8) Проф. И. В. Попов.

Natural moral law. (Psychological foundations of morality). Sergiev Posad, 1897 In the named book (master's thesis) prof. I.V. Popov, by the way, comes to the fundamental conclusion that “Christianity reduces the entire content of morality to the commandment of love, going in two directions - to God and neighbor. But along with the duties of love, the church also prescribes to believers such actions that, apparently, have no such relation to it. These are all the commandments of abstinence in general. These commandments occupy a particularly important and prominent place in monastic life.” 1107 What is the relationship of Christian “asceticism” to the commandments of love? Based on the analysis of the data at his disposal and related to the specified subject, borrowed from ascetic writing, the author answers the question posed in the sense that ascetic demands mean - certainly and solely - the implementation of the same supreme and only Christian commandment of love for God and neighbor. 1108 Fulfillment of ascetic requirements is only a means of achieving the perfection of this love. All of the author’s stated provisions, indeed, quite accurately reflect the essence of ascetic teaching on this subject. But in a further, more detailed and detailed disclosure of these general thoughts, some uncertainty, ambiguity, reticence, and sometimes even confusion and inaccuracy are already noticeable. Hesitation is noticeable in the actual decision of the question: “private moments of renunciation of the world: solitude, renunciation of property and marriage” 1109, etc. are unconditionally necessary conditions for achieving the perfection of Christian love for God and neighbor, or only the best, most convenient and expedient means. The author actually offers both solutions to the question posed, without uniting them in a higher synthesis and as if not noticing their mutual inconsistency. In one place, the most respected scientist states that “renunciation of the world is considered by Christian ascetics as the best means for cultivating in oneself love for God and man.” 1110 Elsewhere, prof. I.V. Popov no less categorically and without any reservations asserts that “removal from the world, solitude and silence are considered by Christian ascetics as a necessary means for cultivating complete devotion to God, expressed in the constant thought of Him and feelings” of love and gratitude towards Him. 1111 However, both expressions are far from equivalent and identical, but express different thoughts and establish a completely different view of the life of Christianity in society, of owning property and marriage. If the second term of the dilemma is true, then the latter states can be tolerable and permissible only at the lower stages of a Christian’s development, but are completely impossible in the state of Christian maturity. 1112 According to prof. I. V. Popova, o.o. Churches invite to complete renunciation of property only those in whom the corresponding mood of complete devotion and love for God and neighbor has matured. But then renunciation of property will no longer be an ascetic means of achieving Christian perfection, but actually a manifestation of this latter. In general, the mutual relationship and comparative value of marriage and celibacy and other parallel forms of Christian life in I.V. Popov seems vague and unclear. This circumstance is undoubtedly due to the fact that the author sets the highest goal of Christian perfection as “contemplative love for God, consisting in constant thought about Him, accompanied by feelings of love. 1113 The author obviously consciously and deliberately ignores the active moment of “love” for God and considers it essentially optional, unnecessary, superfluous. As for the Christian duty of love for one’s neighbor, its fulfillment is limited, according to the author, only by nurturing and maintaining “a constant mood of love and goodwill towards one’s neighbor.” 1114 Such a mood may not manifest itself externally, in corresponding activities. The very fact of its existence in the soul of the ascetic is important. “In the matter of morality, Christianity gives decisive preference to the mood, and looks at the matter as a natural consequence of this mood, following it by itself... The mood serves as a true indicator of the moral perfection of the will. The act itself is simply an expression of this mood, which does not in the least increase its value. Therefore, if the mood does not turn into action due to circumstances independent of the will of the moral figure, the value of the mood (which would have been revealed in practice if it were not for these circumstances) does not decrease in the least. Thus, if a hermit, by any means, creates in himself a constant mood of love and benevolence towards his neighbor, which could be revealed in acts of mercy at every opportunity, but is not revealed due to lack of reasons, then in the face of the All-Seeing One, for whom the heart is open, his moral state is no lower than the state of a person to whom circumstances independent of his will have given him the opportunity to manifest his mood in action... Thus, ascetics have the opportunity to express their love of God in love of neighbor, as a benevolent disposition.” 