Review of the book by St. M. Sokolova "Divine services of the Orthodox Church. A guide for students in secondary schools"

We are very pleased to begin the pages of the “Bibliographical Theological List” with the news of the publication of a book, the full title of which we have written out. As this title above shows, this “manual” was compiled by a master of his craft in order to satisfy the urgent, urgent need to give his pets a completely understandable and suitable guide to the explanation of Orthodox worship. The need for such guidance has been evident for a long time, in the absence of more or less satisfactory manuals of this kind, despite the fact that such manuals are published in dozens a year. The first and main difference between this manual and similar publications lies in the remarkable simplicity and accessibility of the presentation of the available material; which usually finds a place in these books. The author is well acquainted with those for whom he is writing his manual; pedagogical experience tells him what his students need to know and what can be omitted without prejudice to their full and reasonable acquaintance with the state of modern Orthodox worship, as well as what language and tone to speak to them. Therefore, all the attention and effort of the author is aimed at ensuring that what is taught in his lessons is fully absorbed by the students, and that not a single word in his guidance remains inaccessible or incomprehensible to them. And oh. Sokolov can perhaps be reproached for being too zealous in explaining everything to his listeners. This desire in itself is an excellent quality in a teacher, but it can be boring and monotonous and tiring for students when the teacher strives to continue his explanations after the students have long understood and assimilated what is being brought to their attention. This is on the one hand. On the other hand, the teacher himself, who must always offer his listeners the truth in a dogmatic form and, as briefly and concisely as possible, in this case turns into simply a talker who loves to pile up his speech with the same words, but in a different form. As an example of unnecessary detail in definitions and descriptions, we will point out on page 89. Here the author describes the features of the Feast of Pentecost as follows: “The Church celebrates the Feast of Pentecost on the fiftieth day after Easter and devotes it to the memory of the descent of the Holy Spirit on the Apostles on the fiftieth day after the Resurrection of Christ. This is a two-day holiday. The first day is called Trinity Day, the second Spiritual Day. On Trinity Day, immediately after the liturgy, Vespers is celebrated, at which three prayers of St. are read with kneeling. Basil the Great, in which one hears a prayer to the Lord for the forgiveness of people’s sins for the sake of the suffering and death of Jesus Christ, for the sending of the Holy Spirit to them and the repose of the dead. In the songs of this day, believers glorify Christ, who sent down the Holy Spirit on the apostles, with the help of which they (?) converted the whole world to Christ. In gratitude to the Lord that He sent spring again and revived nature, on this day we stand in the church with greenery and flowers, and we also decorate houses and churches with greenery.” This excerpt provides readers with a clear understanding of the language and presentation of this manual. But we cited this tirade to confirm the idea that excessive simplicity and the desire for accuracy sometimes harm the correctness and purity of Russian speech. Here we see in one period the expressions: “holiday” “celebrates”, “on the fiftieth day after Easter” and “on the fiftieth day after the resurrection of Christ”, and other similar roughness and errors against Russian grammar, the interests of which should be pursued with special persistence by all kinds of leadership. In textbooks, especially in secondary educational institutions, students develop their own, so to speak, literary language, using their turns of phrase and stylistic features, quite often they write various kinds of “problems” and “exercises” until, finally, they free themselves from the overwhelming influence of printed authorities and develop their own manner of expressing their thoughts on paper. That's why Fr. Sokolov cannot help but point out this invisible, insignificant circumstance 1 from the point of view of a teacher of the law, who strives mainly to ensure that his students learn everything he teaches and is necessary for the moral and religious education of young men, but not so that his students’ grammatical knowledge does not suffer. I deeply regret that in this tirade Fr. Sokolov left without any reservation the name of the first day of Pentecost - Trinity. The reason for this name remains incomprehensible to students, and further speech about. Sokolova’s account of this holiday can even destroy in the concept of a child the significant difference between the first and second days of Pentecost. To many, it may not be entirely clear to explain the reason why on Pentecost we decorate churches and houses with greenery and stand in churches with flowers. To