.).

“Once Catherine saw a vision: her divine Bridegroom, embracing her, drew her to Himself, but then took a heart from her chest to give her another heart, more like His own” (p. 12).

It was once said that she was dead. “She herself later said that her heart was torn to pieces by the power of divine love and that she went through death,“ having seen the gates of heaven. ”But“ come back, My child, ”the Lord said to me, you need to return ... and the rulers of the Church. ”“ And the humble girl began to send her messages all over the world, long letters that she dictated with amazing speed, often three or four at a time and on different occasions, without getting lost and ahead of the secretaries. All these letters end with the passionate formula: "Sweet Jesus, Jesus Love" and often begin with the words ...: "I, Catherine, the servant and slave of Jesus' servants, I write to you in His most precious Blood ..." (12).

"In Catherine's letters, the first thing that catches the eye is the frequent and persistent repetition of the words:" I want "(12).

“Some say that in a state of ecstasy she even turned to Christ with the decisive words“ I want ”(13).

From the correspondence with Gregory X1, whom she urged to return from Avignon to Rome: "I speak to you in the name of Christ ... I tell you, father, in Jesus Christ ... Answer the call of the Holy Spirit addressed to you" (13).

"And he addresses the king of France with the words:" Do the will of God and mine "(14).

No less indicative are the "revelations" also erected by Pope Paul VI in "Teachers of the Church" by Teresa of Avila (16th century). Before her death, she exclaims: "Oh, my God, my spouse, at last I will see you!" This extremely strange exclamation is not accidental. He is a natural consequence of Teresa's entire "spiritual" feat, the essence of which is revealed at least in the following fact.

After his numerous appearances, "Christ" says to Teresa: "From this day on you will be My wife ... From now on I am not only your Creator, God, but also your Spouse" (Merezhkovsky D.S. Spanish mystics. - Brussels, 1988. - p. 88.) "Lord, or suffer with You, or die for You!" - Teresa prays and falls exhausted under these caresses ... ", - writes D. Merezhkovsky. Therefore, there is no reason to be surprised when Teresa confesses:" The Beloved is calling the soul with such a piercing whistle that one cannot but hear it. This call affects the soul in such a way that it becomes exhausted with desire. "It is no coincidence that the famous American psychologist William James, evaluating her mystical experience, wrote that" her ideas about religion were reduced, so to speak, to an endless love flirtation between a fan and his deity "(James V. The diversity of religious experience. / Transl. from English. - M., 1910. - S. 337).

Another illustration of the concept of holiness in Catholicism is Teresa of Lisieux (Teresa Little, or Teresa of the Infant Jesus), who, having lived 23 years old, in 1997, in connection with the centenary of his death, the "infallible" decision of Pope John Paul II was declared another Teacher of the Universal Church. Here are a few quotes from Teresa's spiritual autobiography "The Tale of One Soul", eloquently testifying to her spiritual state (The Tale of a Soul // Symbol. 1996. №36. - Paris. - p. 151.)

"During the interview that preceded my tonsure, I told about the work that I intended to do in Carmel:" I came to save souls and above all - pray for priests"(Not to save yourself, but others!).

Speaking about her unworthiness, she immediately writes: "I always keep the bold hope that I will become great saint... I thought I was born for glory and was looking for ways to achieve it. And so the Lord God ... revealed to me that my glory will not be revealed to the eye of death, and its essence is that i will become a great saint!!! "(cf .: Macarius the Great, whom his companions called the" earthly god "for his rare height of life, only prayed:" God, cleanse me a sinner, as if I did nothing good before You "). Later Teresa would write even more frankly:" In the heart of my Mother Church I will be Love ... then I will be everything ... and through this my dream will come true !!! "

Teresa's teaching on spiritual love is extremely “wonderful”: “It was the kiss of love. I felt loved and said:“ I love You and entrust myself to You forever. ”There was no petition, no struggle, no sacrifice; for a long time already Jesus and poor little Teresa, looking at each other, understood everything ... This day did not bring an exchange of views, but a merger, when there were no more two, and Teresa disappeared like a drop of water lost in the ocean depths. " There is hardly any commentary on this dreamy novel by a poor girl - the Teacher of the Catholic Church.

The mystical experience of one of the pillars of Catholic mysticism, the founder of the Jesuit order Ignatius Loyola (16th century) is based on the methodological development of the imagination.

His book Spiritual Exercises, which enjoys great authority in Catholicism, continually encourages Christians to imagine, imagine, contemplate and the Holy Trinity, and Christ, and the Mother of God, and angels, etc. All this fundamentally contradicts the foundations of the spiritual feat of the saints of the Universal Church, since it leads the believer to complete spiritual and mental disorder.

The Monk Nil of Sinai (5th century) warns: "Do not wish to see sensually Angels or Power, or Christ, so as not to go mad, mistaking a wolf for a shepherd, and bowing to the enemies-demons" (St. Nil of Sinai. 153 chapters on prayer. Ch. 115 // Philosophy: In 5 volumes.Vol. 2. 2nd ed. - M., 1884. - p. 237).

The Monk Simeon the New Theologian (XI century), speaking about those who at prayer "imagine the blessings of heaven, the ranks of angels and the abode of saints", bluntly says that "this is a sign of delusion." "Standing on this path, those who see the light with their bodily eyes are deceived, who smell incense with their sense of smell, hear voices with their ears, and the like" (St. Simeon the New Theologian. On the Three Images of Prayer // Philosophy. T. 5. M. , 1900.S. 463-464).

The Monk Gregory the Sinaite (XIV century) recalls: “Never accept if you see something sensual or spiritual, outside or inside, even if it was the image of Christ, or an angel, or some saint ... He who accepts that ... is easily deceived. .. God does not resent the one who carefully listens to himself, if he, out of fear of deception, does not accept what is from Him, .. but even more praises him as wise "(St. Gregory of Sinait. Instructions to the silent // Ibid. - S. 224).

How right was that landowner (St. Ignatius Brianchaninov writes about this), who, seeing in his daughter's hands the Catholic book "Imitation of Jesus Christ" by Thomas of Kempis (15th century), snatched it from her hands, and said: "Stop playing with By God into a novel. " The above examples leave no doubt about the validity of these words. To our great regret, the Catholic Church has apparently ceased to distinguish the spiritual from the spiritual and holiness from daydreaming, and consequently, Christianity from paganism.

This is about Catholicism.

With Protestantism, it seems to me, dogma is enough. In order to see its essence, I will now confine myself to only one and the main statement of Protestantism: "A person is saved only by faith, and not by works, therefore to a believer sin is not imputed to sin." This is the main question in which the Protestants are confused. They begin to build the house of salvation from the tenth floor, having forgotten (if they remembered?) The teaching of the ancient Church about what kind of faith saves a person. Is it not the belief that Christ came 2000 years ago and did everything for us ?!

What is the difference in the understanding of faith in Orthodoxy from Protestantism? Orthodoxy also says that faith saves a person, but sin is imputed to a believer. What kind of faith is this? - Not "brain", according to St. Feofan, that is, rational, but then condition, which is acquired with the correct, I emphasize, correct Christian life of a person, thanks only to which he is convinced that only Christ can save him from slavery and torment of the passions. How is this belief-state achieved? Compulsion to fulfill the commandments of the Gospel and sincere repentance. Rev. Simeon the New Theologian says: "Careful fulfillment of the commandments of Christ teaches a person his weakness," that is, reveals to him his powerlessness to eradicate passions in himself without the help of God. Himself, one person cannot - with God, "together", it turns out, everything can. A correct Christian life just reveals to a person, firstly, his passion-illness, and secondly, that the Lord is near each of us, and finally, that He is ready at any moment to come to the rescue and save from sin. But He does not save us without us, not without our efforts and struggle. A feat is necessary that makes us capable of accepting Christ, for they show us that without God we cannot heal ourselves. Only when I am drowning, I am convinced that I need a Savior, and when I do not need anyone on the shore, only seeing myself drowning in the torment of passions, I turn to Christ. And He comes and helps. This is where living saving faith begins. Orthodoxy teaches about the freedom and dignity of man as a co-worker with God in his salvation, and not as a "pillar of salt", in the words of Luther, who can do nothing. From this it becomes clear the meaning of all the commandments of the Gospel, and not only faith in the salvation of a Christian, the truth of Orthodoxy becomes obvious.

This is how Orthodoxy begins for a person, and not just Christianity, not just religion, not just faith in God.

I told you everything, I don't know anything else. However, you can ask questions, but only those that I can answer.

- In disputes with Catholics, using the comparative method, we present different arguments, but in fact, in the Lives of St. Demetrius of Rostov sometimes find phenomena that seem to resemble Catholic mysticism. And now sometimes just apocrypha are written.

Good question, I will answer this as follows.

First, regarding the Lives of St. Dmitry of Rostov. It is no secret that St. Dmitry Rostovsky, without sufficient verification, not critically, used, unfortunately, Catholic hagiographic sources after the 11th century. And they, according to studies, for example, by Hieromonk Seraphim Rose, are very unreliable. The era in which Dmitry Rostovsky lived was with us an era of very strong Catholic influence. You know: the Kiev-Mohyla Academy at the beginning of the 17th century, the Moscow Theological Academy at the end of the 17th century, all our theological thought, our theological educational institutions until the very end of the 19th century developed under the strongest influence of Catholic and Protestant theology. And now the heterodox influence is very noticeable, almost all textbooks are old, and new ones are often compiled from them, which is why our theological schools had and still have a significant scholastic character. The school must be in a monastery, all students of theological schools must pass through the monastery, regardless of which path they subsequently choose - monastic or family. So, indeed, in the Lives of St. Dmitry of Rostov there are unverified materials. They sometimes cause confusion among the reader. But if the Catholics pointed out to us now what you called apocrypha, then our Church would gladly reject them. Would Catholics refuse Teresa the Great or Little?

- Alexey Ilyich, now we are publishing the "Lives of the Saints" by Archbishop Philaret (Gumilevsky), how do you feel about this author?

The most positive attitude towards him. Thank God that you have taken up this edition. Archbishop Filaret (Gumilevsky) is an authority in both historical and theological science. His Lives, with their precision, clarity of presentation, lack of exaltation, I think, are best suited to a modern person who is accustomed to looking at everything critically. I think that your publishing house will make a great gift to both scientists and ordinary readers.

- Dear Alexey Ilyich, you were known as a staunch opponent of the canonization of the Tsar's family. Has your attitude changed after canonization?

I humble myself before the conciliar decision of the Church.

At the present time, we are all in such a life situation when we cannot separate ourselves from the surrounding world in any way and by any walls. What is it like? We live in a world of religious pluralism. We have found ourselves in the face of so many preachers, each of whom offers us their ideals, their own norms of life, their religious views, that the previous generation, or my generation, perhaps, would not envy you. It was easier for us. The main problem we faced was the problem of religion and atheism.

You have, if you will, something much bigger and much worse. There is a God or there is no God - this is only the first step. Well, okay, man became convinced that there is God. So what is next? There are many faiths, what should he become? Christian, why not Muslim? Why not a Buddhist? Why not a Hare Krishna? I do not want to list further, now there are so many religions, you know them better than me. Why, why, and why? Well, okay, having passed through the jungle and jungle of this multi-religious tree, a person became a Christian. I understood everything, Christianity is the best religion, the right one.

But what kind of Christianity? It has so many faces. Who to be? Orthodox, Catholic, Pentecostal, Lutheran? Again, countless. This is the situation facing today's youth. At the same time, representatives of new and old religions, representatives of non-Orthodox confessions, as a rule, declare much more about themselves, and have much greater opportunities for propaganda in the media than we, Orthodox Christians. So, the first thing that modern man stops at is a multitude of faiths, religions, worldviews.

Therefore, today I would like to very concisely walk through this suite of rooms, which opens up in front of many modern people seeking the truth, and see, at least in the most general, but fundamental outlines, why, after all, a person should, not only can, but really should on reasonable grounds to become not just a Christian, but an Orthodox Christian.

So the first problem: "Religion and Atheism." We have to meet at conferences, very significant ones, with people who are really educated, really scientists, not top-sighted, and we have to constantly face the same questions. Who is God? Does He exist? Even: why is He needed? Or, if God exists, then why does He not come from the rostrum of the United Nations and declare Himself? And such things can be heard. What can you say to this?