1115 Regarding the above thoughts of Prof. I.V. Popov considers it our scientific duty to make several comments. And first of all, it is hardly fair and accurate that the position of the most respected scientist, according to which “deeds”, actions are only a consequence of the internal religious and moral mood; it must be added that they also serve as a means of education, strengthening and maintaining this mood. The mutual relationship of mood, on the one hand, and its manifestation outside, on the other, are thus mutual. We also have to admit that the statement that “the act itself” “does not in the least increase the value of the mood” is a big overexposure. Both psychologically and ethically, it is undoubtedly necessary to state the important difference between a mood that has turned into an action, and one that has not turned into action, even without the will of a certain subject. This idea is clearly highlighted in ascetic writing in the analysis of the so-called “passions”. 1116 Each subsequent moment of gradual development of “passion” in the soul, ending with the fact of sin, the external commission of an act, increases the guilt and responsibility of a person. Bewilderment is also aroused by the way I. V. Popov explains the reasons that the hermit contemplatives usually did not manifest their intense mood of love for their neighbors in external activities. According to the author’s depiction, actions of the appropriate kind would certainly follow, caused by the internal mood of the ascetics, if the necessary conditions for this were present. But in reality these conditions did not exist, since, of course, the ascetics lived away from people, without seeing them and often without even hearing about them for a long time; they did not have material resources from which they could help, etc. Since these circumstances did not depend on the will of the ascetics, the lack of external activity, according to the author, could not hinder their moral perfection. We are perplexed how the indicated conditions can be called and considered independent of the will of ascetics, if they undertook and carried out the feat of solitude voluntarily and consciously, for well-known religious purposes? When the mood of love for one’s neighbors really intensively declared itself, the ascetics left their deserted solitude and appeared “into the world,” into society, among people - for appropriate activities. 1117 The point here, therefore, is not actually what Prof. points out. I. V. Popov. The question essentially boils down to whether the demands of contemplative love of God are compatible with external activity for the benefit of people. It was necessary to concentrate on resolving this issue in order to understand this subject. The author, apparently, gives an affirmative answer to this question, since he admits that, when an opportunity presents itself, the hermit cannot refuse active help to his neighbors. 1118 However, what then is the reason for solitude? Is it really not the desire to move away from temptations and entertainment, whatever they may be, that hinder the complete concentration of ascetics? But - in this case - any return to external activity will be inconsistency, a violation of complete concentration, for the sake of achieving and maintaining which the ascetic withdraws from society. The whole point here, therefore, is how to understand hermitic contemplation and what conditions are considered necessary for its achievement. On the other hand, it turns out that the ascetic himself diligently runs away from people, moves away from all external activities, but when reasons, against his will, nevertheless, despite all the measures taken, present themselves, then, as if in the form of a concession, he breaks his “silence” and declares himself with facts of selfless activity for the benefit of his neighbors. Thus, when revealing the subject that occupies us, the central point should be the solution of the question of the relationship - from the psychological side - of contemplative love for God, on the one hand, and active love for neighbors, on the other - about the mutual relationship in general between “contemplation” and “activity”. And this question is far from being as simple as it seems from Prof. I. V. Popova. 1119 In conclusion of our feasible analysis, we note that I.V. Popov’s views on the issue that interests us are closely related to the views of F.F. Gusev, which we have analyzed in more detail; Much of what was said in that section also applies to the present case, and therefore we limit ourselves to what has been said. In addition, peru prof. I. V. Popov owns journal articles related to the subject we inherit: “The religious ideal of St. Athanasius" 1120 and "Mystical justification of asceticism in the works of the teacher. Macarius of Egypt." 1121 The main idea of both of these treatises is that Anthony V. and Macarius E., through asceticism, sought to achieve - and actually achieved, according to the images of the analyzed monuments - (Vita Antonii and the works known with the name of Macarius E.) - actual religious perfection - spirituality, charismatic extraordinary talents, direct contemplation of God, in the form of predominantly light; in short, deification. Written with the usual depth of analysis for a professor, distinguished by clarity and persuasiveness of presentation, these studies owe their design and general formulation of the question - to a large extent - to the influences of a very interesting book by Karl Holl (Karl Holl. Enthusiasmus und Bussgewalt. Leipzig. 1898), which will be discussed in detail below. Some works of Russian Orthodox theologians set themselves the task of clarifying the ascetic views of individual, but very important representatives of pathological writing. p. 279. Italics are ours. p. 285 cf. pp, 299. Wed. page 293 note 1st See chap. II of our dissertation, esp. pp. 256–257. For facts and relevant quotes, see the section of our dissertation where we offer an analysis of the views of F.F. Gusev, pp. 81 et seq. Theological Bulletin 1903 December, pp. 690–716. God. West. 1904 March, pp. 448–483. May, pp. 91–123. Theologian. West. 1904 November, pp. 537–565. 1905 January, pp. 28–59.