say that this is done “in gratitude to the Lord for sending spring and reviving nature,” in our opinion, does not say anything and raises a new question: why is this done precisely on this fiftieth day after Easter, and not on any other? Spring, as you know, quite often begins much earlier than the Feast of Pentecost, and in some areas by this time the first spring flowers have already bloomed. That is why we are completely inclined to side with those who explain the distinctive features of this festive celebration, who bring our Pentecost closer to the Jewish Old Testament. During this holiday, the Jews, in memory of the legislation of Sinai, which took place on the fiftieth day after their exit from Egypt, decorate their houses with flowers and greenery on a mountain covered with trees and flowers. The Zion upper room, in which the remembered event took place, was undoubtedly decorated according to Jewish custom, and therefore Christians, celebrating in the church the descent of the Holy Spirit on the Apostles, at the same time celebrate it in the atmosphere that was at the very moment of this event. The same desire for accessibility and clarity in presentation must explain the drawback that the author sometimes gives external descriptions of known objects instead of correct logical definitions, which, however, successfully replace real definitions. On page 18 o. Sokolov, describing censing with incense, says, among other things, that a censer is a vessel consisting of a cup with a lid, loosely adjacent to each other, hung on chains.” To put it simply, the author gives a definition of censer, but which (i.e., the definition) in no way can claim to be something like that. This description and description, to tell the truth, is not exhaustive even of all aspects of a given subject. Nevertheless, this descriptive definition still immediately leads the student’s thoughts to the subject in question, and therefore we prefer it to other definitions that obscure even the direct perception of the listeners. In general, the author quite often makes mistakes in definitions and often random features of the subject play a major role in him. So, for example, on page 12 o. Sokolov defines a surplice in the following way: “a surplice is a long garment with sleeves. For a deacon, the surplice makes up the outer garment and comes with short, wide sleeves; for priests and bishops - the lower one and therefore is called the vestment.” Of course, anyone who has seen the deacon’s surplice more than once will understand what the author wants to say with his definition, but anyone who has not seen it or who has not heard such a name, and this can be fully expected from children who simply call all priestly vestments “robes,” will not immediately understand what has been done, Fr. Sokolov's definition of the deacon's surplice. However, perhaps he will understand, but it will be difficult to distinguish, using the present definition, a deacon’s surplice from a lady’s blouse, which is also a long outer garment and quite often with wide sleeves. In addition to the extraordinary simplicity and clarity of presentation, this manual is also distinguished by the very commendable quality that the author avoids it in it, when explaining the mysterious commemoration of certain features of our worship and liturgical paraphernalia, “their” and “our” explanations, to which the majority of modern legal educators who have made a name for themselves with works in this area have claims, and is completely content with those patristic explanations that are known in theological historical and liturgical literature, from these interpretations by Fr. Sokolov chooses the simplest ones for children’s and youth’s understanding and assimilation, and moreover, most of all, those that are related to the subject being explained due to the close connection of their characteristics. From here his explanations are read with lively curiosity and are easily retained in memory. To the historical element in his manual, Fr. Sokolov devotes as much space as no one has ever given in such books before. On the very first pages of his textbook, the author, using “Notes about the Church” by Fr. Svyatoslavsky 2, presented a brief but very interesting outline of worship in all times of the existence of the human race to the present day, and detailed the history of the Christian church and its accessories in a condensed outline. In this essay we encounter short but detailed treatises on the Jewish church, on Christian underground churches, or catacombs with their decorations, etc. We can hope that these pages will be read with curiosity not only by students, but in general by everyone who is interested in our worship and wants to resolve many supposedly perplexing questions regarding it. ABOUT. Sokolov seems to want to eliminate all these perplexities, and therefore very often, or rather very often, when speaking about this or that liturgical rite and Christian custom in general, he certainly talks about when this custom appeared in our church practice and in what we need to look for the reasons for its origin. This is where the reader turns over with curiosity the present manual of Fr. Sokolov and almost every question he is interested in from liturgical practice can find one answer or another. This circumstance places this manual high among books of this kind. The merits of this manual include a fairly decent translation of the troparia for the twelfth feasts, the psalms used in daily worship, and some canons. It is very unfortunate that Fr. Sokolov did not bother to translate the Eucharistic prayers into Russian, or rather the rite of the liturgy, which he added to this manual as appendices. There are some passages in the liturgical prayers that are quite difficult to understand, and translating them would be a very valuable scientific aid. Otherwise, we do not fully understand the purpose of publishing the text of the liturgical prayers, which can be easily read from the service book. Very decent drawings of 3 church and liturgical accessories, the church and its components can serve as an excellent illustration for students who have not previously paid serious attention to all this. From these drawings they will be sufficiently familiar with everything that relates to the external side of our worship. While pointing out the merits of this manual, one cannot, however, pass over in silence some of its shortcomings, however small. There are few shortcomings that we noticed, and we list almost all of them in full confidence that the author will correct them in the next editions of his manual. These shortcomings depend on omissions and some inaccuracies in expressions. So eg. the author completely incorrectly interprets that the bishop has a front and a back” (p. 13), that the ringing of the bell sometimes occurs “during divine services, during the sacrament of communion (?), or when reading the Gospel” (p. 19), that “instead ... during the Easter liturgy and in the following days before the feast of the Ascension of Our Lord the following song is sung: “An angel cried” (p. 83), that "preparation of St. peace takes place in Moscow (?) during Holy Week" (p. 102), that the ordination of a bishop is performed by "several bishops, no less than three" (p. 104), that during a marriage, while the couple are walking around the lectern, the same songs are sung as those used during the ordination of deacon and priest" (p. 108), “that the relics are placed under the altar” during the consecration of the church (p. 112), etc. In the first case, the author mixed the epitrachelion with the omophorion, which actually falls on the bishop’s front and back; in the second, you might think that the author is talking about the very moment of communion of believers, during which the bell never rings. Obviously, the expression: “performing the sacrament of communion” replaces the author’s word “liturgy” and, it must be admitted, that such a replacement of one expression by another can hardly be called successful. It would not be superfluous to indicate the time when the ringing occurs during the reading of the Gospel, because otherwise the student can be led to believe that such ringing occurs all the time during the reading of the Gospel. Speaking about the Easter veneration, the author omitted from attention that this veneration twice during the entire Pentecost, namely at pre-sexuality and at the end of sexual intercourse, is replaced by the ninth song of the canon of the Theotokos: “Virginity is alien to mothers.” The Myrrh is consecrated not only in Moscow, but also in Kyiv, and not during Holy Week, but on Maundy Thursday of this week during the liturgy. At the ordination of a bishop, according to the canonical rules, there can be two apxies, and therefore the expression: “at least three” is nothing more or less than publishing arbitrariness. The text of the troparions that are sung as the newlyweds walk around the lectern, and the text of the troparions that we hear as those ordained to hierarchical degrees walk around the throne, differ somewhat, and therefore, in our opinion, it is necessary to explain the origin of this difference in the educational manual. During the consecration of churches, the relics are not simply placed under the altar, but in a box located in the cross under the altar, and, moreover, not always unconditionally, but only in the case when the consecration of the church is performed by the bishop. But all such shortcomings, which can be easily eliminated, as we said, in the next editions of this manual, cannot be particularly blamed on the author in the present case, since they are easily noticed, and experienced Fr. teachers of the law can eliminate them without much difficulty. The terminology of Fr. will present more difficulty for the latter. Sokolov, who, for the sake of intelligibility and clarity, replaces commonly used terms in church liturgical use and in educational manuals on worship, although sometimes with unambiguous expressions, but not entirely accurate and uncommon in writings or even in speech concerning our worship. It is quite strange for a church person or someone familiar with our worship to hear and see in the educational manual the replacement of church expressions with non-church ones, such as; “conceived from the epistle of the Apostle Paul, etc.” the word “oh jerk” from the message, etc.” (p. 107); “rite of the sacrament of baptism”, “rite of repentance”, etc. “divine service of the sacrament of baptism, repentance” (pp. 103. 106, etc.), etc. At the same time, sometimes the author allows the following expressions: “the rite of worship consists of the sacrament of marriage, etc.” (p. 106). The desire to be fully understood by the student, we repeat again, is commendable, but it should not reach the point of subservience to students and should not distort or turn inside out the established terminology for their sake. On the contrary, we would recommend oo. teachers of the law should not shy away from church and liturgical terminology in their classroom lessons with students and, to the best of their ability, will accustom their students to it. Of course, for clarity and accessibility, you can replace the word “conceived” with “excerpt”, but we do not consider or would not consider ourselves to have the right to use this latter as synonymous with the first. The same needs to be said about the terms “rank” and “following”. So that the students of their Fr. teachers of the law, at first you can replace them with the above expressions, as Fr. Sokolov, but it is immediately necessary to explain what the difference is between these terms in the language of our church liturgical practice and then to use them as commonly used, church terms, completely appropriate to the subject with which they deal. teachers of the law in their lessons. In any case, we are not against the word “passage”, etc. in lessons on Russian literature, when it comes to a novel, story, fable, etc.: but we would not want to hear this word in lessons on the law of God, when it comes to St. The Gospels and Epistles of St. Apostle Paul and other holy apostles. Holy objects require that they be spoken about in a restrained, decent and, one might even say, holy speech. Current, everyday speech, to our deep regret, has also invaded theological writings, and therefore often these days one can find in the books of our theologians not only the above terms and expressions, but also like the following: “The Mother of God or the Apostle Paul play a role, etc.” If anyone, then oh. teachers of the law should be alien to such unbridled freedom of speech and will teach their pupils to do the same. Summarizing everything we have stated, we must say that this manual sufficiently satisfies the purpose for which it was written, and therefore we wish it the full attention of our OOs. teachers of the law in secondary and lower educational religious and secular institutions. Let's hope that Fr. Sokolov will not hesitate to hasten to revise and correct his present manual, in order to thereby bring it to the possible completeness and perfection in all respects. To avoid some possible troubles and misunderstandings, we would recommend Fr. In the next edition, Sokolov should not remain silent, as he did in the present case, but precisely and clearly indicate what and where he takes his leadership from... It would not be superfluous to avoid in such manuals incorrect turns of phrase and frequent repetition of the same expressions, for example. beloved o. Sokolov’s expression: “as a sign of this and that”, this expression appears on the same page several times (pp. 82, 83, etc.), so it simply dazzles the eyes. The full title of this very, wonderful and very useful book for oo. teachers of the law is: "Notes for reading about the Church with an appendix, about icon painting, with pictures in the text, borrowed from the publications of I. N. Bukharev. Compiled by the teacher of the Nabilkovsky educational and vocational school, priest I. Svyatoslavsky. Moscow 1879. Printing house at the Nabilkovsky school, 1 Meshchanskaya, no. 48th (price 40 kopecks). Book or “Notes” about. Svyatoslavsky are compiled on the basis of some very respectable works on these issues and are provided with very thorough footnotes. The language of “Notes” is simple, lively and even fascinating. The work generally deserves full attention from the OO. teachers of the law and even teachers of liturgics in our theological seminaries. The influence of this work by Fr. Svyatoslavsky and had a very noticeable impact on the leadership of Fr. Sokolov, who in the first part of it borrowed from there a plan and even material for treatises on worship in general, on underground churches, etc. There is even a noticeable similarity in expressions with these “Notes” in the leadership of Fr. Sokolova. Some of the drawings in Fr. Sokolov were borrowed tacite entirely from the mentioned “Notes" of Fr. Svyatoslavsky or, according to the latter’s frank consciousness, from the publications of I. N. Bukharev. Literally similar drawings should be considered the image of the inside of the altar (p. 1) coll. Notes, Fr. Svyatoslavsky 20), the iconostasis (p. 14. Ibid. p. 31) and altar (p. 10 coll. Ibid. p. 34). The image of the throne and its accessories (p. 7) differs from the same image in Fr. Svyatoslavsky (p. 23) with a slight difference, namely the design of the plinth, which in Fr. Sokolov’s textbook is folded completely incorrectly, like a postal envelope. You might be interested in: