The Pravoslavie.ru website receives many questions that readers address to the professor. We have selected the most frequently asked of them: about doubts in faith, about how to learn to know the will of God, how to give alms, why Orthodox suffer hardships and is there any justice on earth.

What charity is right?

What more can be said about this than Christ said? “Do not blow your trumpet” (Matt. 6:2). It was like this among the Jewish Pharisees: to stand at the crossroads of streets and blow a horn - to give a sign that the poor would come running to them, and then majestically serve them. Christ condemned it. Do you remember how Christ appreciated the widow's mite? She gave the least, and He called her the greatest sacrifice. The point, it turns out, is not how much you gave. Not at all. And in what soul you do it: for the sake of human praise, with vanity, human pleasing, calculation, or to fulfill the commandment of God about love for one's neighbor.

There is a wonderful saying from the Monk Nikon of Montenegro, a Serbian saint of the 11th century: “It is better to give food to the poor than to bring it to the churches and decorate them.” In Russian: “It is better to give to the poor than to decorate churches!” And sometimes they boast: “I have worked for the Church.” (He came with a Zhiguli, and left with a Mercedes.) After all, it even comes to the point that a sign is hung in churches: “With the help of such and such (name, patronymic, surname), our temple was decorated, etc.” What are we doing?! By this we take away from a person his good deed, developing vanity in him. The Lord says: “When you do charity, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing” (Matt. 6:3).

Every true virtue is deeply chaste. And this is a very important patristic position. Not reckless when ready to undress to the last thread. And the chaste one, who hides herself, and does not stick out, does not climb anywhere.

Please note: Christ, having resurrected a 12-year-old girl, the daughter of Jairus, commanded her parents not to tell anyone about this (see: Mark 5: 38-43; Luke 8: 51-56).

This is a natural property of any virtue -. And the very essence of charity is this. And the more chaste charity is, the more it heals our soul. And vice versa.

Alms can be given without any love – and we have been seeing this for a long time in the West. How is it served there? Just transfer from your account. And how much personal contact with a person means! To come to a sick or old person and personally help him - how much it means! This is a completely different moral and psychological impression on the soul of both the giver and the recipient compared to if I simply transferred money to someone's account. Such almsgiving is more sincere, more valuable than in absentia, and even without any soul, formally transfer money to someone. For there is no mercy where there is no love.

Is there justice on earth?

My grandmother (she died in 1931) used to say: “The truth is fed, drunk, sitting over there in that corner, and no one even wants to look at it.” And the grandmother of hegumen Nikon (Vorobyov) said this: “The truth is at the bottom of the sea, and even with an anchor” - so that she would never surface and she would suddenly not be seen. Saint Ignatius (Bryanchaninov) writes that the truth of this world is not the truth of God at all, because worldly truth, as a rule, is morally depreciated by many human lies: calculations, slyness, hypocrisy, pretense, and even deceit. Here it is, Christian principle: where there is no love, there is no truth, no truth, no goodness, no happiness. Indeed, to demand the truth is a matter, and to sacrifice it is a matter of love.

Here it is, the Christian principle: where there is no love, there is no truth, there is no good, there is no good.

A.S. Khomyakov expressed a brilliant idea that could also answer the question that many people talk about, ask, and are interested in - what is the “Russian idea”? Khomyakov, although he did not directly answer this question, actually said about its very essence: Unity in freedom under the law of love". This is not just about legal freedoms. No, no human rights can be good for him if there is no love in them. Of course, freedom seems to be a great blessing. But without love, it becomes arbitrariness, its opposite. Need proof? – Charlie Hebdo. Is it possible to scoff at someone who is a shrine for a person, and even more so, for many people! They mocked Mohammed - and got it themselves.

What to do when doubts in faith come?

First, we must remember that doubt - if it is not reasoning, but precisely doubt, which, I see, generally undermines faith in me as such - is the same sin as the sin of deceit, for example, deceit, theft, etc. .d. It is a sin. Because it is one thing to analyze some questions, in this case, incomprehensible to me, and quite another when these doubts turn into a stage of direct denial of faith. We must remember how often we are mistaken, not knowing the many aspects of a particular issue. In this case, however, we are not talking about one of the questions, but about the meaning of all life, and my whole future, both earthly and eternal, may depend on the solution of this issue. Therefore, one must be extremely careful with doubts. This is tantamount to the work of those who clear mines: one careless movement and death.

Second, one must remember the spiritual law of human life: the spirit (that is, the spiritual state) creates forms for itself. That is, it is my spiritual state that determines all areas of my life: both my worldview and my entire practical life. This is a very important law, which, unfortunately, remains out of sight of many people, including even us Christians. Therefore, you need to take care of your spiritual state. The more correct it is, the less doubts there will be, and the easier it will be, by the way, to resolve those questions that naturally arise in our souls.

And the third thing I want to pay attention to: you don’t need to be embarrassed when doubts come. Who doesn't have them. But to anyone sincerely seeking, and not having fun for the sake of idle curiosity, there will definitely be an answer, there will be a book or a person, or circumstances. You will find the answer yourself, then you will read it, then you will be prompted. Everything has its time. Life constantly convinces of the truth of the words: “seek and you will find” (Matt. 7: 7).

It is not surprising that a person has doubts - oh, if only they were alone! And what else, besides doubt, happens? “Things about which it’s not good to say, and you won’t say forever. As the hero of the novel F.M. Dostoevsky's "Humiliated and Insulted": "Oh, if only it were revealed what is going on in my soul, then, I think, the whole world would have to suffocate!" So, this shouldn't be surprising. Our nature is damaged and a lot of things arise in our soul.

But how to relate to everything bad that arises in me? - I understand that this is not good, and I try to fight it. We must fight, not be surprised. We - and this must be firmly remembered - are spiritually sick. And they were born here, in the hospital, which is our mortal earthly existence. And this morbidity of ours manifests itself in various forms, in particular, in doubts.

Act sincerely - this will be the fulfillment of the will of God

How to know the will of God - God forbid, try to penetrate into the mind of God, to unravel what He thinks. This is terrible and stupid! You can't even ask that question! It should be like this: how can I do the will of God? How can I not be opposed to the will of God in my life or in this or that act? There is an answer, and it is known to everyone: how much you, man, have enough of your stupid mind - I emphasize: stupid, because we have all stupided ourselves with our passions, how much your burnt conscience is enough - I emphasize: burned, because we constantly burn it with our thoughts, feelings and deeds against this voice of God - you need to act according to this mind, but sincerely, and according to this conscience, but sincerely. If we act with a pure conscience, this will be the fulfillment of the will of God. Because God wants only one thing from us: that we act reasonably and conscientiously. Reasonable, for God gave us light and reason, and called us to reason, and not to madness. That is why the holy fathers said: “There is no virtue, no goodness without reason.”

