“A Brief Essay on Asceticism” as a contribution by St. Feofan the Recluse to the Russian School of Theology

Annotation. In the article, against the background of a brief historical excursion describing the state of the Russian school of theology in the first half of the 19th century, as well as taking into account the tracing of the main creative and biographical milestones in the life of St. Theophan the Recluse, his contribution to Russian and universal Orthodox theology is clarified, consisting in the original systematization of patristic asceticism according to the anthropological scheme. First of all, we should define our concepts and explain what we mean by the “Russian school of theology.” This concept includes, in our opinion, two interrelated phenomena - scientific theological thought and theological education. Moreover, one condition determines the other: the development of the theological school - science enriches the theological school - education, just as the development of theological schools as educational institutions of the Church contributes to the fundamental formulation and development of theology as a science. Therefore, when we say “school,” we will mean precisely this unity of theological education and science. In order to determine the contribution of St. Feofan into the Russian school of theology - both educational and scientific, to understand its continuity and innovation, it is necessary to preface the study with a brief historical excursion. By the beginning of the 19th century. The Russian theological school already had a certain tradition, but was not sufficiently developed. Only a few especially gifted individuals made contributions to spiritual enlightenment and theological science, but it was not yet possible to talk about the systematic development of theological science. The problem of Russian theological education was its historical dependence on Western school traditions. This dependence was both external, since the presentation of theology was practiced in Latin, and internal, since at the level of content, theology in Russia remained captive to the old Latin systems and forms. For the development of Russian theological science, it was first necessary to switch from Latin to Russian. As the leading modern historian of Russian theological education N. Yu. Sukhova notes, “the Latin language, preserved in Russian academies and seminaries as the language of instruction, gave students access to Western theology and other sciences, but created two problems: the gap between spiritual scholarship and parish service and the absence of a Russian theological conceptual apparatus and Russian theological literature” [4, p. 52]. Latin did not correlate with living church life and living scientific thought. And it was not easy to oust her, despite the demands of life. So, even though “in 1765 The first Russian theological system of Archimandrite Plato (Levshin) had already appeared, but it did not become the main textbook, but was only an addition to the Latin educational systems (even in the seminary of Archimandrite Plato himself). When in 1800 the idea was expressed that the Latin language was only “a means to enlightenment, and does not constitute it in itself” and the question of teaching in theological schools in Russian was raised, Metropolitan Platon (Levshin) rebelled against this: “Our clergy are already considered by foreigners to be almost unlearned, because they cannot speak either French or German. But it also maintains our honor that we speak Latin and correspond. If we learn Latin the same way as Greek, then we will lose the last honor, since we will neither speak nor correspond in any language; I ask you to leave this. In our language, there are few classical books (i.e. textbooks for classes - hierodiac. P.). Knowledge of the Latin language greatly contributes to Russian eloquence...” [4, p. 50, n. 41]. Thus, by the beginning of the 19th century. in scientific theology, Latin remained unshakable. And even “in 1819, despite official permission, the rector of St. Petersburg DA Archimandrite Grigory (Postnikov) was criticized by the Synod for giving lectures on theology in Russian, and only the high assessment of these lectures by Saint Philaret (Drozdov) saved the situation... In 1825, Metropolitans Evgeny (Bolkhovitinov) and Seraphim (Glagolevsky) achieved the return Latin in the teaching of theology..." [5, p. 29, n. 45]. Nevertheless, the increasingly frequently expressed objections indicated that the process of the transition of theology to the Russian language had been launched and was irreversible, and the new Latin captivity of Russian theology in 1825 was short-lived and lax, so that “already in the early 1830s. in all academies theology was read mainly in Russian. But the Russian scientific language was built on a Western basis, so the borrowing and adaptation of terms have long been problems of Russian theological science” [4, p. 81]. Not only in its external linguistic expression, but also in the very content of Russian theological systems, Western formalism was reflected - the rationality of constructions, dialecticism and rhetorical schematism. Thus, “in 1814, work with notes on theological sciences, undertaken by the rector of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences, Archimandrite Philaret (Drozdov), gave an idea of ​​​​the state of theological sciences in the academies. The notes bizarrely combined old formal schemes with elements of scientific construction and live analysis; there was no unified system and terminology, even within one theological course” [4, p. 71]. Moreover, even by the beginning of the 1840s. in his spiritual and educational project, the rector of the KDA, St. Innocent (Borisov) continues to complain about the lack of independence of Russian theology: “Independence in the teaching of theological sciences and liberation from the influence of foreign theological scholarship is one of the perfections most desired by the Theological Academies. But this perfection is still far from being achieved. Whether we take printed books, or handwritten lectures, or oral teaching itself, we will see everywhere traces of foreign learning. If the consequence were one lack of originality in Russian works, then this would not be a great loss. But this lack can lead to other, more important shortcomings - incompleteness and even inaccuracy in the presentation of the distinctive points of the confession of the Orthodox Church. Therefore, the liberation of theological sciences from the dominant influence of foreign scholarship requires the benefit and dignity of not only the school, but also the Church” [6, p. 63]. The degree of independence of Russian theological thought was also demonstrated by the issue of teaching aids. Textbooks and manuals published in 1785–1786. The Commission of Public Schools, the Academy of Sciences and the Synodal Printing House were distributed to seminaries in order to achieve a uniform level of education in them. However, in the 1820s. The issue of textbooks has already begun to provoke a confrontation between two points of view: teachers should give lectures based on printed textbooks - “classical books” - or compose their own lecture notes. “Kiev Metropolitan Evgeniy (Bolkhovitinov), a supporter of the first point of view, considered teaching from old classical books convenient for three reasons: 1). lecture notes burden students, 2). compiling lectures takes away time from teachers that could be spent doing science, and 3). The notes of beginning teachers are primitive and one-sided; only in the future, with the intensive development of science, can serious scientific systems emerge. First, you should achieve a decent level of independent science, build a system, determine the exact place and meaning of each question in it, and then teach students using this system. The school should be protected from accidents, conclusions that are not fully thought through and untested by time” [4, p. 94, n. 141]. Nevertheless, in 1837, that is, by the time student Georgy (Govorov) began studying at the KDA, the Commission of Theological Schools officially allowed teachers to give lectures from their notes and in Russian. The attempts of the Statutory Reforms of 1814 and subsequent years to overcome the formulas of the “classical” books and to intensify theological thought had results, but they manifested themselves slowly. New systems and methods were being mastered, but so far also Western, mainly German, but at the same time an independent theological conceptual apparatus was being developed [4, p. 80]. The novelty was already evident in the fact that theological systems gradually overcame scholastic abstraction; lecturers of dogmatic theology, for example, St. Innokenty (Borisov), archimandrite. Dimitry (Muretov), ​​archimandrite. Sylvester (Malevansky), strived for the historical study of dogmas in church tradition, a critical direction appeared in lectures on hermeneutics and accusatory theology by A. I. Kapustin (in the monasticism of Antonin) [4, p. 81]. So, by the time of the appointment of Hieromonk Theophan as a bachelor in the department of moral and pastoral theology at St. Petersburg on October 16, 1844, Russian theological science began to lay claim to a certain independence, and in its best achievements, to originality. It was this path that Saint Theophan himself continued and strengthened. In 1846–47 Hieromonk Feofan, a young bachelor in the department of moral theology in St. Petersburg, developed original and independent lectures. They made a deep impression on the students of the course, so that “... one of his students, Konstantin Dobronravin, later Bishop Hermogenes, noted that “Theophanes, as a professor of moral theology, in his time belonged to outstanding figures. We can say that he revived this science, which until that time was considered secondary in the circle of theological sciences, showing that moral teaching is the same doctrine, only implemented in life and activity, and that Christians should constantly strive for this as the main goal of their lives" [cit. from: 1, p. 23]. The saint also wrote a small treatise of ascetic content, “What does one who has repented and entered on the good path of salvation” (published in 1869) also date back to this time in the 40s. entitled “The Order of Godly Life” in separate issues of the magazine “Home Conversation”) [8], which reflected many of the ideas of his lecture course, which, as we can conclude on this basis, had an ascetic orientation. Much later, St. The recluse also testified that his academic lectures were the basis for his central and most significant work, “The Path to Salvation (A Brief Essay on Asceticism)” (1868–1869) [9]. About the “Brief Essay on Asceticism” by St. Feofan, in a letter to M.R. Karyakin dated June 16, 1888, wrote this: “Have you read “The Path to Salvation”? - Good. And read it again sometime. Here everything that I have written is being written and will be written. These are my lessons from the Academy for students of St. Petersburg. The abstract has been revised from Fr. Archimandrite Ignatius - after the former bishop Brianchaninov, and approved by him. This was in 46–47” (Letter 188) [7, p. 222]. Moreover, in the “Path to Salvation” itself, St. Theophan also repeatedly refers to the aforementioned treatise “What does one who has repented and entered on the path of salvation need” [10, p. 345, 349]. All this testifies to the genetic and meaningful connection between his early original theological educational developments and the later central theological creation. Despite his independence in the formulation and development of asceticism, in an analytical note on theological schools compiled by Bishop Feofan of Tambov in 1859, he does not propose to introduce a separate subject of asceticism into the theological curriculum. Although, for example, it supports the specialization and strengthening of the history of the Church [3, p. 57]. Apparently, even ten years later, the learned theologian did not see asceticism as a separate and full-fledged independent science and academic discipline. Therefore, in the title of the work “The Path to Salvation (A Brief Essay on Asceticism)” by St. Feofan also most likely did not mean an independent theological science, which even by 1917 had not formed into a separate branch [2], but used this term to concretize the content of his metaphorical expression “the path to salvation.” So, what is the originality of “The Path to Salvation”, or “A Brief Essay on Asceticism”? It lies in the fact that the ascetic rules of Christian life receive an innovative systematization according to an anthropological scheme in The Path to Salvation. According to St. Feofan, in order to “more successfully” do this, it is necessary first to show “the course of all our actions and, consequently, all activities. Every free action, originating in consciousness and in freedom, therefore, in the spirit, falls into the soul and by its forces - reason, will and feeling - is prepared for execution and then carried out by the forces of the body in a certain time, place and other external circumstances" [10, p. 396]. From this began the ascetic system of St. Feofana receives the following anthropological ordering and dynamics. According to the saint, “having the goal of cleansing and correcting a person, Divine grace first of all heals the source of all his activity, namely: converts consciousness and freedom (that is, the elements of the spirit. - Hierodiac. P. ) to God, so that from here they can then carry out healing to the best of their ability, through their own activity, assigned to them or aroused in them from the source of the already healed and sanctified” [10, p. 397]. Then the spirit, with the help of God’s grace, through exercises of self-resistance and self-coercion, heals the soul and body from alien sinful passions. And here we meet the anthropological systematization of the patristic asceticism of St. Theophan: “So, following the formation and maintenance of zeal with the entire internal structure, we must determine the exercises indicated in the Word of God and the writings of the holy fathers, first for the forces of the soul, as the closest recipients of everything conceived in the sanctuary of the spirit, then for the forces and functions of the body, as recipients of what is maturing in the soul; finally, for external behavior, as the general drain of all internal activity or its field and, at the same time, formation” [10, p. 397–398]. Next St. Theophan selects ascetic exercises from the experience of Christian ascetics and presents them in connection with the corresponding parts and forces of human nature, the transformation of which they are aimed at. Thus, the anthropological model, or the idea of ​​the structure and activity of a human being, appears for St. The recluse is a “measuring thread for wires and drawing” [10, p. 354] ascetic rules of Christian life and is the guiding principle in the presentation of his own mature ascetic system. Thus, we can say that the contribution of St. Theophan the Recluse in the formation of the Russian school of theology - both as an educational course and as a science - consists of systematizing patristic asceticism and developing its anthropological foundations and terminological apparatus. And in terms of its significance, this contribution is not only to Russian theology, but the continuation and development of the patristic experience and theology itself, and thereby a contribution to universal Orthodoxy. 1. Georgy (Tertyshnikov), archimandrite. Saint Theophan the Recluse and his teaching on salvation. M.: Rule of Faith, 1999. 570 p. 2. Glubokovsky N. N. Russian theological science in its historical development and the latest state. M.: Publishing house of the Holy Vladimir Brotherhood, 2002. 189 p. 3. A note on theological schools prepared by Bishop Theophan // Chronicle of the life and works of St. Theophan, the Recluse of Vyshensky. 1815–1894: in 6 vols. T. 2:1859–1863. M.: Publishing House MP ROC, 2019. 680 p. pp. 56–70. P. 57. 4. Sukhova N. Yu. Higher theological school: problems and reforms (second half of the 19th century). M.: PSTGU Publishing House, 2006. 658 p. 5. Sukhova N. Yu. Spiritual educational project of St. Innocent (Borisov) of the 1830s. // Bulletin of PSTGU II: History. History of the Russian Orthodox Church. 2011. Issue. 2 (39). pp. 18–34. 6. Sukhova N. Yu. Notes of Saints Innocent (Borisov) and Philaret (Drozdov) on theological schools // Filaret’s almanac. 2010. No. 6. pp. 43–91. URL: https://cuberleninka. ru / article / n / zapiski-svuatiteleu-innokentiua-borisova-i-filareta-drozdova-o-duhovnuh-shkolah (date of access: 01/17/2021). 7. Feofan / Govorov / bishop. Collection of letters. Vol. 1. M.: Typo-lithographic. I. Efimova, 1898. (Rep. reprint: M.: Rule of Faith, 2000). 8. Theophan the Recluse, St. The order of a godly life // Home conversation. 1869. Issue. 2. pp. 33–37; Vol. 3. pp. 61–66; Vol. 4. pp. 85–89; Vol. 5. pp. 121–124; Vol. 6. pp. 149–153; Vol. 7. pp. 173–177; Vol. 8. pp. 205–209; Vol. 9. pp. 233–240; Vol. 10. pp. 261–266; Vol. 11. pp. 281–283; Vol. 12. pp. 297–299; Vol. 13. pp. 321–322; Vol. 14. pp. 345–346; Vol. 15. pp. 381–383; Vol. 16. pp. 425–428. The same in the book “What does one who has repented and entered on the good path of salvation need.” Ed. 1st. M., 1882. 115 pp.; Ed. 2nd, M. 1889. 107 pp.; Ed. 3rd. M., 1895; Ed. 4th. M., 1899. 106 pp.; Ed. 5th. M., 1912. 106 pp.; M., 2008. pp. 102–194; M., 2011. T. 1. P. 195–268. URL: http://theophanica.ru/books/?book=tom1]. 9 . Theophan the Recluse, St. The Path to Salvation: (A Brief Essay on Asceticism). Compiled from lectures given to students of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy on Moral Theology: Conclusion. approx. to Letters on Christian Life: (In 3 parts). SPb: Type. A. Tranchel, 1868–1869. Vol. 1: After a general introduction, about the beginning of Christian life through St. baptism, with instructions on how to preserve this grace during the period of education, with the application of the thoughts of St. our father John Chrysostom about education. 1868. 112 p. Vol. 2: About the beginning of the Christian life through repentance, or about repentance and the sinner’s conversion to God. SPb.: Type. spirits magazine “The Wanderer”, 1869. 121 p. Vol. 3: About how the Christian life is accomplished, matures and strengthens in us, or the same, about the order of a God-pleasing life. 1869. 164 p. 2nd edition. Vol. 1. St. Petersburg: Type. Spirits. Journal "Wanderer" 1869. 112 p. 3rd edition. [Rus. on Athos Panteleimon Monastery]. SPb.: Type. Homes for the care of poor children, 1875. 303 p. 4th edition. 1879. 331 p. 5th edition. 1884. 6th edition. Odessa: Tipo-lit. E. I. Fesenko. 392 pp. 7th edition. M.: Tipo-lit. I. Efimova, 1894. 344 p. 8th edition. 1899. 346 p. 9th edition. 1908. 10th edition. M., 1915. M.: Rule of Faith, 2008. 608 p. M., 2013. T. 11. 397 p. [Email: resource: http://theophanica.ru/books/?book=tom11]. 10. Theophan the Recluse, St. The Path to Salvation (A Brief Essay on Asceticism). Outline of Christian moral teaching. M.: Rule of Faith, 2008. 608 p.