On the churchliness of theological school and theological science

With understandable embarrassment and awe in my heart, I ascended to this pulpit to give my first lecture. In these most unforgettable moments for me, my activities at the academic department begin. And something is waiting for me, something will be with me here until I leave this pulpit for the last time?.. When the helmsman on a ship is replaced and the new helmsman takes his place and takes the helm, he first of all hurries to find out the direction in which he is going and in which the ship entrusted to him should go. He vigilantly peers into the darkening distance, to where the lights of the saving beacons flicker in the darkness, and by the light of these motionless lights, with a firm and confident hand, he directs the course of his ship over the sea waves. I feel in a somewhat similar position at these moments. I am destined here, at this pulpit, to replace an experienced and reliable helmsman; I am destined to at least partially replace the irreplaceable. I am a young and inexperienced pilot, illiterate in science. That is why a whole series of questions stand before me now in all their severity: why did I come here? where should I go? and what should I do? Yes, I allow myself to think that the circumstances of the time, well known to all of you, and the requests that have been so abundantly and so persistently presented to us and to our school lately from different sides - all this is not only before me, but also before all of you at the beginning of each school year, perhaps with no less urgency, poses a number of similar questions: why did we come here? what should we do? what goals should we strive for? Hoping that there is something common in our mood now, I take the liberty, to the best of my understanding, to answer these questions in my first introductory lecture, introductory not to the course of this academic year, but introductory to my entire academic life and activity. We also need to see if there is a beacon shining for us somewhere. After all, if the poet says at all that Lamp of true light, Than in the books of the New Testament 1, then, I think, for me, a teacher of the New Testament, and for all of you who have gathered for a lecture on the Holy Scriptures of the New Testament, it is most appropriate for us to look for our guiding light precisely in the books of the New Testament. Starting my activity as a teacher of the New Testament, I naturally first of all ask myself the question: how exactly does the New Testament teach about any activity of a Christian person? Asking this question, I remember first of all, of course, the Lord’s parable about the talents. Each of us has been given a talent by the Lord. We should not bury our talent in the ground, as the wicked and lazy servant did. But we cannot think that talent was given to us for our personal benefit, for our complete property. No, our Lord will come to us and demand an account. What are we? Nothing more than guardians of someone else's property. We are only servants of our Master. His wealth must be multiplied. The talent is not ours, and we have no praise for it. If someone received five talents and acquired another five talents with them, he can think and say one thing: I am an unbreakable slave; did only what he had to do. Already on the basis of this parable of the Lord, one can judge how the New Testament teaches about all activity: all activity should be directed towards increasing the Lord’s spiritual possessions. In essence, the same thing, but the holy Apostle Paul speaks more clearly and in more detail. What the Gospel calls talent, the Apostle Paul calls spiritual gifting. The gifts are different, but they have one common source - the Holy Spirit. To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the benefit: to one is given the word of wisdom by the Spirit; to another a word of knowledge by the same Spirit; to another faith by the same Spirit; to others gifts of healings by the same Spirit; to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another discerning of spirits, to another divers tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. Yet all this, as the Apostle especially emphasizes, is produced by one and the same Spirit, dividing it to each individual individually, as He pleases (1 Cor. 12:4-11). Thus, all the abilities of a Christian person are nothing more than spiritual gifts. The very fact that each person is given a special gift and all gifts have one common source, this already indicates some special purpose for the existence of all these spiritual gifts. It was not for the sake of the person himself and not for him personally that the gift was given to him by the Spirit. Indeed, the Apostle, as soon as he spoke about the division of spiritual gifts, now begins to talk about the body that Christians make up. All Christians are members of one body; although there are many of them, they form one body. None of the members of the body constitutes any independent and self-closed being. No member can say that it does not belong to the body. All members are inextricably linked to each other, so that one cannot say to another: I don’t need you (1 Cor. 12:12-27). For the sake of the whole body and each individual member of it, it is endowed with spiritual gifts. Each individual member is only alive and acts in accordance with its purpose when it is inextricably linked with the entire organism of the body. The Apostle Paul immediately begins to talk about the ministry of individual members to the whole body. God appointed some in the Church as apostles, prophets, teachers, and to others he gave gifts of healing, help, administration, shepherding, teaching (1 Cor. 12:28; Eph. 4:11). All this is given for the work of service, for the perfection of Christians (proV ton catartismon twn agiwt), for the building up of the body of Christ, until we all come to a perfect man, to the measure of the full stature of Christ. The Body of Christ is the Church and grows in its spiritual perfection through the action of each member to its own measure with every sense of alms, dia pashV ajhV thV epicorhgiaV, that is, a varied perception of the alms of the gifts of the Spirit (Eph. 4, 12-13, 16). One can also recall the words of the Apostle Peter: serve one another with the gift (carisma) which you have received, as good stewards (oiconomoi) of the manifold grace of God (1 Pet. 4:10). If we summarize all the passages I have cited, then the New Testament view of the meaning and essence of all human activity could be formulated as follows: all activity basically has the gift of the Spirit, and in its manifestation and purpose it should be church service. For the sake of communion with the church body, gifts are given to a person, and only then can he himself say about himself and others think about him that he uses them in accordance with their purpose, when he turns them to the service of the Church. Every gift imposes a duty on a person; it must certainly manifest itself in church service. This is how the New Testament teaches about the use of gifts, that is, about activity. The Holy Fathers and teachers of the Church, first of all, find that this teaching “brings down the great exaltation of arrogance” 2. “In order to humble those who exalt themselves,” the Apostle called the abilities gifts. “Not for the sake of one’s own dignity,” says St. John Chrysostom, “one received more, and the other less, but for others” 4. “Although we have the grace of various gifts, they are all given for the service of the Church,” says St. Ephraim the Syrian 5. And blessed Theophylact sees in the New Testament's view of the meaning and essence of human activity something comforting for those who have received less talent. Having heard the name of the gift and received less, he could grieve that he was deprived of the gift. But hearing about service, it’s not like that; for it indicates labor and sweat. Why grieve when the Lord commanded others to work more, but spared him 6 . In the New Testament we can see how the holy apostles apply this view of the essence of activity to themselves. They call themselves nothing else but servants. Everyone, says the holy Apostle Paul, should consider us as servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God (1 Cor. 4:1). Who is Pavel? Who is Apollos? They are only servants, and, moreover, because God gave them to each. Paul planted, Apollos watered, but God increased; Therefore, the one who plants and the one who waters is nothing, but God who increases everything (1 Cor. 3:5-7). I pointed out how the New Testament looks at all activity: all activity is church service and should be directed towards the benefit of the church. Couldn’t this New Testament thought also illuminate for us the path that we have to follow? I think it can. First of all, it is impossible not to notice that the presented view of the meaning and essence of human activity stands in the sharpest contrast with the prevailing worldly views on the same subject. After all, usually any talent is considered some kind of personal advantage and serves as a source of pride. This personal talent is used to create a personal career, personal well-being, and all activity is so often aimed only at pleasing the demon of ambition, which generally possesses itself with great eagerness and readiness in every person. The ordinary worldly view of activity not only does not “overthrow the great exaltation of arrogance”; on the contrary, he nourishes and strengthens this destructive exaltation in every possible way. Anyone who wants to be guided by the New Testament view of their activities must decisively reject prejudices that are alien to Christianity, according to which talent is a personal advantage and serves as a subject of honor and “noble” pride for its owner. First of all, you must humble your sinful exaltation, recognize yourself as a slave, a helper, a builder, a sicotom of the Lord’s grace. But confusion arises. After all, it is absolutely clear to everyone and does not require any special explanation that the life of a modern person has become very, very complicated. The paths of human life are varied and varied: activities are also very versatile. Is it really possible to desire and demand that, with all the diversity of their life paths, with all the diversity of their activities, all people - Christians, of course - invariably adhere to the New Testament view of their lives and activities, recognizing themselves first of all as members of the living body of the Church, considering their activities to be church service and directing them precisely towards the building of the body of Christ, to the benefit of the church? To demand all this, to even think about it – isn’t this a naive and unrealizable dream? Isn’t the New Testament view of the meaning of human activity something unacceptable, completely inapplicable to life?.. But now I consider it unnecessary to decide whether this view is applicable to all types of human activity or not, whether it can be a universal guiding principle or cannot. I think only one thing. For us, gathered here within the walls of the highest theological school, there is no such question and it cannot and should not arise. We can and should illuminate our stay here with the light of the New Testament. The lamp of true New Testament light can and should be for us that guiding fire along which we need to direct our academic life and activities. Our school is a church school; it was arranged by the Church to satisfy its urgent needs and requirements. After all, “The Orthodox Theological Academy is a higher church school, which, through Christian education and the highest Orthodox theological science, prepares Christian-enlightened figures for serving the Holy Orthodox Church, primarily in the field of church-pastoral, and then in other fields of church activity, preferably in the priesthood.” This is what the charter of our school says (§1). That is why anyone else, and we, of course, must first of all recognize ourselves as members of the Church, live its life, be comforted by its joys, grieve and suffer from its misfortunes. Who else, and we not only can, but also must look at all our activities exclusively as church service. Some of us are called to develop the science necessary for the Church, others receive ready-made scientific knowledge that they will need in various fields of church service - pastoral, missionary, spiritual and educational (§2). But it is clear that both of them should be animated by one common idea, one common idea should give direction to their activities - this is the idea of ​​church service, the idea of ​​the Church, of which we must first of all recognize ourselves as members. It is not for our sake that we have been given spiritual strength and various abilities, but for the sake of the Church, and we should not please ourselves with our activities, but the Church. In the light of the New Testament, we must recognize all our activities and place them on our shoulders in no other way than church obedience. I also take upon myself church obedience, ascending to this pulpit. After all, only the Church gives meaning and value to earthly existence; Only service to the Church, in my belief and conviction, gives meaning and value to our earthly activities... If you do not serve the Church, there is no point in any activity and then there is no need to live in God’s world. The idea of ​​the Church can also have a special guiding significance in scientific activity. We not only belong to the Church, but we also believe in the Church, confessing this faith in the ninth article of the Creed. The Church is higher than the individual with all his powers and abilities, because the Catholic Church has the superior powers of the Holy Spirit. Therefore, the Church for our personality is an indisputable and perfect authority; she is the pillar and ground of truth. Science strives for knowledge of truth. In science, every individual knows the truth. Obviously, the Church, as a treasury of truth, can and should be a guiding authority for everyone who seeks the truth. It is not the Church that should renounce its eternal truths in the name of scientific knowledge of each individual person, but on the contrary, this person should renounce his scientific acquisitions if they contradict the Church. It cannot be otherwise, if only because the leaves change on the spreading and majestic tree of knowledge, perhaps even more often than on the trees of our academic garden. They grow quickly, turn green for a while, but soon turn yellow, wither, dry out, fall and disappear. And what would happen if the Church, in its teaching, adapted itself to the scientific knowledge of each individual person or each individual historical era! How many times would she have to deny herself? But wouldn’t this be the self-destruction of the Church? Believing in the Church, we already have the truth directly, but reason seeks knowledge of the mediated. This legal and natural quest must receive its full satisfaction when a person comes to the same thing in which he believed through rational means. In science we can seek confirmation of our faith and scientific justification of the Church. This last task of science is often not recognized and even rejected. Often a scientist comes to orthodox conclusions that justify the faith of the Church. But tell him that he came to these conclusions because this is how the Church teaches, he will consider himself offended and will claim that he does not care at all about Church teaching, that his conclusions were prompted to him by completely objective scientific data and coincided with the teaching of the Church only by chance and unintentionally. This happens, of course, but if the desire to justify church truth is considered reprehensible, then where is the faith in the Church? If I believe that the Church possesses the truth, is there anything uncommendable in the fact that in scientific work I consciously strived for the truth? After all, the helmsman of a ship does not consider it his crime that he is guided in the direction of his ship by the light of motionless beacons? And if we consider ourselves members of the Church, if we believe in the Church, then, of course, in our scientific work we will look closely at the unflickering light of immovable Christian dogmas. There is nothing reprehensible in this for us; as members of the Church, we cannot do otherwise. Hence the conclusion: our activity within the walls of the Academy is not only church obedience, but it must also take place in free obedience to the Church. After hearing this, did anyone think: what is this? Having ascended to the academic department, he humiliates science, subordinating it to the Church and portraying it as some kind of servant of the Church! Yes, science, especially theology, in my opinion, should be ancilla Ecclesiae, but such a position is not at all humiliating for science; Serving the Church is not humiliating for anyone. Ancilla Ecclesiae is the real place of science, which it can only occupy for a person who consciously professes his sincere faith