So, when I act in this way - not cunningly and without justifying myself, then I act according to the will of God. And then, even if I am mistaken, doing something wrong, but sincerely, then, as all the fathers of the Church say, the Lord will correct it, seeing my desire to act according to His will.

Why do we suffer deprivation today?

Because Russia is still alive.

Once I was walking around Vienna with a lady. It was early summer, everything around was green, blooming, well, just beauty. And she asks me a question: “How beautiful everything is here! And why is everything somehow unsettled in Russia? Well, why is that so? And I also answered her exclamations with a question: “What do you think: who is treated and who is decorated?” She looks at me in bewilderment. I explain: “They treat the sick, and decorate the dead. Vienna is a beautiful city. But look: the impression is that people don’t need anything else here, it’s almost paradise here. No other paradise is needed. And you believers in some kind of life eternal, after death, leave it to yourself. We do not need either Heaven or God - and it is good here. And it’s better not to think about death.” Of course, these are the thoughts of an ostrich that hid its head in the sand in the face of mortal danger. But this is precisely the psychology of spiritual death for the vast majority of people living in comfortable conditions.

All our troubles and difficulties are a sign that our people are not yet dead. The patient is being treated. They treat differently: there are sweet medicines, there are bitter ones. And there are surgeries. But this is the cure. So all our hardships testify: we are alive.

But, of course, our happiness, our people, that we do not know what huge forces are continuously working to destroy Russia. Look, Germany, and almost all of Europe, defeated, all destroyed and how it has risen, but our people are dumber or something, or do we have few natural resources? Isn't it clear?

But without sorrows, without difficulties, it is impossible for a person to renounce this land, which he will have to leave anyway, whether he wants it or not.

All our difficulties are a sign that our people are not dead yet: this is how we, the sick, are treated

Let me tell you about one indicative case that occurred in Geneva. It was told to me by our representative at the World Council of Churches (it includes about 300 different churches: both Protestant and almost all Orthodox Churches, including ours). The General Secretary of the WCC, Wissert Huft, the number one figure of this ecumenical organization, dies. In the cathedral of Geneva - a large and very beautiful Calvinist church - a farewell to the deceased is scheduled. A portrait of the deceased was placed in the temple, an audience from different countries gathered - after all, an event. There is a "farewell" - in front of the portrait. And at this time, a hearse with the coffin of the general secretary himself drives quietly into the cathedral square. Quietly, he drives in and parks in the farthest corner of the square from the cathedral. "Farewell" ends, everyone disperses. Nobody approaches the coffin. And only a few people of the closest relatives of the deceased go, trying not to attract attention, to the far corner of the square where the hearse stands, get into the car and leave for the cemetery. Nobody sees the dead. And you don't have to see it! Why mention death? We live forever here on earth – are we Christians?!

What is shown on TV? Fun, festivals, dances, games, competitions... Do they show the sick? Show how many people suffer and how? – This is a rare occurrence. How much suffering - and how do we live? Oh, if only we could see these sufferings, then perhaps our outlook on life would change, our attitude towards people would also change.

In the end, you need to understand that our earthly life is not a resort, but a hospital. And its task is not at all to ensure that we already receive all the benefits and pleasures here, but that here, on earth, we understand at least a little that we are mortal, that there is eternity and turn to God. For, as the apostle Paul writes: “We have no permanent city here, but we are looking for the future.” (Heb. 13:14). This, at least a little, but still remembers Russia. That is why we are having difficulties. And they will be - as long as we are at least a little, but alive.

One ascetic prayed to God with tears: “Lord, why do I have no sorrows? How have I angered you?"

Alexei Ilyich OSIPOV (born 1938)- Doctor of Theology, Professor of the Moscow Theological Academy: | | | | | .

Alexei Ilyich Osipov was born in the town of Belev, Tula Region, in a family of employees. In 1955, after graduating from school, he refused to enter any university and for three years at home studied the beginnings of theology under the guidance of Abbot Nikon (Vorobiev). In 1958 he entered the fourth (graduation) class of the Moscow Theological Seminary, having passed the exams immediately for the previous three years. The following year he entered the Moscow Theological Academy, from which he graduated in 1963 with a Ph.D. in theology. In 1964 he took a postgraduate course at the Moscow Theological Academy.

Since 1965 - a teacher of basic theology at the Moscow Theological Academy, since 1969 - associate professor, since 1975 - professor. In 1985 he was awarded the degree of Doctor of Theology honoris causa. Since 2004 - Honored Professor of the Moscow Theological Academy. He lectures on basic theology in the fifth year of the seminary and the first year of the academy. Scientific interests - basic theology (apologetics), Western confessions. He performs a lot in various audiences with lectures and talks, a significant part of which have been distributed on cassettes, disks and on the Internet.

Alexey Ilyich OSIPOV: articles

Why does a person turn to God? What is it - the need for protection, the desire to experience religious ecstasy, the desire to differ from non-believers and demonstrate their religiosity? Apparently, there are no general answers, each appeal is the secret of the human soul. Nevertheless, there is a thousand years of experience that can be discussed.

In the same way, another question can be discussed - why are we talking specifically about conversion to Orthodoxy? Is it because it is a Russian tradition and many were baptized in childhood, or because in Orthodoxy certain dimensions are opened up that are inaccessible in other forms of religiosity?

What is happening to me?
Are all religions the same?
Three proofs of the extraterrestrial origin of Christianity.
Why Orthodoxy?
What are dogmas for?

What is happening to me?
Mankind has always strived for happiness, peace, justice, material abundance. But real history says that the closer to our time, the worse it gets. The twentieth century has flooded the entire globe with blood, although they expected paradise on earth from it. Progress leads us directly to crises. For example, ecological. In the book of academician N.N. Moiseev "To be or not to be for mankind" says that humanity as a biological species is mortal. All-human scientific and technological progress, which aims at the maximum well-being of mankind on Earth, leads him to death. Although in the animal world all is well. Do tigers and camels spoil the Earth?! Where did the error occur? After all, there was no villain who would only think about how to destroy the Earth.

But what happens inside a person? I think that I am good. But it turns out I'm good as long as I'm not touched properly. For example, Peter, the apostle, an ardent man, exclaimed: "Lord, even if I have to die with You, I will not deny You." And so, when Christ was already taken into custody, at the first question of a suspicious maid: "And you were with Him?" - Peter denies... Having taken off rose-colored glasses, we involuntarily repeat the words of the Apostle Paul: "I am a poor man!.. I do not do the good that I want, but I do the evil that I do not want" (The Epistle to the Romans, chapter 7, verses 24, 15, 19) - and I can't cope. But this is very strange. Why is a certain dissonance felt so sharply in our lives? Where did the error occur?

I think the mistake is that a person has forgotten that he is a spiritual and bodily being. And that this spiritual part connects him with God. Man has forgotten that he is a mortal being, but that in his spirit he is destined for eternal existence. He forgot about the primacy of the spiritual principle. If it were not for the bodily, non-material side in a person, then he would probably have a completely different attitude towards the surrounding nature (carefully, as an extension of his body), to another person (would not consider him as an enemy). There would not have arisen that terrible thing called the consumer attitude towards the world and towards another person. "Forgetfulness" has led a person to a loss of harmony between the world and himself, between himself and others, between the soul and God.

Are all religions the same?

In order to feel this dissonance, to comprehend one's spiritual component, a person needs a purification of consciousness. Feelings, emotions, and even more passions make it difficult to know. Their action is as follows: a whole kaleidoscope of flashes and memories runs through a person. Sensual fog obscures consciousness, disperses attention, produces the same forgetfulness... Different religions offer different means for its purification. It is curious that outwardly they seem similar, almost identical.

For example, in the most popular Hindu system, Vedanta, to achieve nirvana requires asceticism, liberation from passions, attachment to the worldly. Silence is considered important in the spiritual life. There is such a practice: the guru says to the grown disciple: "You are a brahmin." The student does not answer. And they break up. The disciple walks in silence for several years and then returns to his guru and says, "Yes, I am a brahmin."

Barsanuphius the Great (a Christian ascetic of the 6th-7th centuries) has these words: "Silence is better and more amazing than all the stories. Our fathers kissed him and worshiped him. And they became famous for him."

In general, hermits of all times and religions have experienced by experience that the purest and clearest knowledge comes when all feelings are silent. And the "ratio" itself...
If all religions seem to be talking about the same thing, which one to join, which one is true?

Three proofs of the extraterrestrial origin of Christianity.

Christianity is the only religion that has objective arguments confirming its inhuman, unearthly origin, that is, the Divine. There are many such arguments, I will name the main ones.

1. The first argument is the simplest, not requiring special knowledge, historical. Unlike other religions, Christianity began with monstrous persecution. From the crucifixion of Christ Himself, from the execution of all the apostles (except John the Theologian), from the most severe persecution. Until 313, there were ten powerful waves of terrible persecution. Read the historian of the 1st century Cornelius Tacitus: Emperor Nero in his gardens ordered Christians to be tied to pillars, tarred at nightfall and lit instead of torches at night. The most popular was the cry: "Christians unto the lions." Let's try to imagine a similar picture now. My question is: who will go to this religion? Who would want to sacrifice their lives for a religion about which virtually nothing is known?! How could Christianity survive? Let historians try to explain. The Acts of the Apostles describe what happened to those who sincerely accepted the faith: many of them immediately received the gift of miracles, prophecy, and healing. But the most important thing is that they received in their souls such a knowledge of God that removed all fear of torment. The Great Martyr Eustratius said to the Lord: "These torments are the joy of Thy servants." Without recognizing that God Himself acted in this religion, revived, spiritualized these people, it is impossible to understand the existence of Christianity.

2. The second argument is doctrinal, it is the most lengthy. The basic Christian truths are fundamentally different from all analogues of Judaism and paganism of the era in which Christianity was born. The doctrine of the Trinity is different from the pagan triads; Incarnation - from the incarnations of Jupiters, Zeus. Now I will not dwell on this. Although I explain these differences to my seminary students for a whole year. The fishermen (authors of the Gospels) simply stated that they saw, heard, and touched. They stated, but did not invent, themselves often not understanding what was happening. The evangelists were not very literate. Remember the picture "Hunters at rest"? Simple hard workers ... And the fishermen were very similar to them. And suddenly they say such truths, from which philosophers and thinkers of all ages are perplexed. The next question is: where did these truths come from? Paul was the only bookish among the apostles. He declared openly and with stunning clarity: "We preach Christ crucified - a stumbling block to the Jews; foolishness to the Greeks."

3. The third argument is spiritual and moral. One can ask the question (no matter what religion), "From a religious point of view, who will be saved?" We will be answered: "The one who fulfills the requirements of this religion." But in Christianity this is not so. What requirements did the thief who was on the cross next to Christ fulfill? Scoundrel, criminal - and the first goes to heaven. In this sense, Christianity is an anti-religious religion. Think, where is this from? All students are Jews brought up in the Law. Where does such a sermon come from?

These are objective things, and it is not superfluous to think about them, no matter if I believe or do not believe in Christ. Yes, perhaps, the roots of Christianity are elsewhere, anywhere, but not on Earth.

Why Orthodoxy?

Christianity claims that the main obstacle facing a person on the path of knowing God, through Whom and in Whom true knowledge of oneself, another person, and the world around is possible, is a certain thick (or thin, depending on the state of the person) opinion about oneself . If you want, a false perception of one's Self, when the Self is seen as something almost self-sufficient. A false understanding of what we call human dignity. When we say "human" - great, when we say "my dignity", lies begin. We all feel good. I am a good person. I can tell you what my shortcomings are, but at the same time I feel and have no doubt that I am a good person. And I, a good one, do not understand the words of Macarius the Great: "Lord, cleanse me a sinner, for I have done no good before You (since I have done nothing good)". How can I see, understand that “I am not a very good person”, that I am corrupted, that the Creator’s plan for me is damaged in me?

We don't know ourselves. Orthodoxy directs our gaze to ourselves, to the knowledge of the damage that is inherent in man as such. And only on the path of self-knowledge can I turn to Christ. As sinners, we do not see that we are perishing. The Monk Peter of Damascus said: "The first sign of the beginning health of the soul is the vision of one's sins." From the knowledge of the impossibility of eradicating passions by one's own strength, conquering illnesses, the path to the recognition of Christ, to faith in Him, begins. This is where real Christianity begins.

All the attention of Orthodoxy is concentrated on the knowledge of that deadly disease, which Christ came to heal. The following analogy: when I cut off my finger, I will not go to the surgeon, but I will anoint it with iodine. If the wound is deeper, then I will go to the nurse. When will I go to the doctor? When I have something more serious. And when the disease is already such that doctors cannot cope, I will call on the luminaries of the world. Pay attention: prophets, saints came to mankind... God Himself came! This means that our illness is such that God Himself had to come to heal it.

"... But I don't see anything! - someone will say. - A strange disease." Orthodoxy is all about seeing what Christ came for. This is what distinguishes Orthodoxy: it is all directed towards self-knowledge. For only he who has seen what his disease is, can then correctly assess the means that are necessary for healing. We are not looking for entertainment in Christianity, not delights, not beatitudes, not pleasures. Christianity is therapy. Christ is the greatest Physician, full of love. He cannot touch my freedom - I must turn to Him myself. My face is smitten, but I know the sunlight will heal it. It depends on me whether to expose my nose to the sun or not. I can substitute for a minute, but healing will happen when I am constantly in the sun.
This is the positive thing that characterizes Orthodoxy: attention to oneself, knowledge of oneself. Asceticism is the way of knowing oneself, through which a person really turns to Christ and the path of healing begins.

What is its main feature? The man is becoming more and more resigned. One of the most important criteria for the right path: humility does not see itself as humble. (“The sacred two,” writes John of the Ladder, “love and humility; the first lifts up, and the last supports the ascended and does not allow them to fall.”)

This is a hallmark of Orthodoxy. I would not like to speak in negative tones about other Christian denominations, but for an example I will turn to Catholicism. Starting from St. Francis of Assisi develops compassio, or sensual empathy with the Passion of Christ. The main purpose of this is to achieve love through empathy. In the book of Ignatius (Ignatius Loyola (1491(?)-1556) - founder of the Jesuit order, author of the book "Spiritual Exercises") there is one main chord: "Imagine!" Believers are invited to imagine mentally the suffering of Christ. His wounds, blood... With this, a person brings himself to such a psychosomatic state, when wounds appear on the body, similar to the wounds of Christ. This phenomenon is called stigmata ("stigma" in Greek - "brand").

Orthodoxy very carefully preserves the teachings of the Ancient Church. After all, all the fathers of united Christianity (before the division of the Churches) of the first millennium: John of the Ladder, Abba Dorotheus, Cassian the Roman and Benedict of Nursia - categorically forbid representation, imagination, daydreaming during prayer. After all, true communication with God is important for a person, for which purification from dirt is necessary, and not psychic experiments with one's imagination.

What are dogmas for?

And are dogmas so important for distinguishing between religions?! Is it really important to me how purgatory differs from ordeals? Or how is the birth of the Son different from the procession of the Spirit? What is filioque? (I name the main dogmatic differences between Orthodoxy and Catholicism.) These are certainly important things, rational in their nature. Dogmas, in general, the entire church discipline, is only a certain structure, a vector that indicates the direction of a person's practical, spiritual life. Only by organizing a faithful spiritual life will a person become capable of at least touching the Mysteries of God.

It seems to me that at the beginning of the path it is not so important to know the dogmas about Christ. As long as a person looks at Christianity from a distance, he can be sincerely mistaken. Remember how Gogol's Chichikov goes to one of the villages, looks at Plyushkin from afar and is surprised: "Al man, al woman?" And until he drove closer, he was not convinced that he was a man. So it is the same with spiritual things. We need to get closer, and then we can give an objective assessment. It requires the manifestation of both the mind, rational activity, and the heart. "Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God." Isaac the Syrian has a paraphrase: "The soul sees the Truth by the power of life." Therefore, sincerely seeking the Truth, people from any religion, atheism, came to Christianity, they were pure in their sincerity. And a person who will not strive to live according to conscience will never know Christ, even if you baptize him three times, ordain him... The shameless Christ does not know. The devil knows everything about Christ better than all doctors of theology, but remains a devil. He does not have what we in Christian language call knowledge. Knowledge means unity. The devil cannot possibly become one with God. And only in unity does true knowledge take place. And unity is possible only when there is similarity. Like is known by like.

I AM A SKEPTICK, YOU KNOW

What is wrong with personal spiritual experience? Who can be a missionary? Why do people want to go to hell? What is spiritual life and where to look for it? Alexei Ilyich Osipov, Professor of the Moscow Theological Academy, talks about this and many other things.

A feat beyond strength

You studied at the seminary, then at the academy. Why didn't you become a priest? After all, almost everyone who studies here eventually becomes a priest.
- First, not all. Why didn't I become a priest? First, I, unfortunately, suddenly learned, as St. Sergius said: "The desire for dignity is the beginning and root of the love of power."

So you didn't want this?
- No, I'm not talking about that. First, I heard such things - the beginning and the root of lust for power. Secondly, I was horrified only from the realization that I had to take confession. They already approached me: both women and asked questions, and I understood what it is, what confession is. This is a feat that is beyond my strength. Third - I saw that my direction is completely different - pedagogical, and not the priesthood.

In addition, to accept the rank in the academy, I thought and still think so, this is something strange. The priest must be with the flock. In this case, the rector leads the flock at the academy, and all the priests only serve. They do nothing more, and they cannot do anything at the academy. They also teach, but only in dignity.

More weight? I am extremely afraid of this. Because if it really were necessary, then, I think, Christ would definitely be some kind of high priest. Some high dignitary, maybe even an emperor. And then His speeches would produce a different psychological impression. But we do not need a psychological impression. Our task is completely different - to speak only about what we believe is true, true, useful. And to engage in impressing people, God forbid.

On apperception and the burning of conscience

Alexey Ilyich, how to explain, in general, the craving for luxury in many ways and the justification for this - in the Church, because this is not uncommon, right?
- It's not normal, that's all. Indeed, in the Church, people did not fall from the moon, but from the usual environment, from the people's environment, they came, so there is no need to be surprised. You can't even condemn. Unfortunately, Orthodoxy is often presented as only one superficial side - the cult side: external worship, external, ritual side. They completely forget that the essence of Orthodoxy is not at all in this.

The essence of Orthodoxy is that a person knows how to deal with his passions, of which we have a whole load and a small cart. How to learn not to be annoyed, not to hate, not to envy, not to be conceited, not to be proud. The task is to be healed, because these are illnesses. And everything else is an external side, it is needed only as a help. But it can also be a hindrance. In particular, what you said is already a hindrance.

Don't you think that now this desire is taking on some kind of, simply already unhealthy, scale? These scandals with clocks, lawsuits with apartments, statements... Moreover, on the one hand, it is as if they say that the parishioners should bring all the best to the priests. On the other hand, church speakers say that it is a sin for a priest to think about retirement. When people, well-fed, speak in Moscow, this is one thing. How is it perceived in the rest of the country?
- In psychology, there is such a phenomenon - apperception. What is its essence? A gray piece of paper on a white background appears black, and on a black background it appears white. So, we look at the priesthood against a white background, because we know the Christian teaching, it speaks of holiness. We look at the priests, who in their bulk, overwhelmingly, are gray, like all of us. But we consider their behavior against the white holy background of Christianity. And from here their actions seem terrible to us, oh ... We begin to groan, gasp and be indignant, although we consider exactly the same actions that non-church people do, “Yes, of course, it’s no good,” but against a dark background they don’t already look like this.

We sometimes greatly increase the measure of evaluation of who they should be. And they are people just like us. And they also have passions, and inclinations, and desires, and goals, and so on. But when suddenly we see this in a priest, we are really embarrassed by this especially, because he seems to be teaching about other things. For example, worldly people do not teach, but here they teach, and therefore we are indignant. In fact, we must understand that we are all infected with these passions, and the priest too. Therefore, what can be said about him? One can regret that, unfortunately, his life is at odds with the word. Regret. If you want to show some generosity even. Only and everything. But not to be surprised and astonished: “How can he say one thing from the pulpit, but what is he doing?”