This question, it seems to me, is being solved from the position of the central modern philosophical thought, which is most easily expressed by the concept of existentiality. Human existence, the meaning of human life - what is its main content? Well, of course, first of all, in life... How else? What is the point I experience when I sleep? The meaning of life can be only in awareness, "eating" the fruits of one's life and activity. And no one has ever been able and will never count and assert that the ultimate meaning of a person's life can be in death. This is where the impassable dividing line between religion and atheism lies. Christianity asserts: man, this earthly life is only the beginning, condition and means of preparation for eternity, get ready, eternal life awaits you. It says: this is what you need to do for this, this is what you need to be in order to enter there. And what does atheism claim? There is no God, no soul, no eternity and therefore believe, man, eternal death awaits you! What horror, what pessimism, what despair - frost on the skin from these terrible words: man, eternal death awaits you. I'm not even talking about those, to put it mildly, strange justifications that are given in this case. This one statement makes the human soul shudder. - No, spare me this faith.

When a person gets lost in the forest, looks for a way, looks for a way home and suddenly, finding someone, asks: "Is there a way out of here?" And he replies: "No, and don't look, settle down here as you can," - will he believe him? Doubtful. Will he start looking further? And finding another person who will say to him: “Yes, there is a way out, and I will show you signs, signs by which you can get out of here,” - will he not believe him? The same thing happens in the field of ideological choice, when a person finds himself in the face of religion and atheism. As long as a person still has a spark of a search for truth, a spark of a search for the meaning of life, until then he cannot, psychologically cannot accept the concept that asserts that he as a person, and, therefore, all people awaits eternal death, for the "achievement" of which, it turns out that it is necessary to create better economic, social, political and cultural living conditions. And then everything will be okay - tomorrow you will die and we will take you to the cemetery. Just great"!

I have just pointed out to you only one side, psychologically very essential, which, it seems to me, is already enough for every person with a living soul to understand that only a religious worldview, only a worldview that takes as its basis the One Whom we call God , allows you to talk about the meaning of life. So, I believe in God. We will assume that we have passed the first room. And, believing in God, I enter the second ... My God, what do I see and hear here? There are a lot of people, and everyone shouts: "Only I have the truth." Here is the task ... And Muslims, and Confucians, and Buddhists, and Jews and whoever is not there. There are many among whom Christianity is now found. Here he is, a Christian preacher, in the midst of others, and I am looking, who is right here, who should I believe?

There are two approaches, there may be more, but I will name two. One of them, which can give a person the opportunity to make sure which religion is true (that is, objectively corresponds to human nature, human quest, human understanding of the meaning of life) is the method of comparative theological analysis. Quite a long way, here you need to study every religion well. But not everyone can go this way, it takes a lot of time, great strength, if you will, appropriate abilities in order to study all this - especially since it will take so much strength of the soul ... But there is another method. In the end, every religion is addressed to a person, she says to him: this is the truth, and not something else. At the same time, all worldviews and all religions affirm one simple thing: what is now, in what political, social, economic, on the one hand, and spiritual, moral, cultural, etc. conditions - on the other hand, a person lives - this is abnormal, it cannot suit him, and even if it personally suits someone, the overwhelming majority of people suffer from this to one degree or another. This does not suit humanity as a whole, it is looking for something else, more. Striving somewhere, into the unknown future, waiting for the "golden age" - the present state of affairs does not suit anyone. Hence it becomes clear why the essence of every religion, of all worldviews is reduced to the doctrine of salvation. And this is where we are faced with what already makes it possible, as it seems to me, to make an informed choice when we find ourselves in the face of religious diversity. Christianity, unlike all other religions, asserts something that other religions (and even more so non-religious worldviews) simply do not know. And not only do they not know, but when faced with this, they indignantly reject it. This statement lies in the concept of the so-called. original sin... All religions, if you want even all worldviews, all ideologies talk about sin. Calling, however, it is different, but it does not matter. But none of them thinks that the nature of man in his present state is sick. Christianity asserts that the state in which all of us, people, were born, are, grow, are brought up, marry, mature, - the state in which we enjoy, have fun, learn, make discoveries, and so on - this is a state of deep illness , deep damage. We are sick. This is not about the flu or bronchitis or mental illness. No, no, we are mentally healthy and physically healthy - we can solve problems and fly into space - we are deeply sick on the other side. At the beginning of human existence, there was a strange tragic splitting of a single human being into, as it were, autonomously existing and often opposing mind, heart and body - "pike, cancer and swan" ... What absurdity does Christianity assert, isn't it? Everyone is outraged: “Am I crazy? Sorry, there may be others, but not me. " And it is here, if Christianity is right, and the very root, source, of the fact that human life, both on an individual and on a universal scale, leads to one tragedy after another, is enclosed. For if a person is seriously ill, but he does not see her and therefore does not heal, then she will destroy him.

Other religions do not recognize this disease in a person. Reject her. They believe that a person is a healthy seed, but which can develop normally and abnormally. Its development is due to the social environment, economic conditions, psychological factors, due to many things. Therefore, a person can be both good and bad, but he himself is good by nature. This is the main antithesis of non-Christian consciousness. I do not say irreligious, there is nothing to say, there is generally: "man - it sounds proudly." Only Christianity claims that our present state is a state of deep damage, and such damage that, on a personal level, a person himself cannot heal it. The greatest Christian dogma about Christ as Savior is based on this statement. This idea is a fundamental dividing line between Christianity and all other religions.

Now I will try to show that Christianity, unlike other religions, has an objective confirmation of this statement. Let's turn to the history of mankind. Let's see how it lives all the history available to our human eyes? What are the goals? Of course, it wants to build the Kingdom of God on earth, to create a paradise. Alone with the help of God. And in this case He is considered no more as a means to good on earth, but not as the highest goal of life. Others are without God at all. But something else is important. Everyone understands that this Kingdom on earth is impossible without such elementary things as: peace, justice, love (it goes without saying, what kind of paradise can be, where there is a war, injustice, anger, etc. reigns?), If you like, respect for each other, let us condescend to that. That is, everyone understands perfectly well that without such fundamental moral values, without their implementation, it is impossible to achieve any prosperity on earth. Does everyone understand? Everyone. And what is humanity doing throughout history? What are we doing? Erich Fromm said well: “The history of mankind is written in blood. This is a story of never-ending violence. " Exactly.

Historians, especially the military, could, I think, perfectly illustrate to us what the whole history of mankind is filled with: war, bloodshed, violence, cruelty. The twentieth century is, in theory, the century of the highest humanism. And he showed this top of "perfection", surpassing all the previous centuries of mankind combined with the shed blood. If our ancestors could look at what happened in the twentieth century, they would shudder at the scale of cruelty, injustice, deception. Some incomprehensible paradox lies in the fact that humanity, as its history develops, does everything exactly the opposite of its main idea, goal and thought, towards which all its efforts were initially directed. I ask a rhetorical question: "Can an intelligent creature behave like that?" History simply mocks us, ironically: “Humanity is truly smart and healthy. It's not insane, no, no. It just creates a little more and a little worse than they do in insane asylums. " Alas, this is a fact that cannot be avoided. And he shows that not individual units in humanity are mistaken, no and no (unfortunately, only a few are not mistaken), but this is some kind of paradoxical all-human property. If we now look at an individual person, or rather, if a person has enough moral strength to “turn to himself,” to look at himself, then he will see a picture no less impressive. The Apostle Paul accurately described her: "Poor man I am, I do not the good that I want, but the evil that I hate." Indeed, everyone who, though a little paid attention to what is happening in his soul, comes into contact with himself, cannot fail to see how spiritually ill he is, how much he is subject to the action of various passions, enslaved by them. It makes no sense to ask: “Why are you, poor man, overeating, getting drunk, lying, jealous, fornication, etc.? You are killing yourself with this, destroying your family, maiming your children, poisoning the whole atmosphere around you. Why are you beating yourself, cutting, stabbing, why are you ruining your nerves, your psyche, your body itself? Do you understand that this is destructive for you? " Yes, I understand, but I can't help but do it. once exclaimed: "And no more destructive passion than envy was born in the souls of men." And, as a rule, a person, suffering, cannot cope with himself. Here, in the depths of his soul, every reasonable person comprehends what Christianity says: "I do not the good that I want, but the evil that I hate." Is it health or disease ?!

At the same time, for comparison, see how a person can change with the right Christian life. Those who were cleansed of passions, acquired humility, “acquired, - according to the word of the monk, - the Holy Spirit,” came to a state that is most interesting from a psychological point of view: they began to see themselves as the worst of all. said: "Believe me, brothers, where Satan will be cast, I will be cast there"; Sisoy the Great was dying, and his face shone like the sun, so it was impossible to look at him, and he begged God to give him some more time to repent. What's this? Some kind of hypocrisy, humility? May God deliver. They, even in their thoughts, were afraid to sin, therefore they spoke with all their souls, said what they really experienced. We don't feel it at all. I am filled with all kinds of dirt, but I see and feel like a very good person. I am a good person! But if I do something badly, then whoever is without sin, others are no better than me, and it is not so much I who is to blame, but the other, the other, the others. We do not see our souls and therefore are so good in our own eyes. How strikingly different is the spiritual vision of a holy man from ours!

So, I repeat. Christianity claims that man by nature, in his present, so-called normal, state is deeply damaged. Unfortunately, we hardly see this damage. A strange blindness, the most terrible, the most important, which is present in us, is the invisibility of our disease. This is really the most dangerous thing, because when a person sees his illness, he is treated, goes to doctors, seeks help. And when he sees himself healthy, he will send to them the one who tells him that he is sick. This is the most difficult symptom of the very damage that is present in us. And that it is, this is unambiguously evidenced by both the history of mankind and the history of the life of each person individually, and, first of all, each person's personal life. This is what Christianity points to. I will say that the objective confirmation of only this fact, this one truth of the Christian faith - about the damage to human nature - already shows me which religion I should turn to. To the one that reveals my illnesses and indicates the means of their cure, or to the religion that gloss over them, nourishes human pride, says: everything is good, everything is fine, you need not to be treated, but to heal the world around you, you need to develop and improve? Historical experience has shown what it means not to be treated.

Well, okay, we got to Christianity. I go into the next room, and there again the people are full and again shouts: my Christian faith is the best. The Catholic calls: look how much is behind me - 1 billion 450 million. Protestants of various denominations indicate that there are 350 million of them. The Orthodox are the least of all, only 170 million. True, someone suggests: the truth is not in quantity, but in quality. But the question is extremely serious: "Where is it, true Christianity?"

Different approaches are also possible to resolve this issue. At the seminary we have always been offered a method of comparative study of the dogmatic systems of Catholicism and Protestantism with Orthodoxy. This is a method that deserves attention and trust, but it still seems to me not good enough and not complete enough, because for a person who does not have a good education, sufficient knowledge, it is not at all easy to understand the jungle of dogmatic discussions and decide who is right and who is wrong. In addition, there are sometimes used such strong psychological techniques that can easily confuse a person. For example, we are discussing with the Catholics the problem of the primacy of the pope, and they say: “Pope? Oh, this primacy and infallibility of the Pope is such nonsense, what are you !? This is the same as your authority as a patriarch. The infallibility and authority of the Pope, in practice, do not differ in any way from the authority of the statements and authority of any primate of the Local Orthodox Church. " Although in reality there are fundamentally different dogmatic and canonical levels. So the comparative dogmatic method is not very simple. Especially when you are put in the face of people who are not only knowledgeable, but also striving to convince you at all costs. But there is another way, which will clearly show what Catholicism is and where it leads a person. This is also a method of comparative research, but research is already a spiritual area of ​​life, which clearly manifests itself in the lives of the saints. It is here, in all its strength and brightness, that all, in ascetic language, the "charm" of Catholic spirituality is revealed - that charm that is fraught with dire consequences for the ascetic who has embarked on this path of life. You know that sometimes I give public lectures and different people come to them. And now they often ask the question: “Well, how does Catholicism differ from Orthodoxy, what is its mistake? Isn't it just another way to Christ? " And many times I was convinced that it is enough to give a few examples from the life of Catholic mystics so that the questioners simply say: “Thank you, now everything is clear. Nothing else is needed. "

Indeed, any Local Orthodox Church or heterodox is judged by its saints. Tell me who your saints are and I will tell you what your Church is. For any Church declares saints only those who have embodied in their lives the Christian ideal, as seen by this Church. Therefore, the glorification of someone is not only a testimony of the Church about a Christian who, according to her judgment, is worthy of glory and is offered by her as an example to follow, but, above all, a testimony of the Church about herself. By the saints, we can best judge the real or apparent holiness of the Church itself. Here are some illustrations of the understanding of holiness in the Catholic Church.

One of the great Catholic saints is Francis of Assisi (13th century). His spiritual self-awareness is well revealed from the following facts. Once Francis prayed for a long time (the subject of prayer is extremely indicative) “for two mercies”: “The first is that I… could… survive all the sufferings that You, Sweetest Jesus, experienced in Your tormenting passions. And the second mercy ... is so that ... I could feel ... that unlimited love with which You, the Son of God, burned. " As you can see, it was not the feelings of his sinfulness that worried Francis, but open claims to equality with Christ! During this prayer, Francis “felt himself completely transformed into Jesus”, whom he immediately saw in the form of a six-winged seraphim, who struck him with fiery arrows at the sites of the sores of the cross of Jesus Christ (arms, legs and right side). After this vision, Francis developed painful bleeding wounds (stigma) - traces of the "sufferings of Jesus" (Lodyzhensky MV Invisible Light. - Pg. 1915. - S. 109.)

The nature of these stigmas is well known in psychiatry: the continuous concentration of attention on the sufferings of Christ on the Cross extremely excites the nerves and psyche of a person and, with prolonged exercise, can cause this phenomenon. There is nothing gracious here, for in such compassion (compassio) Christ does not have that true love, about the essence of which the Lord directly said: whoever keeps My commandments, he loves Me (). Therefore, the substitution of dreamy feelings of "compassion" in the struggle with one's old man is one of the most serious mistakes in spiritual life, which has led and continues to lead many ascetics to conceit, pride - an obvious charm, often associated with direct mental disorders (cf. Francis's "sermons" to birds, wolf, turtle doves, snakes ... flowers, his reverence for fire, stones, worms). The goal of life that Francis set for himself is also very indicative: "I worked and I want to work ... because it brings honor" (St. Francis of Assisi. Works. - M., Publishing House Franciscantsev, 1995. - P.145). Francis wants to suffer for others and atone for the sins of others (p. 20). Is this why at the end of his life he openly said: "I do not recognize any sin that I would not atone for by confession and repentance" (Lodyzhensky. - p. 129). All this testifies to the fact that he did not see his sins, his fall, that is, about complete spiritual blindness.

For comparison, let us give a dying moment from the life of the Monk Sisoy the Great (5th century). “Surrounded at the moment of his death by the brethren, at the minute when he seemed to be talking with invisible persons, Sisa to the question of the brethren:“ Father, tell us, with whom are you talking? ” - answered: "These angels came to take me, but I pray to them that they leave me for a short time to repent." When the brethren, knowing that Sisoy was perfect in virtues, objected to him: “You do not need repentance, father,” Sisoy replied: “Truly, I don’t know if I have created even the beginning of my repentance” (Lodyzhensky. - S. 133.) This deep understanding, the vision of one's imperfection is the main distinguishing feature of all true saints.

And here are excerpts from the "Revelations of Blessed Angela" (+ 1309) (Revelations of Blessed Angela. - M., 1918.). The Holy Spirit, - she writes, - says to her: "My daughter, my sweet one, ... I love you very much" (p. 95): "I was with the apostles, and they saw Me with bodily eyes, but did not feel Me like that, how you feel ”(p. 96). And this is what Angela reveals about herself: “I see the Holy Trinity in the darkness, and in the Trinity itself, Which I see in the darkness, it seems to me that I stand and dwell in the middle of It” (p. 117). She expresses her attitude towards Jesus Christ, for example, in the following words: “I could have brought my whole self into Jesus Christ” (p. 176). Or: “I screamed out of His sweetness and sorrow about His departure and wanted to die” (p. 101) - while she was so furious that she began to beat herself so that the nuns were forced to take her out of the church (p. 83).

One of the greatest Russian religious thinkers of the 20th century, A.F. Losev. He writes, in particular: “Seduction and deception by the flesh leads to the fact that the“ Holy Spirit ”appears to blessed Angela and whispers to her such loving speeches:“ My daughter, My sweet, My daughter, My temple, My daughter, My delight, love Me, for I love you very much, much more than you love Me. " The saint is in a sweet languor, she cannot find a place for herself from amorous yearning. And the beloved still appears and appears and more and more kindles her body, her heart, her blood. The Cross of Christ appears to her as a marriage bed ... What could be more opposite to the Byzantine-Moscow stern and chaste asceticism, if not these constant blasphemous statements: "My soul was received into the uncreated light and lifted up" - these passionate gazes at the Cross of Christ, at the wounds of Christ and on individual members of His Body, this is the violent induction of blood stains on his own body, etc. etc.? To top it all off, Christ embraces Angela with his hand, which is nailed to the Cross, and she, all proceeding from anguish, torment and happiness, says: “Sometimes from this very close embrace it seems to the soul that she is entering the side of Christ. And the joy that she receives there, and the insight is impossible to tell. After all, they are so great that sometimes I could not stand on my feet, but I lay and my tongue was taken away from me ... And I lay, and my tongue and limbs of my body were taken away from me "(Losev AF Essays on ancient symbolism and mythology. - M. , 1930. - T. 1. - S. 867-868.).

A striking evidence of Catholic holiness is Catharina of Siena (+1380), who was elevated by Pope Paul VI to the highest rank of saints — the Teacher of the Church. I am reading a few extracts from the Catholic book by Antonio Sicari "Portraits of Saints." Quotes, in my opinion, do not require comment. Catherine was about 20 years old. “She felt that a decisive turning point was about to take place in her life, and continued to pray earnestly to Her Lord Jesus, repeating that beautiful, tender formula that had become familiar to her:“ Combine with me in marriage in faith! ” (Antonio Sicari. Portraits of saints. T. II. - Milan, 1991. - S. 11.).

“Once Catherine saw a vision: her divine Bridegroom, embracing her, drew her to Himself, but then took a heart from her chest to give her another heart, more like His own” (p. 12). It was once said that she was dead. “She herself later said that her heart was torn to pieces by the power of divine love and that she passed through death,“ seeing the heavenly gates ”. But "come back, My child, - the Lord said to me, you need to return ... I will lead you to the princes and rulers of the Church." “And the humble girl began to send her messages all over the world, long letters that she dictated with amazing speed, often three or four at a time and on different occasions, without getting lost and ahead of the secretaries. All these letters end with the passionate formula: "Sweet Jesus, Jesus Love" and often begin with the words ...: "I, Catherine, the servant and slave of Jesus' servants, I write to you in His most precious Blood ..." (12). “In Catherine's letters, what is striking is the frequent and persistent repetition of the words:“ I want ”(12). From the correspondence with Gregory X1, whom she urged to return from Avignon to Rome: "I speak to you in the name of Christ ... I tell you, father, in Jesus Christ ... Answer the call of the Holy Spirit addressed to you" (13). “And he addresses the king of France with the words:“ Do the will of God and mine ”(14).

No less indicative are the “revelations” also erected by Pope Paul VI in “Teachers of the Church” by Teresa of Avila (16th century). Before her death, she exclaims: "Oh, my God, my husband, at last I will see you!" This extremely strange exclamation is not accidental. He is a natural consequence of Teresa's entire "spiritual" feat, the essence of which is revealed at least in the following fact. After his numerous appearances, “Christ” says to Teresa: “From this day on you will be My wife ... From now on I am not only your Creator, God, but also your Spouse” (Merezhkovsky D.S. Spanish mystics. - Brussels, 1988. - p. 88 .) "Lord, or suffer with You, or die for You!" - Teresa prays and falls exhausted under these caresses ... ”, - D. Merezhkovsky writes. Therefore, one should not be surprised when Teresa confesses: “The Beloved is calling the soul with such a piercing whistle that one cannot but hear it. This call affects the soul in such a way that it becomes exhausted with desire. " It is no coincidence that, therefore, the famous American psychologist William James, evaluating her mystical experience, wrote that “her ideas about religion were reduced, so to speak, to an endless love flirtation between a worshiper and his deity” (James V. Diversity of religious experience. / Per. from English - M., 1910. - S. 337).

Another illustration of the concept of holiness in Catholicism is Teresa of Lisieux (Teresa Little, or Teresa of the Infant Jesus), who, having lived 23 years old, in 1997, in connection with the centenary of his death, the "infallible" decision of Pope John Paul II was declared another Teacher of the Universal Church. Here are a few quotes from Teresa's spiritual autobiography "The Tale of a Soul", eloquently testifying to her spiritual state (The Tale of a Soul // Symbol. 1996. No. 36. - Paris. - p. 151.) "During the interview that preceded mine tonsured, I told about the work that I intended to do in Carmel: “I came to save souls and, above all, to pray for the priests” (Not to save yourself, but others!). Speaking about her unworthiness, she immediately writes: “I always keep the bold hope that I will become a great saint ... I thought that I was born for glory and looked for ways to achieve it. And so the Lord God ... revealed to me that my glory will not be revealed to the eye of death, and its essence is that I will become a great saint !!! " (cf .:, whom the companions called the "earthly god" for the rare height of life, only prayed: "God, cleanse me a sinner, as if I have done nothing good before You").

The mystical experience of one of the pillars of Catholic mysticism, the founder of the Jesuit order Ignatius Loyola (16th century) is based on the methodological development of imagination. and the Holy Trinity, and Christ, and the Mother of God, and angels, etc. All this fundamentally contradicts the foundations of the spiritual feat of the saints of the Universal Church, since it leads the believer to complete spiritual and mental disorder. The authoritative collection of the ascetic writings of the ancient Church, Philosophy, strongly prohibits this kind of "spiritual exercise." Here are some quotes from there.
The monk (5th century) warns: "Do not desire to see sensually Angels or Power, or Christ, so that you do not go mad, mistaking a wolf for a shepherd, and bowing to the enemies-demons" (St. Nil of Sinai. 153 chapters on prayer. Ch. 115 // Philosophy: In 5 volumes. T. 2. 2nd ed. - M., 1884. - P. 237).
The monk (XI century), speaking about those who at prayer “imagine the blessings of heaven, the ranks of angels and the abode of saints,” bluntly says that “this is a sign of delusion”. “Standing on this path, those who see the light with their bodily eyes are deceived, who smell incense with their sense of smell, hear voices with their ears, and the like” (Venerable Simeon the New Theologian. On the Three Images of Prayer // Philosophy. T. 5. M. , 1900.S. 463-464).
The reverend (XIV century) reminds: “Never accept, if you see something sensual or spiritual, outside or inside, even if it was the image of Christ, or an angel, or some saint ... who carefully listens to himself, if he, out of fear of deception, does not accept what is from Him, .. but more praises him as wise "(St. Gregory the Sinaitus. Instructions to the silent // Ibid. - p. 224).
How right was that landowner (St.St. writes about this, who, seeing in the hands of his daughter the Catholic book "Imitation of Jesus Christ" by Thomas of Kempis (15th century), snatched it from her hands, and said: "Stop playing with God in a novel "The above examples leave no doubt about the validity of these words. Unfortunately, the Catholic Church has apparently ceased to distinguish the spiritual from the spiritual and holiness from daydreaming, and therefore Christianity from paganism. This is what Catholicism is about."

WITH Protestantism, it seems to me that dogma is enough. In order to see its essence, I will confine myself now to only one and the main statement of Protestantism: "A person is saved only by faith, and not by works, therefore to a believer sin is not imputed to sin." This is the main question in which the Protestants are confused. They begin to build the house of salvation from the tenth floor, having forgotten (if they remembered?) The teaching of the ancient Church about what kind of faith saves a person. Is it not the belief that Christ came 2000 years ago and did everything for us ?! What is the difference in the understanding of faith in Orthodoxy from Protestantism? Orthodoxy also says that faith saves a person, but sin is imputed to a believer. What kind of faith is this? - Not "brain", according to St. Theophan, that is, rational, but the state that is acquired with the correct, I emphasize, correct Christian life of a person, thanks only to which he is convinced that only Christ can save him from slavery and torment of passions. How is this belief-state achieved? Compulsion to fulfill the commandments of the Gospel and sincere repentance. Rev. says: "Careful fulfillment of the commandments of Christ teaches a person his weakness," that is, reveals to him his powerlessness to eradicate passions in himself without God's help. Himself, one person cannot - with God, “together,” it turns out, everything can. A correct Christian life just reveals to a person, firstly, his passion-illness, and secondly, that the Lord is near each of us, finally, that He is ready at any moment to come to the rescue and save from sin. But He does not save us without us, not without our efforts and struggle. A feat is necessary that makes us capable of accepting Christ, for they show us that without God we cannot heal ourselves. Only when I am drowning, I am convinced that I need a Savior, and when I do not need anyone on the shore, only seeing myself drowning in the torment of passions, I turn to Christ. And He comes and helps. This is where living saving faith begins. Orthodoxy teaches about the freedom and dignity of man as a co-worker with God in his salvation, and not as a “pillar of salt,” according to Luther, who can do nothing. From this it becomes clear the meaning of all the commandments of the Gospel, and not only faith in the salvation of a Christian, the truth of Orthodoxy becomes obvious.

This is how Orthodoxy begins for a person, and not just Christianity, not just religion, not just faith in God. I told you everything, I don't know anything else. However, you can ask questions, but only those that I can answer.

– In disputes with Catholics, using the comparative method, we present different arguments, but in fact, in the Lives of St. sometimes phenomena are found that seem to resemble Catholic mysticism. And now sometimes just apocrypha are written.

- Good question, I will answer this as follows.

First, regarding the Lives of St. Dmitry of Rostov. It is no secret that St. Dmitry Rostovsky, without sufficient verification, not critically, used, unfortunately, Catholic hagiographic sources after the 11th century. And they, according to research, for example, of the hieromonk are very unreliable. The era in which Dmitry Rostovsky lived was with us an era of very strong Catholic influence. You know: the Kiev-Mohyla Academy at the beginning of the 17th century, the Moscow Theological Academy at the end of the 17th century, all our theological thought, our theological educational institutions until the very end of the 19th century developed under the strongest influence of Catholic and Protestant theology. And now the heterodox influence is very noticeable, almost all textbooks are old, and new ones are often compiled from them, which is why our theological schools had and still have a significant scholastic character. Schools must be in the monastery, all students of theological schools must pass through the monastery, regardless of which path they subsequently choose - monastic or family. So, indeed, in the Lives of the saint there are unverified materials.

– Alexey Ilyich, now we are publishing the Lives of the Archbishop's Saints, how do you feel about this author?

- To him the most positive attitude. Thank God that you have taken up this edition. Archbishop Filaret (Gumilevsky) is an authority in both historical and theological science. His Lives, with their precision, clarity of presentation, lack of exaltation, I think, are best suited to a modern person who is accustomed to looking at everything critically. I think that your publishing house will make a great gift to both scientists and ordinary readers.

The origins of life

The question before us is: what are the grounds for trusting Christianity and why is it true? Are there any facts that confirm the belief, is there any unconditional argumentation offered, are there really serious grounds? It seems to me that there are several facts that, of course, will make every person think about who is looking (although now it is somewhat old-fashioned) the truth, a person who cannot treat Christianity the way, for example, so many ordinary believers do.

I'll start with the simplest ones. How did the world's religions come about and develop? For example, Buddhism. Its founder is a prince of high birth who enjoys authority and influence. This most educated person, surrounded by respect and honor, receives a kind of enlightenment. With perhaps the rarest exceptions, he is greeted in the dignity in which he was born. He dies surrounded by love, reverence, the desire to imitate and spread the teachings. There is honor, respect and - a certain glory.

Or Islam, another world religion. How did it originate and how did it spread? A very dramatic story. At least there, the force of arms was of the greatest, if not paramount importance, in its, as they say, "popularity in the world." Take the so-called "natural religions". They arose spontaneously among different peoples. They revealed in various myths and legends their intuitive sense of another world or God. Again, this was a natural and calm process.

Take a closer look at this background to Christianity. We see a picture that is not only unique in the history of religious movements, but a picture that, if there were no reliable evidence left, it would be impossible to believe. From the very beginning of its emergence, starting with the preaching of Christ, there are continuous conspiracies against Him, eventually ending with a terrible execution, then the publication in the Roman Empire of the law (!), According to which everyone who professes this religion is put to death. Many would now remain Christians if suddenly such a law was issued in our country? Think about it: everyone who professes Christianity is subject to the death penalty and not just any ... Read Tacitus when he writes that in the gardens of Nero Christians were tied to pillars, honored and lit in the form of a torch! What fun! “Christians to the lions!” And this went on for 300 years, apart from some respite.

Tell me, how could Christianity exist in such conditions ?! In general, how could it even simply survive, how it was not destroyed right there? Remember the Book of Acts of the Apostles: the disciples were sitting in the house, “for the sake of the Jewish fear,” shutting the locks and doors. This is the state they were in. But what do we see then? An absolutely amazing phenomenon: these timid people, who until recently were in fear, and one of them (Peter) even denied (“No, no, I don’t know Him!”), Suddenly go out and begin to preach. And not one - all! And when they are arrested, they themselves declare: "Tell me yourself, what do you think is fair: who is more to obey - people or God?" People look at them and are surprised: fishermen, simple people and - such courage!

An amazing phenomenon is in the very fact of the spread of Christianity. According to all the laws of social life (I insist on this), it had to be destroyed at the root. 300 years is not a small thing. And Christianity is not only becoming the state religion, but also spreading to other countries. By what means? Let's think about it here. After all, in a natural order, it is impossible to imagine such a thing. Currently, historical science, regardless of its ideological orientation, recognizes the fact of the historicity of Christ and the historicity of many documented absolutely extraordinary events. This is where we started our conversation. I am not suggesting that the early Christians passed through closed doors, but they performed miracles that astounded everyone.

They may say: these are fairy tales from two thousand years ago. Let's turn to our century. Still, probably, people are still alive who have seen the many miracles of the holy righteous. This is no longer a mythical figure, this is a real person of our time. There remained a mass of evidence, mountains of books: after all, they did not write about the "miracles" of Rasputin, they did not write about Tolstoy that he worked miracles. They wrote about John of Kronstadt and wrote amazing things. A prep. ? What thinkers, what writers, what figures of science and art went to him! And they didn't just walk. Read what happened while doing this. It turns out that people passed through the doors not only two thousand years ago, but throughout the history of Christianity, moreover, up to the present time.

These are really facts, not fantasies. How should we treat them? In any case, not in the same way as the famous academicians of the immortal French Academy of Sciences treated. After all, one of them immediately healed: "Even if a meteorite falls in front of my eyes, I would rather reject this fact than believe." Why, you ask? The reason was simple. At the end of the 17th century, everyone was convinced that only God can throw stones from the sky, and since there is no God, there can be no meteorites! It is very logical, you will not say anything. So how should we relate to these facts?

First what needs to be commented on is the miracle of the spread of Christianity. I can't find another word - a miracle!

Second... The amazing facts of the miracles that were performed! throughout the two thousand year history of Christianity.

Third... I would like to draw your attention to the facts of spiritual change in people who sincerely accepted Christianity. I say this not because I was born Orthodox and my grandmother took me to church. I'm talking about people who suffered Christianity, who even went through denial (like Dostoevsky: “through the crucible of doubts” his faith passed, like the contemporary American Eugene Rose, who later became Hieromonk Seraphim. The man who cursed God, who went through the study of Indian , Chinese philosophical and religious systems, which was looking for, and not just reasoning!).

I believe that even the facts just cited present a person with a very serious question: maybe Christianity points to realities that we do not notice? Maybe Christianity speaks about what we usually do not think about - after all, Christianity could not have arisen naturally. Even Engels understood this when he said that the emerging Christianity came into sharp conflict with all surrounding religions. And rightly so: isn't it madness to preach the Savior of the world, crucified like a robber, like a scoundrel, among two scoundrels? The Apostle Paul understood this perfectly when he said that “we preach Christ crucified - to the Jews a temptation ...” Why a temptation? They were waiting for the Messiah, the conqueror of the world. "... but to the Hellenes - madness." Still: the criminal is the Savior of the world!

Christianity, it turns out, did not grow in a natural way, out of natural hopes, aspirations, and religious searches. No, it affirmed something that was insanity, absurd to the human eye. And the victory of Christianity could take place only in one case: if a truly supernatural revelation was given. For many, this remains insane to this day. Why was Christ not born an emperor, then everyone would have believed in Him? What kind of Savior of the world is this? What did He do, tell me: He freed you from death? But everyone dies. Fed? Five thousand - and nothing more. And all the others? Healed the possessed? It would be better to create a global healthcare system. Maybe He freed someone from social injustice? He even left his Jewish people, and in what position - in a conquered position near Rome! He did not even abolish slavery, and this is the Savior ?! I doubt anyone can speak of the natural origins of Christianity in the face of such egregious facts.

The question, in my opinion, is clear. The source of its origin is completely different. Only how to understand this different? Why He is not the emperor and why He is the Savior, if He did not feed and free anyone - this is a separate question. I'm not talking about this now, I'm talking about something else: the natural origin of Christianity is inconceivable within the framework of the logic that we operate with. But only by understanding the source of the origin of Christianity, it is possible to understand the sources of life, which we are talking about today. Life, of course, is not just existence. What kind of life is it when a person suffers. He says: no, rather, I'd rather die. Life is a kind of holistic perception and experience of the good. No good - no life! The rest is not life, but a form of existence.

So the question is, what is this good. First, if we are talking to the point, it must be an ongoing good. And if it is given, then taken away, excuse me, it was only in the Middle Ages that Catholics had such a torture of hope. The prisoner suddenly notices, after they brought him a piece of bread and a mug of water, the cell door remained open. It turns out that he is walking down the corridor, no one is there. He sees a crack, opens the door - a garden! Enters stealthily - no one is there. Comes to the wall - it turns out there is a staircase. Everything, set foot! And suddenly: "Son, where do you go from the salvation of your soul?" At the last minute, this prodigal son is "saved." They say this torture was the most terrible of all.

Life is good. The blessing, of course, is unceasing. Otherwise, what good is it? Is candy before death a blessing? Hardly anyone would agree with this. The good should also be complete, embrace the entire human being - both spiritual and bodily. You can't, sitting on a stake, listen to Haydn's oratorio "The Creation of the World"! So where is it, this whole, unceasing, eternal? Christians say: "Imams are not here for the abiding city, but for the coming one we will seek." This is not idealism, not fantasy. In the face of what I have said about Christianity, this is reality. Yes, Christianity says that present life is given as an opportunity for upbringing, spiritual growth, and most importantly, self-determination of a person. Life is fleeting: our ship is sinking, I begin to suspect this as soon as I was born. And that while he is drowning, I will seize more wealth from someone? Captured, and, like Turgenev's (remember, in the "Notes of a Hunter"), - "our boat solemnly went to the bottom."

The good is possible only on the condition that the personality has the possibility of eternal existence, if it does not cease its existence. Moreover, it does not dissolve and does not die. Christianity says that death is not the end of human existence, it is the moment when an extraordinary swallowtail suddenly appears from the chrysalis. The human personality is immortal. God is the greatest good, and union with Him, the Source of this good, gives a person life.

Why did Christ say about himself: "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life"? Precisely because of the possible union of man with God. But pay special attention to the difference between the Christian and many other points of view: what kind of union with God? In 451, a Council of Bishops of all Orthodox Churches took place. On it, a unique formula for understanding what happened to the appearance of Christ was developed. It was said that there was a union of God and humanity. Which?

First, the non-merged: the two natures - the Divine and the Human - did not merge into something in between. Secondly, unchanged: a man remained. Numerous, unchanging, inseparable from now on and inseparable. That is, there was such a union of God with man, which revealed the pinnacle of possible union for each human person, in which it acquires full development and disclosure. That is, a full life begins. The program says: "The origins of life." According to Christian teachings, the origins of life are not at all philosophy, not at all opinions (for opinions, no one would go to the fire and fall into the mouth of the lions). Of course, adherents of other faiths will always have separate units. But Christianity has a scale that exceeds human understanding!

I remember when visiting the Roman catacombs they told me: about five million are buried here. Apparently, they were taken from all over the empire. But it is essentially important: millions and millions of people went to their death when it was enough to say: "I do not believe in any Christ!" All - go, live in peace, prosper! No. People did not suffer for opinions, not for assumptions, but for faith arising from the direct vision of a person, a person's experience of the good for which he strove. At the same time, faith in Christ - how did it make a person? These Christians were really lights, people came to them, they received spiritual consolation, they made the society around them healthy, they were centers of health and light. They were not dreamers and dreamers, not crazy, who got stuck on one idea. No, these were healthy people, sometimes the broadest educated, but who, by their holiness, testified that they had touched the Source of life.