in the Church. It is difficult and even impossible to serve two masters, but it is hardly easier not to serve anyone. Two masters demand service and exclusive worship. One Master is Christ, the other is Antichrist. The choice is possible only from these two kings hostile to each other, and we certainly bow to one. Christ's work on earth is the Church, against which the forces of hell are waging their fierce but unsuccessful war. There are the forces of hell and there is the army of Christ. Both of the warring sides have their own warriors, armed with different armor, including science. Science itself does not at all determine which side a person should take; this is determined by faith, and after faith comes science. If a person believes in Christ, science is for him and in his hands also serves Christ. If a person believes in the Antichrist, he also places the Antichrist’s yoke on science. The fate of at least the New Testament is proof that science follows faith. After all, if it were the other way around, if it was all about science and faith followed science, then it would be high time for learned people to agree on something regarding the New Testament. But what do we see? For hundreds of years, learned spears have been breaking around the New Testament, stacks of books have been written for each verse, the shelves of book depositories bend under the weight of learned works, but even today the most orthodox books are still appearing simultaneously with masterly negative ones, and the New Testament at the same time for some is simply a literary monument of the first or second century AD with a rather dark past, and for others it is the living and active word of God, it is Sacred Scripture. Anyone who has followed the history of science and reflected on it has, of course, noticed with considerable surprise that often for the most serious scientists a hypothesis hanging, if not in thin air, then on a thin thread of an insignificant fact, is more valuable than the opposite statement, based on a whole series of facts that are reliable for another. What makes us reject facts and prefer hypotheses to them? Faith. I consider one of the most valuable truths that I became convinced of here at the Academy to be that there is no and cannot be a so-called free science. Science is free as long as it is abstract. A scientist is free as long as he makes mathematical calculations that do not concern his soul, his life. But as soon as the question of life and death, salvation and destruction is raised, science immediately submits to Christ or the Antichrist, because the answer to these questions depends not on science, but on faith in Christ or the Antichrist. In abstract sciences, in mathematics for example, many indisputable and generally accepted truths have been established, but about questions of life they argue endlessly, they argue passionately and fiercely, and this is precisely because the dispute is about faith, and such disputes are always the most intense. Both love and friendship are swept away 7. I said about mathematics that there are many unshakably established truths, but one of the philosophers (Leibniz) reasoned very wisely. If, he said, mathematics armed itself against our passions, then we would probably violate the laws of mathematics no less often and severely than we do now in relation to the laws of morality, would challenge its provisions and would most sincerely regard all its axioms and theorems as sophisms. Our theological science, above all others, concerns our life, our salvation and destruction. Theological science is the most vital of all sciences, and not a single science can compare in this regard with theological science. In fact, can a sensible Christian person say that for his life and his salvation it is more necessary to know how the Punic Wars proceeded, what some Carolingians or Capetians did, what kind of digestive organs a cockchafer or moth had, that he needs to know all this more than to be, for example, scientifically confident in the authenticity of the Gospels and Apostolic Epistles? I think that every church person will say: God bless them, how the different beetles feed there, what these different Capetians and Carolingians did - for my life, for my salvation, it is incomparably more important to be convinced that the Holy Gospel is the work of the holy apostles sent into the world by Christ, and not a forgery of the 2nd century. And of course it is. The questions that are subject to our discussion are questions of life and death, salvation and destruction, these are the most vital questions. And therefore there is nothing surprising in the fact that theological science is less free than any other; she serves Christ or the Antichrist with great selflessness. If we adopt this particular view of the relationship between the Church and science, faith and science, then we must once and for all rise above some common prejudices. In our country, very often only negative, anti-church science is called “free”, “impartial”. In vain! It is much more biased than church science, because it is subordinate to the Antichrist, and, of course, the Antichrist cannot be denied the constant desire to distort the truth and reality. We, according to the commandment of the Apostle Paul, take our own and scientific thoughts captive into obedience to Christ (2 Cor. 10:5). The non-church direction of science is also often called “advanced,” “progressive.” This is incomprehensible for a church person. The truth is progressive, and the truth is in the Church. Denial of church truth is a lie, but is a lie really ahead of the truth? Is a lie more progressive than the truth? It’s time to give up these and similar prejudices, especially for us, church people. So, when we say that science must be ancilla Ecclesiae, we thereby affirm only what it is: science is always ancilla, either of Christ and His Holy Church, or of the Antichrist, waging a constant war with the Church he hates. Therefore, the only question is, do we believe in the Church? If we believe, then let us not be ashamed to confess this faith clearly and openly, and let us not be ashamed to bear ecclesiastical obedience in obedience to the Church within the walls of a higher church school! What if we don’t believe? And if we don’t believe, then we have nothing to do here and we need to hurry to get out of here, for, I think, in the Theological Academy, within the walls of the Lavra, St. Sergius, to be at enmity with the Church and to prefer the service of the Antichrist to the obedience of Christ is not only inappropriate, but even dishonest. Carrying church obedience in obedience to the Church is my feasible answer to the questions posed at the beginning of the lecture. I, gentlemen, am too young, but also not so naive to imagine and call myself your teacher. No, turning to you, I can talk about our generation. It seems to me that a great task lies before our generation; Moreover, our generation has a moral duty to recognize themselves as church novices and to consider their entire lives and activities as nothing other than church obedience. The fact is that, as always and everywhere, the church ship has to sail against the tide of modern human life. Build this life After all, isn’t it absolutely obvious that the triumphal chariot of culture and imaginary progress is driving past the Church? The path paved by Christ and supported by the Church is narrow and narrow for this chariot. The world, which has long been separated from the true Church, has now even forgotten about it, not seeing or understanding anything except its surrogates for the Church. In Rus', it is difficult and, perhaps, even impossible to forget about the Church, because elements of churchliness have entered into the people’s life and character; and the Church in our country still declares its existence quite loudly. That is why we can be hostile to the Church, fight against it, but we cannot ignore the Church at all. However, there is no doubt that our attitude towards the Church has changed too. To put it graphically, for many of us, the Church has become not a mother, not a matushka, but a grandmother. But the attitude towards a grandmother is usually completely different from the attitude towards a mother. The son obeys his mother, naturally lives with her the same life, the same thoughts and interests. Well, not so grandma. Her views are often too backward. You don’t have to object to her, don’t argue, so as not to make her angry, but you can live your own way. Likewise, to many of us, the Church already seems like some kind of old woman almost out of her mind, a grumbling grandmother with completely outdated and ridiculous views that, in fact, never had any meaning in life. It’s good that she doesn’t particularly force these views on anyone. Indeed, in fact, we have almost no church discipline and absolutely nothing of the church is required from those who belong to the Church. In our country, it is already considered the most ordinary and harmless phenomenon if a person is called “Orthodox,” but considers it completely impermissible to speak about the Church, its dogmas and its rules of life in anything other than a tone of disdain and ridicule. Devotion to the Church is always ready to be suspected of ignorance and self-interest. But a churchly person, enlightened and disinterested, appears to be nothing more than a pitiful or dangerous dreamer. More and more often now church people have to “hear a deafening cry”: are your inventions in our positive age? Are there many of you left, dreamers? Surrender to the onslaught of new times! The world has become sober, hobbies have passed. Where can you, an outdated tribe, stand? It seems to me that it has happened to many of you: they recognize you as a student of the Theological Academy and immediately classify you as one of the “obsolete tribe”, which cannot and should not resist the onslaught of new times. And I don’t know a sadder and more painful sight than to see a student of the Theological Academy apologizing and making excuses for the fact that he is a student of the Theological Academy, often justifying himself with the most humiliating arguments, such as the fact that in our country it is not absolutely necessary to be spiritual, on the contrary, that in our country one can study secular sciences. No, gentlemen, we, observing the modern attitude towards the Church, should and must respond only by increasing love and selfless devotion to the Church, respond precisely by consciously accepting church service, church obedience. This is our real calling. He is nothing to be ashamed of; it is high, ideal and incomparable; it is holy. Then can we hope that the infinite will prevail over the finite. By faith in our sacred meaning we will stir up a counter current Our meaning is sacred. There can be no doubt about this. And the Church now especially needs people with sincere faith in the holiness of their work. The Church has spread throughout the world. Does it have many higher church schools? If you think about this question, you will involuntarily come to the conclusion that every Academy of the Church is very necessary, and that the student of the Academy is not indifferent. There are times and summers when this need increases. It seems to me that our All-Russian Church is now going through such a time. I'll say this briefly. Perhaps nowhere did the Church have such favorable conditions for existence