Since we also touched on the psychological side… Doesn’t this gap arise in the soul that the priest says one thing, but lives differently?
- As long as the conscience is intact, of course, does not arise. But you can burn your conscience. Because actions against conscience, suppression of conscience lead to the burning of conscience, and this applies, in general, to any person, regardless of his position in the Church.

What to answer in this case, when, for example, they say to you: “Here, these Christians or these priests are such and such” - and you understand that the act in question is unworthy, and you are ashamed of it, and it hurts just as much like unbelieving people. Here's how to respond to this when accused? After all, this is not uncommon now.
- I usually answer in this way. I say: “Have you ever read the fables of Ivan Andreevich Krylov?” - "Well, yes". - “Remember what it says there: “What are the gossips to count, isn’t it better, godfather, to turn to yourself”? We judge others very harshly and do not look at ourselves. And if we saw what is going on in our soul, and what sometimes we really do, then maybe we would just bite our tongue. We demand a lot from others, but we are unusually indulgent towards ourselves, that's all.

- There are different people. Sometimes they are demanding of themselves and of others.
- That's right, different people, and here - different people. You still need to have some generosity and understanding that we are all mortal, sinful and sick people. Our rank and position by itself do not change us. It doesn't change that. It changes the sincerity of life in a Christian way, and to what extent who has this desire is a question of a different order. This is the secret of the human soul. Then, I'll tell you, sometimes even very good people suddenly break down, as they say. Suddenly he will allow such that everyone will gasp. And then he himself repents and suffers: “How could I do this?” It happens. So let's show some generosity. We do not justify actions, no, we do not justify anything. But show generosity in relation to the assessment of the person himself. Not an act, but a person - these are different things.

Holy man

Have you met such people about whom it can be said that there really is a Christian light in them, there is holiness?
- I've only met one person in all this time. He is the man who got me into my field. Hegumen Nikon (Vorobiev) ... When I was still a boy, I thought that all priests were like that, only later I saw how deeply I was mistaken. And he was truly a saint. You probably understand that I am not some kind, you know, a person who is engaged in daydreaming. I'm a skeptic, mind you.

- I see. Can you tell about it?
- I have already told you many times. And I will be very brief. This is a man who went through the crucible, as Dostoevsky wrote, of doubt, up to the loss of faith. He himself is from the village. In a real school, he lost his faith, believing that science has proven that there is no God. Already in the senior classes, he saw that science in general does not say anything about the meaning of life and does not prove anything in relation to God - whether He exists or not. Just nothing.

He took up philosophy. Being extremely talented, he learns German and French under incredibly difficult conditions in order to read these German Hegels and French Bergsons. He is engaged in philosophy, history of philosophy. Studying ancient Greek. Reads freely in ancient Greek the New Testament. He studies philosophy. And he sees that, it turns out, in philosophy, whatever the philosopher, then his own opinion on all major issues: the meaning of life, the existence of God and his understanding, the meaning of human activity, and so on. In general, he came to a complete disappointment.

He enters the psycho-neurological institute in St. Petersburg. So I don’t know if he has been studying there for a year or two, and he leaves there for the simple reason that they are not engaged in the soul, but in what the Greeks call “psyche”. "Psyche" is the lower part of the soul, common in man with animals. Psychology, it turns out, does not deal with the problem of the soul as a substance that is mortal or immortal.

Is there eternity or not eternity? Is there, after all, God, or not? What is the sense of life? Deals with some kind of perceptions, sensations, apperceptions, and so on, whatever. As he said: “Dealing, in general, with the skin, and not with this most important issue.” So, having not found an answer to these questions either in science, it does not deal with the meaning of life; not in philosophy, because philosophy says a lot, but you don't know whom to believe; nor in psychology, he fell into despair, real despair.

Once such an incident happened to him. As he says: “I reached such a state that I was almost suicidal, and exclaimed from the bottom of my heart: “Lord, if You exist, reveal yourself to me. You see that I don’t need anything other than the answer to this question.” It was at midnight, somewhere at 12 or in the first hour of the night. And he felt in his soul such an experience of God, from which he exclaimed: “Lord, I am ready to endure anything, just not to lose You.” He says: "I saw, felt, experienced that He exists, and He is love." At the same time, he suddenly heard the powerful measured strikes of the church bell. There was a monastery nearby. And what about the monastery? Night. But the bells continued to ring.

Since he studied both philosophy and psychology, he says: “I thought, is this even a hallucination? And this doubt hung like that, was present with me, although I was really convinced that God exists. But then I remembered Lukerya Turgenev (the story "Living Powers"), who said that she heard a ringing, she did not say "from the sky", but said from above. Then I read in Sergei Nikolaevich Bulgakov's autobiographical notes that he, it turns out, also had a similar condition. After all, he, too, Bulgakov, in the seminary, by the way, was convinced that there is no God. When I read the same thing, I realized that it turns out that when such real revelations happen, they are associated with such external manifestations of this divine action, for example, with the ringing of bells.

So he came to faith, but he knew nothing about it. Entered the Moscow Theological Academy. He did not study for long, as the academy was closed. He began to read, to study theological and patristic literature. The result was such that in the 31st year, during the period of persecution, he became a monk. From the point of view of worldly life, this is madness. In 1933, he was arrested and sent to camps. There he sat with the punks, as he says. “And for no other reason did I feel such suffering - neither from the cold, nor from hunger, not even from these mockeries and ridicule, as from this abuse, which was constantly standing in the barracks.” He becomes a monk and then becomes a priest.

Then, in 1937, he was released; he was taken in by a surgeon in Vyshny Volochek, the father of his comrade, at his own peril and risk. Here they repeatedly tried to re-arrest him again. But this surgeon was a very big figure in the city, and he saved him every time. When, already in the 40s, churches were opened, he began to serve. Recently, he served in the city of Gzhatsk, which was renamed Gagarin in the Smolensk region, where he died, was buried, and his grave is there at the altar.

funny case

How did you meet?
- Well, that's a different story. In general, I met him, and he gave me a lot.

- How old were you?
- I'll say something else. He gave me to read - on the one hand, Ladder, on the other hand, a Greek philosopher. Either read Gogol, Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, or the fathers of The Philokalia. He was a man of the broadest culture. Excellent knowledge of philosophical literature, Russian literature, foreign literature. But how was he different? Erudition is a completely different side - it is a cultural side. There was something else in him: something that can be called a kind of grace, which was felt in his word, in his actions, in his answers to questions.

It was a confessor who never commanded. And he himself warned: “I can only give advice when you ask, but you see for yourself - how the circumstances are, how best to act. You think so - well, well, do it. If you think differently, do it differently." That is why I always say at all lectures: "Run as from fire from ordering confessors - this is a sign of pride." By the way, he actually prepared me for entering the theological school. He prepared me in such a way that I could immediately enter the final class of the seminary, the fourth. Then everyone came running to see what a marvelous miracle this had come.

- You were probably a teenager then?
- Yes, I've been with him for about 15 years, from 16, like that.

Why did he show interest in you? To a teenager?
- Well, like this, he showed it, although there were others. They became priests. There were also nephews. But it so happened that he paid the most attention to me. You see, what's the matter, there are many facts that testify to his foresight. A whole series of facts, and all curious phenomena. All these miracles were performed as if there was nothing special. Like it just comes naturally. Do you want me to tell you a funny story?

- Oh sure.
- We met when I was six or seven years old, in Kozelsk. And it was such a passing acquaintance. One day he was invited to tea, and I had a big misfortune, grief. My cat littered and did not feed the kittens. Can you imagine what a tragedy? When he walked, I rushed to him with all my legs, began to complain. Here we enter the house, sit down at the table and suddenly, I don’t remember who, says: “Look!” What to watch? And the cat stretched out in front of all of us, and the kittens glared and sucked, and she purrs. Seems like a funny case. But imagine, only I complained, and that's it! The cat seemed to show: please, here is an advertisement for you. This is the first time, there have been others like this.

"Tarzan" on Strastnaya

Was it difficult for you to be with him?
- No, it was not difficult for me, okay.

- He did not scold you - do you not read prayers? Or have you always read? Or for some misdeeds...
- These are the details. He was a man, I would say, of great soul and love. But love is not so indulgent, no, no. And one that looked specifically at the benefits of a person, but precisely love. Sometimes we demand favors and are ready to ruin a person with our demands, to drive them into the Kingdom of Heaven by force ... For example, Holy Week, and Tarzan is in the cinema. Tarzan is impossible. I asked him, is it possible? No, he never let me go. During Holy Week he didn't let me see Tarzan.

- How did you perceive? Didn't allow it, that's all. Upset?
- Upset, of course. "Tarzan" is not allowed! How is it? Don't you understand? The trouble happened. Just as the cat stopped feeding the kittens, so I can’t watch Tarzan.

- Did you communicate with him before his death?
- He was sick. The last 2-3 months he did not eat anything at all, only drank. All dried up, became like a baby. He was in full and clear consciousness, did not lie down until his strength completely left. He spoke, he spoke his last words. I remember I managed to record something on a tape recorder. Unfortunately, one Easter, someone broke into our house and stole all those reels of records. But something remains. After his death, I rushed to the addresses that were known, to collect his letters, and, behold, I managed to compile a collection.

On the day of the funeral there was joy, but not sorrow. Later I only read from Ignatius (Bryanchaninov): "The death of a righteous man is always associated with the spirit of peace and joy, which involuntarily dissolves the sorrow of his loss." Indeed, it is so accurate that it is simply amazing. Moreover, I was not the only one who felt this, but also his brothers, his nephews.

- You said that you thought all priests were like that. When did you realize that not everyone?
- When he began to come into contact with them.

- Was it sad, was it offensive? What were the experiences?
- It's not offensive, but a little bit I began to understand what he was saying. He said that, unfortunately, almost no one had even an idea about the spiritual life. The most, if a moral person, is already good. And spiritual life is not even looking, you will hardly find it. You won't find.

The writings of the prudent robber

On the subject of holiness. They say that even the saints were wrong. Are there any issues on which illustrious saints have expressed controversial opinions?
- Well, let's see. For example, Theophan the Recluse. Just think, here are the “Ordinary Stories of a Wanderer”, which are printed and reprinted, and they say: “Look, he published it himself. The third edition of these extraordinary stories was initiated by Theophan the Recluse!” I answer yes, that's right. What did he write 10 years later? "Do not look at stories - it can lead you to charms." He was in the process of spiritual development. A saint does not immediately become a saint.

Imagine if we had the writings of a prudent robber, and we would say: “I see in the saints a prudent robber.” What would it be? What would he teach us? How to rob, kill, debauchery, produce violence? What are you! And we immediately: saint. And immediately we canonize everything, the whole heritage. What is this nonsense? What are you, is it possible? Must watch! Therefore, among the saints, we will find such contradictions here and there, right.

And secondly, I must say that this is a rather rare occurrence, when suddenly they disagreed on something in their views. But again, you need to look at what, why. And all this is not as easy as it seems. And then they got used to it, throwing themselves with the words: "They had contradictions." Let's see what contradictions? Let's take an example - disputes about the human nature of Jesus Christ. As a man, who was He? What was His nature? And it starts. Look, the fathers write that He had the same nature as the original Adam. The second say: He had a nature after the fall of Adam. See the contradiction.

In fact, the situation is quite different. He had a nature, on the one hand, pure and sinless, like the original Adam, but mortal and perishable, like the fallen Adam. Some saints wrote about one side, others about the other side. And they wrote correctly. Indeed, mortal and perishable, like the fallen one. Truly sinless, like the original. But for a person who does not understand these things at all, “contradictions” are obtained.

Bonfires, Old Believers and general decline

They say, here, the fires of the Inquisition, all this is your Christianity. How many people were burned, how much grief.
- Please, ask the Pope such questions. We agree, yes, Catholicism is a bloody externality, it is a bloody religion, really full of violence, throughout history and still. In Ukraine, when perestroika began, what violence was done to our priests, to churches! What beatings! It was up to death. And Pope John Paul II gathers these Uniate bishops, holds a conference there and gives them a blessing. And then, when everything was captured, everything that could be captured: "We forgive you, and you forgive us." Catholicism suffers greatly in this regard, because a catastrophic secularization of the church took place there long ago, a thousand years ago. She was all captured by earthly interests.

- But we also had different things. There were also Old Believers, when there was such cruelty on both sides ...
- Yes. If the Old Believers had the same political power and state support as the Orthodox then, the same would have happened with the Orthodox as with the Old Believers. And the reason is in the general state, in the spiritual state of Christianity in the 17th century. It turned out to be already degraded to a great extent from those holy principles by which St. Sergius and his disciples lived. Our heyday was short-lived - the era of St. Sergius and his disciples. By the end of the 15th century, by the second half, degradation began. Monasteries began to get richer: golden domes, luxurious clothes.

- Why is this happening?
- Why? Very simple. Why do we overeat when a good table? Well, tell me why?

- I want to try everything.
- Well, of course, I want to eat everything. If it tastes good, then more. So are they. That's how easy we succumb to these things. On an inclined plane down is easy. Up is hard.

- Do you think it can still be up?
- No I do not think so…

- Will it only get worse?
- What do you mean worse? Worse ... Yes, the slide is on - this is indisputable. How, when, to what extent - this is difficult to judge .... You pay attention - take the names of conferences, look in any Orthodox Church, and even more so in non-Orthodox - in the Catholic Church, Protestant - just go through the names, and you will see that there is not a single one that would sound something like this: “ The main problems of spiritual life. What is spiritual life? How to understand what means and what is necessary to combat passions? You will not find such conferences. We are busy with a completely different problem. We are busy with everything - culture, art, science, philosophy, education, youth movements, economics, exploitation.

Four month missionary

Missionary.
- Missionary, please. Especially touching: such and such a missionary completed a four-month course! I nearly fainted. Put a four-month-old baby to preach Orthodoxy! What is it? And if such missionaries, then it is understandable. They will tell you: “Show Orthodoxy,” they will show you. They will say: "It's a caricature!" - “How are you? This is Orthodoxy." So expect something...

In general, are missionaries needed? If needed, where do you get them from? What is called missionary today, is it such?
- Here, 60 students are graduating from the seminary. I think that maybe ten people I could call missionaries. But to say that everyone who has studied for five years can be missionaries - I will not say this forever and ever. What does it take to truly train missionaries? They must graduate from the seminary, and from the most talented, who can both speak, and know, and explain, it would be possible to make up a contingent of missionaries, who will already be given some special knowledge. I think so. But they do not agree with me, I can console you.

- The mission can be massive?
- You know, as soon as a person believes in God, he is ready to go and preach everywhere. He doesn't know anything, but he's already starting to learn. Lord, do you know how many letters I get? How many of these missionaries contact me? I'm holding my head. Sometimes, you know, Anya, my hair starts to stand on end where they have not been for a long time, from this missionary work.

Melnikov-Pechersky has a wonderful story about how the priest preached on the Trinity. He preached, he preached, and here stands next to Thomas, a man. "Foma, do you understand?" - "Understood". - "Answer, what is the Trinity?" - "Christ, Mother of God and Mykola." - “Oh, you, such-and-such Foma!” It starts again. "Understood, Thomas?" - "Understood". - "Answer!" - "Theotokos, Mykola and Christ." Here is the missionary. But this is a very serious matter.

Alexei Ilyich, do you think it is possible to convert a person to faith today, for example? Firstly, today people, in general, have very low confidence in the word.
- You can turn only the one who is looking for, who is interested. You know, even the ancient Pythagoreans said: "A student is not a vessel to be filled, but a torch to be lit." That's the problem. If this torch does not burn, does not ignite, it is pointless to fill it. It will lie dead weight. If you stuff more than necessary into the stomach, then negative processes begin. It is the same in the head, which is not interested, but knowledge is stuffed into it. In the front ranks of the revolutionaries one could often see seminarians.

And how to talk with a person who, for example, is looking for? And he already studied that, it seems, and he took an interest in this, and says: “All religions are one. Everyone says his religion is right." How to talk?
- Christianity has objective arguments that testify to its unearthly origin. You will not be able to derive all the truths of Christianity either from Judaism, or, moreover, from the surrounding pagan religions and philosophies that we see there. This is an amazing picture.

But I prefer to talk about this with people who really have at least a little search for the soul, not the boiling of the mind, the game of the mind, with those who really look for ways, like a person lost in the forest. He needs to get out and find a way. And when it's like that, for the sake of entertainment, you know how they like to argue about this and that, then it's useless. Let the dead bury their dead. Religion speaks about the most important issue - about the meaning of human life and eternity, but only with faith. When a person is drowning, he will not reason: “Why are you slipping this knotty log into me!” - a person will clutch, he will clutch at straws.

- Is missionary work necessary today as a phenomenon, what should it look like?
- I think it is loudly said about missionary work - “must”. It seems to me that missionary work is not needed more, but catechesis. …

- How do you feel about public speaking?
- In principle, I think this is a useful phenomenon, a normal phenomenon. Only, of course, as a hint. For one, two, three lectures, what can you say? Take the IV century, Cyril of Jerusalem. He led the announcement for several years! And only after that the person was allowed to be baptized. But today - two or three conversations. But what is required is not just a conversation, what is required? An exam, sort of. What have you learned? Why baptize? What is baptism? Why is it needed? For what purpose? To join a party called a church? That's what you need! The main task - baptism can be accepted only when I am convinced of the faith that Christianity is the truth, that Orthodoxy is really the true path in life. Then yes! And the third condition is if I really want to change my life. And if you get baptized just like that, for the sake of the form, without changing your life, then it’s better not to approach this.

- Just like that with the average Russian? They will be offended and say: "Well, that's how it is ...".
- Yes, because it is important to keep the form, the rite. What characterizes paganism? The execution of certain external forms of action. It does not touch the human soul, it does not touch it. The main thing for me is to make everything look right. And Orthodoxy, in contrast, says: “The form is not important at all. What hermits, what did they have, some kind of temples, icons?

Habit and ritual

It turns out that in many churches they say: “The main thing is that you confessed before taking communion?” - “I confessed” - “Did you fast for three days? Did you read the canon? - everyone, you can take communion.
- You understand what's the matter, and what else can you ask a person? At least they say it. And the main thing, of course, is not this. But what do you want to lead a different life? When is confession valid? When a person still wants to lead a different life, he promises: I repent, but I repent like this, I am like this, and I want to lead, at least I dream of at least leading a different life, and not just give an account of the sins done.

- Alexei Ilyich, how do you feel about the fact that confession is obligatory before each communion with us?
- What should I do? This, I will tell you, is a very complex problem, Christianity is easily transformed into paganism, that is, the external Orthodox form is preserved, and the content is weathered, very easily weathered. The man goes to work. And present there. After all, what do they say: prayer without attention is an empty occupation, moreover, even insulting to God. Because you will not dare to approach even the boss without attention and talk to him. And here you are doing this before God! Seraphim (Romantsov), an elder of the Glinsk Hermitage, has now been canonized. He once told him to one: “I still have unceasing prayer,” he replied: “You don’t have any prayer, you just got used to the words of prayer, as others get used to swearing.”

- How to pray then, if it is so bad, and so bad? One mechanical repetition, scattering...
- Prayer should be with attention. I understand that we cannot, we are scattered. Distracted, reading a prayer, again you catch yourself, again you force yourself. You have to train yourself to pay attention.

- What is the main difficulty today for a person on the way to the temple, to faith, to God? What do you think?
- It is difficult now for a person to get out of the atmosphere of life in which we are immersed. The most difficult thing is the fuss, which takes all the time, clogs our heads. We do not have time to think anything: even about our soul and about God. This fuss, this distraction from the vital question: “Why do I live?” A person does not have time to somehow comprehend himself. This is entertainment, this is entertainment, which is now everywhere, this is the media that plunges us into a completely different, literally anti-Christian world. All this greatly hinders a person from coming to God. We don't read anything, we don't even read the New Testament. Lack of interest, some kind of apathy, some kind of lukewarmness, about which the Apocalypse says: "Because you are neither cold nor hot, I will vomit you out of My mouth." Deadly indifference: "It doesn't matter, I don't give a damn about all these religions, about everything, I live as I live" - ​​this is the main trouble, it seems to me.

All released from hell!

It is clear that we are all sinners, that we are all sick, that we are saved only by the grace of God. And we have no merits, and if not Christ, then everyone will go to hell. But if Christ says: "No, dear, go to hell," - somehow there is no desire to do something at all, to hell - so to hell, there are no forces already ...
- This is a bias, which, unfortunately, has entered our educational and theological literature. I am surprised to see this. Since I often have to speak at universities, at public venues, in houses of culture, and the question is often asked about this - about eternal torment - I did a little and literally made a discovery: I found a number of holy fathers who say that torment, of course, will torment us with our passions, but not endlessly.

In particular, here is the Word of John Chrysostom, just listen: “Hell! Where is your victory? Death! Where is your pity? Christ is risen and hell is overthrown." Hell is destroyed! “Hell devastated” - the saints write, and what saints, if you only think! I will name the first - this is Athanasius the Great, who was always called the pillar of Orthodoxy, writes: "All were released from hell." Everything! The Apostle Peter, and not anyone else, writes that Christ brought out of hell those who "opposed in the days of Noah, dead in spirit." What does the apostle Paul write? "Christ is the Savior of all people, and especially (that is, especially) of the faithful." And on Holy Saturday it sounds: "Hell reigns, but does not last forever over the human race." There should be no despair, no indifference! It is clear that the torment will not be endless. The task is different: I would not want to suffer!

But doesn’t it turn out that then we are generally just egoistically approaching this issue? I want to avoid suffering, so I'll be good here.
- What same this egoism?! It's cold outside, and I dress warmly. Ah, what selfishness! I wanted to eat - I need to eat. Wow, well, selfish, eats! This is nonsense! What kind of selfishness is this? I'm drowning, I want to get ashore. If this is selfishness, it turns out, then this is wonderful logic. I don't know where she came from. Probably from hell.

Naturally, a person wants to be free from suffering. Go home, if only some robbers did not get caught. I would like to? I would like to. “Go this way. Just go ahead and skip." That's all.

- Why, then, do we have such a minority on this topic both in sermons and everywhere?
- What should I do? You see, and amazing facts, I wrote about these fathers, I cite the fathers. In response: "Osipov teaches blasphemy." Excuse me, am I taller than Athanasius the Great? Which Osipov? Athanasius the Great teaches. Am I taller than the brother of Basil the Great, Gregory of Nyssa? This is what he teaches. Am I higher than Ephraim the Syrian, Isaac the Syrian? This is what they teach, and then Osipov. Do you understand how? This, it seems to me, is slyness - they are afraid to speak against the saints. They say: "Osipov teaches that torment will not last forever." I say, "Oh, what a pity, really..."

- Someone wanted to suffer?
- Yes. They probably forgot that not they, sinners, will suffer, but you and I, sinners, will suffer. And they suffer that, it turns out, we will not suffer forever. Oh, poor people, how I sympathize with you.

About the last times

In 20 years, has something changed in the general mood, in church society, in the society around the Church?
- Yes, it has changed. This change happened due to, it seems to me, one main factor - the corrupting influence of Europe. There are no longer ideological boundaries, and they came to us, rushed, ideas, a spirit, a way of life, a way of behavior, a way of thinking are introduced to us with great force, which has long been imbued with only one concern: “How to get settled here?”. That is, to be born only to die. And this is a terrible thing - this mortification. And it is now pressing very hard on the consciousness of our people. This is one side.

The second, as I said, is indifference, when they reduce all religions to the fact that they are one and the same. As a result, all doctrinal truths, which are extremely important, are leveled and disappear. As a result, Christianity loses its significance. It's very dangerous, I'll tell you.

And how do you feel about various activists who destroy, set fire to, for example, smashed the Nabokov Museum? That is, to those who believe that it is necessary to carry Orthodoxy and enlightenment by force, to resist evil precisely physically?
- You know, I am very afraid of such methods and such methods. It seems to me that something is not right here. If it were really correct and possible, I think that Christ or the apostles would at least say something. And keep in mind, they still lived in the era of the slave system. And suddenly we do not find anywhere the slightest hints and instructions to overthrow this system. And there is no condemnation. And why? What's the matter? What, Christianity, means "for"? No. Christianity points to a completely different way of struggle. If the world is fighting with fists and weapons, then Christianity says: "It won't do anything, now you will fight with your fists, in an hour you will be with your fists."

Christianity says: "It is necessary to change a person." Which way? A sermon about what a right human life is. This correct human life is Christianity. And only the person who learns this for himself will change the nature of his behavior in this external world. And the path of violence, from a Christian point of view, is a false path. On the other hand, Christianity is “against” Tolstoy’s doctrine of non-resistance to evil, when the question concerns, for example, military operations, when the opponents do not know each other and fight against the machine of evil that is coming against my people, and I am appointed by the providence of God to defend them. And here, if I do not kill, if I do not undermine these tanks, if I do not shoot down these planes, I will be a traitor and commit a grave, grave, grave sin. Here, it turns out, what a difference.

Interviewed by Anna Galperina

Question: How to love your enemies?

Alexey Ilyich Osipov, Professor of the Moscow Theological Academy, answers:

- When we pronounce the word "love", we must understand that this word is very ambiguous. I'm not talking about varieties of love. In Greek, for example, there are four types of love: phileo - friendly love, storge - love of parents and children for each other, agape - sublime love (not without reason the evening meetings of ancient Christians are called agapes). This love is sacrificial, with humility, with hope in God. And eros is erotic love. There are only four kinds of love. In fact, there are many more of them.

In this case, we are talking about love for enemies, which also has several levels. When we are told about such love, we must definitely take into account: our love for enemies consists in not taking revenge for the evil that they have done to us. As far as it is in our power not to wish them harm. To act towards them is fair. I draw your attention to this "fairness" because we are constantly doing unfair things. Those who we like or whom we love - we forgive such things for which we must be severely punished, and, on the contrary, whom we do not love - we find fault with such trifles that sometimes it is a shame to listen. We are only looking for something that could harm a person. At our level, love for enemies is being fair in relation to the life situation in which we find ourselves. Not to wish evil, not to do evil - this is already the very first stage of love for enemies. And we must also take into account the fact that justice is the lowest level of love! When we touch on the love that happens to a person who has reached the state of love, then here we meet vivid examples. As, for example, St. Isaac the Syrian wrote: “If I were burned ten times a day for the love of people, I would not be satisfied with this.” And this is the state of the heart! When the heart burns with love.

But I repeat once again: at our level, the heart is out of the question. Just be fair! Don't take revenge on him! This will already be the beginning of love for the enemy. At our level, hardly anyone is capable of more ... But if possible, do him a favor. Do good to this person. As we read in Scripture: "If your enemy is hungry, eat him." Ukhlebi - that is, give him bread. Give him some gifts. Do something good for him, because very often in history it happened that in response to this act of your tension, the enemy became your best friend. You swallowed him - and a transformation took place with the person. It turns out that you yourself are ready to kiss him! Love conquers, not revenge, not evil! And we must use this very weapon, not the satanic one.