and prosperity as in Ancient Rus'. It was then that our enormous national spiritual capital was acquired. But two centuries ago, under Peter I, the Church seemed to be an obstacle to the transfer of semi-pagan forms of state and social life to Russian soil, and its position changed dramatically. She was given only a corner of people's life. She was deprived of the patriarch and the freedom of canonical conciliar life. Enslaved Orthodoxy retained the name of “dominant”; he was protected from heretical attempts by external measures. The fruits of such a two-century-long position of the Church could and were very sad. Church life has weakened in general, and in some places has degenerated into formality. Theology lost its patristic boldness and fell into scholasticism. Serving the Church became similar to bureaucracy. The shepherds began to look at the Church only as the feeder of the clergy and, hoping for external state protection, they became more accustomed to doing the same thing that the prophet Jonah did at the bottom of the ship when he fled to Tarshish (Jon. 1:5). In general, there are many phenomena in our church life that can only be explained by the fact that for two hundred years people have become accustomed to living behind a strong wall, enclosing and constraining at the same time. And then suddenly this wall fell almost to its very foundation. Enemies are bursting in everywhere; they must be met with an open chest, and former warriors felt in their place only behind a strong and high wall. New people are needed, new warriors who do not spare their lives when they have to suffer “for the laws of their fathers.” We need people who consciously live the life of the Church, who have consciously and confidently taken upon themselves church obedience and church service. We need inspired prophets, not executive officials! Needed... Needed... But all these “needs” are directed towards us, towards our generation. We need to build new walls around the Church. Love for the Church, devotion to the cause of the Church, a selfless desire to serve the Church to the point of self-sacrifice - these are the stones from which a fence from enemies worthy of the Church must now be created. This is the material we need to stock up on as much as possible. The renewal of church life will now begin, bringing this life closer to canonical ideals. Only naive people can expect any earthly privileges and benefits from the renewal of the canonical life of the Church. We must recognize and firmly remember that genuine church life in all its areas always requires asceticism and self-denial. He judges His servants strictly 10. Is this not why others look at the coming restoration of the true canonical life of the Church with concern and even horror? But isn’t it criminal to flee from church service when there is such a need for ideological church leaders? I think that a person of our academic generation can only be at peace in his conscience when, in response to a church request: “Whom will I send?” - will answer: “Here I am; send me!” He will answer firmly and decisively, remembering the false promise of the Savior: whoever loses his soul for the sake of Me and the Gospel will save it (Mark 8:35). You will be forgiven for what you cannot, Why didn’t you want to - never! 11 These, gentlemen, are the hopes and convictions that animated me during my speech at the academic department. I have laid them out before you directly and frankly. We should do our little business together while we're here. We will, to the best of our ability and ability, study our subject. Of course, you will have to do a lot of menial work, which apparently has no direct ecclesiastical significance or interest. There is no other way. After all, scientific work is only reliable and meaningful when it is broadly conceived. However, among the whole mass of scientific work, we must not lose sight of the main goal for which we are undertaking this work. The idea of ​​the Church and church service should guide and inspire us. I now appeal to myself: Get up, lazy servant of God! Bend over the reins, plowman! Fight, fighter, until late darkness! 12 But I would be infinitely happy if I could not only on my own behalf, but also on behalf of all of you and on behalf of our school itself, answer this call with the words of our poet, theologian and church person: I'm going to accomplish it in labor and sweat And I won’t close my eyes in slumber, and I will not weaken before the fight. I will not abandon the plow, lazy slave! Lord, for your sowing 13. Inaccurate quotation from Goethe’s “Faust” translated by A. Strugovshchikov (St. Petersburg, 1856, p. 31). – Note. ed. Blazh. Theophylact. Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans. Kazan, 1866, p. 168. On the last to Ephesus. demon 11, 2. – Creations. T. 11. Part 1. St. Petersburg, 1905, p. 97. Creations published by the Moscow Theological Academy. Part 7. M., 1895, p. 50. Creations. Ed. Moscow Theological Academy. Part 7. 1895. Pp. 50. Commentary on the Epistle to the Corinthians. Kazan, 1867, p. 153. Inaccurate quote from Goethe’s ballad “The Corinthian Bride” translated by A.K. Tolstoy. – J. V. Goethe. Selected works in two volumes. T. 1. M., 1985, p. 173. – Note. ed. A.K. Tolstoy. Against the current. – Collected works in four volumes. T. 1. M., 1963, pp. 195–196. – Note. ed. A. S. Khomyakov. Russia. – Poems by A. S. Khomyakov and K. S. Aksakov. St. Petersburg, 1913, p. 111. – Note. ed. From Ibsen’s dramatic poem “Brand” translated by A. and P. Hansen. - G. Ibsen. Complete set of works. T. 3. M., 1909, p. 77. – Note. ed. A. S. Khomyakov. Hard worker. – Poems by A. S. Khomyakov and K. S. Aksakov, p. 118. Note. ed. You might be interested in: