Orthodox teaching on salvation

Regarding the book of Archimandrite Sergius “Orthodox Teaching on Salvation” by St. Seraphim (Sobolev) “Orthodox teaching on salvation” by Archimandrite Sergius (Stragorodsky) and his criticism by priest Victor (Ostrovidov) and Archbishop Seraphim (Sobolev) The experience of revealing the moral-subjective side of salvation on the basis of Holy Scripture and the Works of the Fathers Instead of a preface. Personal Salvation Question 1 Your Excellence and Mm. years! To your enlightened attention I offer my best attempt to reveal, on the basis of Holy Scripture and the writings of the patrists, the Orthodox teaching about personal salvation, that is, about the sense and way in which a person, each given person, receives the communion of true, eternal life. It is not difficult to determine the motives that forced me to dwell on this particular department of doctrine. The question about life, about the purpose of existence - about how a person can live in order to live a true life - is truly the alpha and omega of every philosophy and every religious teaching. No matter how abstract, vague, sometimes strange and even absurd the logical constructions of this or that thinker may be, but since he is really a thinker, and not an industrialist of thought, since he wants truth, wants the word coming from the mouth of God, and not bread, the final end and at the same time the point of departure of his philosophical work will still be himself, his own position in the world and this or that definition of his life task. Philosophy without conclusions for life is not philosophy, but an empty game of philosophical words. It's the same in religion. Knowledge about God will only make sense for a person when God is for him “the only saint,” the bearer of his ideals, the legislator of his life. And demons believe, says St. ap. Jacob, but they only tremble. It would be better for them not to know about God at all, and they would certainly prefer a state of ignorance to their present state. A person who lives only for the moment, who considers only his will, his desire as the law of his existence - such a person, of course, will never argue much about what faith he professes. For him, all faiths are equally abstract and meaningless, and, therefore, equally indifferent. The truths of faith can only interest him as a subject of debate, in which he can discover his knowledge, his wit - they will interest him, perhaps, as his natural, national heritage - in a word, they can be interesting for their external side and for random reasons. But such a person cannot understand and recognize the truth, the objectivity and, therefore, the obligatory nature of this doctrine. He sees only philosophical positions and conclusions, sees only dogma and does not notice the way of life, which in fact, in reality, constitutes the content of all these abstract and incomprehensible subtleties of dogma for him. “Whoever says that he loves God and hates his brother is a liar and there is no truth in him” (1 John IV, 20). The knowledge of God is valid when it is accompanied by a corresponding life - when a person arranges himself according to this knowledge. But life is a judge of man not only in this general sense, i.e. not only whether he believes or does not believe in what he preaches. Life serves as the best means for determining and clarifying the true worldview of a person or one or another philosophical system, as well as for evaluating this worldview. In the question of God, the world and the general relations between them, one can sometimes limit oneself to one form, only the external relationships of concepts, without asking the question of what this form or this shell contains, without bringing abstract conclusions to tangible, vital clarity. These questions, abstract by their very essence, may sometimes not require (at least, it may seem that they do not require) such a correspondence in present reality - this correspondence is assumed somewhere above, far from this life and from the surrounding environment. But as soon as a person descends from the height of abstraction down to the ground to real life, as soon as he leaves being in its whole and concerns himself, in particular, with his own personality, tries from a general basis to deduce his personal relationships to this whole and to other similar personalities - then all possibility of limiting himself to one form, one abstraction is immediately taken away from him. No matter how harmonious his system is, no matter how well his various definitions and conclusions are adjusted to each other, neither he himself nor anyone else in the matter of life will be satisfied with this harmony. It will be necessary to show what actually corresponds to these harmonious concepts and conclusions. This is where the illusory, fictitious nature of many theories and systems can be revealed. The entire carefully and effectively finished construction of some thinker can crumble into dust from this one contact with life, precisely from the mere impossibility of confirming one’s speculations by reference to experience. If the worldview is true, then, when compared with life, abstract and obscure formulas and terms become clear, understandable, almost tangible, then real life will no longer seem like a strange negation of philosophy, not a crude mockery of its idealism, but on the contrary, by its explanation, commentary, - a direct conclusion from it. The question of personal salvation represents precisely this point in the system of our religious doctrine, at which the latter comes face to face with reality, with real being, and wants to show in life, in practice, what exactly is the truth that it preaches. – At this point, each religion can find an impartial assessment. - Since here a definition of a person’s life goal is assumed, completely consistent with the arguments of reason and the requirements of moral consciousness, - since all abstract formulas and terms find full correspondence in the data of experience, leaving nothing dark, nothing unexplained - since the remaining parts of the system, the abstract parts, are directly assumed and in turn explained by this definition of life and do not contradict it in any way - this means that this religion is not a set of human inventions, but a direct snapshot from real existence, that it does not distort the fact of life, but truly reproduces it - that, therefore, it is the truth. And, on the other hand, once facts are found in real life that correspond to the provisions and conclusions - once, therefore, the opportunity has presented itself to experimentally comprehend what life according to Christianity is, then the entire system of Christian doctrine is freed from obscurity, abstraction, formality. He who loves his brother has known God and seen Him, says the Apostle (I John IV, 7.8). Anyone who has actually experienced the essence of Christian life will understand what the life of God consists of, because the latter is not only a metaphysical foundation, but also a direct prototype and source of human life. In that (the Word of God) there was life and life was the light of men (John I, 4), presented to human consciousness and as an ideal. Consequently, anyone who wants to know the true essence of Catholicism, Protestantism or Orthodoxy must turn not to their theoretical teaching, but to their concept of life, to their teaching, namely, about personal salvation, in which (the teaching) this concept is most clearly expressed - he must question each of the faiths, in what it believes the meaning of a person’s life, his highest good. The dogma of the filioque undoubtedly concerns the cornerstone of our faith, but has it expressed this dogma as a whole of Catholicism, and is it possible to think that with its elimination Western Christianity will make reconciliation with us? Only one of the many points of disagreement will be eliminated, only one of the many reasons for bickering will be less, and the division will not weaken at all. After all, Catholicism is not from filioque, but vice versa. The dogma of the papacy, of course, constitutes the main spring, so to speak, the soul of Catholicism, but again, the perverted Catholic understanding of life did not come from the papacy, but from this latter the papacy, otherwise it is impossible to explain why and how the pope found and is finding in the Western world so many obedient, fanatically devoted servants and so many silent followers - only forgeries and tricks, one Jesuitism and lust for power of Rome cannot explain this phenomenon. In the same way, not as a result of the rejection of the sacraments and church tradition and not as a result of an exaggerated concept of the fallen nature of man, the Protestants came to their illusory, fictitious salvation, but, on the contrary, having distorted the very concept of life, they had to consistently distort the entire church structure and teaching. Suppose that all the errors in doctrine and structure are corrected - the distorted concept of life will prove that these corrections are only in words - after a while Protestants will have to create new distortions, new errors in place of the eliminated ones. In the same way, Orthodoxy is not recognized from its theoretical teaching. Abstract propositions and formulas, by their very abstractness, are equally incomprehensible and inconceivable for a person, whether they are Catholic or Orthodox. Would direct logical absurdity reveal the inconsistency of the heterodox system? As an expression of precisely this objectively given truth, Orthodoxy is most deeply cognized where it most directly comes into contact with this objective truth, with the realm of real existence: in its description of the actual life of man, in its definition of the goal of life and based on this latter teaching about personal salvation. Only by finally having assimilated the Orthodox teaching on life can one fully (not just by logic) be convinced of the immutable, unconditional truth of Orthodoxy - one can understand, visually grasp this truth. After this, all those theoretical positions, all those dogmas that previously seemed only indifferent metaphysical subtleties will receive their deep, full-life meaning. All this will be one and the same, united in spirit and idea, a teaching about true life - only this time life is considered not for a person, but in its objective reality, in itself. I had to be convinced of these elementary truths in practice when writing my essay. At first I approached the question of personal salvation with purely theoretical interest. I wanted to clarify this question for myself simply, as a dark, confusing point of doctrine, difficult to define. How can we more accurately express our doctrine of salvation? It is known that an Orthodox cannot speak as Catholics speak; that he is even less allowed to speak as Protestants speak; this is also beyond all doubt; but how should he speak? To give myself an idea of ​​this, I began to read the works of St. Fathers of the Church. I read them not only because I understood their, so to speak, canonical authority, not only as a church tradition obligatory for every Christian. My thought was somewhat different: I was looking for in the works of St. fathers descriptions and explanations of life according to Christ, or true, proper life, i.e. precisely that phenomenon in the objective world that the abstract formulas of dogma want to deduce and define. I wanted to understand the views of the fathers on human life, so that from this objective basis I could then test the theoretical teaching and give it a more appropriate explanation. This method of research is necessary in Orthodoxy. We know that Jesus Christ brought us more than one teaching, and that the work of the apostles and the church was not only to listen to the conversations of Jesus Christ and then pass them on literally from generation to generation: for such a purpose, the best means is not oral tradition, but some kind of tablets. We know that Jesus Christ brought us first and most importantly new life and taught it to the apostles, and that the task of church tradition is not just to pass on teaching, but to pass on from generation to generation precisely this life conceived with Christ, to convey precisely that which is not transmitted by any word, by any writing, but only by direct communication between individuals. Theoretical teaching only generalizes and elevates this teaching about life into a system. Therefore, the apostles chose as their successors and deputies people who were the most successful, who most consciously and firmly assimilated the life of Christ proclaimed to them. Therefore, the fathers of the church are not recognized as those of the church writers who were the most learned, the most well-read in church literature - the holy writers are recognized as the fathers of the church, i.e. who embodied that life of Christ, which the church received as its inheritance to preserve and spread. If so, then you can form a correct concept of Orthodoxy not by analyzing its fundamental, abstract teaching, but by observing this real life according to Christ, which is preserved in the Orthodox Church. And since the recognized bearers, embodiments of this life, this vital tradition were St. Fathers, who in their writings interpret this life in detail, it is natural to turn to them for observations. I did just that. The more I read St. fathers, it became clearer and clearer to me that I was moving in a completely special world, in a circle of concepts far from being similar to ours. I began to understand that the difference between Orthodoxy and heterodoxy lies not in some particular omissions and inaccuracies, but right at the very root, in principle, that Orthodoxy and heterodoxy are opposite to each other, just as self-love, life according to the elements of the world, the old man and self-sacrificing love, life according to Christ, a renewed man, are opposite. Before me stood two completely different worldviews, irreducible to one another: legal and moral, Christian. I called the first legal because the best expression of this worldview is the Western legal system, in which the individual and his moral dignity disappear, and only individual legal units and the relationships between them remain. God is understood mainly as the first cause and Ruler of the world, closed in his absoluteness - His relationship with man is similar to the relationship of a king with a subordinate and is not at all like a moral union. In exactly the same way, a person is represented in his individuality, he lives for himself and only with one external side of his being comes into contact with the life of the common, he only uses this common; Even God, from a human point of view, is only a means to achieving well-being. Consequently, self-love is recognized as the beginning of life, and the general sign of existence is the mutual alienation of all living things. Meanwhile, according to St. fathers, being and life in the proper sense belong only to God, who bears the name “He”, - everything else, everything created exists and lives exclusively by its participation in this true life of God, this coveted Beauty, according to St. Basil the Great. God, therefore, is connected with his creation not by one absolute “let there be”; God literally serves as the focus of life, without which the creature is as unthinkable in its present existence as it is inexplicable in its origin. Translating this metaphysical position into the language of moral life, we get the rule: no one can and should not live for himself; the meaning of life for each individual being is in God, which practically means in the fulfillment of His will. “I have come not to do My will, but the will of the Father who sent Me.” Thus, the main principle of everyone’s life is no longer self-love, but “the love of truth” (2 Thess. II, 10). Faithful to this law, man in his relations to God, the world and to people is no longer guided by a selfish thirst for existence (the conclusion from here would be the struggle for existence), but by selfless hunger and thirst for truth, as the highest law, to which he sacrifices his existence. In the legal understanding of life they sought happiness, here they seek truth. There, moral goodness, holiness, was considered a means to achieving bliss; here, true existence is attributed only to moral goodness, embodied in God - and human bliss, therefore, is considered identical with holiness. After this, it is clear what will happen if we apply the legal framework of life understanding to the moral, Christian one. Of course, it will be possible to find a lot of literal coincidences - it will be possible to fit, squeeze in this or that Orthodox provision under each legal heading. But we must remember that the legal framework is much more formal, external than the moral one, that they cannot express the full depth and vitality of the moral understanding of life. A huge variety of concepts will turn out to be completely ungeneralized, left without attention - many things that must necessarily be presented as one will be divided, and, on the contrary, things that require strict distinctions will be brought together under one heading. Orthodox teaching will therefore be presented, in any case, one-sidedly, not to say incorrectly. This determined the content and nature of my work: I had to start with a critique of the legal understanding of life, so that later in the chapters: on eternal life, on retribution, on salvation and on faith, I would reveal the positive Orthodox teaching. My general conclusion is this: a person’s true life is in communication with God. It is possible to be a partaker of this eternal life only through assimilation to God (hence the need for good deeds, i.e. spiritual and moral growth), but this assimilation is possible only when God comes to man, and man recognizes and accepts God. Therefore, the grace-filled help of God and faith in Christ and God are necessary, which makes salvation possible. “I’m standing at the door and knocking. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with Me. To him who overcomes I will give to sit with Me on My throne, just as I also overcame and sat with My Father on His throne” (Apoc. III, 20-21). All the providence of God, the entire economy of our salvation, is directed towards this; this is the purpose and meaning of the ministry of Jesus Christ. The basis of my research, as one of my venerable reviewers put it, is the idea of ​​​​the identity of beatitude and virtue, moral perfection and salvation. How successfully and consistently I applied this idea to that department of the doctrine that I wanted to reveal is not for me to judge, but I console myself with the thought that in the theological work I recalled this idea, or more precisely, I recalled the need to keep it in mind during the dogmatic study of Orthodox teaching. The question of a person’s personal salvation - this most important truth of Christian teaching (“praecipuus locus doctrinae christianae” 2), of course, has long been resolved in the Orthodox Church. The Lord Jesus Christ brought this teaching in all its heavenly purity and intelligibility for every religious and moral consciousness, and not only brought it, but He Himself walked the path indicated by Him. Entire regiments of martyrs and confessors, ascetics and saints, entire periods of the highest development of church life - all these are examples of active following of Christ, all these are living embodiments of Christ's teaching. Finally, doesn’t the whole patristic literature have as its sole goal to reveal and clarify the truth of salvation specifically for private consciousness? Moreover, all these are not considerations of reason alone, but direct snapshots from life, the fruits of the personal experience of the holy writers themselves. This question, therefore, has been more than resolved by church consciousness, and without this, church life would not be conceivable. The same cannot be said about its scientific development. Solid foundations have not yet been developed here. The reason for this is that in the West they cared not so much about loyalty to the patristic and general church tradition, but about loyalty to the principle accepted for some reason, about the logical consistency of their wisdom; Our theological science, always under the strong influence of the West, was afraid of independent research in the legacy of the Greek, patristic church bequeathed to it. Therefore, the abundant material that is given by Holy Scripture and Tradition on this issue remains not yet generalized and studied, as it should. The question of personal salvation cannot be just a theoretical problem: it is a question of self-determination. To tell yourself seriously what you need to do in order to be saved means to pronounce judgment on your entire spiritual content - to destroy concepts that are very dear, perhaps hereditary, and conclusions reached with sacrifices, with difficulty. This cannot be done by a natural person, especially one relying only on the power of his own mind. And so, instead of pure truth, a person in his reasoning offers us only a more or less successful transaction of truth with his views and desires. This is the origin of every theological error and every heresy. At their core, they all have precisely this moral imperfection, the inability or unwillingness to renounce oneself in order to perceive the truth. Based on his imperfect religious experience and taking his equally imperfect reason as a guide, man ends up distorting the Divine truth. As it is based on moral imperfection, any such error requires healing, first of all moral, i.e. subject to pastoral influence. But theological science cannot remain silent, especially when error has already developed into a system, when it even threatens Orthodoxy, or wants to stand next to it as an equal. Just let science not forget the methods of pastoral influence, let it not try to defeat its opponent with syllogisms alone: ​​this path has been tested in its unsuitability. Science must impartially decompose every false theory into its component elements, show that “human”, which by its application distorts the truth, and then positively reveal this truth. This is the task we dare to take upon ourselves in this matter. We are making an attempt to find out that fundamental lie of Western Christianity, which necessarily leads it to distortion of Christian truth, to absurdities, to contradictions with itself and religious experience - and, on the other hand, we are trying, on the basis of the data we have collected from patristic literature and Holy Scripture, to find out and establish in the scientific consciousness the idea that, as we are convinced, dominates in the Orthodox Church teaching about salvation and the fidelity of which will protect the theologian from all mentioned misconceptions. The point where the peculiarities of Orthodox teaching are most characteristically revealed is the question of the relationship between good deeds in earthly life and bliss beyond the grave. The further course of reasoning depends on this or that solution to this particular issue. We put this question at the head of our research in order to derive the Orthodox teaching about the essence of salvation, and from here, in turn, about the conditions for its achievement. The teaching of Christ the Savior is the teaching of self-denial and love of God and neighbor - the destruction of sinful selfhood, selfishness, self-pity is the main task of every Christian. Therefore, in the basic question of morality, in the question of the mutual relationship between virtue and happiness, good deeds and eternal life, Christ’s teaching is characterized by the same unselfishness and the same highest freedom from any foreign admixture, from everything that can violate the purity of moral motives. In the consciousness of the Orthodox Church, indeed, the concepts of good and blessedness have always had an internal conformity and kinship; the local, earthly is the root, the grain from which the heavenly naturally develops, hence the necessity of the first to achieve the second. – But in order to be at the level of this church teaching, in order to understand the internal conformity of doing good and eternal life, for this it is necessary to rise to that stage of spiritual and moral development when virtue ceases to be an external law and feat, but becomes the highest good of man. Such a person, feeling within himself their qualitative identity, will easily understand their necessary connection. But there are few such people. Usually a person still has to force himself to virtue; he not only does not find his highest good in her, but also fears her; he is more inclined to believe his highest good in self-pleasure (however one understands it). From the point of view of this ordinary person (which is what all people are), bliss cannot in any way be derived from virtue and vice versa - for him these are two phenomena of completely different orders. Therefore, such a person most easily and most clearly thinks of expressing the relationship between virtue and eternal life in the likeness of labor and reward, feat and crown, especially since for him a virtuous life is precisely a feat and, moreover, a very difficult one. In itself infallible, this method of expression is so familiar to man and so convenient for him and so clearly expresses the need for good deeds that it is not surprising if it has received the widest application both in the Word of God and in the teachings of the church. But, we repeat, it was not forgotten that this is only a very suitable similarity, that this does not at all express the essence of salvation. Meanwhile, the life of the Church has developed in such a way that a completely legitimate and completely understandable application to the spiritual development of members of the Church served as the source of that fundamental error that now distinguishes Western Christianity; on this basis, the legal (juridical) formulation of the doctrine of salvation developed. From its very first historical steps, Christianity encountered Rome and had to reckon with the Roman spirit and the Roman way or way of thinking, while ancient Rome, in fairness, is considered the bearer and exponent of law, the law. Law (jus) was the main element in which all his concepts and ideas revolved: jus was the basis of his personal life, it also determined all his family, social and state relations. Religion was no exception; it was also one of the applications of law. Becoming a Christian, the Roman tried to understand Christianity precisely from this side - he sought in it, first of all, legal consistency. The indicated elusiveness and at the same time the inseparability of the relationship between the quality of this life and the future could not be more favorable to such an understanding; the familiarity of the legal point of view itself made, in the eyes of the Roman, any further research about the properties of this relationship unnecessary. Seeing that it quite easily fits into the framework of legal relations, the Roman was completely satisfied and did not ask about any further grounds. This is how the legal theory began, which consists in the fact that the aforementioned analogy of work and reward is recognized (consciously or unconsciously, openly or under the line) as a true expression of the very essence of salvation and therefore is placed as the main principle of the theological system and religious life, while the teaching of the church about the identity of virtue and blessedness is left without attention. Of course, this method of external understanding of salvation at first could not be dangerous for the church: all its inaccuracies were abundantly covered by the faith and fiery zeal of Christians; even more. The opportunity to explain Christianity from a legal point of view was in some respects useful for him: it gave the faith a kind of scientific form, as if it affirmed it. But this was during the heyday of church life. It became different later, when the worldly spirit penetrated the church, when many Christians began to think not about how they could more perfectly fulfill the will of God, but, on the contrary, about how they could fulfill this will more conveniently, with less loss for this world. Then the possibility of legal formulation of the doctrine of salvation revealed its disastrous consequences. A legal union arises when one person or family is unable to fight the world around him. In order to ensure a certain share of well-being, a person enters into an agreement with another person in the same position. They assume mutual obligations and work for the common benefit. But this communication is not at all a communication of love, not a moral union; these people serve others only because otherwise they cannot get what they want for themselves. The goal of their life is not society, but their own self. The legal system, therefore, has as its task the juxtaposition of several selfish interests, so that they do not interfere with each other and so that each of them receives its due share. As such, the legal system can only provide benefits to selfishness. – Its first advantage is that instead of a living union it offers a cold, external one. For the state or my fellow citizens, it is not particularly important what my internal mood is; for them only my external behavior is important, because only this latter concerns their well-being and expresses my attitude towards them. This, of course, humiliates the individual, turning him into a soulless screw of the social machine, but it also gives a person such freedom, or better to say, such arbitrariness in mental life, which he cannot obtain under any other system, especially in a moral one. The moral union requires moral conformity and penetrates with its demands and instructions into the very sanctuary of human conscience. The legal system never penetrates there, being content with observing the externally agreed framework and leaving a person as a complete master within himself. – This arbitrariness is increased by the consciousness of complete independence or non-obligation of one’s well-being to anyone. In fact, if others serve a person with something, then he knows that they serve not out of affection for him, but out of necessity or out of a desire for good, first of all, for themselves. For this service they receive the same amount from him: relations are equalized, he, therefore, does not have to consider anyone his benefactor. True, this dooms a person to terrible loneliness, but selfishness is essentially loneliness. The consciousness of independence, this vague ghost of originality, is more valuable for the sinful “I” as such. – At the same time, all those services, even the most insignificant, that he provides to his allies receive the highest importance in the eyes of a person. These services are done, in essence, in spite of desire, not out of love for an ally, but simply out of a desire to receive equal reward. Therefore, a person demands this reward for himself, demands it as a due, and will consider himself entitled to take revenge if this reward does not follow. Feelings of gratitude in the proper sense cannot be found in the soul of a selfish person. – Therefore, the confidence on which all unions are based does not have the same properties as in a moral union. In the latter it is a joyful and at the same time humble hope, but in the former it is rather the confidence that the ally cannot deceive, since there is a certain guarantee by virtue of which he is in some way forced to fulfill the obligation. There, confidence rests on the free desire of the individual, and hence - constant gratitude to it - but here on something third, which forces the individual, and hence there is no gratitude, but only a selfish sense of security. A person loses “that freedom of a child of God,” which constitutes his highest asset, but for selfishness this freedom is too difficult for him not to exchange it for slavery, if only it would leave him with his desires. It is not difficult to see what can happen if a person (who, we note, has already lost the fervor of his first zeal for Christ and now hesitates with difficulty between love for God and selfishness) if he considers his relationship with God from a legal point of view. The main danger of this point of view is that with it a person can consider himself, as it were, to have the right not to belong to God with all his heart and mind: in a legal union such closeness is not assumed and is not required; there it is necessary to observe only the external conditions of the union. A person may not love goodness, he may remain the same self-lover, he must only fulfill the commandments in order to receive a reward. This is most conducive to that mercenary, slavish mood, which does good only for the sake of reward, without inner attraction and respect for it. True, this state of forced good deeds must be experienced by every devotee of virtue more than once in his earthly life, but this state should never be elevated to a rule, it is only a preliminary stage, the goal of moral development is perfect, voluntary good deeds. The legal point of view is sinful in that it sanctifies this preliminary, preparatory state as complete and perfect. And once the mercenary attitude towards the will of God is sanctified, the door is opened for all those conclusions that necessarily follow from this attitude. In a legal union, a person stands before the face of God not at all in the position of an unrequited sinner who owes everything to Him: he is inclined to imagine himself more or less independent, he expects to receive the promised reward not by the grace of God, but as due for his labors. The object of hope here, strictly speaking, is not the mercy of God, but a person’s own strengths, while the third guarantee, which obliges the ally without making him a benefactor at the same time, is his own deeds for the person. Deeds, therefore, turn into something valuable in itself, deserving of reward - a conclusion that could not be more suitable for a selfish nature that has lost its original purity, which, reluctantly, forces itself to fulfill the commandments and therefore values ​​​​its involuntary good at the highest price. Moreover, the dignity of merit is attributed not to virtues or permanent dispositions of the soul, but to individual external actions, which, in turn, the mercenary mood tried to reduce as much as possible and make as formal as possible, according to the natural desire in the mercenary to achieve his pay with the least possible expenditure of effort. Human life has turned from free moral growth into soulless fulfillment of private instructions. The mechanism that developed in the Western Church did not fail to affect theological science, which, under the influence of the era, completely submitted to it and, in turn, contributed to its further development and, so to speak, formalization. Scholasticism, with its worship of Aristotle, cared more about the formal harmony of its systems and did little (not to say not at all) with spiritual experience, with life. It would not be surprising if she (scholasticism) adopted a legal point of view. Could a scholastic think about its truth when under each of its points he saw excerpts from various celebrities - excerpts, let us add, taken outside the context of speech? And in this, so to speak, typographical way of proof, scholasticism justified all the extreme conclusions of the legal worldview. The completely natural doctrine of mutual assistance among church members turned, under the pen and in the mind of a scholastic, into a completely mechanical account of the actions of one person (saint) to another. The uncertain position of the souls who died and repented, but did not bear fruits worthy of repentance, not confirmed in goodness, turned into purgatory, where a person pays God with his torment for crimes committed on earth, and not yet paid for. The pastoral leadership during confession took the absurd form of payment for sins and indulgences - absolution without moral tension, without repentance. The sacraments have become magical acts of opus operatum, in which bodily participation is required rather than mental, etc. The sinful fear of moral work, taking advantage of a successful pretext, came up with many teachings that it needed and so polluted Western Christianity with all outsiders that it was difficult to recognize the truth of Christ in it. It was not without reason that when the German reformers came to the idea that faith alone saves a person, this expression, so common in Christianity and constantly on the lips of the holy fathers, seemed so unusual and terrible that some considered it a heresy and the destruction of all morality, while others took it almost as some kind of new revelation and ultimately distorted its meaning. – His legal point of view on salvation brought such fruits to the West. Its main danger is, we repeat, that it gave a person the opportunity, if he did not want to, to limit himself to appearance alone; moral work seemed to be forgotten. Hence, a good Catholic was often a very bad Christian inside and, despite this, thought that he was being saved, and in this self-deception he perished. The human soul, in its best part, always thirsting for true life and salvation, can only be content with the described teaching through a misunderstanding; it will certainly feel its falsity. This feeling of a living soul was expressed, albeit unsuccessfully, in countless sects, in many attempts to correct Catholicism, which we see throughout Western church history, and finally erupted in that terrible revolution, which is called the Reformation, and which still stands before Catholicism as a living denunciation of its untruth, in turn awaiting its accusers. The Reformation came out with a merciless denunciation of all Catholic counterfeits in life and teaching, the soulless formalism that reigned in it, and demanded life and truth for man. Protestants both wrote and said that the source of Catholic wisdom is not the Gospel, not the teachings of Christ, but considerations of reason, which stands at its own point of view and judges these things exclusively from a human perspective 3 . Without penetrating into the inner work of those being saved, the mind stops at the external side and bases its conclusions on it alone. It is not surprising if in this way he comes to positions that are absurd from the point of view of spiritual experience and before the judgment of human conscience 4 ; and then, feeling a lie and at the same time not seeing any other way than the existing one, he is forced, against his will, to resort to various artificial constructions in order to somehow drown out the painful voice of his conscience. (That is why extraneous matters occur, extraneous objects of veneration, invented by people in a moment of (feeling) danger (spiritual) against fear of conscience 5 ). To avoid this sad and terrible fate, it is necessary to break all connections with accepted, but not reconciled with the truth of Christ, philosophical views and turn to the truth of Christ itself and explore it, listening to the inner voice of your conscience, trying to grasp what the Word of God and church tradition says not only to the mind, but to the whole soul 6, and to care not only about fidelity to logic, but about fidelity to the truth, which is essentially living and effective, not formal. Protestantism actually proclaimed this only true and safe method of theology - guidance. They thought to see the test of the truth of their doctrine not in agreement with the metaphysics of Aristotle (for which Luther could not find a strong enough curse) 7 and with scholastic axioms, but in the fact that in it good consciences “piae et pavidae conscientiae” 8 find peace and consolation. It appears that the time has come for a radical renewal in Western Christianity. Indeed, Protestantism began to furiously refute the main dogma of the legal view - the doctrine of works as merits before God. This teaching is untenable because it fundamentally contradicts the very foundation of the Christian faith - salvation through Jesus Christ alone. “Whoever confesses that he has earned grace through works neglects the merit of Christ and grace and seeks the path to God besides Christ, through human forces” 9 . Even if there were no such contradiction, man’s deeds taken in themselves, by their very essence, cannot be a merit before God: a person does good deeds only with the help of God’s grace 10 , yet everything he does himself inevitably bears the mark of sin 11 . Therefore, all who are magnified by the merits of their works, or hope for superfluous works, are magnified by vanity and hope for idolatry, which is subject to condemnation,” 12 we read in the Scottish Confession. – So decisively and mercilessly were exposed all those conclusions that necessarily followed from Catholic teaching: purgatory, indulgences, etc. But... Protestantism was a child of its time and school. The first reformers learned to speak and think in the same Aristotle and Cicero as their Catholic opponents. Therefore, indignant at the blatant distortion of Christ's truth that they saw in Catholicism, they thought to explain it only by accidental reasons - the malice of the hierarchy, etc. and did not suspect that instead of these conclusions, others would inevitably appear, equally false, because the lie is not in the conclusions, but in the very basis, in the very point of view on the subject. Instead of rejecting this basic lie, Protestants were able to reject only some of its offspring and, thus, only replaced some distortions with others. That is why the Reformation, in the sense of restoring Christ’s truth, ended in complete failure. Protestants, as we have seen, turned to life itself and tried to verify their conclusions with it - but they looked at life from a legal point of view. They wanted to bring peace of conscience with their teaching, but they understood this peace in a completely legal way, in the sense of a sense of security, impunity for committed sins. A person is afraid of punishment, and so the death of Jesus Christ is pointed out to him as such a great, excessive satisfaction with the truth of God that this truth can no longer - has no right to demand anything else from a person, any other satisfactions. A person, since he believes in the Gospel, must calm down about himself. – We see that Protestants did not understand this greatest and most comforting mystery of our salvation in all its depth and vitality. Of course, man is by nature a mercenary; of course, he first of all fears for himself and seeks his own safety - and, therefore, he learns the secret of salvation first from this side. But our church, always pointing the sinner to this particular side (since it is most understandable, closest to the sinner), does not think because of it to forget other more encouraging sides of the mystery of salvation. She sees in Christ not a passive instrument of propitiation, but the restorer of our fallen nature, the firstborn from the dead, whom He brought out of death, calls Him the “second Adam,” the heavenly Lord, “the heavenly ones” (1 Cor.: 15:20. 23. 45. 47. 48.), i.e., as if the leader of humanity, but only “Christ’s” (v. 23), who has put on Christ, following his Leader into the Fatherly glory inherent in Him from eternity (Col. 111, 1 - 6). The Protestants, in this greatest secret, thought to find only that “third” of the legal union that lies between its members and which forces one of them, no matter what, to make a concession in favor of the other. Once this “third” has been found and, moreover, is not only sufficient, but also surpasses all measure, then there is no need to look for any other satisfaction. If Christ paid for our sins even more than they were worth, why still think that we need to work for this satisfaction ourselves? Human efforts, not to mention their imperfection before God, etc., are simply unnecessary and even dangerous: they diminish the significance of Christ’s merit. What, then, is salvation? It is nothing more than the remission of sins or deliverance from punishment for sins 13 justification 14, which is already followed by acceptance into the favor of God, etc. Justification is understood “not in the physical sense, but in the external and judicial 15. It does not mean “to make righteous out of the wicked, but in the judicial sense (seusu forensi) to proclaim righteous 16, to consider righteous, to declare (iustum aestimare, declarare) 17, and this is for the sake of the merit of Jesus Christ 18, i.e. for the sake of an extraneous event that has no connection with my inner being. Justification, therefore, is a completely external act, “an act that acts not in a person, but outside and around a person” 19. Therefore, the consequence of this act can only be a change in the relationship between God and man, but man himself does not change” 20. We are still sinners, but God treats us, because of the merits of Jesus Christ, as if we had not sinned, but, on the contrary, as having fulfilled the law, or as if the merit of Christ were ours.”21 In other words, instead of the previous Pelagian legal point of view, rejected and condemned, Protestantism put forward the same principle of law, only taking its other side: having rejected human merit as insufficient to appease an angry God, or more directly, in order to oblige God to grant me eternal life, Protestants still looked at eternal life as an agreed payment that God “must” be given to a person, only the obligatory “third” for Protestants is not the person’s own merit, but the merit of Christ 22 . In Catholicism we saw the oblivion of Christ in the work of our salvation, but here the work of man himself is forgotten, “our righteousness” was reduced to the imputation of someone else’s righteousness (imputatio alienae iustitiae) 23. This idea is common to Protestants of all times 24 and if in the newest dogmatic systems of Protestants we encounter attempts to give external judicial events vitality, reality, to transform dogmatic provisions into psychological phenomena, then these attempts either clearly do not reconcile with the basic Protestant principle, according to the consciousness of the Protestants themselves 25, representing only inevitable concessions of Protestantism to religious experience, or they only change names without changing the essence of the matter 26 . It cannot be said that the teaching of the Protestants did not have any instructions and spiritual experience behind it. There is no doubt that only with development in goodness can a person understand the full depth of his sinfulness and moral weakness. Hence, the higher a person is morally, the stronger his consciousness of his unworthiness and the more abundant his repentant tears. Such, for example, is Rev. Ephraim the Syrian, whose creations are almost continuous lamentation, although they bear indelible traces of heavenly joy inherent in every true righteous person. Isn’t that what the all-encompassing phenomenon says: when the era of martyrs ended, Christian zeal found expression in nothing other than monasticism, the rite of penitents? Protestants, we repeat, were not mistaken in pointing to this undoubted phenomenon and trying to draw conclusions from it for Christian teaching. But just as crude Catholicism, also based on the need for religious consciousness in its constructions, came to mercenaryism and Pelagianism, so Protestantism, seeing the inconsistency of salvation through the merits of man and at the same time not finding any other way of understanding other than the legal one, created for itself, in the essence of the matter, only spiritual seduction, a fiction of salvation that has no true content. True, Protestants, with all their desire to be faithful to their teaching, could not help but recognize the need for certain conditions on the part of man. But such a condition was recognized as the last “possible minimum”: faith in Christ without works. Yielding to the demands of life and conscience, Protestants make an attempt to give this faith as much vitality and effectiveness as possible. They say that only living faith 27 justifies, i.e. active, which is necessarily accompanied by deeds 28 and is in no way conceivable in a person given over to sin 29 ; and that, therefore, justification will necessarily be accompanied by a moral regeneration of man 30 . “It cannot be that this holy faith remains idle in a person” 31. But how does this rebirth occur and in what sense can faith be called “the root of good works” 32? Not at all in the sense that it serves as an incentive, an inspiring principle, in a word, not at all in the sense of any moral work on the part of the person being saved. This work has nothing in common with justifying faith 33 and therefore does not relate to justification. Faith is the root of good works in the sense that through it we “receive Christ, who promised us not only liberation from death and reconciliation with God, but also the grace of the Holy Spirit, by which we are reborn into newness of life” 34. But this is no longer an excuse, but a consequence of it. Only those who have already been justified can receive Christ, i.e. declared righteous, reconciled to God 35. Does, therefore, the indicated vital side of salvation have any significant significance in justification, the significance of an active condition? No. To be justifying, faith must remain “exclusively perceptive, must rely solely and exclusively on a sacrifice independent of our personality (Sabjectivitat), but completely satisfying God” 36. Faith “is justified not by the fact that it is our work” (which would presuppose moral tension and would be precisely expressed by the spiritual upheaval that Scheele describes) 37 , but for the sake of Christ - our truth, whom it perceives 38 , and this is understood to mean that it perceives the promised mercy 39. Faith saves, thus, externally, for the sake of the truth and holiness of Christ, which it assimilates to man 40, for the sake of the merit of Christ, which is imputed to a person 41. In other words, faith serves as the basis for a phenomenon only externally judicial, and not moral 42. After this, what significance does a person’s deeds, that is, his moral work and development in goodness, have in justifying him? It is impossible not to see that good works, even if they are presupposed in justification, are only as a co-existing or subsequent phenomenon, and not productive, not participating in the actual act of salvation. This idea is expressed with complete clarity in symbolic books. For example, the Ausburg Confession, recognizing that “faith (which justifies) must give birth to good fruits,” hastens to stipulate that remission of sins is acquired by faith.”43 Or in the Apologia: “To receive forgiveness of sins means to be justified... By faith alone in Christ, not through love, nor for love or deeds, we receive remission of sins, although love and follows faith.” So, by faith alone we are justified, understanding the word “justify” in the sense of “making or reviving from wrong” 44. Thus, faith justifies, in contrast to good deeds, moreover, understood not in the sense of external actions, but in the sense of even an entire mental disposition or mood. This disposition does not participate in justification, does not contribute to it, and even more than it cannot be in a person before he is justified. “This is very unreasonably written by opponents, as if people guilty of eternal wrath deserve remission of sins through a work of love, when it is impossible to love God unless remission of sins is first received through faith. A heart that truly feels that God is angry cannot love God before He is appeased. While He frightens and appears to subject us to eternal death, human nature cannot overcome itself to love the angry, condemning and punishing one.”45 What, in this case, remains of a justifying faith if the “love that promotes it" should be distinguished from it and should not share justification with it? Protestants, contrary to all their reasoning about living faith, must admit that, according to their teaching, it is the abstract phenomenon of perception, taken in itself, that justifies, and not in its effect on the human soul, not because this faith is living. “When people believe that they are accepted into grace and their sins are forgiven for the sake of Christ, who by his death satisfied for our sins, God counts this faith as righteousness before Him” 46 ... Or, even more definitely in the Apologia: “We should not think that on the guarantee of this love, or for the sake of this love, we receive remission of sins and reconciliation; just as we do not receive remission of sins for the sake of two subsequent works; but one by faith in the proper sense (proprie dicta) the remission of sins is obtained, since the promise cannot be acquired otherwise than by faith. And faith in the proper sense is that which agrees with the promise.”47 Thus, faith justifies a person, even though it is rich in the possibility of works, in any case, at the time of justification it is still only abstract and mental and justifies precisely by its mental side as (the means and instrument) with which we assimilate; self-satisfaction of I. Christ 48 Thus, there is no place for human participation in Protestant justification. By this, Protestantism directly contradicted the requirements of the moral nature of man, from which it came. The human soul seeks good for the sake of good, wants life for life’s sake; she does not want to be counted only in the kingdom of God, but to really live in it and experience freely and consciously communion with God. Therefore, the human soul could never agree with the Protestant ghostly justification. This illusory nature could be destroyed only by recognizing the deeds of man not as a consequence, but as a condition of justification. But for Protestants this meant going over again to Catholicism with its human merit, since from a legal point of view the condition can only be understood in the sense of a legal basis, merit. The impossibility of maintaining a middle ground between Catholicism and Protestantism on a strictly legal basis was clearly demonstrated by Melanchthon’s conciliatory attempt. In the Apology he says: “we teach that good works have the power of merit, but what they deserve is not remission of sins, not grace or justification (this we achieve by faith), but other rewards, bodily and spiritual, during and after this life... By works we do not deserve justification... by works we do not deserve eternal life; for faith achieves all this, since faith justifies us and propitiates God” 49. “For,” he says in another place, “the righteousness of the gospel, which revolves around the promise of grace, is freely justified and quickened; but the fulfillment of the law, which follows faith, revolves around the law, in which, not freely, but for our works, a reward is given and due; but those who deserve this latter are justified before they fulfill the law; they are first translated into the kingdom of the Son of God and became joint heirs with Christ” 50. The moral development of a person in goodness, that is, in the eyes of Melanchthon, has the meaning of merit, but not for justification and eternal salvation, but for receiving various rewards on earth and in heaven. However, this did not improve the matter, but made it even more difficult. Denying the dignity of merit for deeds before justification, Melanchthon, in essence, recognized deeds after justification not only as merits, but also as supererogatory, which are awarded a special reward in addition to the kingdom of heaven, bestowed on everyone. But because these supererogatory merits were performed after justification, their danger to the dignity of Christ’s merit did not decrease. If Christ brought excessive satisfaction, then what is the merit on the part of man? And if merit on the part of a person is necessary, even if only to increase the crown, then the merit of Christ is insufficient. Most importantly, by Melanchthon’s theory, mercenaryism, of which Catholicism was guilty and against which Protestantism fought, was not only not destroyed, but was even more strengthened and received an even more base appearance. No longer for the sake of eternal salvation and eternal life, but for the sake of either earthly well-being or reward. Unlike others, a person does good. And on the other hand, the necessity of doing good for salvation, which a person’s conscience urgently speaks of as a necessity, a duty, and not a benefit, was by no means explained or proven by Melanchthon’s attempt. In fact, if eternal life in communion with God is given to man and given to tuna, are all other rewards and benefits worth anything in comparison with this highest good? Will a person think about them, and will he even consider himself to have the right to think and desire them? Not to mention that good deeds, as a consequence of justification, as the work of the Holy Spirit dwelling in the justified 51, do not, in essence, depend on a person, on his free choice and desire. It seemed as if a person, if he does not desire any special rewards for himself on earth or in heaven, may not care about his moral success, but can simply leave it to the grace of the Holy Spirit: salvation for him is already assured. But this directly contradicted the testimony of experience, since conscience says that one must take care of success in goodness and that without this it is impossible to be saved. Melanchthon’s attempt, we repeat, only proved that there is no middle ground in the legal understanding, that with it only extremes are possible: either the merit of Christ, or the merit of ours, which are mutually exclusive. Since it does not explain anything in religious life and, on the other hand, is dangerous for the dogma of salvation by Christ alone, Melanchthon’s attempt therefore did not find sympathy in the Protestant world 52 . Subsequent Protestants rejected any difference in the degrees of holiness and blessedness and asserted with particular force that holiness (not to mention the fact that it is impossible without justification) has no significance not only for justification, but also for eternal salvation in general 53. Thus, Protestants, despite their sincere desire to be faithful to experience and give consolation (to the conscience) of believing souls, could not do anything while remaining on a legal basis. Avoiding the extremes of Catholicism, they fell into the other extreme: they completely crossed out the internal side of justification. True, Protestants of all times constantly say that they require good works 54, that they recognize them as necessary in order for faith to be a living faith, which alone justifies 55 - that the accusation that they preach a teaching dangerous to morality is based either on “misunderstanding or on a malicious distortion of Protestant teaching.” 56 But all this is only the breaking through voice of conscience, only a concession to the demands of nature human, is a concession unjustified in teaching. Despite all these statements, the need for good deeds remains unfounded, since the motivation for it is not in salvation, but outside of it: in a sense of duty, gratitude to God, etc. 57 But reason, if it takes only a legal point of view, always has the right to ask: if my deeds are decidedly unimportant to God, in the sense of any value, then can they be considered a retribution of gratitude to God and is there any meaning in such a performance of an unnecessary duty? And since there can only be a negative answer to this question, the need for conscious and intentional good deeds naturally disappears. The life of the justified loses its moral character and the conscience does not receive peace. No matter how unsuccessful the attempt of Protestantism to explain human salvation was, it nevertheless showed with obvious certainty the weaknesses of the Catholic doctrine of merit. Catholicism, which had seen these aspects in its best representatives before, had to deal with the conclusions of Protestantism, especially since the latter threatened the very existence of the former. That human merit in its literal sense is both impossible before God and contradicts salvation through Christ alone—Catholicism could not but agree with this. But, on the other hand, it could not sacrifice either the experience or the tradition of all previous centuries of universal church life - both experience and tradition alone said that good deeds are necessary not only in the sense of a consequence, but also in the sense of a condition of salvation. How can these two apparently contradictory accounts be reconciled? How to understand this conditionality of salvation by doing good, if the latter at the same time cannot be a merit before God? - This is the question that Catholicism should have resolved. This question was directed to the very essence, it required a discussion of the very basis, that point of view on salvation that leads Catholicism to false conclusions, the legal point of view. The question was whether we have the right to reconstruct Christianity from this point of view. And, without a doubt, Catholicism would have come to the right decision (since it did not want to break ties with church tradition) if it had really accepted the challenge and discussed itself impartially. But Catholicism only skimmed over the question posed to it, without touching on it or even trying to answer it: it only cared about somehow reconciling the contradictions of its teaching with religious consciousness and church tradition, without touching on this teaching itself. Therefore, the Catholic attempt is as unsuccessful as the Protestant one. If Protestants quite rightly accused Catholics of destroying the merit of Jesus Christ with their human merit, then Catholics, in turn, just as rightly point out to Protestants that with their illusory justification they contradict the holiness of God 58 . Justification, according to the teachings of Catholics, should not be external, not based on the content of the soul, a purely judicial incident of imputing someone else's righteousness to a person - but should be an internal change or renewal of a person 59 . Justification also has an external, judicial side 60 , but this is not its only content, and whoever believes its essence in this alone, let him be anathema 61 ; justification means not only “to declare righteous” or “to recognize him as righteous,” but “to make righteous,” means the eradication of unholiness and the establishment of holiness in us, true and internal sanctification, making righteous” (Gerechtfertigung) 62. From a legal point of view, the relationship between these two sides of justification 63 could only be understood in the sense of merit and reward, i.e. a person's holiness is a merit, and being declared justified and accepted into the sonship of God is the reward for holiness 64 . Now, if we recognize the participation of human freedom in the accomplishment of this holiness, then remission of sins and adoption will turn out to be a reward for the merits of a person, which directly goes against the Divinely revealed teaching about the One Savior Christ, as Catholicism also recognizes 65. Consequently, Catholicism was necessary, as far as possible, on the one hand, to retain behind justification the full-life meaning of deeds, and not the proclamation only of saints, and at the same time, on the other, it was necessary, as far as possible, to limit human participation in the acquisition of this initial holiness; so that the grace of justification was in fact undeserved. Catholicism thinks to solve this difficult problem with its teaching about the so-called infusion of grace, infusio gratiae. If for Protestants the grace of justification was a decision made in the Divine consciousness (actus Dei immanens 66) and therefore, for a person it was a completely abstract formal action, then for Catholics grace is first of all a supernatural gift (supernaturale donum" 67), or “the action of God in creation” 68, i.e. some movement occurring in the creature itself, its property or state settled in it by God and experienced by it at one or another moment in time. Accordingly, in particular, the grace of sanctification is a gift - an internal and supernatural gift of God given to a rational creature for the merits of Christ." her reason (so that there is no merit) is, so. arr., in addition to the existing spiritual content of a person, it is self-evident that the supernatural nature of this action should involuntarily intensify despite its arbitrariness and consciousness. Holiness descends on the soul, if not completely unexpectedly, then in any case involuntarily or against the will, leaves no conclusion from mental life, comes to it from the outside and apart from its natural development. This complete (in the sense described) involuntary sanctification is expressed by the Catholic term gratiae infusio, the infusion of grace. “All justification,” says Thomas Aquinas, “originally consists in gratiae infusione 70. Instead of a judicial decision external to the soul, we get here some supernatural transformation taking place in the soul itself. “Sanctification,” says Klee, “is true sanctification, accomplished not only through the actual (wirkliche) taking away, the negation of sin, but also through the positive establishment of new life, through the communication of the Divine Spirit. It is the taking away of the heart of stone and the giving of the heart of flesh (Tez. XXXVI, 26), the destruction of sin (Ps. L, 3) and the consciousness of the new spirit (v. 12), the death of sin and the life of Christ (Rom. VI, I et seq.), putting off the old and putting on the new man (Eph. IV, 22), ceasing to walk in the flesh and walk in the Spirit (Rom. VIII, Gal. V), walking not in darkness, but in the light (Eph. V, 8 et seq.), burying dead works (Heb. VI, 1; Apoc III, 1) and the offering of good deeds (Eph. II, 10)" 71. Catholicism, apparently, quite thoroughly solved the task assigned to it: the merit of Christ is preserved and justification is not a deception, not a dream, but a real internal change. But this is only apparently. Not to mention the involuntary justification, which, in the essence of the matter, deprives it of the dignity of a moral phenomenon 72 and therefore directly contradicts fundamentally the religious consciousness and teaching of the entire Word of God and tradition - even taken in itself, Catholic justification is very unfounded from its own legal point of view. In fact, if the grace of justification is the action of God in man, independent of man, then how can we explain its appearance in man? Why does God renew one and deprive another of this mercy? Catholics, as we have seen, did not want and did not have the right to recognize the basis for this as the previous life of a person, since this, translated into legal language, would be salvation through one’s own merit, and not through the merit of Christ. To avoid this, it was necessary to recognize all people without distinction as not deserving of salvation and justification by an exclusively Divine work, as Catholics do. But in this case, why does God renew those and not others? Perrone, as we have also seen, is trying, contrary to the clear teaching of the Council of Trent, to recognize as such a basis or merit “that which precedes justification in man,” i.e., faith, etc. But he himself must admit that sanctifying grace does not fit the concept of merit in the proper sense, 73 that faith, etc., which accompanies it, can never correspond in its value to the gift of holiness given to us in justification. Will not then faith be only an instrument for perceiving the merits of Christ, and will not justification be an external proclamation, judicial recognition, as the Protestants taught? Catholics are drawn to this conclusion with fatal necessity, and they must agree with it if they do not want to renounce their legal point of view on the matter of salvation. But Catholicism could not agree to this conclusion: the Word of God, the tradition of the church and the voice of conscience were against this, which demanded man’s participation in his salvation, and not notification of his salvation, the situation turned out to be completely hopeless: either fidelity to one’s wisdom, or fidelity to the truth. Not wanting to give up the first and not daring to openly contradict the second, Catholicism is forced to resort to a trick: it confuses justification and sanctification and covers the exceptional appearance of the first with the content of the second. The technique is quite natural given a false basis and is not new: Protestantism did the same thing, trying to give its illusory justification some content. Just as Protestantism makes faith an instrument for the perception of the power of God, which by itself, apart from man, sanctifies and renews him: similarly, Catholics came up with their own infusio gratiae, which in essence is the same Protestant sanctification only dedicated to justification itself and materialized to the extreme: if God acts there for man, then in Catholicism the gift of God acts: as something separate from God and settled in man - but, both there and here, the will of man does not act. But again, to this, the Word of God, the tradition of the church and conscience object that what is needed is not the inactive consent of a person to salvation, but precisely participation, and without this latter nothing can happen. Thus, with fatal inevitability, the legal principle comes to that copper wall, which it is not able to cross. If justification is a phenomenon of the legal order, it will necessarily remain external to the soul, which means - only a dream, only a ghost of self-deception - and allows... a change in what is being justified only in the form of a supernatural forced transformation, essentially devoid of a moral character and at the same time completely inexplicable, unfounded from the point of view of the legal principle itself. Having thus failed to explain the first initial moment, Catholicism thinks of correcting itself in the further course of justification. Let us suppose, he says, that the first act of justification is performed apart from man; let us suppose that the holiness that man receives is not actually his own, but that of Christ 74 ; This does not at all destroy man’s personal participation in the matter of salvation; on the contrary, the independence of this first act from human will preserves human participation with greater effectiveness, the greater value - it gives it the strength and significance of a condition, if not the only one, then almost equal to grace. This is what Catholics want to achieve with their theory of increasing the holiness received in justification through good deeds in the subsequent life. In justification, a person is undeservedly and, therefore, involuntarily given a certain degree of holiness sufficient to obtain the right to afterlife bliss. But God “did not want Christ’s merits to bring us benefit without any assistance on our part" 75 , and therefore, by God’s definition, human work must have its place and its meaning. Holiness, as involuntary, is equal for everyone, but preserving it in oneself and increasing it in order to receive an even greater reward for it is already a matter for man (although, of course, not without the help of God). Through his diligence, his efforts or good deeds, a person can acquire it It is Christ's merit to add his own and, thus, to independently increase his crown. A person’s independent participation is understood exclusively in the sense of certain external actions that serve as a revelation of inner holiness, in “the sense of concrete formations and manifestations of faith, hope and love” 76, and not in the sense of these latter taken in themselves. God is not looking for holiness as a general structure of the soul, but it is the discovery of this holiness on the outside that justifies a person through deeds 77 . Why Catholicism insists specifically on works, on actions, and in what sense it understands this justification by works, it will be clear to us if we remember that, according to Catholic teaching, justification does not mean recognition only as a righteous person, but rather the infusion of righteousness. Justification by works has the following meaning: works deserve a new supernatural gift - (supernaturale donum) 78, i.e. God, seeing a person’s good deeds, adds as a reward for him that holiness and righteousness that He poured into a person during justification, 79 and thereby gives a person the opportunity to do even more good deeds in order to again earn an increase in holiness, etc. The holiness achieved in this way, in turn, deserves bliss beyond the grave. The righteous, through their good works done by grace, are truly worthy before God, 80 and therefore eternal life is the necessary reward for their efforts. “The “Righteous Man,” Perrone describes the entire process of this increase in righteousness in this way: “sanctified by the internal grace co-present to him as a property, he is not only the heir of eternal life, to which he has both the right and the guarantee in himself in the most lasting way; but also planted, as the Apostle says, in Christ Jesus and, so to speak, grafted in, bears fruit to God with holy deeds, which are the fruits of the spirit. lists these fruits, saying: spiritual fruit is love, joy, peace, patience, etc. (Gal. V, 22.23). For grace, which sanctifies like the seed or germ of eternal life, which develops in the heart of the righteous and is revealed in holy works, through which it grows in the sanctification achieved, and the crown of righteousness promised to it increases more and more, covers it with new decorations and makes it. more precious. In these actions, performed in a state of righteousness, merit consists, which begins from the very communication of grace, both actual and sanctifying by the power of the merits of Christ, and ceases only in eternal life” 81. So, although a person is sanctified involuntarily, in his subsequent life it is up to him to preserve and increase the received holiness through his personal labors. With this technique, Catholicism wants to close a problem that is insoluble for it. But here the same question arises again about a person’s legal capacity to deserve eternal bliss before God. Merces, a reward, a payment according to the understanding of the Catholic theologians themselves 82, is what is used to pay for someone's work or deed - as if some price of the latter. Hence, just as giving a fair price for a thing received from someone is a matter of justice, so giving a reward for a deed or labor is a matter of justice.” The relationship of labor and reward, in order to be a matter of justice, requires first of all equality, while the relationship of human goodness and eternal bliss does not represent this equality. The main thing is that no matter how diligent a person is in doing good, he will always remain a sinner before God; he must first be forgiven, and then think about reward; and his deeds will always bear traces of his imperfection and sinfulness. There can be no question of merit. – Catholicism is thinking of eliminating this confusion with its teaching about the difference between merit de condigno and merit de congruo. In the first case, merit is in the proper sense, and in the second only figuratively. The first are possible with complete equality of relations. Between God and man there is no equality of relationship, therefore between them there is only a quiadam modus iustitae (a kind of justice) 83, therefore human merit can only be de congruo 84; nevertheless it is a merit. But Protestantism sharply and quite rightly objected to this, that this was only a trick invented to hide its Pelagianism; the essence of the matter remains absolutely the same, whether a human action is recognized as merit de condigno or de congruo, in both cases the reward equally necessarily follows the work, the legal significance of the matter remains in all its force 85 . Consequently, the question of a person’s legal capacity for merit before God is by no means eliminated. Catholics try to remove this obstacle by attributing a Divine character to human action: the work of a person after justification is the work of the righteousness of Christ infused into him and, therefore, Divine. Moreover, the Divinity of this action is protected from all impurities, from every touch of human impurity, since the will is recognized only as a recipient, and not as an actual creator of spiritual holiness. In this case, human deeds can receive the meaning of merit, like Divine deeds, and can be merit, moreover, not only de congruo, but also de condigno 86. In such a formulation, recognition of a person’s merit does not contradict salvation through Christ alone, since it leaves the power and significance of I. Christ’s merit in its complete integrity. “In the same way,” says Perrone, “just as nothing is diminished from the glory of the vine if its branches bear great fruit; on the contrary, the more fruit the branches bear, the more praise the vine deserves, because all the life-giving juice and moisture that is in the branches is from the vine; in the same way, the glory of Christ’s merits is not diminished in the least from our merits, since the latter come from the first (Christ’s); on the contrary, the merits of Christ through our merits become more and more obvious (commendantur) “87. But here the question arises again: if a person’s deeds are not essentially his deeds, then how can there be any talk about a person’s merit and his right to a reward? To evade this objection, Catholics allow the following conditional technique: they recognize the will as the second cause of good deeds. "The human merit of saying Klee, if we define it more closely, is not at all an unconditionally pure merit, since the grace of God is the first and main cause of good done in man and through him, but it is not completely absent, because man is still the second cause of good done in him and through him."88 Let us consider this position. The will can be recognized as the second cause of action in the sense that it perceives and contains within itself the righteousness poured into her through her actions 89 . If a good deed is performed, then this means that the grace that dwells in a person strives to accomplish this deed, and since this aspiration is accomplished in a person, then, naturally, for his consciousness it seems to be his own deed, and he, as it were, arbitrarily decides to actually perform a certain good deed. Everything is from grace: the beginning of the movement belongs to her 90; the will is the conductor of that current of grace, which, so to speak, moves a person’s hands to a good deed - nothing more than in this sense only the will can be called a helper and servant of grace 91. This idea about the illusiveness of the active participation of the will in doing good is perfectly expressed by Klee himself, saying: “(Man) must do what he can, but what he can and how he can, this is done by God” 92 . Translating this, in itself, Orthodox expression into Catholic language, we get that a person must do what seems possible to him, and he will do this, recognizing himself as the cause of his actions, but in fact, his ability to perform a certain action and the very way of discovering this ability is not his - it belongs to grace living and acting in him. Thus, it is obvious that recognizing the will as the second cause of good deeds does not at all resolve the question posed, but only rejects it; that even after this it is impossible to understand on what basis a good deed is recognized as a person’s merit, when the latter’s will serves only as a conductor of the influence of grace that is foreign to it. True, Catholics are responsible for this, that the recognition of the complete lack of merit on the part of man is based on the false assumption that man is completely deprived of freedom in relation to the Divine life and that in the matter of sanctification and justification he acts only passively”; and that, “on the contrary, with the recognition of the truth that a person freely goes to meet the excitement, direction and every action of grace, and then after its influence and together with it independently participates in the accomplishment of good - with the recognition of this truth, the merit of a person must be consistently established as possible and permissible, as really existing” 93. But we have seen how justly the actions of a Catholicly justified person can be called “free participation." Only those who forget or try to forget what was said earlier about the essence and consequences of Catholic justification can be called by this name. The righteousness infused into a person, this independently moving and self-acting property or appendage of his spirit tolerates freedom next to it only as the described second cause, allows, therefore, only the ghost of freedom, together with which the possibility of merit on the part of man is completely denied. Catholics, in the end, themselves had to recognize the inconsistency of their legal point of view and its insufficiency to explain human salvation. Here, for example, is how they prove the possibility of merit oo. Council of Trent: “Although Christ himself, as the head into the members or as the vine into the branches, constantly pours out virtue into the justified themselves (which precedes and accompanies the good deeds of the righteous and concludes the procession of works, and without which in no case can deeds be favorable to God and deserving), nevertheless one must believe that for the justified themselves there is no harm from this; it must be thought that, nevertheless, by these works, which were accomplished in God, they satisfied the Divine law for the state of this life and truly deserved eternal life, which should follow in due time, if, however, they departed in union with grace" 94. In other words: although a person’s deeds are not the essence of his deeds and, therefore, cannot be his merit, nevertheless one must believe”… “one must think” that they “truly deserve.” Why do they deserve? The council cannot explain this and must only demand blind faith, based on nothing, hiding behind its external right. All Catholic theologians must and indeed do come to the same end. Let us remember the words of Perrone quoted above 95: “God did not want Christ’s merits to benefit us without any assistance on our part”; or in more detail and clearly Klee: “Since God was pleased to recognize the good, begun by his grace and completed with the assistance of man, as man’s own work, he was pleased to recognize in it the character of merit, and the increase of active and mediating grace and, in the end Finally, to recognize eternal life as a reward, reward, fruit and inheritance, and the reward seems to be a matter of truth and faithfulness of God - then the reality of human merit cannot be denied. Thus, neither Klee nor Perrone, remaining true to their point of view, can in any way justify the need for human participation in salvation: Christ’s merit, as a value as a value, is too sufficient to satisfy the truth of God to require any other human merit, the very possibility of which, moreover, is still subject to strong doubt. Why then are these merits required for salvation and why can they be recognized as merits? “God so favored,” Catholic scientists are forced to answer. But why did He favor? After all, there must be some meaning in this Divine determination? It cannot be just an empty, causeless desire, as if a whim? For Catholics, however, the will of God is precisely the will, the order of the Master of the world. They, as true adherents of the law, bow only to the right of God to command the universe and do not think of finding consolation in the fact that God, although “possesses the kingdom of men,” but not arbitrarily, - that He wants goodness and holiness, not because He wants, but because “He Himself is holy,” because holiness is the immutable law of world life, that it is good itself, “For Your power is the beginning of truth.” and the very fact that You rule over everyone disposes You to spare everyone (Wis. 12:16). Thus, Catholic dogmatism, which tried to build a doctrine of salvation on a legal basis, resorting to all sorts of tricks for this purpose, ultimately comes to the realization that it is impossible to do this, and to all the objections of reason it only blindly points to the requirement of revelation, and it (dogmatics) hastens to misinterpret this requirement in its legal sense: it cannot be proven that works are merits, but the Word of God tells us that works are necessary for salvation and save, – next (Catholics conclude, making a logical leap), works, be that as it may, have the meaning of merit. This is the conclusion to which Western Christianity inevitably leads with its main lie - the legal understanding of salvation and all religious life in general. The legal system knows only external relations and does not care about the internal content hidden behind these relations. Without asking about the internal structure of the thing, he wants to find out its price and, having found out, considers his business over. If, according to Christian teaching, a person is saved only through Jesus Christ and only when he does the deeds commanded by Christ; then for the mind of the scholastics this means that Christ and man each represent to the truth of God a sufficient price for the promised eternal life. But, if the work of Christ is the work. human beings are concepts of the legal order, then they are mutually exclusive: to the extent that the price of human merit increases, so much is the merit of Christ unnecessary; Christ came because man could not save himself. Meanwhile, the Word of God and conscience require both, and precisely together, and precisely as indispensable reasons for the salvation of man. – This is the main lie of Western Christianity, which leads it to all sorts of tricks: its main premise requires some conclusions, and the life and direct teaching of the Word of God, with which it does not want to break ties, requires others. In their essence, both Catholicism and Protestantism teach and say the same thing: both are sick with the same incurable disease, the only difference is in the covers with which each of them tries to calm itself down. Both those and others admit (Protestants openly, and Catholics under the line) that, strictly speaking, a person’s deeds are not necessary and should not have justifying force. Both of them, in order not to go directly against the truth and at the same time not to deviate from their reasoning, must recognize the making of man as involuntary (Protestant sanctification and Catholic transformation - infusio gratiae). The only difference is that Protestants, without forgetting or hiding their thoughts, think only of somehow making amends for its disagreement with life, indicating its safety: deeds, they say, will necessarily follow - there is no need, therefore, to worry about their absence in justification. Catholics, on the other hand, try to cloud the very thought and, forgetting their main premises, only try to close their eyes to say that works are still necessary, that they still deserve salvation, without being able to explain how these works deserve it. From what has been said, it is clear which path should be followed in the scientific study of the Orthodox teaching on salvation. To take the works or symbolic books of Protestants and Catholics and try only to destroy their extremes would be wrong and useless; such a path, as we see, will never lead us to something clear and definite, stable. The extremes in the West are not accidental, they are a natural conclusion from a false fundamental principle. It is necessary, therefore, first of all to reject this basic principle (legal understanding of life) and then, independently of it, begin to study the truth, drawing information not from ready-made Western works, but from Holy Scripture and the works of St. Fathers. In this way, only we can clarify for ourselves the basic principle of the Orthodox understanding of life. Having clarified this beginning, it will not be difficult to reveal the very doctrine of salvation. Therefore, in further chapters we must first of all decide how Holy Scripture and Tradition relate to the legal understanding of life, do they recognize it? After answering this basic question, we will reveal the doctrine of eternal life, and the beginning of Orthodox theology will become clear to us. From this teaching will necessarily follow the teaching about the meaning of retribution and, further, about salvation and its conditions. 1. Legal understanding of life before the court of Holy Scripture and Holy Tradition We believe that we are saved by the one Jesus Christ, that only “through Christ alone can we be accepted by God” 96 - but we also believe (and in this we find constant testimony in our conscience) that God honors everyone with a portion according to his good deeds” 97, that “there is no other way (to receive remission of sins and hope of inheriting the promised benefits) except by knowing our Christ and being washed by that baptism for the remission of sins, which Isaiah proclaimed, you then lived without sin” 98; that “after the grace of God, the hope of salvation must be placed only in one’s own works (oiceioiV catorJwmasi) 99. “The Kingdom of God is in need” and only “the needy,” that is, those who use effort, those who labor, “delight it” (Matthew XI, 12) I. Christ came not to destroy the law, but to fulfill (Matt. V, 17). A person who is justified and sanctified does not do good, but must do it, because “everyone will receive from the Lord according to the good he has done” (Eph. VI, 8). Good, therefore, is not the fruit or evidence of salvation only, but one of the direct culprits of the latter, through which “free entry into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is opened to man” (2 Peter I, 11). Therefore, a person’s life after baptism is by no means a state of inactive bliss and involuntary good deeds (as it should be presented in the West), but, on the contrary, an active following of Christ (Col. III, I – 14). Earthly life is sowing, and the afterlife is harvest, and therefore a person must sow goodness in order to later inherit bliss (Gal. YI, 7 - 10), he must, like a diligent ant, accumulate fruits for the future life 100), collect for himself that “indestructible wealth, collecting which is not only not a vice, but also a great virtue and reward” 101. So, a justified person does good arbitrarily and is constantly aware and convinced of what he is doing “for the sake of honor in the kingdom of heaven” so that he “earns praise from God as a good servant and receives some honors” 102; so if there were no this conviction, if a person did not expect this reward in heaven, then a virtuous life would be meaningless and therefore impossible. “Who would want to accept would you undertake such bitter labors if you did not have the sweet hope in Christ?” 103. "Would we keep ourselves in such purity if we did not recognize that God is watchful over the human race? Of course not. But since we believe that we will give an account of all real life to God, who created both us and the world, then we choose a life of abstinence, love of mankind and humiliation, knowing that here we cannot tolerate, even if we were deprived of life, any evil that would be equal to the blessings to us prepared by the Great Judge for a meek, philanthropic and modest life” 104 Good deeds, therefore, are a necessary condition for salvation. But here again one can ask in what sense good deeds are recognized as a condition of salvation: it can only be an external basis for receiving salvation, but it can also be a condition in its own sense, a producer of salvation. Both answers, being very close to each other in form, in terms of their content are very, not to say, fundamentally different from one another: they can serve as exponents of two completely opposite, mutually exclusive understandings of life: worldly, pagan and Christian. A self-lover lives for himself, puts his “I” at the center of the world, from the point of view of this “I” evaluates everything that happens both in his own and in the world’s life. His goal is his own well-being, the highest good is pleasure, whether in the form of sensual pleasures, or in some kind of nirvana, etc. of that kind. Now, sin (the essence of which is self-love), while giving a person pleasure in this life, at the same time brings him immeasurably greater suffering in the afterlife: the world order established by God turns out to be detrimental to self-love and necessarily leads him to punishment. A self-lover, as such, of course, does not care about the truth or untruth of this world order, even more so, he is ready to rebel with his whole being against the latter - with his whole being he is ready to protest against this limitation of his “I”, the desire of which is law for him - but he, as a self-lover, cannot help but want to avoid that bitter fate to which unrepentant contradiction to a world order hostile to him leads. And so the self-lover begins, as he says to be saved, that is, with extreme regret cutting off his favorite and still dear desires, he begins to fulfill the law laid down by God - to fulfill it precisely because the illegality in its final conclusion turns out to be extremely unprofitable for the self-lover, although it does not cease to be desirable and pleasant for him. A selfish person in his soul is an enemy of God (Rom. 8:7) and wants to listen to his father - a murderer (John 8:44), he is ready to bite the Hand that has mercy on him (remember the Jews, “who killed the prophets and stoned those who were sent to them,” remember the crucified I. Christ), but he trembles at God, because he knows that He is omnipotent, that everything, and himself a self-lover, in the hands of God, that you cannot escape from God. A self-lover has to submit to the will of God for his own benefit. He obeys, but like a slave, with inner disgust, with grumbling, driven by a whip, or like a mercenary who needs benefit, a reward. A person so disposed, of course, cannot understand that “freedom of the children of God” that Jesus Christ brought, that “reconciliation” with God that the Apostles announced to us: “a natural man cannot “serve God in spirit and in truth (John 4:23), he judges everything according to his soul (Cor. 2:14). Coming to Christ, he does not so much want to learn from Him, how he should live in order to live a true life, how much he wants to know what benefit following Christ will bring him. Therefore, hearing about the salvation of Christ, he learns from this good news mainly its external side: deliverance from disaster, from final destruction and the receipt of the highest bliss, and does not notice the other, more significant side of this salvation, does not notice - that the disaster here is not suffering, not torment, but sin - that the highest good here lies in that very thing. the will of God, against which his selfish nature is so jealously indignant. He thinks only about what he will enjoy, and what? - he doesn’t ask about that. But, if the whole point is only about bliss, as such a benefit to a person, then it is natural to ask, why does a person receive this benefit? would it not be unfair to bestow upon him bliss when he has done nothing to deserve it? Christ taught that only those who do good are saved. Consequently, the person concludes, goodness is that payment, that concession to God, for which He grants man eternal life. Why God pleases this and not other behavior, the self-lover cannot understand: he himself, fulfilling the desires of his “I" only because it is pleasant to him, desirable, he is inclined to imagine the law of God as the same causeless desire of the Master. Of course, a person cannot love such an causeless will, as well as the Master Himself: He is only afraid of the latter, and fulfills the former only against his desire. Hence, his labors incurred in fulfilling the will God, cannot have the power and meaning of a selfless sacrifice to God, a loving and grateful sacrifice. For a person, they are a burden, a forced yoke. Therefore, he is not able to sacrifice them and demands a reward for himself, like any mercenary. In the eyes of a person, deeds receive the meaning of merit. Thus, the legal concept of salvation could not be more understandable and convenient precisely for a selfish mood. We have seen the weak sides of this idea - we have seen how they open up free entry to all sorts of deals and direct distortions of Christ’s truth in Western Christianity. Now we must reveal how the sacred sources of our faith relate to this idea: Holy Scripture and Tradition. If we approach these sources with a preconceived idea and if we tear out from them only individual words and sayings, without dealing with their main idea, then we; Perhaps we can find quite a few reasons for the legal representation in Holy Scripture or Tradition itself. First of all, how is salvation understood? "What more are you looking for, asks St. Gregory the Theologian, besides salvation? Future glory and holiness? For me it is very important to be saved and get rid of the torment there. You are following an unbroken and inaccessible path, and I am following a well-trodden path that has saved many."105 In these words, salvation is understood, as we see, exclusively from its external, formal side, the destruction of a person is taken in the literal and general sense, without definition, in what exactly it consists of: a person is threatened with trouble, and he gets rid of it. The same meaning can be found in those places of Holy Scripture where judgment, destruction, torment are contrasted with eternal life (for example, John: 3, 15; 5, 24; Matthew X25:46, etc.) If the essence of salvation is in a person’s well-being, in his pleasure, then why should a person be rewarded? “Without deed, no one is crowned” 106, says St. Ephraim the Syrian. Does it really seem fair to you that earthly and passing things and perishable glory require effort and labor, and in order to acquire the hope of ageless and endless centuries to reign with Christ, even this short time of your stay on earth should not be used for labors and exploits, so that you can subsequently reign for centuries.” 107. "Pay attention, says another holy father, to the very law of truth and enter into yourself. You have different servants, and some are good, and others are bad; you respect the good, but you beat the bad. And if you are a judge, then you praise the good, and punish the wicked. Is it possible that justice is observed with you, a mortal man, and with God, the unsuccessor of all?" King, is there no righteous retribution? It is wicked to deny this” 108. What is the basis on which a person is awarded a great reward in heaven? The reward is given only for feat; consequently, and the heavenly reward is achieved through feat, “righteous deeds." 109. Deeds, thus, give the right to eternal bliss, and turn out to be, as it were, a price, payment for it on the part of man. This comparison is very common in Holy Scripture and Tradition. Thus, the Lord I. Christ very often, convincing his listeners of this or that Christian virtue and Christian behavior in general, pointed out to them mainly that for such behavior and only for it, a reward is given in heaven. "See, He said, do not do your alms in front of people so that they can see you: otherwise you will have no reward from your Father in heaven. So, when you do alms, do not sound a trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, so that people may glorify them. Truly I say to you, they are already receiving their reward. With you... etc., and your Father who sees in secret will reward you openly" (Matt. 4:1–6, etc.). Or, for example, the well-known saying about a single cup of cold water given to a prophet, or a disciple: “Whoever receives a prophet in the name of a prophet receives the reward of a prophet; and whoever receives a righteous person in the name of a righteous person will receive the reward of a righteous person. And whoever gives one of these little ones only a cup of cold water to drink, in the name of a disciple, truly I tell you, will not lose his reward” (Matt. 10:41–42). The Holy Apostles also often resort to this form of expression, and also in those cases when it is necessary to encourage someone to do good. The afterlife reward is compared with the reward on the lists, with the crown of the winners. "Don't you know, says, for example, St. Apostle Paul, that those who run in the field all run, but one receives the reward; and you run so as to receive. All ascetics (i.e., fighters) abstain from everything: they to receive a perishable crown, but we an imperishable" (1 Cor. 9:24-5; Gal. 5:7; Philip. 3:14; 2 Timothy 4:7-8; 1 Peter V5:2-4, etc.) When restraining Christians from any vices, they point to the punishment that will come from the Lord to all sinners: “This is the will of God, that you should abstain from fornication, so that you do nothing unlawfully and selfishly to your brother; for the Lord is the avenger of all these things.” We spoke to you before and testified” (1 Thess. 4:3-6). These and similar passages are used to justify the legal understanding of moral life. Subsequently we will see how fair this is. It is exactly the same in the patristic works. The Fathers of the Church, with the same goal of justifying good deeds and inducing them to do it, sometimes resort to comparisons that, apparently, directly refer to the external understanding of life. This is, for example, the analogy of buying and selling. "It is necessary, says St. Gregory of Nyssa, strengthened by faith in what is expected, by virtuous behavior to purchase (proemporeuetJai) future grace in advance." brabeiwn); and just as the dumb cannot receive reward or approval for the perfections that they possess by nature, so we would not receive any of this. For natural perfections serve for the praise and honor of those who do not possess them, and so, that is why God did not present everything to nature.”111 Virtue is recognized as the sufficient reason that makes retribution a matter of simple justice. “Spiritual healing cares for the soul, so that the soul can inherit the mountain glory for the feat and for the struggle with the earthly and, having been tempted here by them, like gold by fire, received hope as a reward for virtue, and not only as a gift of God." 112. "If souls, says St. Ephraim the Syrian, turn out to be skillful in everything, faithful and worthy, enduring to the end and preserving hope of faith, then having been worthy of deliverance by grace, in all justice they will become heirs of the kingdom." 113 Or Nilus of Sinai: "On the day of judgment, God will truthfully award reward to everyone, not according to the erroneous assumption here, but as justice requires, according to the very truth of what was done" 114. Moreover: not only virtue, as a general and constant disposition of the soul, but also every good action, good deed, in itself, seems to be deserving. Such an idea can be given, for example, by the words of St. Cyril of Jerusalem: "Only be trustworthy; do only, strive only diligently. Nothing will perish. Every prayer of yours, every psalmody is written down; every almsgiving is written down, every fast is written down; even if the marriage was preserved honestly, the abstinence observed for God is also written down; the first crowns in this record are presented to virginity and purity" 115. If you continue to explore the works of the holy fathers are all in the same direction, then one can, perhaps, find in them traces of Catholic supererogatory merit. For example, in the Ladder we read: “There are souls who have done more than what the commandments command.”116 Or St. Gregory of Nyssa, praising Placilla, says that with her exploits (catarJwmasi) she exceeded what was prescribed. (purercetai cai taprostetagmena) 117. In general, human life sometimes seems like some kind of mechanical combination of various feats and merits, each of which awaits its own reward and is done only for the last. “Everyone’s life is, as it were, weighed, says St. Cyril of Alexandria, retribution will certainly be balanced with our goodness.” 118. Previous good deeds reduce the punishment for sins, because the righteous Judge pronounces a sentence, proportioning the latter with the former,” says Blessed Theodoret 119. In total, the legal understanding of life can find the most grounds for itself in the works of St. I. Chrysostom, who more than anyone else, perhaps, had to speak against selfish callousness towards the poor and, therefore, prove, first of all, the imprudence of such behavior. By the very essence of the matter, he could not speak to the miser and self-lover about the sweetness of sacrifice for his neighbor - when speaking with a mercenary, he had to choose the appropriate language. Hence the desire, noticeable in some places in the saint’s works, to calculate when, for what and exactly how much a person will receive. “If you, says the saint, do something good (crhstou) and do not receive reward for it here, do not be embarrassed: an abundant reward awaits you in the future.” 120. “When you see a righteous person punished, consider him blessed, and say: this righteous person either has a sin on himself, and receives retribution for it, and goes there clean, or is punished beyond his sins, and an excess is calculated for him, an appendage to his righteousness (prosJhch dicaiosunhV autw logizetai). Because there is a calculation (logoV) and God says to the righteous: you owe me so much, let’s say he entrusted him with ten ovols, and give him ten ovols in the account. If he has spent sixty oxen, God says to him: I count ten oxen for your sin, and fifty for righteousness.”121 If we are now from oo. If we turn from the eastern to the western, it goes without saying that in their works we will find even more traces of a legal understanding of life: these fathers had to deal with Rome directly; therefore, they could not ignore its way of thinking, especially since the sinfulness of man seemed to justify such an understanding of life. "From then on, says Tertullian, as evil entered the world and as the goodness of God was insulted, His justice began to govern His kindness. It provided goodness to the worthy, denied it to the unworthy, took it away from the ungrateful and marked it out to its enemies. It judges, condemns, punishes: His judgments, His executions, the fear they inspire serves as a curb on self-will, encouragement virtues" 122. This is where the designation of human deeds of “merit” comes from, common to all Western fathers. Deeds are considered mainly as a certain value that gives the right to a reward. So St. Cyprian writes to the confessors: “Some of you forestalled others by committing your martyrdom and are destined to receive a reward from the Lord according to their merits; and some are still languishing in prison, in the mines and in chains and... through the slowness of suffering they acquire the fullest right to merit, by which they hope to receive from heavenly rewards as many rewards as there are now days in torture.”123 Tertullian directly represents the Lord, as if God, he says, not wanting the death of his saints, declared himself their intercessor, and therefore accepts their good deeds and repentance; He makes Himself obligated to reward them for this.” 124 The relationship between God and man is sometimes strictly equated to the relationship between members of a simple legal union: the essence is based on mutual satisfaction, with vengeance for any violation. Let's take the same Tertullian. Here, for example, is what he says in his work on patience: “Corporal sorrows are a cleansing sacrifice that reconciles God with us through humility, when the flesh, content with a little bread and water, offers its poverty and abstinence as a gift to the Lord, when it adds frequent fasting to this, and when it spends fasting in ashes and sackcloth... So the once proud king Nebuchadnezzar, who irritated the Lord, made a magnificent and useful sacrifice of patience by humble and strict repentance of a seven-year exile, during which he lived with animals, removed from the society of people; and by this cruel sacrifice he regained his kingdom, and, what is more important, by this purifying satisfaction he again acquired the mercy of God.”125 Despite, however, all these numerous traces of legal understanding of life in Holy Scripture and the works of oo. The Church cannot recognize this understanding of life as a valid patristic or biblical understanding of life, or it can only be done if we use Holy Scripture or Tradition only as a collection of incoherent sayings, and not as the single word of God, not as an expression of a single and integral worldview. All these traces must be compared with a long series of thoughts that were also constantly on the lips of sacred writers and oo. Churches and which nevertheless directly deny the legal understanding of life. First of all, is a legal relationship between God and man possible? Based on Holy Scripture and Tradition, we say that they are impossible. – In fact, if they want to represent a certain relationship as a legal relationship, then they must demand from it full compliance with the concept of a legal relationship; If there is no such correspondence, and the relationship, meanwhile, does not contradict either reason or moral feeling, then this is because this relationship belongs to an order of phenomena different from the legal one and requires special laws, a special explanation. Now, a legal union is fundamentally a selfish desire for one’s own well-being and is expressed in the mutual self-restraint of several selfish interests, so that each of them prospers to the greatest possible extent. Is this standard applicable to God's relationship with man? To think so is not only wicked, but also insane. "Can a man, asks Eliphaz, benefit God? A wise man benefits himself. What pleasure is it to the Almighty that you are righteous? And will He benefit from the fact that you keep your ways pure?" (Job. ХХП, 2 – 3). "God, says St. Augustine, does not need human righteousness itself, and everything in which true worship of God is expressed is useful to man, not to God. Of course, no one will say that he was useful to the source when he drank from it, or to the light when he saw it." 14), existing today and not tomorrow, believes that he has worthily honored the Divine nature. It’s like lighting a thin thread of tow and thinking that with this spark you are increasing the brilliance of the sun’s rays” 127. "Who is man? asks St. Tikhon of Zadonsk: earth and pus. Who is God? He is the Creator of all creation, visible and invisible." 128. Is any comparison possible between them? And if it is impossible, then how to understand the closeness of God to man? Why does the Lord, all-satisfied and all-perfect, descend to union with man, with this worm, ashes, with this sleepy vision and shadow" 129. "Lord, exclaims the Psalmist, what is man, what do you know about him, and the son of man, why do you pay attention to him? Man is like a breath: his days are like a retreating shadow" (Ps. CXLIII, 3 - 4), "What are the deeds of men? asks St. I. Chrysostom: "Ashes and dust, dust before the wind, smoke and a shadow, a leaf and a color carried away by the wind, a dream, a dream and a fable, an empty vibration of the air, easily excited, a feather tossed, a fickle current, and everything that could be even more insignificant than this” 130 Why did the Lord need these ghostly human deeds? Why did He not only deign to “bring man from non-existence into being, but also restored the fallen one again and gave him the future kingdom” 131. The legal principle will not explain to us this “compassionate mercy” of God, according to which He “did not suffer from the devil to see the tormented human race” 132. Where law and satisfaction operate, there is no place for such an unreasonable, selfless goodness. Let us, however, take the relationship between God and man as a given of experience; without thinking about their origin. Let us assume that a legal union currently exists between God and man: a person’s virtue is the price that the Lord demands from him for the promised rewards. But even with this concession, the relationship between God and man will not be valid from a legal point of view: before thinking about any reward for his deeds, man owes God for all the benefits received and received. "If God, says St. Macarius of Egypt, entered into court with us, then nothing would be found that in true truth belongs to man; because both property and all the imaginary earthly goods with which a person can do good, and the earth and everything that is on it, and the body itself, and the very soul belongs to Him. And not only everything else, but also man’s very being has by grace. Therefore, what kind of property does he have, by which rightly could he boast and justify himself? Just as it is impossible to get ahead of your shadow, which moves forward insofar as we move forward, and always precedes us at an equal distance; just as it is impossible for a body to grow higher than the head, which always rises above it, so it is impossible for us to surpass God with our gifts. For we give nothing that does not belong to Him, or that is outside the circle of His generosity. Think about where your being, breathing, understanding come from? Where does this highest advantage come from, that you know God and hope for the kingdom of heaven? 134. “What shall we render to the merciful God for all these blessings and gifts, for the fact that He came down from heaven from the Father, or that for our sake He was incarnated in the womb, or that He was killed for us? In order to repay for one strangulation, then if we lived on earth for thousands of years, we could not repay in any way for this God’s mercy” 135 “Children, says St. Tikhon of Zadonsk, no matter how much they honor and please their father, they pay their due to him as a parent, educator and provider, otherwise they would be ungrateful: so Christians, no matter how hard they try to please the heavenly Father, pay their due and thus cannot earn anything; but what they receive from God, they receive not. Because we cannot repay God in any way or in any way for His good deeds to us, shown and demonstrated, but we always remain debtors to Him” 136. Our good deeds, therefore, even if we recognize some value in them, still cannot deserve a reward for a person; it will go, so to speak, to pay off a debt; so, “if we do not do what is commanded to us, then we are not only deprived of a heavenly reward, but we do not even have the right to be called unworthy slaves” 137. “You are not showing mercy (to God by striving for good), says St. Cyril of Jerusalem: “because you yourself received it first: on the contrary, you are repaying mercy, repaying the debt to Him who was crucified for you on Calvary” 138. But this is not enough. If we measure the relationship between God and man by legal standards and consistently; to adhere to it to the end, then we must admit that, just as every good deed gives a person at least the ghost of the right to a reward, so, on the other hand, every sin, every violation of the covenant with God necessarily requires satisfaction, so to speak, payment for itself (as Catholics actually teach), and consequently, the last ghost of the right to some kind of reward from God is taken away. “The corruptible human race is worthy of a thousand deaths, because it remains in sins,” says St. Basil the Great 139. Sin is not the property of only the imperfect, it is a universal phenomenon, and everyone, without any hesitation, can say about himself: “How can a person be justified before God? So He does not trust His servants and sees shortcomings in His angels: especially in those who live in churches made of clay, of which the foundation dust, which are destroyed faster than moths (Job. IX, 2; IV, 18 - 19 “In the courage of even chosen people it is possible, in the words of St. Cyril of Alexandria, to find something worthy of just censure, which is seen as the knowledge of the Lawgiver, although it eludes our gaze” 140. “Let, says St. I. Chrysostom, there be someone righteous, but even if he is a thousand times righteous (can muriaciV h dicaioV) and ascending to the very top, so as to renounce sins, he cannot be clean from filth; even if he were a thousand times righteous, he is still a man.”141 Where is the opportunity to demand from God some kind of reward, some kind of satisfaction, when on our part there is only a violation of the covenant with God, only an increase in the already great debt? “Know,” says St. Tikhon of Zadonsk, “that we have not deserved any good from God, but on the contrary, we are worthy of any punishment, and no matter what punishment there is, our sins still deserve more.” reproach the justice of God, the avenger,” says quite rightly, from a strictly legal point of view, Blessed Augustine 143. But, if we forget all this, forget both the insignificance and sinfulness of man, then even then from the point of view of law we cannot explain the salvation of man: the basic principle of the legal union is not maintained - the equality of sacrifice and retribution, labor and reward. What is earthly life in comparison with afterlife bliss? An insignificant drop compared to the whole ocean. If, therefore, a person’s deeds have any value, then, in any case, not for obtaining eternal bliss. "If Abraham, says St. Apostle Paul, was justified by works, then he has praise, but not before God (Rom. IV, 2). From our earthly point of view and for earthly purposes, the righteousness of a person has some value and may deserve some kind of reward in the eyes of people, but before the Judgment of God, where the sentence is pronounced on the final fate of a person, this righteousness has no value, does not correspond to the greatness of the reward. First of all, this is because “The time of repentance is short, but the kingdom of heaven has no end” 144. “The work of asceticism is fleeting, like a dream, but the peace with which this labor is rewarded is endless and indescribable.” 145 “Our short-term suffering produces eternal glory in immeasurable abundance” (2 Cor. IV, 17-18). “The thousands of years of this age are also in comparison with the eternal and incorruptible world, as if anyone took one grain of sand from the whole multitude of sea sands" 146. But time and eternity are opposite to each other not only in their continuity, quantitatively, - they are much more incomparable in their content, in their qualitative difference. Whatever work a person undertakes, whatever suffering he endures, all this is nothing in comparison with the bliss that he receives for this. “Look, St. Chrysostom says, what. the greatness of glory that the following virtues enjoy exceeds everything (wV nican authn panta), no matter what anyone does; let him reach the very top, and then what can a person do that will completely deserve (epaxiwV aJlhsai) the generosity of the Lord? 147. “If only,” says the reverend. Macarius of Egypt, every person from the time Adam was created until the end of the world fought with Satan and endured sorrows, then he would not have done anything great in comparison with the glory that he inherits, because he will reign with Christ for endless centuries" 148. The impossibility of understanding salvation from the point of view of law is further revealed from the unacceptable and unthinkable phenomenon in a legal union that one of the members of the union (God) not only does not need the other members and does not seek to take advantage of their labors and forces for his own benefit, but turns out to be a constant and necessary helper for them in everything that these latter want to oblige Him to. Each member of a legal union has his own well-being as his goal and, as is natural, wants to have it at the lowest cost on his part. But the Lord possesses bliss apart from man, and despite this, He not only recognizes Himself as a debtor to everyone who does good, but also strives for some reason to increase His debt, Himself working for people and considering what He has done as the work of people. “Virtue,” says St. Augustine, whatever they may be, although it is called ours, is given to us by Divine grace” 149. “Your virtues,” says St. I. Chrysostom, do not come from you, but from the grace of God. If you point to faith, it comes from a calling; whether you point to the remission of sins, to gifts, to the ability to teach, to virtues, you received everything from there. So, tell me, what do you have that, no matter what you received, you achieved on your own? You can't point to anything. Have you received it and yet are you arrogant? At the same time, one should humble oneself; because what is given does not belong to you, but to the Giver. If you have received, you have received from Him; if you received it from Him, then you received what was not yours; If you have received something that is not yours, then why do you exalt yourself, as if you had everything from yourself? 150 “How can we earn eternal life by our obedience, when true obedience is not our own, but the work of God’s grace, and it is ascribed to us that we do not resist the grace of God, but cooperate with that which works in us?” 151 How can there be any talk of merit on the part of a person when he cannot take a step in moral development without the help of God? “If Thy mercy had not covered me,” says St. Ephraim the Syrian: I would perish now, like dust before the face of the wind, as if I had never appeared in this life.” 152 Without God, according to St. Gregory the Theologian, we are all mortal playgrounds of vanity, the living dead, stinking of sins.” You have not seen a bird fly where there is no air, or a dolphin swim where there is no water; so a person without Christ does not lift his feet up” 153. Man, therefore, in the essence of the matter not only does not oblige the Lord with his merits, but rather owes them to Him. How can we understand the union of God with man after this, if we stand strictly from a legal point of view? I enter into an alliance not at all out of a desire to serve or help my neighbor, but, on the contrary, out of a desire to use the powers of my neighbor for my own well-being. At the same time, my goal, of course, is to receive as much as possible and give as little as possible. Will I, therefore, accept any obligations if I do not expect to receive a greater or, at the very least, equal reward for them? Meanwhile, the Lord not only enters into an alliance with man and assumes obligations, Himself absolutely not needing either this union or man in general, not only “gives man a reward infinitely superior to the labor of the latter and forgets all his untruths, without demanding payment for them, but He Himself produces good in man, so that for this good He Himself may be obliged to man.” “God, Who, in the words of St. Irenaeus of Lyons, does not need any than, he accepts our good deeds for the purpose of giving us a reward with His benefits, as our Lord says: Come, blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the creation of the World. For I was hungry, and you gave Me food... etc. since you did it to one of the least of My brothers, you did it to Me (Matt. 25:34 et seq.). our own benefit, so as not to be fruitless" 154 From a legal point of view, this phenomenon is incomprehensible, even downright meaningless. Obviously, it is not jus that is at work here - obviously, this union of God with man must be understood from a different point of view, and not a legal one, which can only distort it and not explain it. What is at work here is not the right, not the desire of “one’s own”, but mercy, self-forgetfulness and the desire to serve another, lesser one. “What is the distance,” asks St. I. Chrysostom, do you imagine between God and man? Like between a man and a worm? But even imagining this difference like this, you said nothing, and you can’t say anything. But do you want to seek loud glory for yourself from the worm. No. If with everything your love of glory., if you don’t want this, will He who does not have such a passion and stand so high above you need your glorification? However, even without needing glory, He says that He desires it for your sake. And if He did not disdain to become a slave for your sake, is it surprising that for the same reason, He gives His consent to anything else, no matter what contributes to our salvation, He does not consider anything unworthy of Himself? 155. That is why the Fathers of the Church, who used the analogy of work and reward, feat and crown, never forgot and did not hide from their listeners that this is only an analogy, only an approximate comparison, the essence of our salvation in no way expresses that salvation is not accomplished according to the external law of equal reward. Here, for example, are a few examples from the works of St. I. Chrysostom, who, as we noted above, most often and in more detail dwelled on this analogy of feat and crown. Wanting to explain to man his salvation, many, including St. father, come after Ap. Pavel, to the analogues of competitions on the lists: both here and there a reward is given for victory. But the similarity is only visible, the difference is fundamental. ,,(At the Olympic Games), says St. Chrysostom, the teacher of wrestlers, stands, remaining only a spectator, unable to do anything else, but only waiting to see which side will win. This is not so our Lord: He both fights and stretches out His hand, and touches and, as if He Himself overcomes the enemy on all sides, betrays him into our hands, does and arranges everything so that we can resist the struggle and win, and he can place an unfading crown on our head” 156. They use the comparison with battle, but this comparison must be understood with great limitations. "Do not hide behind the weight of labors and exploits: not only with the hope of future blessings, but also in another way, God has made virtue easy for us: He always assists and helps us. Just wish to show at least a little zeal, and then everything else will follow by itself. For this He requires from you even a little work, so that your victory will be. Just as a king commands his son to stand in line, shoot arrows and be visible in order to attribute victory to him, and meanwhile he himself controls the course of the battle: this is what God does in our war against the devil. He only requires from you that you declare open hostility to the devil - and if you do this, then He Himself will end the whole war.”157 You can compare the relationship between God and man with the relationship between a lender and a debtor, but “among people, those who have accepted a mortgage think that they are showing mercy to us, preserving what they have received: with Christ, on the contrary: having received a mortgage from you, He, according to His words, does not show mercy, but on the contrary receives, and for the very care that He shows to your property, He does not demand payment from you, but repays you” 158. Thus, all these and similar comparisons, while presenting some external similarity with the work of our salvation, do not express such an essential, basic feature of it, without which it appears in a false light: according to them we should serve God, while He “came not to be served, but to serve and to give His life” for us (Matthew XX, 28). According to the legal understanding, it turns out that by our actions we render something to God, that we must satisfy His wrath with our sorrows and sufferings, we must pay for ourselves, and for the future pleasure that God has promised us. He takes away from us our temporary pleasures, as if not being so generous as to provide a person with complete bliss. In fact, God is ready to do everything to save a person, to bring him into that bliss - He does not consider anything so great and dear to Himself that He would not sacrifice it to save a person. Our deeds are insignificant and illusory, and if God were as the legal understanding of life imagines him, like a lazy slave who buried his talent, if He were a reaper where he did not sow, and a gatherer where he did not waste (Matthew 25:24), then, of course, He would not give anything for these deeds of ours (and we would not have them then), and we would never be able to “get rid of our bodies of death” (Rom. 7:24). But “thanks be to God,” He is not one to be afraid to show mercy and lavish His gifts, He does not calculate how much a person owes, on the contrary, He “awaits only a reason from us to show His great mercy” 159 “Man, says Rev. Ephraim the Syrian cannot receive a reward for his labors other than through goodness. (But) whose work is equivalent to the kingdom? Who (therefore) can receive the kingdom in truth, if he does not inherit its tuna? Is a drop given in truth, and the rest makes up for goodness? The work of truth only gives the opportunity to reward the giver with great wealth for small things” 160. In view of such inconsistencies in the legal understanding of life, oo. The churches allowed it only in the form of comparison, they always realized that in our salvation it is the mercy of God that is at work, always ready to give even more than is required - and not dry calculation, which thinks only about not passing on the excess, so as not to cause a loss to itself. Therefore, recognizing works as necessary for salvation, precisely as a reason, oh. The Church, however, attributed salvation not to works, not to merit, but exclusively to the grace of God. We work, we do good, but we are not saved for work, “we are rewarded from Christ the Lord in the next century according to His mercy alone, and not according to merit” 161. “Eternal rest, says St. Basil the Great, awaits those who labored lawfully in this life, (but) peace, not rewarded according to the merit of works, but according to the grace of the most generous God given to those who trusted in Him” 162. Interpreting Romans 6:23, St. AND. Chrysostom says: “The Apostle did not say that it (eternal life) is a reward for your merits, but: “the gift of God,” meaning that we were not freed by ourselves and received not a debt, not a reward, not a reward for our labors, on the contrary, all this is a work of grace. And from this we can see the advantage of grace: it not only freed us and improved our lot, but even accomplished all this without our efforts and labors" 163. "Everything that is good and salutary is accomplished not by duty, but by grace and grace alone (cariti panta cai agaJothti), and we have not given any reason for doing good to us" 164. Our personal participation in our own salvation, as it were, disappears before the greatness of what the Lord does for us and in us, so that the Orthodox teaching about the salvation of man is quite accurately expressed by St. Athanasius of Alexandria, saying that all our salvation should be attributed to the mercy of God" 165. Only such a teaching is reconciled with that concept of God; "which God Himself revealed to us; only with such an idea of ​​​​salvation will we understand that God is a God of love, is, indeed, our heavenly Father, Who is indifferently ready to have mercy on everyone, if only they turn for this mercy. “Ask,” says the Lord, and it will be given to you, seek and you will find; press and it will be opened to you, etc. Even if you are wicked, you know how to give good things to your children: how much more will your heavenly Father give good things to those who ask Him" ​​(Matthew 7:7-11). "You have heard what was said: love your neighbor and hate your enemy (this is the main position of the legal, legal understanding of life: to give what is due to everyone). But I say love your enemies, bless those who curse you and pray for those who mistreat you and persecute you (the mood is exactly the opposite of legalistic. Why is it needed?): that you may be sons of your Heavenly Father; for He commands His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the just and the unjust, without asking how much they deserve these mercies, and without fear of rewarding the unworthy. (Matt. 5:43–45). Does the legal concept of Him correspond to such a concept of God? Can it be said that the Lord “is good to the graceless and the wicked" (Luke 6:35), if He rewards only equals, if He has mercy only on the worthy. How does such reward differ from ordinary human justice? “If you, says the Lord, love those who love you, what is your reward? Don’t publicans do the same? And if you greet only your brothers, what special thing are you doing? Don’t you do the same? pagans"? (Matt. 5:36-47). The same can be said about the legal concept of God. If He has mercy only on the worthy, then wouldn’t each of us, imbued with selfishness, do the same? “If,” we confess to God in our daily evening prayers, “you save the righteous, it is nothing great; and if you have mercy on the pure, it is nothing wonderful: for they are worthy of Your mercy.” But “this is love, not that we loved God, but He first loved us” (1 John 4:10); but “God proves His love by the fact that Christ died for us while we were still sinners” (Rom. 5:8), “But on me (we pray), a sinner, surprise Thy mercy, for this show Thy love for mankind, so that my malice may not overcome Thy unspeakable goodness and mercy” 166. If the Lord teaches us to forgive our neighbor for his sins against us, it is because He forbade us to demand any satisfaction for the offenses inflicted on us, although the law of truth not only allows this, but also requires it, He forbade it because He Himself does not demand satisfaction from us, that He Himself forgives us for tuna. Only the law represented the Lord as the guardian of the truth, but with the coming of Christ the law, recognized as imperfect (Rom. III, 21, etc.), ceased to exist, and we saw our Heavenly Father as His Only Begotten Son showed Him to us. Not being able to fully carry out the concept of merit and at the same time not wanting or afraid to leave it completely in the West, they came up with a distinction between merit in the proper and inappropriate sense (de congruo), and the merits of a person are classified in the second category. God, they say, of course, cannot in all truth recognize human deeds as they are, merits worthy of reward, obliging Him to give man his due (for the reasons mentioned above); but, as if turning a blind eye to this, He announces to man that he will recognize his deeds as merits and reward them as if they were worth a reward. Retribution, therefore, is still done according to the truth, albeit conditional. But isn’t it similar to the following: there is some law, the implementation of which is somehow burdensome or harmful for a certain person. And out of compassion for him, we advise him to circumvent the law without violating it to the letter. The law is being circumvented, and we pretend that we are convinced of its full implementation. Many examples of such detours can be found in the moral teachings of those very Jesuits who, perhaps most zealously, preached a legal understanding of life. But isn’t our moral feeling indignant when this pathetic game, this hypocritical observance of the letter while actually violating the meaning of the law, is attributed to God? The law of truth, if it is understood as reward for work of equal pleasure - after all, it will still be violated - after all, after all, a person does not deserve eternal life, and so, despite this, the Lord will say that a person receives eternal life according to his deserts. Of course, this will be mercy - of course, it will be better, more comforting for us than with the repulsive dryness of a strict law, but the idea of ​​God will be far from moral, unworthy of the One Saint. By presenting God’s relationship to man in such an incorrect light, the legal understanding of life also distorts man’s moral life. The essence of the Christian life is found in love, which “is the fulfillment of the law.” (Rom. 13:10). "Jesus said (to the lawyer): Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy thought, and with all thy mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. The second is like it: Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments are the whole law and the prophets established (Matthew 22:37 - 40). “If anyone would come after me, says the Lord, let him deny himself and take up his cross." and follow me (Matthew 16:24). Does the legal understanding of life meet these requirements? Can one say that a person loves God most of all, can one say that he has completely denied himself - when a person does the will of God only in the hope of receiving the highest reward for this. After all, the goal that sanctifies good deeds for a person in this case is nothing other than well-being - the focus of a person’s life continues to be his own “I”, and not God. Having made a certain concession in favor of the law of God, a person in his soul remains the same self-lover, wanting only his own benefit. True, the saying about bearing the cross refers to the sorrows of life here. But is it fair to limit the power of the Savior’s words with these sorrows? We must not forget that the Lord never taught us external good behavior as the final goal, but had in mind the mood. If, for example, He commanded to beware of swearing, to turn the other cheek to the one who strikes, etc., this does not mean at all that these are the actions that are prescribed to a Christian (sectarians do not have the right to limit the meaning of these words in such a way). For a Christian, the mood that, under certain conditions, can be expressed in the indicated actions is mandatory; these latter serve only, so to speak, as a clear example of the teaching, and not as its content. The same is true about bearing the cross. The Lord, of course, does not need our suffering, but needs that mood that makes us not only indifferent, but also joyful to suffer for Christ - we need that self-hatred that is an expression of love for God. Give me, son, your heart, says the Wise One (Proverbs 23:26). Meanwhile, doing for the sake of a reward from the heart does not give, the heart still belongs to man, and not to God. "If you do good to those who do good to you, what gratitude do you have for that? For sinners do the same. And if you lend to those from whom you hope to get it back, what gratitude do you have for that? For sinners also lend to sinners in order to get back the same amount (Luke 6:33-34). Again, the Lord does not care about our debtors, but wants by this example to teach us self-sacrifice for the sake of our Heavenly Father. "And Your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High; for He is kind to the ungrateful and the wicked (v. 35). If we love Christ and follow Him only because “they ate bread and were filled” (John 6:26), - if we do good only because we expect a greater reward from God, then how does our good work differ from the pagan? After all, even the pagans, expecting a reward, can do good deeds - even perform such feats at which one cannot help but stop in amazement? These are, for example, fakirs, Buddhist ascetics, some dervishes, etc. All of them, each in their own way, expect a reward or benefit beyond the grave and for the sake of it they depress their body, endure insults, refuse the comforts and honors of worldly life, etc. The whole difference between our good deeds and pagan ones will be that we expect rewards from the true God, while Buddhists, fakirs, etc. are chasing ghosts; but in our essence, from the point of view of mood, we will not differ at all from them; we will be just like them, selfish 167 . No, a true follower of Christ “calls the Sabbath a delight” (Isa. 58:13), and not a burden and not a means for gain, “he who is born of God does not commit sin” not out of fear of punishment and not out of desire for reward, but because “the seed of God abides in him” (John 3:9). His good deeds, therefore, must find their root within the soul, must stem not from self-pity, which is inherently hostile to Christ’s teaching, but from love for goodness and God. That's why ooh. The churches with all decisiveness denounce doing good because of reward or fear; this is “feeding,” in the words of St. Gregory the Theologian 168. "In my opinion," says Clement of Alexandria, "we must resort to the word of salvation, not out of fear of punishment, nor because of the promise of a reward, but for the sake of goodness itself. Those who do this stand on the right side of the sanctuary - those who think that by giving perishable things they will receive in exchange the immortality that belongs to them, are called mercenaries in the parable of the two brothers."169 "If we could imagine," he says, "that Someone suggested to the Gnostic whether he wished to choose the knowledge of God or eternal life, and if these two things, which are completely identical, were separated, then the Gnostic would, without the slightest hesitation, choose the knowledge of God, recognizing that the possession of faith, which from love ascends to knowledge, is desirable in itself” 170, regardless of whether it is pleasant or unpleasant, beneficial or not for a person. "If you are a slave," says St. Gregory the Theologian, "be afraid of beatings. If you are a mercenary, keep one thing in mind: to receive." If you stand above a slave and a hireling, even a son, be ashamed of God as a Father; do good, because it is good to obey the Father. Even if you didn’t hope to receive anything, pleasing the Father is a reward in itself.” 171 “Perfection,” according to another Gregory (Nyssa), “is not slavish (douloprepwV), not to move away from a vicious life through fear of punishment and not to do good in the hope of rewards, trading in a virtuous life with some conditions and agreements; but losing sight of everything, even that which is kept by hope by promise, - just imagining it is terrible - to lose God’s friendship, and recognizing only one thing as precious and desirable – to become God’s friend; this, in my opinion, is perfection in life” 172. But the most important, so to speak, irreconcilable accuser of mercenary good deeds finds itself in the person of St. I. Chrysostom, whom one can sometimes point to as his defender. He directly reveals the real source of this good work in selfishness in the absence of love for God and Christ. "What are you saying, cowardly, pitiful man? - exclaims the Saint: - you have to do something pleasing to God, and you stand thinking about the reward? If, having done this, you were destined to fall into Gehenna, and then should you put it off? On the contrary, shouldn’t you take on a good deed with greater zeal? You do something pleasing to God, and are looking for another reward? Truly you do not know what a great good to please God; because if you knew this, then no other reward would compare (with this good). Don’t you know that your reward will be greater when you do what is right without hoping for a reward?” 173, "We," the Saint says in another of his works, "are in such a pitiful state of mind that if there were no fear of Gehenna, perhaps we would not even think of doing anything good. That is why we are worthy of Gehenna, if not for other guilts, then precisely because we fear it more than Christ. These are not the feelings of Blessed Paul, but completely opposite. That is why we are condemned in Gehenna, that our dispositions are different. If we loved Christ, as we should love, then we would know that it is harder to offend a loved one than Gehenna. But we do not love, therefore we do not know the greatness of this punishment... Although we always live in sins and vices, but as soon as we do a small good, if only it is worth some kind of reward, following the example of evil slaves, we calculate to the last minute what payment is due to us. But you will receive a greater reward if you do not do it in the hope of a reward. Talking about rewards and calculating them in advance means more of a mercenary than a faithful servant. We must do everything for Christ, and not for reward. This is why He threatens Gehenna, this is why He promises the kingdom, so that we will love Him. So, let us love Christ as much as we ought to love: here is the high reward, here is the kingdom and pleasure." 174 Some try, despite the voice of oo. Church, to justify doing good for the sake of reward by the consideration that, although it may not be entirely moral, it is useful. It is necessary, they say, to look at what kind of bribe is available in this case; Christians mean a reward that surpasses everything; Moreover, the expectation of this reward forces Christians to cleave to God, to be moral, etc. But this consideration can only prove the rationality and prudence of such good deeds, but not the purity of its motives. In addition, the quality of such good deeds, its depth and strength are very doubtful. “A horse,” says St. I. Chrysostom, “should be especially surprised when he can walk straight without a bridle; but if he walks straight because he is held by reins and a bridle, then there is nothing surprising in this: then this harmony should be attributed not to the nobility of the animal, but to the strength of the bridle. The same should be said about the soul: it is not surprising if it behaves modestly when fear oppresses it; no, then show me spiritual wisdom and perfect good morals, when temptations pass and the reins of fear are removed” 175. And this is quite understandable. If a person does good only because of reward or fear of punishment, then his entire moral development can be very strongly doubted. Suppose he is now doing good; but, after all, his soul does not participate in this good and does not value it; after all, the meaning of life for him is self-pleasure. One has only to assume that circumstances have changed, that it has become more profitable for a person to do evil rather than good, and then all his virtue, like a plant without a root, will disappear instantly, and then it will turn out that a person’s heart is not at all with God, although he honored Him with his tongue. “Let none of you approach virtue,” St. Chrysostom said to those who had not yet received baptism, “as a mercenary, as an ungrateful person, as something difficult and unbearable; on the contrary, let us approach it with zeal and joy.” If a reward had not been promised, would one really not have been virtuous even then? But let us be virtuous at least because of the reward. Isn’t it a shame, isn’t it extremely dishonest to say: if you don’t give me a reward, then I won’t be chaste. We can say this: even if you remain chaste, you will never be chaste if you do it for a reward; for you do not value virtue at all if you do not love it for itself” 176. Like the Pharisee and, in general, every lawyer, such a person will be serviceable, even impeccable, but his heart will still be sinful, alien to God, precisely because virtue and pleasing God are for him only a means to achieving his personal well-being, and by no means a goal in itself that would comprehend his entire life. “Virtue,” says St. Gregory the Theologian, “must be unselfish if it wants to be a virtue that has only good in mind” 177, that is, virtue in the proper sense. “Those who truly love God,” says St. Macarius of Egypt, - they decided to serve Him not for the sake of the kingdom, as if for purchase and gain, and not because of the punishment prepared for sinners, but as adherents to the one God and together to their Creator, aware by the natural order that slaves are obliged to please the Lord and Creator" 178. This forced act of goodness is perfectly described by St. Tikhon Zadonsky. "Many Christians," he says, "have come to the sense of their sins, with which they angered the Majesty of God, and regret and lament for no other reason than the fact that they will suffer the torment prepared for sinners. This sadness comes from self-love, as everyone can see; as if they regret their next destruction, and not about God, who was angry with their sins and Offended, even if they did not expect further punishment for their sins, and if it were possible to live forever in the world, they would never stop sinning. For they cease from sins not for the sake of God, but for the fear of their own destruction. works for our benefit, so we must do everything for His glory. This sadness may also be the beginning of true sadness for God, as with such fear a person can be aroused and recognize his delusion, and thus come to sorrow for God, as we read quite a lot of such examples in church history, but it is impossible to call that true sorrow for God... True pity and sadness for God consists in the fact that a Christian should grieve and feel sorry not for the sake of the deprivation of eternal life and the subsequent executions in hell, but for the sake of that he did not honor, love and listen to God, the Creator, Redeemer and Provider of his, Whom he should most of all honor, love and listen to. This is true sadness for Bose. A Christian should be sad about this, that he did not give God his due. He who has such sadness, even if there is no eternal life and Gehenna, will grieve, cry and be ashamed; and to curse oneself... Such sadness comes from love, and is true, Christian, God-righteous sadness” 179. Thus, the very essence of Christianity turns out to be distorted in the legal understanding of life: the sublimity and spirituality of the idea of ​​God is lost, while man is left with his former, pre-Christian, selfish disposition. But, if so, if this understanding of life is in its very essence opposite to the Christian one and if it was unanimously rejected by the Word of God and the Fathers of the Church, then how can we understand the above sayings, in which this understanding of life seems to be recognized? First of all, in very many cases, the Word of God and the Fathers of the Church, pointing out to a person the eternal bliss of the righteous and the eternal torment of sinners, want to express only the idea that holiness is truth, and sin is a lie, and therefore the first has in itself a guarantee of triumph, is eternal, and the second must necessarily lead to destruction, to shame.” No one will strengthen his life by his iniquity" (Ezek. 7:13). In other words, this is the conviction that our holy God is the One True God, and His law is the one true order of life, there is the one true law of existence. If there is nothing beyond the grave, or if the same fate awaits the righteous and sinners beyond the grave, then good and evil are the same in dignity, they are both equally conditional, temporary. Good has no advantage over sin; it is even weaker than sin, because in this life sin often triumphs. But this already leads to the idea that God, who commands to do good and is Holy Himself, is not in fact the Lord of all, His teaching, therefore, is not the unconditional truth, etc., etc. That is why we must always keep in mind the “expectations of the life of the next century" so that our life of faith has meaning. If there is not a day when it will be possible to “see the difference between the righteous and the wicked, between those who serve God and those who do not serve Him” (Mal. 3:18), in which case those who say are right: serving God is in vain and what good is it that we have kept His statutes?…. because in this world those who practice iniquity make themselves better" (vv. 14 - 15). "Every truly rational person, bearing the image of God and sympathizing with the high and heavenly, would not want to live or be resurrected along with other people who have to live, if he did not hope to earn praise from God, as a good servant, and to receive some honors, says St. quite rightly. Gregory of Nyssa (vol. VII. 447). This is not a mercenary reluctance to do good except for the appropriate payment, but a direct requirement of common sense, because otherwise, virtue does not have any sufficient basis for itself, a virtuous person cannot give an account of his hope. On the contrary, believing that the Lord exists, and that He is the God of truth and holiness, and that, therefore, He will not allow evil to triumph forever, he is righteous and “not ashamed” of his hope, he “holds his face like a flint” and “knows that he will not remain in shame,” because “he who justifies him is near” (Is. 50: 7–8), because “the salvation of God will endure forever and His righteousness will not endure.” will cease” (51, 6). In this sense, those very many places in Holy Scripture should be understood where the righteous are perplexed that “the way of the wicked is sung,” or that the righteous are humiliated, that the law of God is in reproach. We will be very far from the spirit of the Word of God if we understand all such perplexities in the sense of selfish discontent, murmuring against God; in the sense of demanding payment for fulfilling the law. These bewilderments arose from the fact that the humiliation of the righteous and, in general, the true faith and piety was presented as if they disagreed with the truth of God. If evil triumphs and there is no end in sight to its triumph, then isn’t it the true law of existence? Is it really not God who rules the world? Is it really nothing more than a delusion to follow God’s law? The opportunity to think this way (not for them, but for those who do not know God) tormented the conscience of the Old Testament righteous: the triumph of evil gave their enemies a reason to mock God’s law. “It is not natural for Your pure eyes to look at atrocities and You cannot look at oppression. Why do you look at the evildoers and remain silent when the wicked devours the one who is more righteous than him" (Hab. 1:13). His personal sufferings are not at all in the first place here; the incorrectness and unnaturalness of the order of things torments the righteous. Therefore, if the matter is only personal suffering, if it is proven to the righteous that his God is the true God and certainly rules over evil, then the righteous may not remember his own sufferings. personal fate may not care: even if he himself suffers and even will suffer forever, he still knows that he believes in the truth and that the truth will prevail. This idea is very clearly revealed in the book of Job. Job patiently endures his misfortunes and does not fall away from God, not because he thinks about the reward, but simply because he believes in God. Therefore, in response to the tempting advice of his wife, Job does not even mention future reward, but simply once again confesses his faith in God: “if we have received good from Him, what of it if we now receive evil,” no matter what happens to us, whether it would be useful for us to fulfill the law of God or useless; nothing changes because of this, the truth remains the truth, God is still God. Listening to the not entirely sincere reasoning of his friends, Job suffered and grumbled, but again because, with the consciousness of his innocence, he could not consider his misfortunes as punishment; if they are not punishment, then where is their meaning and is the Lord fair? The reasoning of friends, thus, led a person either to hypocrisy (feeling in his soul that suffering is not deserved, yet to say that it is deserved, to defend the truth of God with hypocrisy, for which Job denounces his friends) or to sincerely make him doubt God. That is why Job asks that he be given the opportunity to see the Lord, that he be given the opportunity to appear before the judgment of God. When the Lord appears and reveals His greatness to Job and his friends, Job is thrown into dust and ashes, but completely calmed: now his eyes have seen the Lord, about whom he had heard only by the ear, his faith has found irrefutable proof, the truth triumphs. He doesn’t even mention deliverance from suffering: his God, in fact, is God, is truth, for him this is the main thing. Thus, the triumph of good is necessarily presupposed by its truth; the eternal bliss of the righteous is evidence of the truth of Christ’s teaching. If good and evil have the same rights to exist, or do not have it, are equally eternal, then there is no reason to choose the first, the law of being, in this case, “yes and pits.” This is one of the very important reasons why it is necessary, when teaching about virtue, to point to the eternal bliss that follows it. But we will be told that in Holy Scripture and the works of the Fathers of the Church there are not only indications of the future triumph of good, as a guarantee of its truth, but also direct attempts to induce a person to do good with the promise of a reward, attempts that apparently speak in favor of the legal understanding of life that we refute. In view of all of the above, we can decisively answer that for such attempts one must look for the reason not in the teaching, but outside it; they must be understood as inevitable concessions to the ordinary human mood. True Christians, in whom “the anointing of God abided,”, of course, according to the word of the apostle, “had no need for anyone to teach them” (1 John 2:27); burning with love for Christ, they, of course, were not burdened by fulfilling His will. Preachers of truth had to turn mainly to sinners, to those who had become morally lazy. How could they (preachers) not apply themselves to the level of their listeners? Could a selfish person understand that it is difficult and shameful to anger God when all his concern is directed only at his own well-being? It was necessary, therefore, to point out to him, first of all, that it was detrimental to his well-being to remain in sins, that to anger God was not only regrettable and shameful, but also scary. It was necessary for a person to first “be aroused” and recognize his “delusion”, so that he could then proceed “with an open face” (2 Cor. 3:14-16) to the knowledge of the truth. “When, we read from St. Gregory of Nyssa, others, as the Apostle says, in hopelessness will give themselves up (Heb. 4:19) to a life of sin, becoming truly somehow dead and ineffective for a virtuous life, they do not even feel the least bit about what they are doing. If some healing word touches them, as if with some kind of hot and scorching composition - I mean strict threats of future judgment - and the fear of what is expected will penetrate to the depths of the heart, and in it, numb from the passions of voluptuousness (the root of selfishness), as if rubbing and warming, like some kind of intoxicating and pungent substance - the fear of Gehenna, an unquenchable fire, a worm not dying, gnashing of teeth, incessant crying, pitch darkness and all the like, make you feel the life that you are living; then it will make him worthy of pleasing, producing a painful feeling in the soul” 180. On the other hand, the delights of a virtuous life cannot be explained to a selfish person while he is selfish; it is necessary first to show him that virtue leads to bliss, that labors in this life will be rewarded a hundredfold in eternal life. This is where the desire to attract people to do good by pointing out its usefulness comes from - a desire that we meet in Holy Scripture and Tradition. "Severe virtue," says St. I. Chrysostom, answering our question directly, "but let us imagine it clothed in the greatness of future promises. People with an exalted soul find it beautiful even without that, in itself, and therefore strive for it - they live virtuously not because of rewards, but to please God, and highly value chastity not in order to avoid punishment, but because God commanded. If anyone is weaker, let him imagine the rewards" 181. Thus, only the weak and imperfect need to be reminded of the reward for virtue; the perfect know the value of virtue and therefore will be virtuous without rewards. Taking the indicated point of view of the few, oo. The churches never forgot its imperfections, and, allowing it in life, never sanctified it, never forgot to point out to their flock that this is only a preparatory degree, and only in this sense is it permissible in Christianity. “The first step to salvation, says Clement of Alexandria, is instruction, accompanied by fear, as a result of which we lag behind what is bad; the second step is hope, by virtue of which we desire the best; but love, as it decently completes, educates according to knowledge” 182. “This is already the second degree of a commendable life - to do something out of reward and reward; and the third is to avoid evil for fear of punishment.” 183 “Those who do what they should do out of reward, according to the Rev. Isidore Pelusiot, inferior to those who are skilled in goodness because of their love for him, but better than those who do it out of fear, and not out of love, and better to a greater extent than in which they themselves concede victory over themselves to those who practice virtue out of love for it” 184. Therefore, even in their appeals to the most beginners and, moreover, in ascetic exercises, which are especially severe and, therefore, according to Chrysostom, most in need of strengthening the will with promises, even in these cases the ascetic fathers recalled the truth about selfless virtue. “If it is possible for you, says St. Isaac the Syrian, indicating with such a restrictive expression the difficulty of having an elevated mood, do good and not for the sake of future reward” 185. Consequently, attempts to substantiate virtue on motives alien to pure morality, on profit or benefit, have a completely accidental origin in Holy Scripture and Tradition; they are determined by the degree of development of readers and listeners, and not at all by the essence of the teaching that is preached there. Being so accidental, it cannot shake our conclusion about the legal understanding of life: this latter, we repeat, irreconcilably contradicts the Christian understanding of life, as it is expressed in Holy Scripture and the works of the Fathers of the Church. The purpose of the coming of the Son of God into the world, as well as the purpose of the entire economy of our salvation, is that whoever “believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life” (John 3:15), in order to restore to us that eternal life that we have lost. The sermon about this eternal life or about salvation from eternal destruction constitutes the main subject and task of all apostolic and church preaching. “This But all things were written, that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God, and that you may live in His name as a believer” (John 20:31). This eternal life constitutes the ultimate goal of the aspirations of every true Christian, every Christian ascetic; it constitutes the highest good that gives meaning to life according to Christ, and without which this life would be aimless and incomprehensible (I Cor. XV, 30). 32). “The highest good, says St. Augustine, is eternal life, and the greatest evil is eternal death; therefore, to acquire the former and avoid the latter, we should live righteously 186. In order, therefore, to clarify for ourselves the Christian understanding of life, as opposed to the legal one, it is necessary first of all to determine what this eternal life consists of, what properties make it the highest good for Christians. “Behold, this is the eternal life, that they may know Thee the One True God, and Him that thou hast sent, J. Christ” (John XVII, 3), - this is the essence and content of eternal life. “Nothing else, brethren says St. Basil the Great, honor the kingdom of heaven as the true understanding of Being, which (understanding) in Holy Scripture is called life and blessedness" 187 . The main beginning of the existence of the soul (beyond the grave), according to St. Gregory of Nyssa, is not the assimilation of something dry and wet (that is, not the use of some sensual benefits that flatter self-love, which the unenlightened mind associates with the idea of ​​eternal life), but the understanding of the Divine nature" 188, "The Kingdom of God, says St. Athanasius of Alexandria, is not there is nothing else but the tasting of future blessings, that is, the contemplation and knowledge of God, as far as this is available to the human soul” 189. The knowledge of God and eternal life, therefore, are “completely identical” things 190. What kind of knowledge is meant here? Of course, not rational knowledge, which comprehends only the relationships of things, and not the things themselves. The knowledge of God, in order to meet its concept, must be an experience in oneself of the presence of God, which gives a person a direct sense of the Divine life and, thus, will lead to an experienced comprehension of the Divine Being. “No one has ever seen God,” no one can know Him rationally. There is another and true way of knowledge: “Inaccessible to every mind, He enters the heart and dwells in it; He who is hidden from the fiery is found in the heart. The earth cannot bear His footsteps; but a pure heart carries Him with itself” 191 “God is love, and he who abides in love abides in God, and God in him,” therefore, “Everyone who loves is born of God and knows God” (John IV, 12.16.7). A person then really, and not illusively, knows God when he feels Him directly, when God for him is not just an infinite greatness, will not be the root cause of all causes. not the first premise of world knowledge, but will go inside a person, become the beginning that animates a person and builds him on his own. Such knowledge, obviously, can well be called life, since it is not the work of the mind alone, but precisely the experience, the feeling of the Divine life in oneself. Such knowledge is of course in the present case. "In human bodily life, says St. Gregory of Nyssa, health is a certain good, but bliss is not only knowing what health is, but living in health. For if someone, praising health, takes into himself food that brings bad juices and harmful to health, then, oppressed by illnesses, what benefit will he receive from praising health? Therefore, let us also understand the proposed word, namely, that the Lord calls not knowing anything about God, but having God within oneself, bliss, for “blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.” But, it seems to me, God is not offered before the face of one who has purified the heart, like some kind of spectacle; on the contrary, the height of this saying perhaps also represents to us that the opening set forth the Word, saying to others: kingdom. God is within you (Luke XYU, 12), so that we learn from this that he who has cleansed his heart from every creature and from a passionate disposition, sees in his own beauty the image of God’s nature” 192. Thus, knowing God is seeing the life of God in oneself; From the disposition of his own soul, the righteous person learns what the Divine life consists of and what its essence is - he learns, so to speak, from experience. In other words, the knowledge of God, which constitutes the essence of eternal bliss, has the reverse side of becoming like God, achieving the possible complete reproduction of the image of God in oneself. "Whoever, says St. Basil the Great, through imitation, as much as possible, depicted in himself the dispassion of God's nature, restored the image of God in his soul. And whoever became like God in the way now shown, he, without a doubt, acquired the likeness of God's life, constantly remaining in eternal bliss. Therefore, if by dispassion we again restore the image of God in ourselves, and likeness to God grants us unceasing life; then, having neglected everything else, let us use our care to ensure that our soul is never possessed by any passion... and so that through this we become partakers of God’s bliss” 193. But, no matter how close a person is to God in the likeness of his nature, no matter how fully he reproduces the image of God in himself, his life, even endless in time and quality, will not be, according to the teachings of Holy Scripture and oh. Church, that highest all-covering good to which man strives. As a finite, non-original being, which (in the words of St. Macarius of Egypt) “does not have God’s light in itself,” a person cannot find eternal bliss in himself, in a self-enclosed life: as soon as there is a likeness, an image, he will always strive for his Prototype, and will always feel Its deprivation; so that as a person becomes like God, he will feel more and more strongly the insufficiency of his life and, consequently, will suffer. A clear example of this is provided by at least Shakya Muni, whom modern sages place on a level with Jesus Christ, if not even higher. If we recognized not only the similarity, but also the complete similarity and even identity of the moral structure of these two personalities, if we forgot who the Lord Jesus was, then even then the fundamental, most essential difference between Buddha and Christ would not be hidden. Christ “gave His life in order to take it again" (John X, 17), and this is because He knew the love of the Father, was always one with Him. Meanwhile, Buddha dies amid the general inconsolable crying of all creation, with full awareness of the meaninglessness of existence, with the hope of finding peace only in non-existence. “God is life,” say St. Basil the Great 194. “To the body It is impossible to live without breathing: and it is impossible for the soul to exist without knowing the Creator 195. On the other hand, Godlikeness, which constitutes the essence of true life, is unthinkable for a person if he remains alone, that is, if he goes to Godlikeness through only perfection, regardless of God. A person can become like God only when God is with him in a living union, in the closest, most sincere communication. "For a person; to say St. Macarius of Egypt, it is necessary not only for him to be in God (that is, not only to experience God internally within himself, not only to be like Him in the dispositions of his soul), but also for God to be in him" 196, i.e., for this experience to have its support in the communication of God with him. God, therefore, must be for a person not only the guiding principle of activity, not only the prototype for imitation, but also the goal of aspirations, must be a living being for living, personal communication. Therefore, the Lord Jesus Christ, depicting the state of a perfect man, says: “We (i.e., the Holy Trinity) will come and make our abode with him” (John. 14:23); Godlikeness is not a complete state in itself; it will be complete when it turns into communication with God. Therefore, the bliss of a servant consists not only in the fact that “he will be placed over many” (in which one can see an indication of the inner side of his bliss), but also in the fact that he “will enter into the joy of his Lord.” Therefore, if the word of God teaches us that eternal life is the knowledge of God, that eternal bliss consists in likeness to God, then we must remember that this internal experience of the life of God in ourselves necessarily presupposes external, personal communication with God, or better said, inevitably goes side-by-side with this latter. (Those who created good), according to St. Gregory the Theologian, will inherit the ineffable light and contemplation of the holy and royal Trinity, which will then illuminate more clearly and purer and will be completely united with the complete mind, in which alone (i.e., only in this complete union of the soul with the royal Trinity) I especially establish the kingdom of heaven” 197 . "Let us strive, says St. Gregory of Nyssa, in order to comprehend. What is comprehended? What honor? What crown? - Whatever you imagine of what you hope for, all this, it seems to me, is nothing other than the Lord Himself. For He Himself is both the hero of those who strive, and the crown of those who overcome. He shares the lot; - He is also the good lot. He is the good part; - He also gives the good part” 198. Just as in this life we “live and move and are” by God, so after the grave He will be our bliss and our life. “The goal of our life, says Theodore, Bishop of Edessa, is bliss or, which is the same, the kingdom of heaven or the kingdom of God, which consists not only in the fact that we will witness the royal, so to speak, Trinity, but also in the fact that we will receive Divine influence and, as it were, to receive deification and in this influence to find the replenishment and perfection of all shortcomings and imperfections. This is what the food of the intelligent powers (angels of heaven) consists of, i.e., in replenishing shortcomings through the Divine influence 199 “And I, John, we read in the Apocalypse (XXI, 2-4), saw the holy city of Jerusalem coming down from God from heaven, prepared as a bride, adorned for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from heaven, saying: Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and He will dwell with them; they will be His people, and God Himself will be with them as their God.” There will be no need there for a church, nor for the sun, nor for the moon, nor for a lamp, nor for anything, because all this will be replaced for the righteous by the Lord Himself, who alone will be the content of their life (21:22 – 23; 22:5). But what does this communication with God consist of? In the usual idea of ​​it, only the bliss of this Communion with God is shaded and the more essential side is forgotten, it is forgotten exactly what and why it is blissful. Holy Scripture and Tradition give several clear instructions regarding this. God is presented to the moral consciousness of a Christian not only as an unconditional Ruler, having the power and right to dispose of His creation as He pleases, and to prescribe everything that He finds necessary. The will of God, first of all, is the holy will, which itself wants this and fulfills what it demands from people. “Be holy,” says the Lord, but not because this is My will, but because “I am holy,” because holiness is consistent with the essence of God, because God is holy, Whom you consider to be the only source of truth and life. Virtue and the will of God, therefore, are identical in essence. “Virtue is not outside of the Divine,” 200, say St. Gregory of Nyssa, - therefore, “whoever walks the path of true virtue participates in nothing other than God Himself, because He is all-perfect virtue." 201 Therefore, knowing God, a person learns to live morally, virtuously; “knowing God renews a person.” 202. And on the other hand, “knowledge can be grasped by the purity of life.” 203. Knowing virtue, living virtuously, a person experiences God. "What do we know about God? asks St. Basil the Great: "Sheep listen to my voice. This is how God is understood - through hearing the commandments and through doing what is heard. This is the knowledge of God - keeping His commandments." 204. "If you keep my commandments, you will be in My love" (John 15:10). "With virtues, says St. Gregory of Nyssa, we acquire knowledge of a good that surpasses all understanding, as if by some image we draw a conclusion about the original beauty.” 205 The concepts of Godlikeness and virtue, thus, ultimately turn out to be identical. “We have become like us, the Only Begotten, as God, the first-born in humanity.”206 To cleanse oneself from sinful defilement, to achieve heartfelt purity, therefore, means to prepare oneself, to become capable of the knowledge of God and to be God-like: “Blessed are those who are pure in heart, for they will see God.” “Moreover,” says St. Tikhon of Zadonsk, a person will put off the old man with his deeds, much less put on the new (Col. 3:9-10); the more it puts on new things, the purer the soul will be, the greater the goodness and beauty of the image of God will appear in it; just as the purest the water, the more clearly the appearance of the sun is depicted in it; or the purer the mirror, the more vividly it depicts the likeness of the face looking into it” 207 . “The pure in heart, according to St. Gregory of Nyssa, will not see in himself anything other than God,” therefore, “to shun as much vice as possible in word, deed and thought, cleansing oneself from filth, is an imitation of the Divine perfection that surrounds the heavenly God” 208. Consequently, if you ask about the essence of eternal life, from the side of the mental state of the person living it, then its essence, the source of the eternal bliss inherent in it will lie in holiness. Man will be endlessly blessed because he (man) will be holy and in communion with the all-holy God. “The Kingdom of God, says St. Apostle Paul, is not food and drink, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit” (Rom. 14:4), i.e. (if we renounce the private reason for which these words were spoken), the bliss and joy of the Kingdom of God will not flow from the satisfaction on earth of man’s imaginable, selfish aspirations and demands - there will be joy in the Spirit Holy, which is necessarily united with righteousness and peace. A person entering the kingdom of God does not enter there in order to be blessed (if blessedness is necessary and can be separated from virtue), but in order to be holy. The blessedness and holiness of the righteous, from a Christian point of view, are thus inseparable concepts. For a Christian, bliss lies only in holiness, virtue and nothing more. Once holiness is given, then all other benefits, all rewards offered for holiness, lose primary importance for him. A perfect person “does good not because of the benefit that he would receive, but because he considers it fair to do good,”.. he has “the custom of doing good neither for glory, nor, as philosophers say, for reputation, nor for reward from people or from God, but in order to lead a life in the image and likeness of God 209, which for him is valuable in itself. “Let us sweat,” says St. Ephraim Sirin, follow this path (i.e., the narrow path of virtue), because the path itself is life” 210, the only possible, the only legitimate dispensation of man “As a reward for yourself” (Psalmist in Ps. CXVIII, 40), according to St. Athanasius the Great, asks for a righteous and virtuous life, because he not only kept the commandments, but is also disposed towards them with love, and not for the sake of anything, but for their own sake, he fulfills them” 211. Righteousness, therefore, in the eyes of a Christian is not only not a burden, not only does not require a reward for itself; but “it itself is much greater than any reward, because it itself is a reward that contains many rewards” 212; “Great work (for virtue), according to St. Gregory the Theologian, in itself is a great reward for a person whose heart is not completely devoted to feeding.”213 Knowing that his God is holy, that in holiness there is truth and life, a Christian does good so that he can live this true life. Knowing his calling, “honoring the part of the Divine that he has in himself” 214, a Christian “is zealous for salvation, not dreaming of merit, but considering himself obliged to work like a slave” 215, bowing before the highest immutable law of existence. The Christian’s mental gaze, of course, is presented with the thought that only in this way can he “come to the Father and be a partaker of the Divine, all-blessed life, be God by adoption” 216; but it is no longer the thought of bliss that serves as an incentive, it is not this that makes a Christian strive for virtue: before this thought, he loved virtue and bowed before its truth, recognizing in it his highest good. The thought of future glory only strengthens his faith in goodness, confirms to him that he was not mistaken in choosing his life path, that there is truth in it. “When, as Reverend Theophan says, eternal life is provided in such an important matter, what is the moral goal, then nothing selfish, mercenary is presented, but only the essential feature of Christianity and Christians, who are still here becoming citizens of heaven and live, tea and sighing about their heavenly fatherland, with the thought that strangers and strangers are on earth, not having a city abiding here, but they who seek what is to come (Heb. 11:13–16)” 217. However, the consciousness of the immutability, self-worth and, hence, the unconditional obligatory nature of life according to the will of God does not crush a person with severe necessity like any other. Kant's non-objectionable imperative. Holy communion with God is not only a man’s duty, but is the only good for him, the only correct state of his nature. "By his very nature, man, in the words of St. Cyril of Alexandria, is destined to be near God 218. If this is the purpose of man, "if he, says St. Gregory, comes into being for this purpose, to be a partaker of Divine blessings, then he is necessarily created in such a way that he is capable of participating in these blessings. Like the eye, due to the ray naturally inherent in it, is in communion with with the light, attracting what is akin to it, in the same way it was necessary to interfere in human nature with something akin to God, so that it would have a desire for what is akin to it. And in the nature of the dumb, those who have the lot of life in water or in the air are arranged according to the way of their life, so that to each, due to the location of the body, air is characteristic and akin to one, and water to another. Likewise, a person who received existence to enjoy Divine blessings must have in his nature something akin to that of which he became a partaker. Because of this, he is adorned with life and speech (i.e., reason), and wisdom, and all the goods befitting the Divine, so that for each of them he may have the desire characteristic of them” 219. As the image and likeness of God, man is endowed with God-like properties and endless aspirations. He is not satisfied with one appearance of phenomena, one ostentatious side of life, he seeks its foundations and, thus, reaches the final foundation. He is not satisfied with only the visible, service-oriented relationships of nature and people towards him; he wants to make these relationships eternally significant, unconditionally valuable. But man cannot find the answer to these truly endless Divine requests of his nature in himself, and this is because he is only an image, only the finite reflection of an endless, self-existent and self-valuable life, and not this life itself. Soul, speak Rev. Macarius of Egypt, who does not have God’s light in herself (i.e., self-existent life), but was created in God’s image (for God so designed and pleased that she should have eternal life), not from her own nature, but from His Divinity, from His own light, receives spiritual food and spiritual drink, and heavenly garments, which constitutes the true life of the soul 220. Therefore, a person left to himself is doomed to hopeless contradiction and eternal suffering. “The human soul, says St. Tikhon of Zadonsk, as a spirit created by God, cannot find pleasure, peace, peace, consolation and consolation in anything else, except in God, from Whom it was created in His image and likeness; and when it is separated from Him, it is forced to seek pleasure for itself in creatures and with various passions, how to feed itself with faces 221, but proper does not find peace and joy; and so she must die of hunger, for the Spirit needs to eat spiritual food” 222. Consequently, holy communion with God is not only a duty, but a direct necessity of man. Outside of this communication, a person is not only outside his calling, not only sinful, but also downright morally dead. Because of this, a normal person longs for Communion with God as his cherished goal (Phil. I, 23). "Created in the image and likeness of God, man, says the Most Reverend Theophan, by his very nature is in some way the Divine race (cf. Acts XVII, 28. 29). Being of the race of God, he cannot help but seek communion with God, not only as with his beginning and prototype, but also as with the supreme good" 223. So, if the Orthodox Church teaches that “the end of a virtuous life is bliss" 224, then by this she by no means sanctifies a mercenary attitude towards virtue, does not think of basing moral life on a selfish desire for self-gratification. We saw above with what force and decisiveness this egoistic beginning is rejected by the Holy Fathers of the Church. “The limit of human bliss is likeness Divinity" 225, and this likeness is in holiness. Virtue, therefore, is the bliss that a Christian seeks for himself. Good in itself is dear to a Christian, it is itself the highest good. Consequently, in order to understand the bliss of Communion with God, in order to be a participant in the blissful glory in eternal life, it is necessary first to renounce oneself, to sacrifice one’s selfish desires in favor of goodness, as the highest law of existence; it is necessary first to place the focus of one’s life not in oneself, but in the will of God, “to allow, in a word, God to reign over oneself.”226 Since the focus of a person’s life is in his “I,” since he considers self-love to be the law of being, then for him the will of God, like any limitation of his desires, seems hostile, unbearable, and the Lord Himself is an merciless ruler who reaps where he did not sow. A self-lover, therefore, cannot recognize holiness as his highest good, and will not understand the bliss of Communion with God. But once a person has renounced himself in the name of holiness, then the hostility of the Divine world order for him disappears by itself. For the saint, i.e. loving holiness, the Holy Lord is the natural end of all desires - not only a prototype for imitation (which can be presented to the consciousness by force), but, namely, a response to the needs of human nature, is both an ally and a support, in a word, for everything. It is clear that for such a person communion with God will not be an unbearable burden, as it was for many people in the Old Testament and as communion with the righteous is for us now. For someone who loves holiness, communion with God will be precisely the desired good, the goal of all his aspirations, for which he will sacrifice everything that can only seem dear from a human, sinful point of view. "What do I have in heaven and what do I want from You on earth? My heart and my flesh are gone, the God of my heart and my part. God forever. "That is why, while the Jewish people, who had just come out of Egypt and had not yet forgotten the Egyptian meats, languished with fear, standing at the foot of Sinai and feeling the closeness of God, while the people asked to deliver them from the unbearable communion with God (Exod. XX, 18 – 19); The holy “prophet Moses,” according to the expression of Rev. Theophan, “put the vision of God’s face at the edge of his desires, and after God had already revealed through him so many extraordinary actions of His goodness and omnipotence: “If I have found grace before You, show me to You Samago, so that I can see You rationally (Ex. 33:13), he prayed” 227. In the same way, the holy prophet David longs for trees on the springs of water, the holy prophet David describes his spiritual mood, “my soul longs for You, O God” (Ps. 12:2), “my soul longs and dies for the courts of the Lord” (and only there, next to God, does it find its peace, like a bird’s nest), “it is good for me to cleave to God” (LXXII, 28). Thus, only community of moods, likeness to God makes communion with God the true good of man. The Holy Lord only “rests on the saints.” That is why the Lord Jesus Christ asked His Heavenly Father only “for those whom the Father has given Him,” that is, only for those who have assimilated the life of Christ, only for those who know God like Christ Himself (v. 25), “so that they may be with Him.” (Io. 17:24); therefore, it is obvious that only they are capable of being in unity of love with the all-holy God (vv. 20 - 21). “Only those,” says St. Justin Martyr, achieve immortality who draw close to God through holiness of life and virtue” 228. It is impossible to imagine that Christians renounce themselves in favor of virtue because they know the final conclusion of this self-denial, they know that in this way they will ultimately come to greater benefit. The first steps along the path of virtue are, of course, very often guided by such considerations. But these are just the first steps. The more a person knows God, the more he approaches God, the less and less such a calculating mood becomes possible for him. True and desired beauty, contemplated only by those who have a purified mind, belongs, according to St. Basil the Great, - God's and blessed nature. Whoever attentively directs his gaze to the radiance and grace of this beauty, borrows something from it, as if directing some colored rays onto his own face from a dye solution” 229 . And this is not only because and not in the sense that, contemplating this beauty and admiring it, a person is imbued with the desire to imitate it, but also in the sense that love, which constitutes the basic law of Divine life, cannot fail to evoke the same love in a purified heart. Man contemplates in God not self-imposed holiness, which would be immersed in the pleasure of its perfections, but sees first of all love, which strives to sacrifice itself, strives to endow its benefits to everyone who can perceive them. The person realizes that he, in particular, did nothing to deserve this love - that, on the contrary, his ingratitude deserved punishment, not love. Realizing all this, can a pure person who loves goodness not light up in response to this love with the same boundless and selfless love that he sees in God? Then everything disappears for a person: he himself, and future rewards, and the law of justice, and only God remains, for whom he lives and about the prosperity of the kingdom of Whose, as the kingdom of good, he only thinks, forgetting whether he himself will participate in this kingdom or not. “I am confident,” says the Holy Apostle, “that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor the present, nor the future, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature can separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Rom. 8:38-39). For the sake of this love, jealous not of its own benefit, but of the glory of God, Elijah considered it impossible to remain alive any longer, when the name of God is in reproach. For the sake of this love, Moses asked God to blot him out of the book of life, if the people of God were not forgiven by God, and the Apostle Paul wanted to be excommunicated from Christ. With a legal understanding of life, this self-sacrifice cannot be explained in any way: it is not only incomprehensible, but it seems to be indecent. Can a person encroach on the decisions of the Divine will? Can he offer himself as a sacrifice for others? wouldn't that be conceit? Sometimes they think to weaken the power of the apostle’s words by the consideration that he wanted something impossible. But Rev. Theophan rightly says to this that "these were not just words (which is indecent in the mouth of an apostle), but a sincere desire emanating from the depths of the soul - an irrevocable desire. If what he desired was possible, he was actually ready for the offered sacrifice. "He does not simply say: I would like, but expresses an intensified desire to pray - hicomhn, a prayer that is expelled from the heart and embraces its entire being (St. Zlat.)" 230. What cannot be explained in a legal manner does not require any explanation from a Christian point of view: Paul was burning with love, and love consists of self-sacrifice. “The love of Christ,” says St. I. Chrysostom, so animated (Paul) that if he had been offered to endure eternal punishment for Christ, he would not have refused it. After all, he served Christ not like us mercenaries, out of fear of Gehenna and out of desire for the Kingdom; no, embraced by some other, incomparably better and more blissful love, he endured and did everything for nothing other than to satisfy this love that he had for Christ” 231. "Christ," says the Saint in another place, was everything for the apostles; they preferred neither heaven nor the kingdom of heaven to the Beloved. But you ask: how can one love like this? If we imagine how many times we offended God after the countless benefits we received from Him, and He did not cease to beg us, - how many times we moved away from Him; and He does not leave us, but Himself runs to us and calls, and draws us to Himself - if we think about all this and the like, then we can kindle such love in ourselves.” 232 This self-forgetting love is the height of Christian perfection, because only by being imbued with such love will a person become like God, will he acquire that knowledge of God, which constitutes the content of eternal life. “It is very important,” says St. Gregory the Theologian, adhere to what has been said: he who has loved will be loved; and whoever is loved, God dwells in him. And in whom God is, it is impossible not to be granted light; The first advantage of light is to know the light itself. Thus love brings knowledge" 233. So, that “ultimate (i.e., highest) good, by which we could be truly blessed” is “holy communion with God.” From the desire to be in this communion, Christians undertake all their deeds and labors, and only that work is considered “a true sacrifice, which is made out of this desire.”234 But at the same time, nothing alien to morality, nothing selfish is conceived. life and consists in holiness, limitless and never applied. St. Basil the Great expresses this thought remarkably clearly in the following words: “Therefore there is a true good, which in its own and original sense should be called blessed; and this is God. That is why Paul, intending to mention Christ, says: after the appearance of the blessed God and Savior Jesus Christ. For truly blessed is this imprecise good (moral, as we will see later), to To whom all things are directed, to whom all things desire, this unchangeable nature, this sovereign Dignity. this serene life, this carefree state in which there is no change, which is not touched by vicissitudes, this ever-flowing Source, this inexhaustible grace (love), this inexhaustible Treasure. But ignorant people and lovers of peace, not knowing the nature of good itself, often call blessed that which has no value: wealth, health, a brilliant life - that everything by its nature is not good: because not only does it conveniently change into the opposite, but (note) it cannot make its owners good. For whom has wealth made just, or health chaste? On the contrary, each of these gifts often contributes to sin for those who abuse them (this is why evil is recognized). Therefore, blessed is he who has acquired something worthy of a greater price, who has become a partaker of inalienable blessings. But why do we recognize him? This is the one who does not go to the advice of the wicked 235. So; the benefit of communion with God consists in holiness, and not in pleasure as such. Therefore, the first, inevitable condition for achieving this good is self-denial in the name of the unconditional value of good. Knowledge of God, says St. Cyril of Alexandria, can only be the work of one who has already reached such a degree of strength that he does not attach any importance to the carnal and worldly (a stranger to self-indulgence), but is capable of, as it were, fiercely and indomitably striving in spirit for what pleases God 236. And since the prototype of holiness is embodied in God and is love, self-denial in the name of good is finally resolved into disinterested admiration before God, forcing a person to live only for God and see only God, forgetting about everything. God is love, and Christianity, which is “the imitation of Divine nature,” 237 also posits the highest good in love. Thus, the highest good and virtue are identical concepts. The essence of eternal life lies in moral perfection, in the actual experience of Divine goodness within oneself. “The good of God,” therefore, “is not separated from our nature and does not stand somewhere far from those who decide to seek it; it is unknown and hidden in everyone, when it is drowned out by the worries and pleasures of life, and found again when we turn our attention to it.”238 But if man, in the words of St. I. Chrysostom, “was created in order to please to the man-loving God and tasted the kingdom of the future" 239, if without communion with God (which is what being in the kingdom of God consists of) a person suffers moral death; then is it possible to imagine eternal life only as the very last conclusion from the entire earthly life of a person, a conclusion that is achieved only after death? will be honored with it after, for example, at the end of all his labors. No, it must be an everlasting, continuous state of a person, so that, as long as there is no communication with God, as long as it is not felt, a person must admit that he is standing outside his goal and his purpose. The state in which a person recognizes himself in Communion with God “is the only true state of man, is the only decisive sign of the presence in him of the beginning of true moral and spiritual life.”240 If Communion with God can and should always be inherent in a person, then, consequently, eternal life does not contain anything in its essence that would prevent its discovery here on earth, in other words, eternal life precisely as a state of the human soul does not depend on the conditions of space and time, is not confined only to the afterlife, but depends exclusively on the moral development of a person and, therefore, can begin for the chosen ones in this life. This shakes the main dogma of the legal understanding of life - the preconceived idea of ​​the unconditional opposition of eternal life to the earthly existence of man - a thought that the adherents of this understanding of life need in order to explain and justify their other dogma, which is equally alien to Orthodoxy, about doing good because of reward 241. Orthodox teaching, taken in its purity and regardless of random appendages, recognizes eternal life as only a continuation of present life. St. St. pursued this idea more consistently and clearly than other sacred writers. Apostle John the Theologian, all of whose writings can be called a sermon on eternal life in the sense of holy communion with God. This eternal life is eternal, according to him, not by its temporal infinity, but by its internal richness, and therefore does not depend on the conditions of space and time. “He who believes in the Son (already here on earth) has eternal life” (John III, 36). “We know that (already now) we have passed from death to life, because we love our brothers; he who does not love his brother remains in death (1 John III, 11). Eternal life is not conditioned by the resurrection from the dead, it precedes it, and seems to even condition it by itself: “Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I (as if by virtue of this) will raise him up for the last day" (John VI, 54). On the other hand, “no murderer has “eternal life abiding in him” (John III, 15), that is, not only does he not have a firm hope of receiving eternal life in the next century, but he directly does not have eternal life here on earth as his spiritual property. As for the patristic works, they can be said to be full of indications of this meaning of the doctrine of eternal life. So, for example, Rev. Ephraim the Syrian discusses the different dignity of life in the following way: "Not every life is the same. The dumb also live, but they differ in no way from the dead; therefore, those who slaughter them are not subject to condemnation. And the life of sinners is death, because they languish with corruption and death, living in order to die to eternal torment. The Savior says: “I am life" (John XIV, 6). Therefore, the righteous are beautifully called alive, because in this life they delight in the unceasing contemplation of God and not doing or enduring any evil is, indeed, life." Therefore, “whoever has acquired a higher way of thinking, is still here anticipating the kingdom of heaven, begins to live a blissful life, expecting for himself the bliss prepared for those who love God." 243. To receive eternal life does not mean to move from one area of existence to another, but to acquire a certain spiritual disposition. Eternal life, in this way, does not work out, but gradually grows in a person. Therefore, it is possible to pray to God: “May my heart be a good land for You, receiving good seed within itself, and may Your grace water me with the dew of eternal life” 244. The church fathers generally imagined human life as an unceasing development that begins here on earth and continues beyond the grave. For them, earthly life was a preparation for the afterlife, and precisely in the sense of predestination of the latter, planting it in the soul. Man, according to the teachings of St. Fathers, here on earth he creates for himself the mood that will be the content of his life beyond the grave. “As you draw closer to God through life, deeds and teaching, more securely, prepare yourself, convinces St. Gregory the Theologian, for the truths there and contemplation of Christ Jesus our Lord.” 245. “What good someone has found here, the same, according to St. Macarius of Egypt, will be life for him on that day.”246 Thus, the afterlife is a direct continuation of the present life, a continuation in its content identical with its beginning. Once the corresponding mood has begun to be created, a person can still feel future bliss here on earth” 247, can “even now drink living water” 248. “The path that raises human nature from earth to heaven is not different, says St. Gregory of Nyssa, as an escape and removal from earthly evils, and the means to avoid evil, in my opinion, cannot be other than likening to God. And to become like God means to become righteous and holy, and good, etc. If someone, as clearly as possible (enargwV) has imprinted in himself the traits of these virtues, he naturally, without difficulty, moves to the heavenly country: because there is no spatial (topich) distance between God and man, so that we have a need for some kind of tool or invention to remove this heavy, burdensome and earthly flesh resettle into an incorporeal and mental life, but, after the mental separation of virtue from evil, it depends on human will alone to be where he is inclined by desire” 249. St. I. Chrysostom expresses the same thought in the following short but meaningful saying: “To mortify the flesh means to live eternal life, which means to have within oneself the guarantee of resurrection even here on earth” 250. To what extent the teaching about eternal life, about the structure of the soul, and about the possibility of its revelation here on earth, was inherent in the Fathers of the Church, this is shown by the example of St. Macarius of Egypt. Having himself ascended to the heights of virtue and having experienced within himself the future blissful communion with the Highest Good, Rev. Macarius was so deeply imbued with this feeling that he no longer seemed to imagine what other bliss would be given to his soul after the grave, what glory it would still be clothed with and what blessings it would become a partaker of. The complete revelation of eternal life in the soul, the complete enjoyment even here on earth of the joys of the heavenly kingdom made for the saint. father, as if any new joys, new pleasures were unnecessary. Therefore, “the soul, according to the words of St. Macarius, even now accepts within itself the kingdom of Christ, is at rest and illuminated by eternal light” 251, but the future glorification of man remains, as it were, only resurrection and glorification of the body. “The resurrection of mortified souls is still happening now (apo tou nun), and the resurrection of bodies will be on that day” 252. To the extent that the soul has achieved perfection, the extent to which it enjoys spiritual life here, in the next century the body will join it. "To the extent that each of us, for his faith and zeal, has become a partaker of the Holy Spirit, on that same day his body will be glorified. For whatever treasure he has now collected internally in his soul, that same thing will be revealed outside in his body."253 - Thus, the otherworldliness of eternal life is only apparent; a Christian, while still here on earth, must consider himself a citizen of heaven, while still here on earth, he must begin eternal life, so that as far as possible here to begin and eternal bliss. If eternal bliss is possible in this life, then what does all the reasoning of the saint mean after this? Scriptures about the discovery of some very special life that will occur after the general resurrection and renewal? All these considerations mean only that there is no complete revelation of eternal life here on earth, that this latter “is returned to man in the present century in the form of a deposit, and in the future - in its entirety” 254. The reason for this is not in the essence of eternal life, but in the state of the present world and man in it. "It was not fitting, says St. Ephraim the Syrian, to have a blessed life in the land of curses and to find eternal life in a transitory world."255 Evil, enmity, selfishness live in this world, death continues to reign in this world - the life of the world is a direct negation of eternal life. It is exactly the same in private human life. The beginning of sin, the flesh always remains in a person to one degree or another, always tempts him, and therefore always hinders his complete spiritualization. Self-love, no matter how hard a person tries to destroy it in himself, still does not disappear completely. Therefore, the knowledge of God, the perception of heavenly bliss in oneself cannot be perfect. “Since, says St. Tikhon of Zadonsk, love cannot be perfect here for the sake of our weakness, then joy cannot be perfect, but only a certain drop and, like a small ray of sunshine passing through the clouds, sweetly strikes lovers of the heart” 256. It is necessary for man and the world around him to renew himself, to cast out everything sinful from himself, in order to then accept the coming kingdom with all its fullness and perfection. This is what will happen with the destruction of the world, this is the meaning of death and of each individual person. This last one, according to the mind of St. fathers, consists in the decomposition of man into his component elements; so that later man can rise renewed. “To the true Artist,” says, for example, St. Epiphanius of Cyprus; who, like a poor man, cares about a creature and a vessel created with his own hands, when this vessel later, due to disobedience, turned out to have a deficiency, and while it was still, so to speak, soft clay, and a leak formed in the vessel, as if through a crack, - do not leave the vessel like that, but turn it into the original mixture, so that later into regeneration, i.e. in the resurrection, to restore this vessel to its original and even greater lightness, that is, the bodies of those who have done a lot of unrighteousness, but have repented, have abandoned their own actions, and have become perfect in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ, so that the mixture that rises from the earth becomes similar to the mixture softened by the Artist, and then the original and even better image is built from it” 257. After “this initial image is established,” man and the world become capable of full perception of eternal life, then “the heavenly Jerusalem will descend to earth” (Apoc. XX, 10), and the full revelation of the kingdom of God will begin in the world. Thus, the whole work of salvation is presented in the following form: a person here on earth works, works on himself, creates the kingdom of God in himself, and through this now little by little begins to become a partaker of eternal life, to the extent that he has the strength and ability for this communion; after the evil inclination is finally expelled, in the age to come, man will finally see God face to face and will enjoy eternal life in all its infinite fullness. The moral renewal of man, therefore, is essentially connected with eternal salvation: the latter is not some special action, not the receipt of something new, but only the perfect disclosure, the implementation of those principles that were laid down and developed by man in this life. If eternal life, in its essence, is a direct consequence of one or another direction of human earthly life, then how can we understand after this the main dogma of Christianity about afterlife retribution? Retribution, by its very concept, consists of giving something to the worker. special, some kind of reward he deserves, i.e. something. special, new, which he does not yet have and which could replace his work. If eternal life is a simple consequence of human labor, a conclusion from his moral development, then it seems as if it ceases to be retribution in the strict sense of the word. This can be answered in the affirmative: indeed, the legal concept of retribution, in which the otherworldliness of eternal life is necessarily conceived, such a concept has an accidental origin in the Christian worldview, and, therefore, if we are talking about Christianity in essence, such a concept of retribution in the literal and strict sense cannot be allowed. In fact, the concept of retribution is inextricably linked with the legal understanding of human life, which (understanding) places the highest good of a person not in moral good, but in self-pleasure, and recognizes good only as a relative good, only as a means to achieving self-pleasure in the future world 258. From the point of view of this understanding of life, obviously, the goal of a person’s life will not be achieved if a person only becomes a saint and leads a holy life in the next century. Self-pleasure requires a reward even beyond this, it demands a reward for all the labors and hardships that a person suffered on earth in acquiring holiness, forgetting the simple truth that for everyone striving for truth and life, this very truth and life itself are a reward; because he worked only for them. Hearing about the bliss beyond the grave and not wanting to understand what it consists of, self-pleasure recognizes this bliss as the retribution it needs to cover the labors of man. Being built on self-love, such an understanding of life is most understandable and close to a sinful person, a self-lover, as all of us, people of this age, find ourselves in the essence of the matter. For the self-lover, eternal life seems, of course, otherworldly; it fundamentally denies all those definitions of life that he recognized as undoubted truths. To understand the bliss of eternal life, you must first love goodness, holiness and place your goodness in it; Meanwhile, the selfish person thinks more about himself than about the higher laws of existence, seeks happiness rather than truth. It is clear that for him a speech about the bliss of holiness will be music to the deaf. He will not understand the conviction to be kind if, in the form of a reward, he is told that he will be kind and nothing more. Let us not forget that he must first of all overcome his evil mood, overcome his sinful habits and passions (John Y. 37.44). Therefore, a struggle with oneself is required, and the struggle is persistent and difficult, continuing until the last moment of earthly life. You need to suffer a lot to become good. And then they will tell the selfish person that this very goodness, which he is so afraid of and does not understand, will be his highest reward. Of course, this will not convince a selfish person. For such a mood, the concept of retribution is necessary, it is necessary to point out that good, like truth, can only lead a person to true life, while evil inevitably threatens with torment, although, like any lie, it flatters self-pity. St. Gregory of Nyssa perfectly explains the origin of the concept of retribution, in the sense indicated. “In those who are now being elevated to a higher life,” we read in his work, “On the Inscription of Psalms,” the soul, as not prepared by experience and not accustomed to such understanding, does not yet have sufficient strength to discern the good. And what is completely unknown, besides, although it is the most beautiful of all, our desire remains motionless; without a previous desire there will be no pleasure from such a thing for which one does not feel partiality; because the path to pleasure is addiction. Therefore, for those who have not yet tasted pure and Divine pleasure, it is necessary to come up with something so that the lessons of virtue would also be accepted, being delighted with something that captivates the senses. This is what doctors usually do when they make some bitter and unpleasant-tasting healing composition palatable to the sick by seasoning it with the sweetness of honey” 259 . This "sweetness of honey" is the doctrine of retribution for good, although the power is not in retribution, not in the sweetness itself, but in the good, which this sweetness makes attractive to the sinner. Here, of course, nothing like deception happens: bliss, of course, will be the lot of the righteous, but the latter, one might say, will not notice it in the sense of self-pleasure, because his attention is not focused on himself, but in God, in Whom alone he rejoices. Self-pleasure takes a completely secondary place; but, if a person only understands it for now, the work of love, which has come to save sinners, is, of course, to begin with what sinners understand, in order to then lead them from “milk" to “solid food", following the example of the Apostle. This explains the presence of the concept of retribution in Holy Scripture and the works of the fathers. Despite this presence, however, we have every right to assert that the concept of retribution in the mouths of the sacred writers and the Fathers of the Church was used only in a preliminary sense, only to be understandable to the everyday mood, not only all our previous reasoning gives us the right to assert this, but also the direct instructions of Holy Scripture and the Father of the Church. The purpose of the Word of God is not speculation, but instruction, and that of sinners. It is not surprising, therefore, if in the Word of God we find only hints, only traces of that concept of retribution, which would fully correspond to the essence of Christianity and in which eternal life is not a reward as something external, but a natural consequence of man’s labors in obtaining good. Nevertheless, these traces are there. First of all, in the Second Testament we find such expressions that the Lord “loves to have mercy” (Mic. 7:18) and that “It is not according to the pleasure of His heart that He punishes and grieves the sons of men” (Lamentations Jer. 3:33). Such expressions are understandable only when the Divine sentence is pronounced, namely, depending on a person’s ability or inability to achieve eternal bliss. The sinner blinds himself and therefore cannot see the light. It is not that the Lord, contrary to the desire and ability of the sinner, excommunicates him from communion with Himself, but rather that communion with God is completely unacceptable for the sinner. This idea is quite clearly expressed in the following passage in the book of the prophet Isaiah: “The sinners in Zion were afraid, trembling took possession of the wicked: who of us can live in the consuming fire? Who of us can live?” with eternal flame? One who walks in righteousness and speaks the truth; whoever despises self-interest from oppression and keeps his hands from taking bribes... will dwell on high places” (Isa. 33:14-16). Thus, it is not impossible for those who keep the law to dwell in Zion, while for sinners there is an eternal flame, a consuming fire. Sinners themselves flee from God and the kingdom of God, because it is unbearable for them to be there. “The Light of Israel for sinners becomes “fire and the Holy One thereof” (Isa. 10:17). Expressions like Hos. 14:10 have the same meaning: “the ways of the Lord are right and the righteous walk in them, and the wicked will fall on them,” since the structure of the souls of the righteous corresponds to the ways of the Lord, in general to the kingdom of God, they can walk in these paths, but for sinners these paths are destruction. The natural dependence of retribution on one or another direction of a person’s life is even more clearly expressed where it is said that sinners carry fire within themselves, which will burn them on the day of judgment. “You are pregnant with hay, you will give birth to straw, your breath is a fire that will consume you. And the nations will be burned like burning lime, like cut down thorns (Isa: 33. 11 - 12). “And I will bring fire from among you, which will consume you” (Tez. “28, 18”). Or it seems that sinners, with their iniquities, kindle the fire, which will be their fate. "Behold, all of you who kindle fire, armed with incendiary arrows, go into the flame of your fire and the arrows you have kindled. This will be done for you by my hand: you will die in torment" (Is. 50:11). Thus, God rewards the sinner with the same fire that the sinner kindles with his sins. In the book of Proverbs of Solomon we find a direct indication that the concept of retribution can be taken precisely in the sense of a natural consequence. So Wisdom says: "because they hated knowledge and did not choose the fear of the Lord for themselves, did not accept my advice, despised all my reproofs, therefore they will eat from the fruits of their ways and be satisfied with their thoughts. Because the stubbornness of the ignorant will kill them, and the carelessness of fools will destroy them" (Prov. I, 29 - 31). If a person despised the instructions wisdom, it is natural for him to endure the consequences of his folly, meanwhile, these consequences are at the same time a punishment for him for not heeding Wisdom. Retribution is a natural conclusion from human behavior. In the New Testament it is impossible, together with St. Gregory of Nyssa, do not stop your attention on Luke. XYI, 25 - 26. Here we read: "Abraham said to the rich man (who was tormented in hell): child, remember that you have already received your good things in your life, and Lazarus your evil things; now he is comforted, and you suffer. And above all this, a great abyss has been established between you and us, so that those who want to cross from here to you cannot, and from there they cannot cross over to you." in that, taking the usual, legal point of view on retribution, it gives a hint of its deeper meaning. Verse 25 turns to the moral consciousness of the sinner and says that both the suffering of the rich man and the bliss of Lazarus are fully justified from a legal point of view, and both fairly reward everyone for his earthly life. But if this were not so, the rich man and Lazarus. after all, they cannot go over to the side of the other, this would not only be unfair, but also downright impossible, the very essence of the matter does not allow such a change. "Above all that," besides this conformity to the present state of affairs, "a great abyss has been established between us and you," there is a certain, as it were, natural necessity, due to which the state of things cannot change. If we keep in mind the first half of Abraham's words, it turns out that such a necessity was created by the behavior of the rich man and Lazarus in earthly life, i.e., a certain direction in the spiritual and moral life of each of them. St. Gregory of Nyssa did just that. understands the parable of the rich man and Lazarus. In conversations with Macrina about the soul and resurrection, he puts the following speech into Macrina’s mouth: “By the details of this story, that is, the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, the Gospel denotes certain dogmas concerning the question of the soul. The Patriarch, having first said to the rich man: in the carnal life you received part of the good things,” said the same about the 6ed: “and he fulfilled it.” serving those who have partaken of the evils in life,” then, continuing about the abyss by which they are separated from each other, through this, apparently, some great dogma is revealed in the word. This dogma, in my opinion, is this: in the beginning human life was homogeneous. I call homogeneous the one who appears in one good and to whom evil is inviolable... But man, with a voluntary free movement, leaving a share inaccessible to the worse, has delighted in life dissolved from opposites. However, God’s Providence did not leave our foolishness uncorrectable. But since the one who transgressed the law necessarily followed the death prescribed by law; then, dividing human life into two parts... out of love for mankind, he gave the power to anyone who wants to choose from this or that - I mean good and evil, either in this short and fleeting life or in these endless centuries, the limit of which is infinity. since both good and evil are called by the same name, and each of them is divided according to a twofold concept - I mean the mind and the feeling, and some count as a good share that which seems pleasant to the feeling, while others are confident that what is comprehended only by thought is and is called good (the difference between moral good and egoistic good happiness): then those whose reason is untrained and incapable of seeing the best, those in the carnal life greedily expect the share of good that follows nature, saving nothing for the next life, but those who manage their lives with a discriminating and chaste mind, exhausted in this short life by an insulting feeling, save the good for the age of the future life, so that the best lot will extend for them to eternal life. So, this is what, according to my concept, the abyss means, which is not formed by the opening of the earth, but which is produced by judgment, divided in life into opposing wills. For he who has once chosen what is pleasant in this life and has not corrected his folly by repentance, which is inaccessible to himself, then creates an area of ​​good things, having dug this inevitable necessity before him, like some kind of yawning and impassable abyss. That is why it seems to me that the good state of the soul, in which the word of God rests the ascetic of patience, is called Abraham’s bosom. For this first patriarch who ever was, as it is related, exchanged the enjoyment of the present for the hope of future blessings; having stripped himself of everything that he originally had in life, he had to stay with strangers, redeeming the desired bliss with real suffering” 260. Thus, the impenetrable abyss, which, in addition to legal conformity, weighs down on the rich and Lazarus, was created by the direction of life of both. The first believed the goal of life to be self-pleasure and therefore turned out to be unprepared for eternal life; the second, together with Abraham, preferred the mind (spirit), the moral law, to feeling, and therefore naturally passes into the kingdom of moral goodness. St. Irenaeus of Lyons sees a similar indication of the meaning of retribution that we are clarifying in Io. III, 18 - 21. “He who believes in Him (the Son) is not condemned, but he who does not believe is already condemned, because he did not believe in the name of the only begotten Son of God.” It is further explained what the word “judgment” means. “The judgment is that light has come into the world; but people loved darkness rather than light”; and therefore they themselves did not take advantage of the good that God sent them down, and thus they themselves subjected themselves to deprivation of light, to punishment in darkness. The reason for such disposition towards the kingdom of God is that their deeds were evil,” lies in the direction of their previous life, contrary to the kingdom of God, in the structure of their souls. truth goes to the light, so that his deeds may be revealed, because they are done in God.” Since man has made himself in the image of God, he strives for God, because in God he will find only the justification of his structure and the element of life that is akin to himself. But if a person did evil, if he thought only about self-gratification, then, of course, in the kingdom of God he will find only denunciation of his life, only its complete denial, and therefore he will love darkness and will not go to the light in order to remain with his own. Thus, everyone receives what his soul is prepared for. The consolation for the righteous is that he has come to the light that he was looking for and according to which his soul arranged itself, while the sinner is punished by the very darkness that he loved. As for the works of the Holy Fathers, the idea of ​​the natural dependence of future fate on the direction of earthly life is no longer hinted at, but revealed directly, clearly and in detail. The church fathers could not limit themselves to instructions on how to live in order to live truly, but they had to explain philosophically why one should live this way, they had to devote their time to speculation. Therefore, along with ordinary instruction, we find in their works and gnosis a philosophical comprehension of faith. The doctrine of retribution is revealed more clearly and in detail in the works of St. Irenaeus of Lyon and Gregory of Nyssa. We'll start with them. In the fourth book “Against Heresies,” St. Irenaeus writes: “God, knowing everything in advance, prepared appropriate dwellings for those and others - those who sought the light of incorruption and turned to it, graciously imparting this light they desired - and for the despisers and scoffers who flee and turn away from this light, who, as it were, blind themselves, He prepared darkness; appropriate for those creatures who resist the light, – He also imposed appropriate punishments on those who, being His subjects, try to escape. (How can we understand this imposition of punishments?) Submission to God is eternal peace, so that those who flee from the light have a place worthy of their removal, and those who flee from eternal peace have an abode according to their flight. In fact, since all goods are with God, then those who, by their own decision, flee from God, deprive themselves of all the goods available. from God, they therefore fall under the righteous judgment of God. For those who withdraw from peace, rightly, are punished, and those who avoid the light, rightly, dwell in darkness. For, just as in relation to this temporary light, those who move away from it betray themselves to darkness, so that they become the cause of their deprivation of light and their dwelling in darkness - and light, as I have already said, is not the reason for such their state - so those who remove themselves from the eternal light of God, which contains all goods, themselves serve as the reason for their presence in eternal darkness, the deprivation of all goods, themselves becoming the cause of such a dwelling" 261. The sinner is thus punished by nothing other than removal from God, from Whom he himself removes himself arbitrarily. Punishment is nothing more than a natural consequence of the accepted direction of life. In the fifth book, “Against Heresies,” the holy father expresses himself even more clearly and in more detail: “God the Word will come for the destruction of those who do not believe in Him - those whom He threatens with greater punishment on the day of judgment than Sodom and Gomorrah (Luke X, 12) - and for the resurrection of those who believe and do the will of His heavenly Father. The coming of the Son, therefore, will be for everyone, but will have the goal of judgment and the separation of the faithful from the unbelievers, for those who believe believe by their own choice, in the same way those who do not agree with His teaching do not agree by their own choice... To those who remain in their love for God, He grants communion with Him. But communion with God is life and light and the enjoyment of all the good things that He has. On those who, by their own choice, withdraw from God, He imposes that separation from Himself which they have chosen. own agreement. But separation from God is death and separation from the light is darkness, and separation from God is the deprivation of all the blessings that He has. Therefore, those who through apostasy lose these above-mentioned things, being deprived of all good; - experience all kinds of punishment. However, God does not punish them directly Himself, but this punishment falls on them because they are deprived of everything that is good. In fact, the good is eternal and endless with God and, therefore, the deprivation of the good is also eternal and has no end. In this case, the same thing happens as with a libation of light: those who have blinded themselves or are blinded by others are completely deprived of the enjoyment of light. But not so that the light imposed punishment on them for blindness, but this blindness itself brought them misfortune. Therefore, the Lord declared: “He who believes in Me is not condemned" (John III, 18), that is, he is not separated from God, for he is united with Him by faith. On the other hand, he says: “He who does not believe is already condemned, for he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God"; that is, he, by his own agreement, has separated himself from God. For in this is the judgment that the light and etc. The 19th – 21st verses of the third chapter of the Gospel of John are given, which we discussed above, and in the conclusion of St. Irenaeus says: “So, since some people in this world give themselves to the light and through faith are united with God, while others flee the light and separate themselves from God, the Word of God will come to prepare an appropriate abode for both: for those who are in the light, so that they can receive the bliss of the light and the good that lies in it, as well as for those who are in darkness, so that they will be involved in its disasters. For this reason, He says that those who are those on the right hand are called to the kingdom of heaven, but those on the left hand He will send into eternal fire, because they have deprived themselves of all blessings 262. It seems to us that it is impossible to express the concept of retribution more clearly. "God, according to St. Irenaeus, does not punish sinners directly Himself," the punishment for them will be the very element of life that they voluntarily chose and loved in earthly life. In the same way, the joy of the righteous will consist in the fact that they will revolve in the light, in holiness, in communion with God, which in real life was the content of the soul for them. The quoted words of St. Irenaeus are remarkable in this in the sense that he gives a natural explanation for the most extreme expressions that can often seem to be the basis for a legal worldview. St. Irenaeus also speaks of the imposition of punishment, and also mentions the picture of the Last Judgment, where retribution, apparently, has a completely external character. All these phenomena for St. Irenaeus have a deep natural conformity, which at the same time provides an example of how to understand such expressions found in Holy Scripture. St. Gregory of Nyssa, in his essay “On Children Who Died Before Baptism,” directly had to deal with the Orthodox definition of the concept of “retribution." Reward, in his opinion, should not be used in the sense of any special payment for labor incurred, not in the sense of receiving something new, but in a conditional sense similar to, for example, obtaining health after a diligent fight against an illness. In the aforementioned work, St. Father says: “Since Scripture says that the communion of God is the life of the soul, and communion, to the extent of its capacity, is knowledge, ignorance is not the implementation of something, but, on the contrary, the taking away of the activity of knowledge, and as soon as the communion of God was not fulfilled, alienation from life necessarily followed, and since this would be the extreme of evils; then, as a result of this, the Creator of all good works in us to heal from evil (for healing is good), but the method of healing, of course, is not known to those who do not turn their gaze to the Gospel sacrament. Therefore, since, according to what has been proven, it is bad to be alienated from God, Who is life; then the cure for such an ailment is to assimilate it to God and enter into life again. And since this life is offered to human nature in hope, it cannot be said in the proper sense that the communion of life is a reward for previous good deeds, and the opposite is a punishment for bad deeds 263. What has been said is similar to the example with the eyes. We, after all, do not call discernment of the visible a reward or some kind of distinction that rewards someone who has cleared their sight, and, on the contrary, we do not call punishment the circumstance that befalls the patient that he is deprived of visual activity. But just as a person who is in a normal state and needs to see (tw cata fusin diaceimenw), and one deprived of the norm by illness naturally loses the ability to see (to mh energein thn orasin), so a blissful life is akin to and characteristic of those who have pure organs of spiritual senses (ta thV yuchV aisJhthria), and for whom the disease of ignorance, like some kind of pus, serves as an obstacle to communion with the true light, For this purpose, it is a necessary consequence not to have a part in that, the participation of which we call life for those who partake.” A little lower the same idea is expressed even more clearly. "If, asks St. Gregory, the reward of benefits is done according to justice (that is, there is a legal concept, there is a reward in its own, external sense); then among whom will there be those who ended their lives in infancy and in the continuation of this life did not do either good or evil, so that they would be rewarded according to their worth? To this, bearing in mind what was examined above, we answer that the expected benefit, although characteristic of the human race by nature, is nevertheless the same in a sense, this is also called retribution. This idea is clarified by the same example (with the eyes). Suppose that the vision of two given people is affected by some kind of illness, and one of them devotes himself with great care to healing, enduring all the prescriptions of the medical art, no matter how difficult they may be; and let the other be inclined to the point of intemperance towards baths and drinking wine, without taking any advice from a doctor on preserving eye health. Therefore, looking at the end that befalls both, we say that both will worthily accept the fruits of their will, namely, one is the deprivation of light, and the other is the enjoyment of light. For what follows by necessity, we call reward 264 by distortion of the meaning. This can also be said in response to the question of babies: enjoying that life is characteristic of human nature; but since almost everyone living in the flesh suffers from the disease of ignorance, he who has cleansed himself with proper healing and has washed away ignorance from his spiritual eye, like some pus, deserves to enjoy the fruits of his efforts, entering into a life that is natural for him (en th xwh th cata fusin); he who avoids the purifying means of virtue and makes the disease of ignorance incurable by seductive pleasures, due to an unnatural disposition, is alienated from what is natural and becomes not having a part in the life that is characteristic and proper for us” 265. These words are so clear and definite that, we think, they do not need any explanation. Another work of St. is based on the same idea about the natural dependence of retribution. Gregory of Nyssa: “On the Soul and Resurrection", an excerpt from which we cited above in the interpretation of the parable of the rich man and Lazarus. In this work, St. Gregory considers the cause of suffering and, so to speak, the content of it in the afterlife to be the carnal principle that sinners enjoyed and which sinners developed in themselves during earthly life. “From the story of the rich and the poor, we learn,” says the holy father in the person of Macrina, and another dogma... When Lazarev’s soul is occupied with the present, he does not turn to anything left behind; the rich man, as if by some kind of composition, was welded to the carnal life, which even after his death he was not completely freed from, on the contrary, the object of his concern is still flesh and blood; Therefore, we believe that the Lord teaches the following through these narratives: those who live in the flesh should most of all distance themselves through a virtuous life and renounce attachment to the carnal, so that after death we again do not need a new death, cleansing us from the remnants of the flesh, but so that the flow of the soul towards good, as if by breaking some bonds, becomes easy and free, when no bodily sorrow will distract it to itself. If someone has become completely and completely filled with the mind, occupying every movement and action of the soul with the fulfillment of the desires of the flesh; then, having become outside the flesh, he does not part with carnal passions, but, like those who have lived for a long time in fetid places, who, when they move to where the air is fresh, are not cleansed of the unpleasant odor that they accumulated during their long stay in it: so it is also impossible for carnal lovers, upon their transition to the invisible and formless life (ahdh cai ablepton), not to attract with them some kind of carnal stench, from which torment is caused for them it is even more difficult, because this makes the soul more coarsely reified (ulwdesteraV ec tauthV perisiasewV ths yuchV ginomenhV) 266. In other words, afterlife torment is not something completely new for the sinner; They have their root again in his soul, in the fact that it, given over to carnal lusts on earth, upon transition to the afterlife, as materialized, turns out to be completely unprepared for spiritual existence, and, thus, is tormented in its own way by spiritual hunger. Let us recall the above words from the same work, in which St. the father speaks of a certain, so to speak, physical necessity that determines the position of the righteous and the sinner in the afterlife: “Once he has chosen what is pleasant in this life and has not corrected his folly (aboulian) by repentance, after this he makes the area of goods inaccessible to himself, having dug before him a yawning and impassable abyss (baraJron acaneV te cai aparodeuton) of this inevitable necessity” 267. Of course, this is a comparison, but it is too expressive to be just a comparison. In connection with other words and reasoning, this “abyss” will mean the impossibility for a sinner to enjoy bliss, because his soul does not perceive this bliss, because he is not accustomed to such pleasures in this life. In the works of other church fathers, we, of course, no longer find such a direct disclosure of the concept of retribution, but there can be no doubt that the idea of this meaning of retribution was not alien to them either. This especially needs to be said about the ascetic fathers, who had to think more closely and more often into the inner, moral meaning of doctrinal truths. The first who gave us and illuminated the real, Orthodox meaning of retribution was St. Macarius of Egypt. Having read the works of this church father, we received a guiding thread for reading the works of other fathers. At Rev. Macarius has no direct instructions, like St. Gregory, in all his reasoning, all his teaching can only be understood if we recognize retribution as a natural consequence. According to Rev. Macarius of Egypt, this life with all its labors and sufferings has a purely educational meaning: to prepare the soul, to give it the opportunity to crhsimeusai - to be suitable, beneficial, that is, suitable in its disposition to the moral environment of the heavenly kingdom, the heavenly fatherland, to be related to it in its desires. Retribution (it must be concluded from here) consists in the assimilation of what is characteristic of a person given a certain disposition of his soul. "The soul that truly believes in Christ, according to St. Macarius, must shift and change from the current vicious state to another good state and from the current humiliated nature to another Divine nature, and be remade into a new one (cainhn authn apergarJhnai) through the power of the Holy Spirit. And, thus, it can enter the heavenly kingdom. We can achieve this if we we believe and love Him truly and follow all His holy commandments” 268. Or in another place: “If a soul betrothed to Christ does not do what is pleasing to Him, does not follow His will, it will not be a co-operator of the grace of the Spirit inherent in it; then with reproach she is subjected to shameful dishonor and excommunication from life, as having been found to be indecent and incapable of communicating with the heavenly King” 269 . Let us remember the reasoning of Rev. Macarius that eternal life begins here on earth, etc. After this, such expressions of St. Macarius, such as the fact that eternal bliss is obtained by the righteous as much by grace as by truth. For example, he says: “By grace and the Divine gift of the Spirit, each of us acquires salvation; by faith and love, with the effort of free will, one can achieve the perfect measure of virtue, so that as much as by grace, so much by truth, one can inherit eternal life - just as one is granted complete success not only by Divine power and grace without bringing one’s own labors, so again achieving a perfect measure of freedom and purity without by his diligence and power alone, without the help of God’s hand from above.” 270 Obviously, St. Macarius, in this and a similar way of expression, only wants to say that eternal bliss or eternal torment is made the property of people not by the causeless will of God, that the fate of a person is determined by the actual state of his soul, in other words, he wants to affirm not that salvation is accomplished according to the laws of law. that it has a direct basis in the human soul. “If the soul, says St. father, in this still world does not accept the shrine of the Spirit for much faith and prayer, and does not become a partaker of the Divine nature, then it is not suitable for the kingdom of heaven” 271, in this sense, one must understand the reasoning about salvation not by mercy alone, but also by truth. Rev. Ephraim the Syrian taught in the same way that a person must create the kingdom of God within himself here on earth, so that later at the court the inner storehouse of your soul will be revealed and we will go where we have prepared ourselves. "John," says St. Ephraim, in his revelation saw a great and wonderful book; it was written by God Himself, and there were seven seals on it (Ap. V, 1). Neither on earth nor in heaven could anyone read it, except the Son of God alone, because He wrote and sealed it. This book is a soul written in the kingdom; except the One who wrote it, no one knows what it is. None no eye can see, no ear can hear, and no heart can imagine that the kingdom is written in the soul and placed in it as a dowry, so that when the Heir of the kingdom comes, He will bring it with Him into the bridal chamber and when the hosts of the earthly ones are gathered, then the wise virgins with whom He was betrothed and wrote to them will be prepared and come out to meet Him. attached painting. They joyfully go to meet the King when He comes to celebrate their marriage. since they have kept their vows, they enter with Him into the bridal chamber. And those who have lost their virginity go into complete darkness. The groom takes from them a dowry, which he wrote to them and about which he says: the kingdom of God is within you. Since the Son of God is in you, His kingdom is also in you. Here is the wealth of heaven - in you, if you want it. This is the kingdom of God within you, sinner. Enter into yourself, search harder and you will find it without difficulty... Outside you is death and the door to it is sin... Enter within yourself, remain in your heart; for there is God" 272. Thus, a person prepares for the kingdom of God, but this kingdom is inside his soul. It is necessary to cleanse it from sin, then this kingdom will open without difficulty, and through this a person will receive a guarantee, a foreshadowing of the bliss that the Tsar will give him at the trial. On the other hand, sinners go into complete darkness because they have not preserved and developed the gifted deposit, which is therefore taken away from them. "As here, St. Ephraim explains his parable in another place, each one has grown his wing, so there he soars into the heights; just as each one has purified his mind here, so there he will see His glory, and to the extent that each one loves Him, to that extent he is filled with His love." something special, external, and so that this very development gives a person the opportunity and ability to perceive the highest degree of bliss. It is this difference in the degree of receptivity to good that St. Ephraim, together with Rev., explains. Isaac the Syrian, the difference in the degrees of bliss of the righteous in the kingdom of heaven. "The Savior, according to the words of St. Ephraim, calls the many abodes of the Father the measures of understanding of those installed in that country, but I mean those differences and differences with which they enjoy there, in accordance with their understanding. For the Lord named many abodes, not according to the difference of places, but according to the degree of talent. As everyone enjoys the rays of the sensual sun, according to the purity of visual power and impression, and as from one lamp illuminating one house, each ray is different, while the light is not divided into many lamps: so in the future age all the righteous are settled inseparably, in a single joy, but each in its own measure is illuminated by a single mental Sun, and according to the degree of dignity, draws joy and joy, as if in one air and place, seat, contemplation and image, and no one sees the measure of either the highest or the lowest, so that, looking at the excellent grace of another and at. one's deprivation, to have no reason for grief and anxiety. Let this not happen where there is neither sadness nor sighing, but everyone, according to the grace given to him, in his own measure rejoices internally, and outwardly everyone has one contemplation and one joy” 274. St. Basil the Great, who, as we saw above, believed that afterlife bliss was in the contemplation of God, in communion with Him, explains the degree of communication by the degree of preparedness of a person, the degree of purity of his soul. "The Spirit, says St. Basil, dwells in each of those who accept Him, as inherent in him alone, and sufficiently pours out to all the complete grace that those who partake enjoy, according to their own acceptability, and not to the extent possible for the Spirit. The assimilation of the Spirit with the soul is not a local rapprochement (for can the incorporeal approach in a bodily way?), but the elimination of passions that subsequently ascended into the soul from its attachment to the body, and alienated it from its affinity with God. Therefore, whoever has cleansed himself of the shame that he created in himself through sin, returned to natural beauty, and through purification, as it were, returned the ancient appearance to the royal image, he alone can approach the Comforter.”275 The method of retribution, thus, according to St. Basil, is completely opposite to what the legal understanding. From the point of view of this latter, it seems that man, despite his sins, has not yet lost the ability to communicate with God and has not reduced it. But God, wanting to be fair, does not allow him to fully use his power of perception, giving him only a certain share of contemplation, smaller compared to people who are more deserving. Meanwhile, according to St. Vasily, the Lord All rushes to man, “Abides in everyone, as inherent in him alone,” and “pours out complete grace” to everyone, and if the degrees of contemplation and bliss are different, then the reason is not that the Spirit does not inform everyone, “to the extent possible to Him,” but because the degree of “own acceptability” is not the same for everyone, which depends on the unequal spiritual development of each. In the same way, punishment cannot be understood in the sense that God’s truth requires human torment for Its satisfaction, so that, wanting to maintain uniformity in retribution, it deprives people of blissful communion with Himself, despite the fact that they desire this communion with all their souls and are prepared and capable of it. Torment occurs again from the mental structure of a person. "For everyone, says St. Basil the Great, his deeds will be the cause of painful punishment; because we prepare ourselves to become fit for burning, and, like fiery sparks, we kindle in ourselves spiritual passions for the ignition of the flame of Gehenna, just as the rich man, scorched by thirst in the flame, was tormented for his own pleasures. For, as we accept the arrows of the evil one into ourselves, we are subjected to more or less burning” 276. Thus, it is nothing more than those very “arrows of the evil one” that a person takes into himself in his life here, those passions that a person nourishes within himself, that make a person “fit for burning,” so distort his spiritual nature that in the next century it must inevitably endure torment. St. Cyril of Jerusalem, in the 15th catechumen, explains the picture of the Last Judgment in this way, which, apparently, should provide the basis for an external idea of \u200b\u200bretribution: “And separate them from each other, just as a shepherd separates sheep from goats." How does a shepherd separate? Is it by consulting the book what is a sheep and what is a goat? Or does he separate according to one type? The sheep is not does the wave reveal, and does not the goat reveal the hard and shaggy hair? So, if you are already clean from sins, then your deeds will subsequently become like a pure wave, and your robe will remain undefiled, and you will always say: “I have put off my robe, as soon as I put on nakedness (Song of Songs V, 3)?” It will be known by your clothing that you are a sheep. And if you turn out to be hairy, like Esau, who was shaggy in hair and thin in heart, lost his birthright for food and sold his primacy, then you will be made hairy.”277 Legal understanding requires precisely that the shepherd, separating the sheep from the goats, “cope with the book,” remember the person’s past, without paying attention to what he is like now (i.e. whether he is capable and disposed to live in communion with God): the shepherd weighs the person’s past and declares that he is a sheep or a goat. In fact, only the components of the mental structure of a person that he possesses during the trial are taken into account as qualities. Man is constructed in such a way that he can be a member of the kingdom of God, then he is placed on the right side; is not arranged, then he is sent into eternal fire. St. Cyril thus understands the depiction of the Last Judgment in the Gospel in approximately the same way as St. Irenaeus of Lyons in the above passage of his “Against Heresies”. In the works of St. I. Chrysostom, as we have already said, one can find apparent grounds for the most extreme external, judicial idea about the future fate of a person. Eternal life, according to him, is so significantly different from the present, and the entry into it will be so amazing in its novelty for a person that it can only be compared with the state of a newborn baby who would suddenly be given control of the state. "Imagine, says the saint, that a royal child, who, while in the womb, does not feel anything, would, having come out of there, suddenly ascend to the royal throne and not gradually, but suddenly receive everything. Such will be the then state."278 However, it is only possible to so decisively oppose eternal life to our ordinary, selfish mood. For us, life for earthly interests is so ordinary, we are so deeply and sincerely We believe in the immutability of our accepted laws and everyday rules, that any other life has become completely incomprehensible and unimaginable to us. Chrysostom, addressing listeners of an ordinary everyday disposition, could have resorted to the above method of presentation. But the idea of ​​a natural dependence of retribution is by no means holy. Chrysostom was no stranger. This is also proven by the way the saint compares the future resurrection with the resurrection of a sinner from his sins. "When, says the saint, a fornicator becomes chaste, a money-lover - a poor lover, a hard-hearted - meek; then the resurrection takes place in a person, which serves as the beginning of the future 279. The beginning, therefore, of that resurrection, in which a person will enter the kingdom of God, is supposed to be here on earth the resurrection of the soul from sin. Present life, therefore, is the time of education, the planting in man of those principles that are more complete will be revealed in the future resurrection. “After short-term admonitions, we will be safe, says St. Chrysostom, to enjoy the future benefits, being in this life, as if in some school, through illnesses, sorrows, temptations, poverty and other, as we call them, disasters, in order to become capable of assimilating the future benefits” 280. This ability to perceive lies the whole purpose of human development and the meaning of reward after death. Let us conclude our review of paternal testimony on this issue with the testimony of the disciple of St. Irenaeus of Lyons, St. Hippolytus, bishop of the pier near Rome, is evidence that does not allow for misinterpretation. St. Hippolytus explains the very method of the afterlife reward for a sinner with the following example: “Just as, as a result of an incorrect lifestyle, a deadly bile moisture can form in the insides, which a doctor with his art can lead to painful vomiting, without being accused of producing painful moisture in the human body; for what caused it was a deviation from the diet, the doctor’s knowledge has only just been discovered - so, although it can be said that painful the reward that falls on those who choose evil comes from God, however, with a sound mind it only agrees to think that evils of this kind find their origin and cause in ourselves 281, i.e. in the fact that we, in the words of St. Basil the Great, in this life we ​​“kindled” in ourselves that flame of Gehenna, with which we will be tormented beyond the grave, that we have formed in our nature principles that do not reconcile with the kingdom of God and with life in God, and therefore lead us to suffering. So, according to the view of the sacred writers and fathers of the Church, eternal life in its essence is devoid of that otherworldliness that an ordinary person attributes to it, from his point of view. Eternal life, on the contrary, can be begun here on earth before bodily death, and this latter, together with the resurrection of the flesh, determines only the complete and perfect revelation of eternal life, and not the beginning of it in the proper sense. Therefore, the word “retribution" can be used in the question of the future fate of a person only ec catacrhsewV, in a conditional sense and with great restrictions. “With common reason,” only that idea of ​​reward after death, according to which this latter is a direct conclusion from one or another state of a person, one or another direction of his mental life, and this direction and state depends on how a person spent his life. For deeds a person receives reward, but this reward is in the deeds themselves, in the imprint they leave on a person’s soul. “If the mental eyes” of a person, as a result of a sinful life, are “too dark to see into the abode of joys,” 282 if he has not developed them so much, then he will be forced to dwell in darkness and suffer, because everything in which a person believed the good of life will be taken away from him; and yet a person still thirsts for it and only in this can he find food for his soul. He who has prepared himself for spiritual life and will enjoy it, and, moreover, to the extent that he has condemned himself. “The portion of bliss,” says the Reverend Theophan, expressing the patristic teaching, will be awarded and given to everyone, as much of this bliss as anyone can contain; this capacity is determined by how one has opened his nature to receive heavenly blessings, and this revelation depends on the work on oneself. If these works are different, the revelation is different. nature; if it is revealed differently, the capacity is different; if the capacity is different, the degree of bliss is different. You can judge the difference of torment by the opposite, i.e. they will correspond to the degree of immersion in sins and hardening in them” 283. The stated teaching of St. Fathers of the Church about retribution and explains why that duality, that contradiction between justice and Divine love, which various heretical sects could not resolve, never arose in their minds. These sects stood entirely on the basis of their former pagan or legal concepts and took the concept of justice in the Roman sense. The justice of God, in their opinion, meant such a property in God that He cannot forgive a single sin without corresponding satisfaction. Meanwhile, Christianity proclaimed that the Lord is love and that He will forgive a person everything, if only he would turn and accept the gift offered to him. Of course, this by itself denied the familiar pagan concept of the punishing Themis, who does not allow anyone any leniency. For a pagan, there is only one conclusion from this: the Christian God cannot be one and the same with the God of truth. Gnostic and other dualism appeared. In the works of the fathers, the truth of God and love are never put against one another, unless, of course, this causes a dispute with the same heretics. This is understandable. They understood the truth of God, in accordance with Holy Scripture, not in the sense of punitive wrath, but in the sense of such a property of God, according to which God “rewards everyone,” that is, a free being, “according to his deeds,” that is, in accordance with where a person has determined himself. You can perfectly see this property of God’s truth, in contrast to human truth, in the XXX III chapter of the prophet Ezekiel. Standing on their human point of view, the Jewish people thought that there was no mercy for them from God: “our crimes and sins are upon us and we melt away in them,” a person can never forget his iniquities; what has been done cannot be recognized as not having happened. And since sins are not forgotten, it is necessary, therefore, to wait for punishment for them, since the truth requires satisfaction. “How can we live?”, the Israelis exclaim in despair. In response to these sinful complaints, the Lord reveals the true nature of His Justice. “Say to them: I live, says the Lord (so important was this message and so it could seem incredible from a human point of view, that the Lord swears by Himself in the immutable truth of His words): I do not want the death of the sinner, but that the sinner should turn and live. Turn, turn from your evil ways; why should you die, O house of Israel"? (v. 10 – 11). Sin, therefore, can never completely overcome God’s favor towards man. The Lord is always the same and always desires the salvation of the sinner. God is not a man to persecute anyone for past sins. Let the wicked forsake his way and the wicked his thoughts, and let him turn to the Lord, and He will have mercy on him, and to our God, for He is abundant in mercy. My thoughts are not your thoughts; neither are your ways my ways, says the Lord. But just as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways and My thoughts higher than your thoughts” (Is. 55:7-9). Sinned Israel, therefore, should not judge humanly; he should expect Divine mercy from God. “And you, son of man, we continue to read in the book of the prophet Ezekiel, ... say to the sons of your people: the righteousness of the righteous will not save in the day of his transgression, and the wicked for his iniquities does not fall on the day of turning from his iniquity, just as the righteous in the day of his sin cannot survive for his righteousness (v. 12). This is the basic idea of \u200b\u200bthe righteousness of God, which the holy apostle revealed in his writings Pavel. According to the law of human truth, every action has its own value in itself, and will never lose this value, even if it was committed decades ago, and let everyone forget about it. Retribution for him must follow, no matter what. Therefore, the repentant thief must still suffer the following punishment for his previous deeds: and on the other hand, the righteous person must enjoy some leniency for his righteousness. This is not the truth of God. The Lord once and for all determined that He does not want the death of a sinner, therefore, having forgiven a person every sin, present, past and future, the Lord rushes to a person and offers him life, offers it indifferently to everyone, both the righteous and the sinful. But, of course, it is necessary that people accept this gift. Since they turn away, whether they are righteous or sinful, they will equally lose their lives, because the Lord does not rape anyone. But, if they accept the life offered, then also no person’s past is remembered, the Lord will rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. "When I tell a righteous man that he will live, and he relies on his righteousness (he thinks that he lived for it, and not out of mercy, and thus takes a human point of view) and does a lie, then all his righteous deeds will not be remembered - and he will die from the unrighteousness that he did." This is understandable. The Lord forgives a person and gives him life not because he received satisfaction from him for his sins, but simply because he decided to forgive the person and give him life, because otherwise the person will perish. What meaning will the previous righteous life have if at the present moment, when a person is given life, he turns out to be committing a sin? Despite all the mercy of God, this person will perish, because he does not want to accept life. On the contrary, when I say to the wicked: “You will die,” and he will turn from his sins and will do justice and justice, if this wicked person returns the deposit and pays for what was stolen, If he walks according to the laws of life, without doing anything bad, he will live and will not die. Not one of his sins that he has committed will be remembered to him; he began to create justice and righteousness, he will live” (12 – 16). Why is this so? This is explained in detail in Chap. XYIII. “If, we read there, a righteous man departs from his righteousness and commits iniquity and dies for it, then he dies for the iniquity that he committed (he is in such a state now that he cannot live). And the wicked, if he turns from his iniquity, which he did, and does justice and righteousness, his soul has returned to life. For he has seen and turned from his crimes, which he has committed; he will live, he will not die" (26 - 28). This is the reason, why does one live, and the other die, despite the fact that the first was a wicked man, and the second a righteous man: the first returned to life, and therefore lives; the latter had life, but departed from it, lost it, and therefore naturally must die. “Do I want the death of the wicked? says the Lord God. Is it not that he should turn from his ways and live?” (23). The cause of death is in man himself. What should Israel do? “Rest and turn from your crimes.” yours, so that wickedness will not be a stumbling block to you. Cast away from yourself all your sins that you have committed, and create for yourself a new heart and a new spirit (by this you will enter into life); and why should ye die, the house of Israel? After all, you are the cause of your death, not I. “For I do not want the death of a dying person (if he dies, this does not mean that the Lord condemned him to death, although he has the power to live and be blessed - he dies of himself,” says the Lord God; but turn and live,” and you will live (30 – 32). This is the righteous reward of man, “according to his ways” (Ezek. XVIJI, 29 - 30). “Therefore, says St. Justin Martyr in explanation of the words of the prophet Ezekiel, the Lord Jesus Christ said to us: in what I find you, in that I will judge you.”284 The truth of God, therefore, is revealed and acts not in such a way that God, for his satisfaction, wants the torment and death of a sinner, even if the latter were capable of life, but in such a way that God, as the Holy Bearer of life and truth, from eternity gave the right to life and bliss only to good (Gen. I, 31) and condemned evil, as a direct denial of Divine life, to death and torment. Therefore, every being that chooses by its own will (otherwise there would be no truth, but arbitrariness) evil, thereby dooms itself to a certain evil part: the sinner must die. The action of God's truth in the life of an individual now consists, therefore, in giving to each the fate that naturally follows from the direction of life adopted by each. “The Heavenly Father wants the sinner’s repentance, and not his torment 285 - but if the sinner chooses death, then he dies of himself. This does not mean that the sinner is punished apart from God: this would only be the case if the culprit of the present, contrary to evil, dispensation of the World (according to which evil perishes and sin is punished) was not God, but someone else. And since the world and the laws of its existence have the will of God as their beginning, then the first reason for the punishment of evil is nothing else, not some force independent of God, a Roman fate, but the same truth of God, only it is no longer guided by a feeling of insult, but by the moral dignity of existence. This truth cannot contradict love, because it is overcome not by the desire for satisfaction, which excludes love, but by the direct impossibility, without denying Oneself, of giving peace and life to lawlessness. If, from the Orthodox point of view, the highest good of a person lies in holiness, and if this good is achieved not by a series of individual merits, but by preparation for its perception, then in the concept of salvation, naturally, its moral side and internal, not external definition should come first. Salvation, in common language, is the deliverance of a person from sin, curse and death. This definition can equally be accepted by both the Orthodox and the follower of the legal worldview. But the whole question is what each of them considers the most important and essential in salvation. A self-lover will, of course, put in the first place the consequences of sin for a person’s well-being, that is, death, suffering, etc. Curse, alienation from God also seems to him harmful, again because it leads to suffering. It is clear that he will explain salvation to himself as deliverance from suffering caused by sin. Further, since the essence of sin and its undesirability in itself elude the consciousness of the self-lover, it is natural that the very method of deliverance appears to him incorrectly, one-sidedly. Not understanding why sin leads to death, etc., the selfish person explains this to himself only externally, by saying that God is angry and therefore punishes. Therefore, he understands salvation only as a change from God’s wrath to mercy, and imagines it in the form of an action that takes place only in the Divine consciousness and does not concern the human soul. And since salvation or, more precisely, justification is a supernatural work of Divine consciousness, then the consequence of justification - sanctification - is naturally attributed to the same Divine decision. Hence the supernatural transformation by which Protestantism and Catholicism want to destroy sin in a justified person (since sin, even after justification, would bring the wrath of God upon a person). Of course, human consciousness would have to rebel against such a perversion of mental life: after all, the soul is not some kind of substance for such an involuntary transformation to be possible in it. But the mind often does not prescribe, but obediently follows the feeling and will, and so it is here. Since all the attention of a sinful person is directed towards not suffering, in order to obtain a comfortable life of self-pleasure, he does not think much about how this opportunity to be eternally happy is achieved. Moreover, an involuntary transformation of his soul would be even more desirable for him. He does not like goodness, he does not understand working on himself for the sake of holiness and is afraid, sacrificing a sin that is dear to him is difficult and unpleasant for him. What would be better if, without any effort on his part, without unpleasant tension and struggle with himself, he was suddenly made to love goodness and do the will of God, and for that to be blissful? This is exactly what his selfish and self-pitying nature needs. Meanwhile, for the Orthodox, sin in itself, in addition to all its disastrous consequences, constitutes the greatest evil, and even it alone is “evil in its own sense,” as St. Basil the Great says 286, “real evil.” However, everything that is considered evil only “due to the painfulness of the sensation,” from the point of view of self-pity, - all this for the Orthodox is “only imaginary evil, having the power of good.” 287 Death in itself is not terrible for the Orthodox, he is afraid of “death hiding inside, in the heart,” he is afraid of “inner death,” because only this is “true death” for him 288. To free a true follower of Christ from all the consequences of sin, but not to free him from sin itself, means not only not to save him, but also to subject him to the most bitter and terrible fate that Only he can imagine: to live forever and sin forever - for him this is worse than Gehenna. “If,” says Clement of Alexandria, “we could imagine that someone asked a (true) Gnostic whether he would choose the knowledge of God and eternal life, and if these two things, which are completely identical, were separated, then the Gnostic would, without the slightest hesitation, choose the knowledge of God, recognizing that the possession of faith, which from love ascends to knowledge, is desirable in itself.”289 A true Christian would prefer to be a saint and suffer than to be eternally blissful and sinful. Hence, it is obvious that in the concept of salvation, the Orthodox will put liberation from sin in himself in first place, and will accept deliverance from torment and suffering as a simple consequence, which in essence does not add anything to the benefit received - so it is insignificant compared to good in the proper sense. Salvation for the Orthodox is first and foremost deliverance from sin. Thus, indeed, they teach. German Holy Scripture and the Fathers of the Church. The Old Testament was, of course, a time of shadows and fortune-telling: Old Testament man imagined the bright time of deliverance more under the guise of the restoration of the Jewish kingdom in the Promised Land. However, the best people did not forget that we were talking, first of all, about the kingdom of God, that the Lord was restoring this kingdom for His own sake (Isa. XLVIII, 11), and not for the sake of the complacency of the Israelites themselves. Therefore, when describing the future Savior and the future kingdom, the prophets did not forget to indicate where it was necessary that the Savior would lead his people to nothing other than holiness, that the joy of the future would be concentrated in the opportunity to always be with God, to please before Him and to make acceptable sacrifices to Him. Here, for example, St. king and prophet David. He sees the “blessedness” of a person in “not walking in the counsel of the wicked and not standing in the path of sinners” Ps. I, 1); the law of the mouth (of God) was (for him) better than thousands of gold and silver (CXVIII, 72); “to keep the words (of God) he considered as his destiny,” recognition, purpose and meaning of life (v. 57), therefore, suffering for the sake of God and the law of God was desirable for him: “It is good for me,” he says, “that I suffered in order to learn Your statutes” (v. 71). Evil for him, therefore, is rather in sin than in suffering. Hence, the main idea of ​​salvation is in deliverance from sin for holiness. “The Lord brought out his people in joy, his chosen ones in joy. And he gave them lands nations, and they inherited the labor of foreigners (but all this) so that they would observe His statutes and keep His laws” (Ps. IV 43 - 45), in order to establish the kingdom of good among them. Therefore, asking the Lord to “please Zion with favor and build the walls of Jerusalem,” the prophet immediately, as a particularly noticeable feature of future prosperity, indicates that “then you will be pleased with the sacrifice of righteousness, offerings and burnt offering, then they will lay bulls on your altar” (L, 20 - 21), i.e. the future kingdom should be a kingdom of piety, union with God, which (the union) was so often violated by the sin-loving Israelites. Union with God, as the end of salvation, consists not only in the fact that a person here finds eternal peace for his soul, an undisturbed sense of security, but also in the fact that the Lord “will guide him on the path of righteousness,” which protects him not only from external, but also moral evil (Ps. XXII, 2.5.3). The Holy Prophet Isaiah depicts the bright day of Jerusalem and the reign of the branch of Jesse. The prophet describes how the gates of the city will not be closed from the multitude of riches coming, how the proud enemies of God’s people will lick their fingers before him, etc. But again, these features are only a preface, only the opening of the kingdom of God, which, of course, must first triumph, must first defeat what is contrary to it, and then open in power. But what will life be like in the future kingdom? This will be the kingdom of peace. "Then, says the prophet, the wolf will live with the lamb, and the leopard will lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the wolf will be together, and a little child will lead them. And the cow will graze with the bear, and their cubs will lie down together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox. And the child will play over the asp's hole, and the child will stretch out his hand." on the nest of serpents. They will not do evil or harm on my holy mountain, for the earth will be filled with the vision of the Lord, as the waters fill the sea” (Isa. XI. 6-9). This is the essential feature of the kingdom of the branch of Jesse - knowledge of God and holiness. This knowledge will be the main source of general contentment in the future kingdom. "Arise, shine, O Jerusalem, for your light has come, and the glory of the Lord has risen upon you." What is this glory? "You will be filled with the milk of the nations, and you will suck kings' breasts," but this is only to learn that "I am the Lord your Savior and your Redeemer, the Mighty One of Israel." This is only for the beginning of the preaching about the kingdom. Its blessedness is that "The sun will no longer serve you as daylight, nor will the brightness of the moon shine for you; but the Lord will be your everlasting light, and your God your glory." The people of God will then not think about themselves, about their well-being, the Lord will be their light, the only content of their life, the highest joy. That is why this bliss will be endless, will in the proper sense be eternal life. "Your sun will no longer set, nor will the moon yours will not be hidden, (and cannot be hidden, for this is not self-indulgence, which is changeable by nature, which can grow old, but) the Lord will be an everlasting light for you, and the days of your mourning will end.” A necessary sign of this eternal bliss in union with God will be that “your people will all be righteous” (Isa. LX, 1. 16. 19 – 21. Comp. 29, 22 – 24; 33, 5 – 6). “Then those who remained in Zion and those who survived in Jerusalem will be called saints, all written in the book for living in Jerusalem, when the Lord will wash away the filthiness of the daughters of Zion and cleanse the blood of Jerusalem from the midst of it with the spirit of judgment and the spirit of fire” (Isa. IY, 3 - 4). These are the characteristics of the kingdom of the Lord and this is the final goal of the restoration of Zion. Foresaw the coming of the righteous Branch of David and St. The prophet Jeremiah depicted this coming in the same terms. This will be the kingdom of knowledge, certainty in moral life. “I will appoint over them (the sheep of the people of Israel) shepherds who will feed them, and they will no longer be afraid and dismayed and will not be lost, says the Lord.” At the head of this kingdom will be the Branch of David, the righteous one, bringing judgment and righteousness on earth, and “this is His name by which they will call Him: the Lord is our justification” (Jer. XXIII, 4. 5. 6). Therefore, the whole kingdom will be a kingdom of holiness and truth. “Thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel: henceforth, when I bring back their captivity (when I save them), this word will be spoken in the land of Judah and in its cities: The Lord bless you, the dwelling place of righteousness, the holy mountain” (Jer. XXXI, 23. Wed. 3, 12 - • 19; 24, 6 - 7) ... St. foresaw the same thing. Prophet Ezekiel. The eternal kingdom, which the Lord will open in Zion, will be established on the closest, inner communication of the people with God, and this in itself already presupposes a righteous life. “In this land, on the mountains of Israel, I will make them (Judah and Joseph) one people, and one King will be king over them all, and they will no longer be two nations and will no longer be divided into two kingdoms (cf. John XVII, 21 - 23). And they will no longer defile themselves with their idols and their abominations and all their vices, and I will free them from all their places of residence where they sinned, and I will cleanse them, and they will be My people, and I will be their God.” The deliverance of Israel from pagan captivity in the mouth of God means, therefore, the deliverance of Israel from those places where they sinned, which means the cessation of their sin and the cleansing of them. And my servant David will be King over them and Shepherd of them all, and they will walk in My commandments and will keep My statutes and do them. And they will live in the land that I gave to my servant Jacob, in which their fathers dwelt; there they and their children and their children’s children will live forever; and my servant David will be their prince forever. And I will make a covenant of peace with them, an everlasting covenant will be with them. And I will establish them, and multiply them, and set up my sanctuary among them forever. And they will have My dwelling place, and I will be their God, and they will be My people” (Ezek. XXXYII, I 22 - 27. Wed. 11, 17 - 20; 36, 24 - 28). The Holy Prophet Malachi, apparently, wants to express the aspirations of all Old Testament humanity when he speaks about the coming of “the Lord whom you (the people of Israel) seek, and about the Angel of the covenant whom you desire.” What kind of Lord did they desire in the Old Testament? "Behold, He (the Lord, the Angel of the covenant) comes, says the Lord of Hosts. And who will endure the day of His coming, and who will stand when He appears"? However, this unbearability of the coming of the Angel does not depend on the fact that He will be a formidable, punishing Judge. The Angel will be terrible and unbearable only for those who are stuck in sin and afraid of working on themselves, and unbearable because He will come to renew people morally, to recreate them for a new favorable and eternal service to God. "Who can stand when He appears? For He is like a refiner's fire and like a refiner's lye, and He will sit as a refiner and purifier of silver, and to purify the sons of Levi, and will refine them as gold and as silver, that they may sacrifice to the Lord in righteousness. Then the sacrifice of Judah and Jerusalem will be acceptable to the Lord, as in the days of old and as in former years" ( Mal. III, I – 4). This renewing action of the future kingdom is depicted in the same terms by the prophet Zechariah: “And in all the earth, says the Lord, two parts will be destroyed and die out, and the third will remain in it. And I will bring this third part into the fire and will refine them as silver is refined, and I will refine them as gold is refined: they will call on My name, and I will hear them and say: these are my people, and they They will say: The Lord is my God” (Zech. 13:8-9), In that kingdom there will be eternal peace (9:10), - the Lord will “live in Jerusalem, and Jerusalem will be called the city of truth, and the mountain of the Lord of hosts - the mountain of holiness (8:3). The Prophet Zephaniah describes in very strong terms the external side of the future salvation that will come on the day of God’s wrath (3, 8); the oppressors of the people will be oppressed, and, instead of the present humiliation, the people of God will be given eminence and honor (vv. 19 – 20). But the basis for such a change lies precisely in the internal renewal of the people. "Then again I will give the nations pure lips, so that everyone will recognize the name of the Lord and serve Him with one accord. From the countries beyond the rivers of Ethiopia, My worshipers, the children of the scattered people, will bring Me gifts. On that day you will not disgrace yourself by all your deeds with which you have sinned against Me, for then I will remove from among you those who are vainglorious about your nobility, and you will no longer exalt yourself on the holy mountain Mine. But I will leave with you a humble and simple people, and they will trust in the name of the Lord. The remnant of Israel will not do injustice, nor will they speak a lie, and no deceitful tongue will be found in their mouth, for they will feed and rest, and no one will disturb them.” The main joy of the next century is in living communication with God: “The Lord your God is among you” (Zeph. 3:9 – 13.17). Thus, the prophets depict in the strongest terms the future triumph of Israel over the nations, describe the restoration of Jerusalem and the kingdom of Israel, describe future wealth, prosperity, etc. However, these features do not absorb all of their attention; moreover, these features speak more about the beginning of the kingdom, and not about its essence. But as soon as the prophets move on to describe how and what Israel will enjoy in the future kingdom, immediately in their speeches the main, main feature of this kingdom is its holiness, pleasing to God, freedom from all sin. The Messiah, through the very fact that He will free the people from captivity, will give them the opportunity to live holy and in communion with God. Of course, foreign slavery was hard, the whole misery of life was hard, but the main oppression that oppressed the moral consciousness of true Israel was still sin. Therefore, getting rid of it was the main content of the concept of salvation. This basic idea of ​​the prophecy is remarkably clearly expressed at the turn of the two Testaments by the father of John the Baptist, the priest 3axapius. “Blessed is the Lord God of Israel, that he hath visited his people, and has wrought deliverance unto them: and hath raised up a horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David: as he hath declared by the mouth of his holy prophets that have been of the world, that he will save us from our enemies, and from the hand of all them that hate us, that he will show mercy to our fathers, and that he will remember his holy covenant, the oath which he swore He gave us to Abraham, our father, without fear, after being delivered from the hand of our enemies, to serve Him in holiness and righteousness before Him, all the days of our life.” Therefore, the calling of the newborn Forerunner will be “to make the people of God understand salvation,” namely, “in the forgiveness of sins,” while the goal of “visiting the East from above” will be “to enlighten those who sit in darkness and the shadow of death, to guide our feet.” to the path of peace” (Luke I, 68 – 75. 77. 78. 7U). The time has finally come for the East itself to be born again. An angel appears to Joseph in a dream and commands him to name the baby being born Jesus. “For,” says the Angel, “He will save His people from their sins” (Matthew I, 21). The Lord Jesus Christ Himself placed His calling in this salvation from sins. “Come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.” The rite of tonsure adds: “burdened with sins,” and this addition is fully justified by the further course of speech. What is the repose Christ offers? “Take My yoke upon you, and learn from Me: for I am meek and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls" (Matt. XI, 28 - 29). Peace, salvation is in a change of morals. Faithful to His calling “to seek and save what was lost, 1 ", the Son of Man comes to the house of Zacchaeus and says: “Now salvation has come this house, because he (Zacchaeus) is the son of Abraham.” These words were spoken in response to the exclamation of Zacchaeus: “Lord, I will give half of my property to the poor, and if I have offended anyone, I will repay him fourfold” (Luke XIX, 10.9.8). The publican, a lover of money by his very position, is suddenly released from the bonds of his passion. The Lord calls this salvation. St. Apostle Peter urges his readers to graciously endure all the sorrows of this life in order to “finally achieve through faith the salvation of souls." This salvation was proclaimed by the Old Testament prophets. “Therefore, beloved,” writes the Apostle, “having girded the loins of your mind, being watchful, fully trust in the grace given to you at the appearing of Jesus Christ. Like obedient children, do not conform to former lusts that were in your ignorance; but, following the example of the Holy One who called you, be holy in all your actions, knowing that you were not redeemed with corruptible things, silver or gold, from the vain life handed down from your fathers, but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot” (I Pet. I, 9.13 – 15.18). St. Apostle Paul describes the salvation accomplished by Jesus Christ in this way: "We were once foolish, disobedient, lost, slaves of lusts and various pleasures, lived in malice and envy, were vile, hated each other. When the grace and love of our Savior, God, appeared, He saved us not according to the righteous deeds that we would have done, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, which He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior." The grace of God thus brought salvation to people in the regeneration and washing away of spiritual iniquities. Therefore, the direct conclusion from the preaching of this salvation is to convince everyone to lead a righteous life (that is, the preaching of grace revealed); and I desire that you should lead a righteous life. confirmed this, so that (here is the end of this sermon) those who believe in God might strive to be diligent in good works” (Tit. III, 3 – 6.8). Otherwise, the announced grace will not apply to them, since the revealed grace of God is therefore “saving to all men” because “it teaches us that, having rejected ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live chastely and righteously in the present age.” This is both the goal and the meaning of the work done for us by Jesus Christ, since “He gave himself for you (in order, precisely) to deliver us from all iniquity, and to purify for himself a special people, zealous for good works"" (Tit. II, 11 - 12. 14), in order to "deliver you from the present evil age (Gal. 1: 4). - Salvation consists in the fact that God "delivered us from the power of darkness"; and this darkness was our alienation from God and sinful life. “By being disposed towards evil deeds,” we were hostile to God and thereby alienated from Him (to a self-lover, anyone who sets limits to his desires appears to be an enemy). Now God has reconciled us in order to present us holy and blameless and blameless before Him.” But all this, of course, is subject to this indispensable condition, if we remain in our calling: “Only if you remain strong and steadfast in the faith, and do not fall away from the gospel which you have heard” (Col. I, 13.21.22.23), otherwise our enmity against God will rise again. - “Christ loved the Church and gave Himself for her, in order to sanctify her, having cleansed it with water, through the word, so that he might present it to himself as a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or anything like that, but that she might be holy and without blemish” (Eph. Y, 25-27). “God, who was rich in mercy, made us alive with Christ because of His great love.” (We are) saved by grace through faith, and this is not from (us) the gift of God”; so that “we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared in advance for us to walk in” (Eph. II, 4 – 5. 8. 10). The main thing in the question of salvation is considered by the sacred writers to be sin in itself, even regardless of its consequences. Suffering is not evil for a person - sin is evil; the people of the Old Testament were eager to get rid of it; Christ preached freedom from it with His apostles in the New. This will be completely understandable for us if we remember what a Christian believes his true life and his highest good to be. If a person’s life goal is not self-pleasure, not personal happiness, but holiness for the sake of the Holy Lord, then, of course, evil in the proper sense for him will not be the lack of personal happiness, not suffering, but the lack of holiness, sinful hostility towards God and His holy kingdom. In the presented teaching of Holy Scripture on salvation, we thus find the development and, therefore, confirmation of the idea of ​​bliss in holiness, which (idea) we recognize as fundamental in the Orthodox understanding of life. After everything that was said earlier about the views of the Church Fathers regarding eternal life, retribution, etc., the fatherly teaching about the essence and final goal of salvation becomes quite clear. The Fathers of the Church could not understand salvation otherwise than salvation, first of all, from sins. “Elisha,” says St. Justin Martyr, throwing a tree into the Jordan River, summoned an iron ax from the bottom, with which the sons of the prophets came to cut down trees to build a house, in order to read and meditate on the law and commandments of God; so our Christ redeemed us, immersed in the gravest sins we had committed, through His crucifixion on the tree and through the sanctification of us with water. and made us a house of prayer and worship” 290. "We," says St. Justin, while still given over to fornication and every vile deed in general, have drawn into ourselves by the grace bestowed by our Jesus according to the will of His Father, all the unclean and evil things in which we were clothed. The devil rises up against us, always acting against us and wanting to draw everyone to himself; but the Lamb of God, that is, the power of God sent down to us through Jesus Christ, rebukes him, and he withdraws from us. And it’s as if we were snatched from the fire, because we were delivered both from previous sins and from the torment and flames that the devil and all his servants prepared for us and from which Jesus the Son of God again delivers us” 291. Thus, St. Justin does not forget the consequences of sin, but deliverance from them seems to him more like a ghost, a consequence of salvation, than its essence and main goal (“again delivers”). The essence of salvation is that the Lord Jesus Christ has given us the power with which we overcome the attacks of the devil attacking us and remain free from our former passions. "Through the action of the evil one, says St. Ephraim the Syrian, everyone became weak in evil: the damage became so severe and was not healed that neither the prophets nor the priests were able to completely heal the ulcers. Therefore (this is the reason) the Holy Only Begotten Son, seeing that everything was naturally weak in evil (this is the essence of the disaster), by the will of the Father, descending from heaven... came with grace and generosity to heal those possessed by various infirmities and with His word to heal all diseases; He delivered everyone from the stench of their own ulcers” 292. The purpose of salvation and the meaning is in "deliverance from the stench of one's own ulcers." darkness; heal, O Lord, according to Your false promise, all the infirmities that you see in me” 293 In these words, Rev. Ephraim not only expresses the essence of salvation from the side of its content, but makes it clear also its very form, the way in which it is accomplished: it is not some external - judicial or magical action, but a development gradually accomplished in a person by the action of God's grace, so that there can be degrees of redemption. “The Perfect One, the Holy Father expresses the same thought, a Christian, produces every virtue and all the perfect fruits of the spirit that surpass our nature... with pleasure and spiritual pleasure, as natural and ordinary, without fatigue and easily, no longer struggling with sinful passions, as completely redeemed by the Lord” 294. The same idea can be found in very clear form in St. Athanasius of Alexandria. "Since, he says, human nature, having undergone a change, abandoned the truth and loved lawlessness; then the Only Begotten became man, so that, having corrected this in Himself, He could instill in human nature to love truth and hate lawlessness. This was the reason for the incarnation. For this, for the sake of the anointing of You, O God. " For what exactly? So that those who have become Your partakers may rejoice; how pardoned because they learned from you to love truth and hate lawlessness” 295. Christ is called, according to St. Gregory the Theologian, “Deliverance” (I Cor. 1:30), as freeing us who were held under sin, as having given Himself for us as an atonement, as a cleansing sacrifice for the universe” 296. So, from the Orthodox point of view, the essence, meaning and final goal of a person’s salvation is to deliver him from sin and to grant him eternal holy life in communion with God. The Orthodox Christian by no means forgets about the consequences of sin, death, suffering, etc., and is by no means ungrateful to God for deliverance from them, but this deliverance is not the main joy for him, as it is in the legal understanding of life. Like the Apostle Paul, the Orthodox lament not so much that he is threatened with punishment for sin, from which (sin) he cannot in any way free himself, but rather that he cannot “get rid of this body of death,” in which lives “another law, contrary to the warring “law of the mind” that delights him (Rom. YI, 22 - 25). Not fear for oneself, but the desire for holiness, life according to God. makes a true ascetic of piety grieve. If this is the essence of salvation, then the very method of it becomes definite for us. If you think only about freeing a person from suffering, then it is completely indifferent whether this deliverance is free or not free on the part of the person: the whole point is in the person’s complacency. But if a person needs to be made righteous, it is necessary to free him from sin, then it is not at all indifferent whether the person will only be a passive object for the action of supernatural power, or whether he himself will participate in his own deliverance. That's why, in St. In the Scriptures and in the works of the Fathers of the Church, one notices a constant desire to convince a person to work out his own salvation, because without one’s own efforts no one can be saved. It is certain that "man is nothing without God; while God maintains, governs and enlightens him, something exists and is shown to be: but when God hides His light and takes away his vital force, he immediately disappears 297; and that, therefore, salvation can only be attributed to the grace of God. However, "God adorned man with the gift of freedom" 298 and gave him the opportunity to do by free choice what for animals is a gift of nature 299. And this is in order to make a person a participant in true life, that is, holy, Divine, since involuntary holiness cannot be the holiness and the highest good of a person, and the goal of his aspirations. “Goodness cannot be pleasant to people and communication with God will not be dear to them, they could not especially seek goodness if it existed in people without their own effort or diligence, if it were innate by nature and without their participation... For how can those who do not know what good is rejoice in goodness? What value would it have in the eyes of those who do not strive for it? And could it be a crown for those who did not at all pursue it like victors in a lists? That is why the Lord said that the kingdom of heaven is the destiny of those who use effort (Matt. XI, 12) 300. Holiness, if it is an involuntary property of nature, will lose its moral character and turn into an indifferent state. “You can’t be kind out of necessity” 301. Therefore, it is equally wrong to imagine salvation as a matter imputed to a person from the outside, as well as a supernatural transformation occurring in a person apart from the participation of his freedom. In both cases, a person would turn out to be only a weak-willed subject of someone else’s influence, and the holiness he received in this way would be no different from innate holiness, which has no moral dignity, and, therefore, not at all the highest good that a person seeks. “I,” says St. I. Chrysostom, heard many who said: “Why did God create me autocratic in virtue? But how can I raise you to heaven, slumbering, sleeping, devoted to vices, luxury, gluttony? Even there you would not have fallen behind the vices.”302 A person would not have accepted the holiness forcibly imposed on him and would have remained the same. Therefore, although grace God does a lot in the salvation of man, although everything can be attributed to her, but she “also needs a believer, like a writing stick or an arrow in an active one” 303. "It is not through violence and arbitrariness, but through conviction and good nature that the salvation of man is prepared. Therefore, everyone has full power in his own salvation." (of God)" 305. "The hero of heroism, says St. Ephraim the Syrian, is always ready to give you His right hand, and will raise you from your fall. For as soon as you first stretch out your hand to Him, He will give you His right hand to raise you up." remains idle, does not feel only his salvation, but “promotes the grace that works in him” 307. Every good thing that happens in a person, every moral growth, every turning point that occurs in his soul, necessarily takes place not outside of consciousness and freedom, so that it is not someone else, but “man himself who changes himself, turning from the old into the new.” 308 Salvation cannot be some kind of external judicial or physical event, but is necessarily a moral action; and, as such, it necessarily presupposes, as the most inevitable condition, the law that man himself performs this action, albeit with the help of grace. Grace, although it acts, although it does everything, is certainly within freedom and consciousness, and it must not be forgotten in order to understand the teaching of the Orthodox Church about the very method of saving a person. The legal point of view offers two inconsistencies in the teaching about how a person is saved: it, firstly, teaches that God does not impute sin to a person and declares him righteous, while a person in his soul remains the same sinner; and, secondly, salvation itself, or rather the sanctification of a person, is presented in the form of a supernatural, non-water re-creation, an almost material transformation carried out in the soul by grace. Orthodox dogma can use the same expressions, but their content, of course, will be far different. Having clarified the Orthodox concept of God's truth, of retribution, of the essence of salvation, it is impossible to imagine that even at the moment of baptism or repentance there would be some kind of imputation of sin, some kind of declaration of a person as righteous, pronunciation, as Protestants say. According to Protestant teaching, it turns out that God was always angry with man, all the time he could not forgive him for the insult that man inflicted on Him through sin. Then, suddenly, seeing a person’s faith in Jesus Christ, God is reconciled with the person and no longer considers him his enemy, although the person can still sin after this, with impunity. Here the basic principle by which the legal understanding of life lives is clearly revealed: everything is built on offended pride - once pride is calmed, then sin, previously condemned and cursed, loses its sinfulness. This is not how the Orthodox Church teaches. Is it possible to imagine that God would be at enmity against a person for his sin, so that God could not be reconciled with a person, even if the latter thirsted for God with all his soul and prayed for communion with Him? Remaining faithful to the Word of God and the teachings of the fathers, we can only say: no. To be convinced of this, let us open the Bible, and there, right from the first pages, we find a refutation of this Protestant view, although Protestants boast that they believe only what the Bible teaches. If God was at enmity with man for offense by sin, then how will Protestants explain the primitive history of mankind to us? Why does the Lord, having denounced Adam, not leave him to his fate, but arrange his life and immediately give him the most joyful promise that the seed of the woman will erase the head of the serpent? Why does the Lord, seeing the proximity of sin for Cain, appear to him and warn him? Why, in general, only for people “who despised the Spirit of God” (Gen. VI, 3), only for the wicked, who did not want conversion, there was no peace,” that is, reconciliation with God (Is. LVII, 20-21) “But he who fears God and acts righteously in every nation (was) acceptable to Him” (Acts X, 35)? Obviously, all this is because, in the words of St. I. Chrysostom, "It is not God who is at enmity against us, but we are against Him. God is never at enmity" 309. God always strives for man, always draws him to Himself, but the fact is that man does not always obey the calling of God. In this case, the person dies, but the reason is not the wrath of God, not the unwillingness of God to forgive man; but the man himself, choosing the bad, whom (the bad) God cannot leave to live, cannot give to evil the truth that belongs only to good; God cannot do this, just as he cannot die or lie, because this would be a denial of the Divine Being. But without putting up with sin, God’s love is always ready to convert and save man. Sin removes man from God, and not God from man. The prophet Isaiah expresses this idea remarkably clearly. For example: "Thus says the High and Exalted One who lives forever, His holy name is: I live in the high place of heaven and in the sanctuary, and also with the contrite in spirit and the humble, to revive the humble spirit and revive the hearts of the contrite. For I will not fight forever and not be completely angry; otherwise the spirit and every breath that I have made will fail before Me" (Isa. LVII, 15 – 16). God, as the Creator of everything, could, of course, only be a punishing truth, but then man would perish. Therefore, God’s love does not place sin as an absolute obstacle to the rapprochement of God with man; wherever there is a humble and contrite heart, where there is a noticeable desire to abandon sin and be with God, God’s love does not leave him without help. hid his face and was indignant (to correct him); but he, turning away, followed the path of his heart (My removal only brought the man even closer to destruction. Then I decided to act differently). I have seen his ways (however, I am now ready to help him), and I will heal him and guide him and comfort him and those who mourn him. “I will fulfill the word: peace, peace to those who are far and to those who are near,” says the Lord, and I will heal him” (17 – 19). But an indispensable condition for this pardon must be a contrite heart, otherwise mercy will not touch the person.” I am merciful, says the Lord, I will not be indignant forever; just admit your guilt (Jer. 3:12 – 13). “But the wicked are like a troubled sea, which cannot calm down, and whose waters throw up silt and dirt, there is no peace for the wicked, says my God" (20 - 21). Why is this? Because they did not accept the mercy of God and did not want to be reconciled with Him. Every day I stretched out My hands to a disobedient people who walked in evil ways, according to their own thoughts (this is the attitude of the Lord towards the sinner, despite his sin). However, “this is what is written before Me: I will not keep silent, but I will repay, I will repay your iniquities into their bosom, says the Lord... You who have forsaken the Lord; you have forgotten My holy mountain, you are preparing a table for Gad and you are pouring out a full cup for Me - I will condemn you to the sword, and you will all bow down to the slaughter, because I called and you did not answer, I spoke and you did not listen, but you did what was evil in My sight and chose what was displeasing to Me. Why does the Lord God say this: behold, My servants (i.e. those who have turned to God) will eat, but you will starve” (Isa. LXV, 2.6 – 7, 11 – 13). “Who can turn the wrath of God into mercy and justice into mercy,” says St. Ephraim the Syrian, unless the one who has tied the burden of sins to himself and bears and unties and eases it when he wants does not beg the Judge? For we increase the burdens; when we sin grievously, we also lighten them when we bitterly repent: and it is up to us to destroy and bind. God’s work is to forgive those who fall to Him; for, indeed, the Lord is philanthropic, Who by repentance relieves the burdens of slaves" 310. The reason for punishment, therefore, is not the need to somehow satisfy the truth of God (after all, this satisfaction does not exist even after repentance), but that the sinner does not repent, continues to remain in sin and thereby alienates himself from the life of God. The enmity, therefore, is not in God, but in man, as the Apostle Paul makes it clear with undoubted clarity. "It pleased the Father that in Him (the Son) all fullness should dwell, and that through Him He might reconcile (not Himself with all, but) with Himself all things, having pacified through Him the blood of His cross, both earthly and heavenly. And you, who were once alienated and enemies, by disposition towards evil spirits (loving evil, man cannot love the holy God) now reconciled in the body of His flesh, by death Him, to present you holy and blameless and blameless before Him" (Col. I, 19 - 22). "All things are from God, who through Jesus Christ reconciled us to Himself (and not Himself to us) and gave us the ministry of reconciliation, because God in Christ reconciled the world to Himself, not imputing their trespasses to men, and gave us the word of reconciliation. So we - messengers on behalf of Christ, and as if God himself exhorts through us, in the name of Christ we ask: be reconciled to God" (2 Cor. Y, 18 - 20) ... "We, as companions, beseech you, so that the grace of God will not be received by you in vain" (VI, 1). Thus, while people given over to sin were at enmity against God, opposed His law and etc., God did not cease to love them, His enemies. “You, who are the enemy, have loved me dearly,” our Church sings 311. For the sake of this love of His, God, not wanting to impute to people this enmity against Himself, sent His Son to reconcile people with Himself. If even after this, for some, the grace of God is “vain,” then this is because they themselves do not want to heed God’s admonition, they do not want to be reconciled with God. Who, in this case, is reconciled in baptism? Obviously, not God, because He calls a person to baptism, He awakens his faith, etc. Consequently, a person is reconciled with God, that is, a person who hitherto loved only himself and sin, now responds to the call of God and, for his part, decides not to serve sin anymore and, thus, not to be at enmity with God, decides, instead of enmity, to be in communion with God. Thus, if from the Orthodox point of view we can talk about God not imputing sin to man, then only as a pre-peaceful assumption of the entire economy of God about our salvation, an assumption that brought the Son of God to earth and lifted Him to the cross, and which, on the other hand, is an eternal guarantee of mercy for us, every sinner who approaches God. This does not mean that God condones sin. Sin, as a direct denial of God's life, will always remain an "abomination" before the holy God, never receive recognition from Him, will never receive the right to exist. But this is not because God wanted, so to speak, to note the insult inflicted on Him as the Ruler of the world - this is explained by the very essence of truth. The sinner, as an individual, has never ceased and will never cease to be the object of the strongest love of God, ready for all kinds of sacrifices, if only man heeded Her calling. Then “all his guilt will become like a shadow” 312, as if it had never happened at all, and the Heavenly Father will forgive him for his previous enmity, without demanding any satisfaction. "The sinner has not yet paid the debt, through repentance he becomes irresponsible in debt. He has not yet laid aside the burden from himself (of course, the eradication of passion) and is clothed with grace... Repentance does not promise only, but already grants the cleansing of sins and the remission of them; it does not only lead the sinner to hope, but in one word utters a command, assures him that he will be free. It tells him: know that you have, and do not wait. But understand what you have and know that with the grace given to you I assure you of the future. It pleases God that you have flowed to Him; Once a person becomes righteous, God does not reject his prayers, does not deprive him of the right to turn to Himself. God’s mercy is withheld not by God, but by the sinner himself. One only needs to repent, “sacrifice oneself to God” 314, renounce his beloved life, God will not remember our previous enmity, he will come to meet us. The love of God, says Rev. Ephraim the Syrian, "does not hesitate to listen to those who truly come to God. And he does not reproach the wicked who comes again: why have you served the enemy for so long and voluntarily despised Me the Master? He does not look for how much time has passed, but only the Lord looks at the humility, tears and sighs of the one who falls to Him, because He is the forerunner, like our God and creator, and suddenly forgives everything sins and errors in thoughts and deeds, and says that they should bring him (the one who falls) the first garment and also a ring on his right hand, and commands all the angels to rejoice at the discovery of this sinner’s soul.” 315 Of course, what is perfect remains perfect, a person cannot forget past sins - let us remember the tears of the Apostle Peter. But if a person begins to consider his sins as an impenetrable wall between him and God, then this will be a mortal sin, despair. The consciousness of past sins only teaches a person to understand the mercy and all-forgiving love of God, and does not arouse in him horror before the wrath of God. Consequently, God’s economy is directed not to somehow reconcile the division that has formed in God between love and truth (a division that is difficult to tolerate in the One and always identical Being), but to somehow save the lost sheep, in order to somehow arrange for man to be brought onto the path of truth. Therefore, the non-imputation of sin from the Orthodox point of view should be understood in the sense that the Lord, from eternity, condemned evil to destruction, nevertheless from eternity decided not to reject a person for sin if he stops sinning and turns to God. Therefore, to posit the essence of justification in imputation means to talk only about the indispensable presupposition of justification, but not to talk about the latter itself. It is certain that everyone who turns to God asks, first of all, for forgiveness and receives it; but this does not mean that in God, during the very performance of the sacrament, some special act of reconciliation with a hitherto unloved sinner took place; a change occurs in man and consists in the reconciliation of this latter with God. Thus, the main thing in justification is not the pronunciation of Protestants, but the conversion of a person from sin to life according to God, a moral revolution. So, indeed, the Orthodox Church taught and teaches. The prophet Isaiah describes the “atonement of the iniquities" of Jacob in this way. The Lord punished him, “threw him out with a strong breath of his, as if on the day of the east wind. And through this the iniquity of Jacob will be atonement (but suffering is not an external price for sin, because we read further); and the fruit of this will be the removal of sin from him, when he turns all the stones of the altars into pieces of lime, and they will no longer be stand oak groves and idols of the sun” (Is. 27.9.) Disasters lead Jacob to repentance and, when he destroys his sin (idolatry), this sin will be removed from him. The Apostle Paul calls baptism the death of sin. “We,” he says, “have died to sin; how can we live in it?” What does this death consist of? “Do you not know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? Therefore we were buried with Him by baptism into death, so that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life.” “Our old man was crucified with Him, so that the body of sin was abolished, so that we would no longer be slaves to sin" (Rom. VI, 2 - 4. 6). The further conviction to be faithful to our calling, to remain alien to sin, makes it clear that death itself to sin is also accomplished in a moral way, an act that is as “mysterious as it is freely willing.” The quoted words of the Apostle Paul, of course, are not physical, but moral, consisting in rejection of all sin and hatred of it. For how do we come to the Lord by repenting and being baptized, as St. Peter pointed out to those who asked on the day of Pentecost: Repent, and let everyone be baptized in you, he answered (Acts. II, 88). What does it mean to repent? - He says in his heart: I have sinned, I will not. This I will not do and is death to sin” 317. In other words, baptism, according to the Apostle Paul, was the same “promise to God of a good conscience” as it was according to the Apostle Peter (I Pet. III, 21). The essence of baptism or the sacrament of repentance consists, therefore, in a radical revolution accomplished in the soul of a person, in a change in his entire life. Man was a slave to sin, fulfilled the lusts of the devil, was an enemy of God - now he decides to stop sin and be in communion with the Holy Lord. This decision, of course, is a matter of human freedom, but it is accomplished in the soul only under the influence and with the help of grace, which is communicated in the sacrament. Baptism, asks the Rev. Feofan, what does it add? “It strengthens this decision of the will with grace and gives strength to persevere in this decision” 318. Before accepting grace, a person only wanted to follow Christ and do His will. But sin continued to be pleasant to him. The grace of God so strengthens a person’s determination that he begins to hate sin, that is, he finally considers it an evil for himself, as he previously considered it his good. This means that a person completely went over to the side of the Lord and became His faithful servant (Rom. VI, 17-18). The grace of the sacrament, entering, so to speak, into the soul of a person and certainly “merging with human zeal" 319, consolidates and carries out the moral revolution carried out by the will of a person and gives a person the strength to resist the decision made (unless, of course, the person turns away from grace again). With this very radical change in the direction of life, the “destruction of everything that was former” is accomplished 320. Every sinful fall puts a certain stamp on a person’s soul and in one way or another affects its structure. The sum of sinful actions thus constitutes a certain past of a person, which influences his behavior in the present, attracting him to certain actions. The mysteriously free revolution consists in the fact that the thread of a person’s life is, as it were, interrupted, and the sinful past formed in him loses its defining coercive force, as if thrown out of the soul, becomes alien to the person. Whatever this past may be, whether it is an inheritance from parents (original sin), or the consequences of the actions of the person being baptized, all this is equally crossed out in a person’s life, if only he sincerely turns away from it, if only he finally breaks the connection with this past 321. A new man emerges from the font, without determination to sin; but with strengthened grace and zeal he does the will of God and never abandons God. In this way, “the reproach of sin is removed from a person” 322, “the impurities of previously committed crimes are blotted out 323. Sin is not forgotten and is not imputed to a person due to some reasons extraneous to the person’s soul - sin is literally removed from a person, ceases to be part of his internal content and refers to the past that has been lived, which, thus, has nothing in common with the person’s present. And we saw above that God is not angry for the past, does not count it out to a person. Since there is no sin in the present, therefore, there is no alienation from God, a person is “reconciled and reunited with the Church,” the holy kingdom of God and God, sin is truly forgiven to a person 324. This is precisely how the gracious effect of the sacraments of baptism and repentance is depicted in the works of the Church Fathers. Directly concerns the issue of the baptism of St. Cyril of Jerusalem, whose very works: “Catechetical Teachings” directly answer our question. S. Cyril clearly represents the rebirth of a person in baptism in the form of a vital and at the same time morally free revolution in the soul. A person approaching baptism must quite sincerely and decisively cast aside his previous life according to the elements of the world and determine himself for good. This, radically changing a person, decision or will is what makes a person “called,” that is, in reality, and not just in the imagination, brings him into communication with God and to the beginning of a new life. "Although God is generous in doing good, nevertheless, he expects from everyone a sincere will. Why did the apostle add: to those who are called by will. Will (h proJesiz), when it sincerely makes you called (clhton se poiei) 325. In order for the beginning of a new life to take place, it is necessary that the old one be actually rejected. The Lord gives his wonderful saving seal (thn swthsiwdh sfragiVa thn Jaumasian) only where he sees a “good conscience”, i.e. not just a verbal promise, but a sincere desire to be good. “As those who begin to recruit soldiers enter into research about the age and physical constitution of those being recruited; so the Lord, inscribing souls into the army, tests the wills. And, if anyone has hidden hypocrisy, he rejects this person as incapable of true service in the army. And if he finds one worthy, he readily gives him grace. The saint does not give it to dogs. Where he sees a good conscience, he gives a wonderful saving seal, which demons tremble and which angels know." Therefore, a real, consciously free spiritual change is necessary for the sacrament to fully benefit a person. Without free assistance, without the aforementioned turning point, a person only tempts the Lord in vain. This thought was in the eyes of St. Kirill is so important that he returns to it several times in his Announcements, trying to imprint it as strongly as possible in the minds of those preparing for enlightenment. “If, as the saint says in the “Word of Preface” at the very beginning, you are here with your body (that is, you receive the sacrament), but not here with your mind, then there is no benefit in this. And Simon the Magus once approached this font. And he was baptized, but was not enlightened; he washed the body with water, but did not enlighten the heart with the Spirit; the body was immersed in the water and came out of the water, but the soul did not buried with Christ, and was not resurrected with Him. I present examples of falls, so that you do not fall... We, the servants of Christ, accept everyone and, as if correcting the position of the doorkeepers, we leave the doors unlocked. There is no prohibition for you to enter, if your soul is defiled by sins and your intention is unclean. Do you see this venerable improvement of the Church? deeds, reading the scriptures, the presence of the clergy, following the teachings? Almost the place and understand what is visible. Go out now at the right time (that is, with a soul prepared to receive grace, and what is this preparation, the Holy Father explains further), and enter in the morning even more timely. If the love of money serves as the clothing of your soul, enter in different clothing; take off the clothes you are wearing, and do not cover them with them. Put off fornication and impurity, and put on the bright robe of chastity. I warn you about this before Jesus, the Bridegroom of souls, came and looked upon the garments (referring to the parable of those invited to supper). A long term is given to you. You have forty days to repent. You have plenty of convenient time to undress and wash and put on your clothes and enter. If you remain with an evil will, the one who precedes you is not guilty, but you do not expect to receive grace. The water will receive you, but the Spirit will not receive you. If anyone knows he has an ulcer, let him take a plaster; if anyone has fallen, let him rise. May there be no Simon (magician) among you, may there be in you "neither hypocrisy nor idle inquisitiveness. Die to sins, and live in righteousness, live from this day on." baptism" 328. From this point of view, accepting the sacrament of baptism seems to be a great test of a person’s conscience, such a turning point in a person’s life that if he misses it, then nothing can improve his situation. "(The Holy Spirit) tests the soul, does not cast pearls before swine. If you are a hypocrite; then people are baptizing you now, but the Spirit will not baptize. But if you came by faith, then people serve in the visible, and the Holy Spirit gives the invisible. You come to a great test in this single hour, for a great military recruitment. If you ruin this hour, then the evil is irreparable. But if you are worthy of grace, your soul will be enlightened; you will accept strength that you never had; you will accept weapons that are terrible for demons. And if you do not throw away the weapon, but keep the seal, the demon will not approach.”329 Thanks to this revolution in a person’s soul, his sins are left behind. "Do not ask: how will my sins be blotted out? I tell you: by will (tw Jelein) by faith (tw pisieuein). What is this in short? But if your mouth says what you will, but your heart does not say it, then the Knower of the Heart will judge you. From now on, abandon every worthless deed. - Let not your tongue utter obscene words, let not your gaze sin, and let not your thoughts turn that which is useless" 330. "Prepare, says St. Cyril in another place, a spiritual vessel so that you may become a son of God, an heir of God, a joint heir with Christ, if only you prepare yourself to receive it, if you come with faith in order to become faithful, if by your own will you put off the old man. For everything that you have done will be forgiven you. by you” 331. Thus, one’s own will to leave the old man is a condition for the grace-filled effectiveness of the sacrament: the old man actually dies, and the former life is forgiven to the person. There is no will, the old man does not die, then there is no forgiveness. According to St. Basil the Great, acceptance of the sacrament is our reconciliation with God, Who previously forgave the sins of all people. "How does a soul undoubtedly make sure that God has forgiven its sins? If it perceives in itself the disposition of the one who said: I have hated and detested unrighteousness (Ps. CXVIII): because God, having sent down His only begotten Son for the remission of our sins, on His part first forgave the sins of all. But since St. David sings of mercy and judgment and testifies that God is merciful and righteous; then it is necessary for us to do what the prophets and apostles said “in those places where repentance is spoken of, so that the judgment of God’s righteousness may be revealed and His mercy may be accomplished in the remission of sins” 332. What is this contribution on our part to the grace of God? The fact is that we “are in the likeness of His death, having been buried by Him through baptism." “What is the image of burial? And why is such imitation useful? Firstly, it is necessary that the order of the former life be stopped. And this, according to the word of the Lord, is not possible for one who is not born again. For rebirth, as the name itself shows, is the beginning of a new life. Therefore, before the beginning of a new life, it is necessary to put an end to the life that preceded it. Just as in those who go back and forth in the field, two opposite movements are separated by a certain stop and rest: so during the change it turned out that it was necessary for death to serve as a medium between one and the other life, ending the previous life and laying the beginning of the next life.” baptism. The symbol of this death to sin is immersion in water. “How is the descent into hell accomplished?” Imitating Christ's burial in baptism; because the bodies of those baptized in water are, as it were, buried. Therefore, baptism (i.e. immersion, the visible form of baptism) symbolically means the rejection of the works of the flesh (the inner side of baptism, as a sacrament), according to the word of the Apostle, who says: circumcision was made with a circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of sin of the flesh, in the circumcision of Christ, having been buried with Him by baptism (Col. II, 11). It is, as it were, the cleansing of the soul from the filth produced in it by carnal wisdom, according to what is written: wash me and I will be whiter than snow (Ps. L, 9)” 333. The forgiveness of a person’s sins is based on the indicated death to sin, this is the suppression of the order of the previous life. If there is no suppression, then there can be no forgiveness. "In what case are spiritual sins forgiven? When virtue, having prevailed over the soul and, having completely protected it with its lessons, produces in it an aversion from the opposite disposition... Whoever is so disposed, as a result of skill (i.e., as a result of a finally formed decision), may be forgiven of previous iniquities... Whoever has healed himself in this way, having adopted a disposition towards the opposite, the grace of forgiveness can also be useful for him... It is impossible for anyone without God’s forgiveness to indulge in a virtuous life (graceful help is needed to fulfill the decision). Therefore, the all-wise Steward of our life wants someone who has lived in sin and then vows to rise to a healthy life to put an end to the past, and after committing sins to make some beginning, as if renewed to life through repentance” 334. St. Gregory of Nyssa constantly pursues the idea that it is impossible for a person to be reborn in a new life somehow involuntarily: a person can be reborn only thanks to his free decision not to sin, which makes it possible for him to accept grace. "The one who changes, says the Holy Father, must constantly be born: in a perverted nature you will not notice anything that is always identical to yourself in everything. But to be born does not depend on an alien decision (ouc ec allotriaV edtin ormhV) like a bodily birth - but this birth happens by choice; and we are in some way the fathers of ourselves, giving birth to ourselves as we want, and forming ourselves by our own will into any gender, male or female, according to the lessons of virtue or vice” 335. Mysterious rebirth in baptism is no exception: and it is possible only in the form of an arbitrary decision, which is only strengthened and brought to completion by grace. St. Gregory of Nyssa develops this idea in detail in his “Catechetical Word”, like St. Cyril of Jerusalem, insisting on the idea that without this free decision, the reception of the sacrament is not of any use. "We must, I think, says St. Gregory, pay attention to what after this and what many of those who have approached the grace of baptism leave without attention, deceiving themselves and considering themselves only reborn, and not actually becoming such. For the transformation of our life accomplished by rebirth will not be a transformation if it remains in the same state in which it is now. Whoever remains in the same state, I don’t know why it would be possible to think that he has become something new when not one of the distinctive features has changed in him. For that saving rebirth is accepted for the renewal and transformation of our nature, this is obvious to everyone; but humanity itself does not accept change from baptism, neither reason, nor understanding, nor the cognitive ability, nor anything else that actually serves as a distinctive feature of human nature, does not come into transformation; the worst would be if any of these distinctive properties of nature were to change. So, if being born again is done by re-creating a person, and this does not allow for change; then we must consider the implementation of which the grace of regeneration is perfect. It is obvious that with the eradication of bad signs in our nature, a transition to the best occurs. So, if, according to the word of the prophet, having washed ourselves in this mysterious bath, we have become pure in our wills, having washed away the wickedness from our souls; then they became the best and were transformed into the best. If the bath served the body, and the soul did not cast off passionate impurities, on the contrary, life after the secret action is similar to life before the secret action; although it would be bold to say, I will nevertheless say and will not deny that for such people water will remain water” 336. If a person does not decide to completely give up sin and if he does not try with all his strength to maintain this decision, then he accepted the sacrament in vain: he participated in it only with his body, but the soul did not receive anything from this participation. This is understandable. The essence of baptism is “suppression of the continuity of evil”; if a person does not do this suppression, then why accept baptism? “In the image of mortification, represented by means of water, the destruction of the mixed vice is carried out, although not complete destruction, but some suppression (diacoph) of the continuity (suneceiaV) of evil, with the combination of two aids to the destruction of evil: repentance sin and imitation of death, by which a person somewhat renounces the union with evil, by repentance being brought into hatred of vice and alienation from it, and by death bringing about the destruction of evil” 337 Thus, the destruction of evil in a person occurs precisely through the free alienation of a person from vice and a vicious life. "If the free movement of our will interrupts the relationship with the non-existent (to anuparcon, which is evil in essence) and draws closer to the Existing, what is now in me, no longer having existence, will not have the ability to remain in me at all; because evil taken outside of will does not exist by itself."338 This is the fundamental law of the relationship to evil. The same law also operates in the destruction of evil in baptism. For St. Gregory the Theologian, the remission of sins in baptism was by no means an external event, independent of the free determination of a person: if God forgives the sins of the baptized, then in order for this remission to be effective, it is necessary to “pre-purify”, create in this “skill for good,” that is, decisively determine oneself to a good life. Then only one can guarantee that baptism will not be only a form or fruitless talent, but in fact “will provide redemption for a person." “Those who approach baptism carelessly and without preparation, and do not provide redemption through skill in goodness, must be purified. For although this grace gives remission of past sins, then all the more reverence is required from us, so as not to return to the same vomit (Proverbs XXVI, II)" 339. “The font, says St. Gregory in another place, gives remission of sins committed, and not those committed (not those that still dominate the soul). It is necessary that the cleansing is not carried out for show, but penetrates you, so that you become completely bright, and not only embellished on the outside, so that grace does not serve as a cover for sins, but as liberation from them” 340. And this depends on the person to whom St. the father makes an admonition. St. John Chrysostom compares the forgiveness of sins performed in baptism with ordinary royal forgiveness, and finds between them the fundamental difference that royal forgiveness is an external matter and does not affect a person’s soul, does not change it, while God’s forgiveness in baptism recreates a person. “It is possible for God alone to forgive sins; although leaders and kings forgive adulterers and murderers, they free them only from real punishment (the essence of forgiveness from a legal point of view), but do not cleanse them of their sins; and even if they elevated those forgiven to the highest ranks, even if they clothed them in purple, even if they put a diadem on them, and then they will make them kings, but they will not free them from their sins; this God alone does this: He does this in the bath of rebirth; for grace touches the soul itself and purges sin from it. Therefore, the soul of one forgiven by the king may be unclean, but the soul of the baptized is not; it is purer than the very rays of the sun and is even much better; for it receives the Spirit, which completely enkindles it and makes it holy. Just as you, by refining iron or gold, make it pure and new again, so the Holy Spirit, refining the soul in baptism, as if in a furnace, and, destroying sins, makes it purer and more brilliant than any gold” 341 How, however, does this cleansing of the soul take place, does it ignite it with the power of the Holy Spirit? There is only one way to get rid of vice: “Stop in a vicious life and do not go further, and you have already received everything... Do not go further, and the power of vice over you will end." 342. “If you want and listen to Me, says God. Do you see that one desire is needed? But the desire is not ordinary, common to many, but thorough. I know that now everything want to soar to heaven; but this desire must be proven by deeds." 343 The same law also applies to the destruction of sin in baptism. "Although, says the saint, sin truly dies in us through baptism; however, it is necessary that we ourselves contribute to its mortification." This assistance is described by St. John Chrysostom in Discourse IX, 2 on the Epistle to the Hebrews. "Whoever, we read there, moves from one thing to another, and leaves this, and accepts this, he needs to abandon the former and leave the disposition towards it, then move on to another: if he again begins to adhere to the first, then how can he achieve the second?.. I am talking about evil deeds; for whoever intends to turn to virtue must first renounce vices, and then enter into a virtuous life. Repentance could not make believers pure; therefore, they were immediately (but after repentance) baptized, so that what they could not do on their own, they could achieve by the grace of Christ. Therefore, repentance is not enough for cleansing, but one must begin to be baptized, having first renounced one’s sins and condemned them” 345. Graceful help, therefore, is necessary in order to complete what we ourselves are not able to do. But this directly assumes that we tried to do the best we could. Grace completes our efforts. That is why we pray for the catechumens, so that the Lord “will grant them the bath of restoration at a time of need." “What do they mean, asks St. Chrysostom, the words: at a time of need? They indicate that time in which the one preparing for baptism has positioned himself well and with zeal and faith begins to accept it. For for believers such a time is pleasant” 346. So, this is where forgiveness is mysterious: it necessarily presupposes the alienation of a person’s will from evil and therefore not only forgives sins, but also destroys them. Also reveals the essence of Divine forgiveness of sins and St. Cyril of Alexandria, “When,” he says, “we stop sinning and, with the help of an inclination for the better, we seem to lead the soul to the choice of what is useful: then we remove from ourselves the ugliness of the previous falls (the fundamental law of forgiveness) and having destroyed the stench of sin with the fragrance of subsequent good deeds, we will again enter the camp of the saints, that is, the church of the firstborn.”347 Therefore, the Father "accepts the lost (under one condition only) if they turn out to be clean from the wicked seeds that have infested them and if they do not bring with them any remnant of the abomination of those who led them astray" 348. A necessary condition for forgiveness is renunciation of sin, only thanks to it a person can be accepted as a father. "Only by deciding to renounce the addiction to pleasures and worldly life, trying with the greatest zeal to follow the laws God, but not yet enriched with grace through holy baptism, we are not very strong or capable of suffering and enduring labor for the sake of virtue” 349. The essence of baptism, therefore, is that a person, as it were, sacrifices himself to God, “mentally undergoes a sacred death,” 350 while grace makes up for what a person’s decision and his greatest zeal cannot do: grace makes a person’s decision not to sin in the future unshakable. This same decision serves in turn as the basis for forgiveness. Rev. Ephraim the Syrian represents the forgiveness of sins as a very significant action, accompanied not by the imputation of sin alone or the oblivion of the latter, but by its direct, decisive destruction. A forgiven person not only is not afraid of punishment, but also receives strength to lead a virtuous life. Forgiveness is a change in a person. “As soon as Your gaze, O Lord of all, turns to the darkness of my sins, it disappears before me, and unhindered, with all zeal, I begin to walk the path of Your commandments, I am strengthened by hope in You and freed from the darkness of delusions." 351. However, in what way exactly does the forgiveness of sins renew a person? "I will tell you, answers St. Ephraim the Syrian, how a person through repentance is made perfect, so that, having learned the very method, you will not have an excuse. Listen. Do you repent of poisoning others? Destroy every trace of this, just leave what is not obvious, but do not engage in killing people, keep your tongue from slander, from slander, from gossip... You are melting yourself, sinner, you are raising yourself from the dead. Therefore, if you do something half-heartedly, you offend yourself. If a little and a little unfinished is insufficient and imperfect, then how much more is a half done?.. If you do not fully repent, then you will become half righteous. There is no benefit for a pig to be half clean, i.e. have cloven hooves, for in this way all purity is lost” 352. This is the inner, essential side of the destruction of sin in a person: a person must give up sin himself and, to the extent that he gives up it in his own will, grace will free him from sin. That is why, after the forgiveness of sins, he turns out to be a zealot for good deeds. From these luminaries of church teaching, it would not be out of place to make a short return to an earlier era in order to find the same teaching there too. St. Justin the Martyr in his “Conversation with Tryphon" very clearly distinguishes the Christian non-imputation of sin from the usual, only external, so to speak, condonation of sin. “All who wish,” says St. Justin, “if they repent, can receive mercy from God,” and Scripture calls them blessed, saying, blessed is the person to whom the Lord does not impute sin, that is, having repented of his sins, he will receive forgiveness from God; but not as you deceive yourself and some others like you in this, who say that although they are sinners, they know God, and the Lord will not impute sin to them. As proof of this, we have one crime of David, which happened from his pride, which was later forgiven when he cried and grieved, as it is written. If such a person was not given forgiveness before repentance, but only when he, the great king, anointed and prophet, cried and behaved like this, then how can the unclean and extremely criminal, if they do not grieve and cry and do not repent, hope that the Lord will not impute sin to us? 353. Thus, forgiveness does not consist in covering or forgiving existing sin; such forgiveness does not exist in Christianity. A person receives forgiveness only when he grieves over the sin he has committed and repents of it, that is, he decides not to sin in the future, he promises to God, then he is forgiven. But this reveals the essential meaning of the forgiveness of sins that we are talking about. St. Justin, indeed, expresses this thought when describing St. baptism. "Whoever is convinced and believes that this teaching and our words are true and is promised that he can live in accordance with it, they are taught that with prayer and fasting they ask God for forgiveness of past sins, and we pray and fast with him. Then we bring them to where there is water, and they are reborn in the same way as we ourselves were reborn, that is, they are then washed with water in the name of God the Father and the Lord of all, and our Savior Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit... Since we do not know our first birth and were necessarily born from a wet seed through the mutual copulation of parents and grew up in bad rights and a bad way of life: so that we do not remain children of necessity and ignorance, but children of freedom and knowledge and so that we receive remission of past sins, the name of the Father of all and the Master of God is named in water on the one who wants to be reborn and repents of sins” 354. In contrast to carnal birth, in which a person is not responsible for the mood of his nature, in a mysterious rebirth a person becomes a child of freedom and knowledge, he is no longer a passive object or a field for the action of an outside force, he himself wants to be reborn and he himself throws away his previous life. That is why preparation for baptism is a feat, preparation for a new life, which a person now decides and promises to lead. “When the Jews,” says St. Irenaeus of Lyons, - will turn and come to repentance and stop doing evil, they will have the power to be children of God and receive the inheritance of immortality, which is bestowed by God" 355. It is this voluntary suppression of evil that is the most essential part of justification, is, so to speak, the very way in which a person’s sins are forgiven. So, according to Orthodox teaching, the forgiveness of sins in the sacrament of baptism or repentance does not occur in an externally judicial way, it does not consist in the fact that God from that time ceases to be angry with a person, but in the fact that as a result of a radical spiritual change, as grace-filled as it is voluntary, a life determination appears in a person completely opposite to the previous, sinful one, so that the previous sin ceases to influence the spiritual life of a person, ceases to belong to the soul - is destroyed. Therefore, a person is reconciled with God, and the mercy of God becomes available to a person. It is very instructive to read the explanation of the inner side of the sacrament, that is, that which, in essence, should only be kept in mind, since only by becoming acquainted with it can we understand what exactly the rather general abstract definitions of justification mean - it is very instructive, we say, to become acquainted with the disclosure of this side in the writings of the late Rev. Feofan, so deeply imbued with paternal teaching (especially where he, leaving his school uniform, moves on to life, truly paternal soil). According to the presentation of Rev. Theophan, the inner essence of the mysterious renewal of man is his voluntary and final determination of himself to please God. “This decision,” says Rev. Theophan, “is the main moment in the matter of conversion, fundamental, imprecise." 356. The effectiveness of revival depends on this fundamental moment. “If a person (after baptism) does good, then this is because he comes from the font as a zealot for good deeds, endowed with the power to do them. But this zeal is arbitrarily perceived by him, in moments of contrition sorrow for sins and seeking pardon; the grace of God, coming later, strengthened it and made it powerful." is it in baptism? - Immediately in the spirit in the one being baptized. For what does the one being baptized do before immersing himself in the font? Satan and all his works and all his ministry are denied; and this is also what turns away from sin and hates it. When then, in this spirit of disgust and hatred of sin, he plunges into the font, then the grace of God, descending inside, strengthens these dispositions and decisions of the will and gives them living and active power. To a baptized person, all previous sins are forgiven, and this power that descended into him in baptism will protect him from future ones. He is truly dead to sin" 358. A person has abandoned his previous sins and therefore they are not considered to him, but instead of sin he now has a decision to serve God. As we see, Rev. Theophan, in this description of the true content of dogmatic concepts concerning the question of salvation, absolutely correctly expresses the teaching of St. church fathers. The legal understanding cannot allow such a detailed disclosure of the vital side of justification - this disclosure itself actually refutes it. For Orthodox teaching, it is necessary to stop on this side, otherwise you can confuse it (the teaching) with heterodoxy, which uses the same words and is similar in appearance. Thus, comparing the previously clarified concept of God’s Truth and retribution on the one hand, and this attempt to reveal the vital meaning of justification, on the other; we receive the real concept of forgiveness or destruction of sins in the sacraments of baptism or repentance. This concept will not be contradicted by numerous places in patristic literature where, apparently, only an externally judicial meaning is attributed to the petition. All such passages must be supplemented, according to the basic rule of any interpretation: the less clear must be supplemented with the more clear. Once the essential (real) side of this phenomenon has been clarified, it is not difficult to agree on the external side. Cutting back the first for the sake of the second will not only be wrong, it will be a direct distortion of the truth. Freed from sins in baptism, a person becomes a participant in the righteousness of Christ. The Protestants turned this into a completely external judicial incident. According to them, God, not finding anything in man for which he should be given a reward in eternal life, imputes to him the merit before Divine Justice that Jesus Christ performed. The basis for imputation is simply that God sees on the part of man a desire to appropriate this merit to himself (faith, as a tool instrumentum for assimilating Christ’s merit). This rather strange teaching for ordinary understanding is necessary for Protestants in order to avoid a contradiction between the merit of Christ and the merits of man. Orthodox teaching does not know such a need, therefore, in this matter, it does not leave its true soil. It speaks, of course, in approximately the same words, but their meaning will be much deeper, more vital, and even more meaningful from the point of view of the moral consciousness of every sane person. If a person, in his very turning to God, is not only in words, but in fact is cleansed from sin, then there is no need or reason to insist that the merit of I. Christ is only externally imputed to us, to serve only as payment for our sins independent of us. The Lord Jesus Christ, in His farewell conversation with the disciples, indeed, portrays to us His attitude towards believers as much more internal, vital, than just external imputation of Christ’s merit to us would allow. A person is saved not by the fact that he wants to appropriate to himself what Christ did, but by the fact that he is in the closest union with Christ, like a branch with a vine. "I, says the Lord, am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser. Every branch of Me that does not bear fruit He cuts off; and every branch that bears fruit He purges, that it may bear more fruit... Abide in Me, and I in you. Just as a branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it is on the vine, so neither can you, unless you abide in Me. I I am the vine, and you are the branches; he who abides in me, and I in him, bears much fruit; for without me you can do nothing. He who does not remain in me will be cast out like a branch, and they will be gathered into the fire, and they will be burned” (John XV, 1-6). “His word abides” in us (Jn. XV, 7) to fulfill His Commandments (Job XV. 10). Consequently, the one who strives to be like Christ, who decides to do His will (the essence of baptism), becomes a branch, united with Christ in the most intimate and mysterious way. This unity, on the one hand, gives a person strength, strengthens his determination to observe the will of Christ, and, on the other hand, requires diligence from him (otherwise there is nothing to strengthen if there is no determination). If he is like Christ, the Heavenly Vinedresser will not cut him off from eternal life. If he loses zeal for Christ, then he will lose God’s help, and then the likeness of Christ will dry up, and the end of this impoverishment of spiritual life is eternal destruction. If the merit of Christ remains only an external event for a person’s spiritual life, then he cannot be saved. “I do not tell you that I will ask the Father for you: for the Father Himself loves you (why? Is it for the sake of My merit as such? no, because you loved Me and believed that I came from God" (XVI, 26 - 27). What does it mean to love Christ? Only one who loves good and for the sake of the law of God is ready to sacrifice everything can love Christ. To love Christ means to devote oneself to the service of Christ, it means to strive to become like Christ, to consider Him as your teacher and example (I Peter, II, 4 - 5). Such a person will not be outraged by persecution, because he knows that his Teacher was expelled and reviled in the same way (XV, 20), and that the world, rejected by a follower of Christ, cannot love its rejecter (vv. 18 - 19). Such a person is a true servant of Christ, he will be where Christ is glorified, and the Heavenly Father will honor him (John XII, 26). "Whoever loves me will keep my word; and My Father will love him, and we will come and make our abode with him. He who does not love does not keep My words (John XIV: 23-24), and therefore cannot be a participant in Christ's glory. The merit of Christ does not concern him. It is necessary, therefore, to assimilate the merit of Christ in life, that is, through spiritual communion with Christ, to assimilate the moral dispensation that Christ had and which can make us capable of perceiving eternal bliss. So, indeed, it is. Through baptism, people “cling to the true Vine” 359. become its branches, not only in the sense that they “are dressed in the bright and precious garment of Christ’s righteousness, like royal purple” 360, but they perceive Christ into themselves, inside, according to the dispositions of their souls, they become Christ’s (I Cor. XV, 23), conformed to Him. “Here,” says St. Macarius of Egypt, is the foundation of the path to God: with great patience, with preparation, with humility, in spiritual poverty, with meekness, to walk the path of life; in this way a person can acquire justification in himself, and by justification I mean the Lord Himself.”361 Here we are talking about life after baptism, but this life, as we will see, serves only as a development of what was received at baptism. In baptism, a person does not assimilate to himself only what the Lord has done, but through a decision he perceives what is sacred, that is, life according to the will of God. “The confession that (a person) will not accept more sinful mud and will not touch earthly filth on his life’s path becomes, according to St. Gregory of Nyssa, the entrance of the sacred into the soul thus prepared; the sacred is the Lord 362 . The soul does not outwardly participate in the fruits of death or the righteousness of Christ, but perceives Christ within itself, puts on Him. “To put on Christ, according to the thought of St. I. Chrysostom, means never to leave Him, but always to show Him to yourself through your holiness and righteousness.” 363. “Let us not just hold on to Christ, but let us cleave (collhJwuen - stick) to Him; since if we separate ourselves, we will perish... Let us cleave to Him, and let us cleave by deeds: for he who keeps the commandments Mine, he says, abides." 364. Putting on Christ, thus, means becoming like Christ. “What is the intention and what is the power of baptism? asks St. Basil the Great and answers: “Through it, the one baptized changes in mind, word and deed and, according to the power given to him, becomes the same as the Holy Spirit who gave birth to him 365 and renews us again. creates us into the images of God; through the washing of rebirth and renewal of the Holy Spirit we are adopted as sons of God. The creation that partakes of the Spirit is new again, while deprived of the Spirit it has become old... Man, who has lost the Divine likeness in himself, has again become the image of God.” But the vestment in Christ, in the sense of freely accepting His spirit and dispensation, is especially clear in the works of Saints Gregory of Nyssa, Cyril of Alexandria and Saint Tikhon of Zadonsk. In the eleventh conversation on the Song of Songs of St. 1 "Rigory of Nyssa explains the words this way: “I have stripped off my robe, as if I had put on nudes. I have washed my socks, as if I would defile them (Song. Y, 3). “She (soul) listened perfectly to Him who commanded her to become a sister, a neighbor, a dove and a perfect one, so that as a result the truth would dwell in the soul." For she did what she heard, putting off the skin in which she put on after sin, and washing away from her feet the earthly uncleanness with which she was covered, when, having returned from the life of paradise to earth, she heard that you are earth, and you have gone back to earth (Gen. III, 19). and, speaking of the flesh, I mean the old man, which the divine Apostle commands those who are preparing to wash off the uncleanness of their spiritual feet in the font of the word. So, having put off the old man, and having taken away the veil of the heart, the soul opened the entrance to the Word, and when It entered, it makes Him its garment, according to the leadership of the Apostle, who commands that he who has put off the carnal garment of the old man should put on the robe created according to God in honor and righteousness (Eph. IV 24). I call Iucyca clothing. And the bride’s confession that she will not again put on the discarded robe, but, according to the law given to the disciples, will be content with one robe, in which she put on, having been renewed by being born again, confirms the word of the Lord, who commands those who have once been adorned with divine clothing to no longer put on the robe of sin, and to have not two clothes, but only one, so that two robe on the same thing will not be one with the other. converging, because what is the relationship between darkened clothing and light-like and immaterial?... Therefore, the bride says: I have put off my robe, how can I put on nudes? For who, seeing on himself the sun-transparent robe of the Lord, placed on him for purity and incorruption, for example, which the Lord showed on the mountain during the transfiguration, will then agree to have poor and torn clothes placed on him, in which, as the parable says, a drunkard and a fornicator are clothed (Prov. XXIII, 21)? And having washed his feet, he does not agree to defile them again by walking on the ground. For he says: Having washed my socks, how can I defile them? Therefore, the Lord forbids the disciples to have boots when he commands them not to walk on the path of the tongue, but to follow the holy path (Matthew X, 5.10). Of course, you do not know this holy path that the disciples are commanded to follow, having learned this from Him who said: I am the way (John XIY, 6), a path that it is impossible for a dead person to touch without taking off his clothes. Therefore, since there was a bride on this path, on which the Lord, walking along it, washes his feet with water and wipes them with the ribbon with which he girdles; and the girdle of the Lord is the power that cleanses from sins, for it is said: The Lord clothed himself with strength and girded himself (Ps. XXII, 1); - then the bride, having cleansed her feet, keeps herself on the royal path, not turning aside either to the right hand or to the left (Deut. V, 39), so that, having transferred the mark to one side or the other of the path, she does not stain her feet with mud. Of course, you understand what is meant by what has been said, namely, that the soul, having once cast off the boots through baptism (for it is the baptizer’s own business to cast off the straps of the boots, as John testified, that he cannot do this over the Lord alone: ​​for how can one be loosed who was not at all bound by the strap of sin?), she herself washed her feet, and cast off the boots together with all earthly uncleanness. And therefore he keeps his feet undefiled on the smooth path, as David did when he washed his feet from the clay of the mud and set them on a stone, expressing it this way: he raised me up from the pit of passions and from the clay of the mud, and set my feet on the stone and straightened my feet (Ps. XXXIX, 3). By the name of the stone he also means the Lord, Who is light, and truth, and incorruptibility, and righteousness - that by which the spiritual path is equalized. He who has not turned away from it in one direction or the other, keeps his traces in no way defiled by the dirt of voluptuousness. This is the very thing with which the bride, in my understanding, opens the door to the Word. For the confession that one will no longer accept the rejected mud, and on the path of life will not touch earthly filth, becomes the entrance of the shrine into the soul thus prepared; But the holy thing is the Lord" 367. In the above words of St., they pass before us in various images. Gregory of Nyssa almost all the concepts mentioned in the description of the revival. We see that the one who is baptized first of all comes to reject the old man. This rejection gives him the opportunity and ability to assimilate the sacred to himself, that is, to put on Jesus Himself. The endowment consists in the fact that a person firmly follows the path of Christ, not yielding in the least to the temptations of the world and the flesh. “You cannot be Christ without being righteous, pure, truth and the absence of all evil, and you cannot be a Christian (clothed in Christ) without showing in yourself an affinity with these names.”368 To put on Christ means, therefore, to accept Christ’s mood and way. St. Cyril of Alexandria says: “God and the Father honors and recognizes His vision (i.e., eternal bliss) only to those who (not want to appropriate the merit of Christ for themselves, but) have a spiritual affinity in the Son, enriched from Him and through Him with spiritual rebirth.”369 The initial stage of this assimilation to Christ is assumed at baptism and consists in the fact that the believer cleaves to Christ. “He is a vine; and we have grown together with him like a rod, connected with Him through sanctification by unity in the Spirit.”370 However, this cleaving cannot be imagined otherwise than in the form of a free deed, or at least as free as it is grace-filled; and this is also because it is “burning in the spirit and burning with love for God” (which is the essence of Godlikeness) we can only when “we cleave to Christ by faith and by living a good life and in accordance with the law” 371, i.e. by freely following the law of Christ. Therefore, “those who are preparing to have Christ dwell within them through the Spirit (those who are preparing to put on Christ) must, I think, first (freely) be washed from defilements and cleansed from crimes and, thus, reveal their soul to Him bright and undefiled, as, without a doubt, the Divine Psalmist, being adorned with such virtue, exclaimed, saying: my heart is ready, O God, my heart is ready: I will sing and sing ( Ps. LVI, 8). Just as paint adheres well to wool, if it is clean, but if there is some residue of impurity in it, then the induced dye easily falls off, not having a firm hold in it: so the communion of Christ solders holy and pure souls, but in souls that are not so inclined, it cannot at all be established: the Holy Spirit of punishment will flee from the flattering, according to what is written, dwells in the body below. guilty of sin (Wis. I, 5, 4). So, by providing services to the offended and by deeds of love, driving away the grief of the brethren, let us free ourselves from all guilt and obtain remission in Christ” 372. Thus, to receive “release in Christ” or for the sake of Christ and then to be rewarded with eternal bliss “in the sight of God,” in other words, to assimilate Christ’s righteousness, is possible only for one who has in advance delivered himself from all guilt,” who, that is, “through faith and a good life and in agreement with the law, will cleave to Christ” and become like Him, akin to Him. Christ is possible only through likeness to Christ. St. Tikhon of Zadonsk, in whose works one can find quite a few apparent indications of the mere external meaning of the righteousness of Christ, himself gives the key to how these external definitions should be understood. “By Baptism,” says the saint, everyone is renewed and accepts the holy disposition of the Holy Spirit, and thus is included in the holy Church." 373. How does this assumption of the disposition of Christ take place? This is explained in the following words: "We must now, with difficulty, diligence and feat, seek for that which has been given to us from God without effort and without our labor (i.e., the primitive purity and righteousness of the soul). Then Christ, seeing such diligence, care and labor of the soul, by His mercy takes away the ugliness from it and gives the goodness and beauty of His image. And this is to lay aside for us, after the first life, the old man, who is decaying in deceitful lusts; “Let us be renewed in the spirit of our mind and put on the new man, created in righteousness and perfection of truth (Eph. IV: 22-24), which requires no little diligence, struggle and labor” 374. This is the basic law by which the consequences of the Fall are destroyed in us: work, diligence, and moral efforts of the person himself are necessary. Only in this way can a person restore in himself the image of God, or what is the same, “the character of Christ” or “the image of Christ". Likeness to Christ, therefore, is only possible freely. It is this likeness to Christ, the perception of His character, that serves as the means through which a person becomes a partaker of eternal bliss, i.e., therefore, the righteousness of Christ. At the same time, this righteousness ceases to be external to man: a person is saved by perceiving the righteousness of Christ. into yourself, becoming like Christ. This assimilation makes a person capable of being and enjoying being in the kingdom of heaven, makes him akin in mood to this kingdom of holiness and light. “Let us seek, O Christians, says St. Tikhon, for our goodness and beauty in Christ, which we lost in Adam; let us seek until it is found, and here we will receive it in our souls, and at the coming of Christ we will appear with it before Him and the whole world, which will not only then be in our souls, but also appear on our bodies; and Christ, the righteous Judge, seeing in us the image of God and us who are like Himself, will recognize us as His own and glorify us with Himself” 375. So, according to the mind of St. fathers, a person is clothed in baptism with the righteousness of Christ in the sense that he takes on the “disposition of Christ”; and this disposition makes him akin to the eternal kingdom of God and, thus, capable of receiving it in the future life, when this kingdom will be revealed in its entirety. Again, we consider it not superfluous to compare these conclusions of ours from the testimonies of our fathers with the same conclusions of Rev. Feofana... the latter very often resorts to the external representation of a person’s mental life and, in particular, salvation, which is usual in school dogmatics. In the same way, the righteousness of Christ, by which a person is saved, is often in the mouth of the Right Reverend. Theophanes, apparently, turns into an external event, for the sake of which God ceases to be angry with the sinner. "When a person, says Rev. Theophan, became a transgressor of the law, he could not hope to achieve his goal (i.e., communication with God) otherwise than through assimilating someone else's righteousness. This assimilated righteousness makes up for the lack of legality in our lives and gives us the opportunity to be close to God" 376. Apparently, a person is justified only externally, through the assimilation of someone else's righteousness, which only makes up for or covers up the “lack of legality" in the person himself. However, it would be a big mistake to attribute such a similar view to our late theologian-thinker. One must think that such expressions in the mind of Rev. Theophan received the most vital meaning and the richest content. The basis for this is in the writings of Rev. Theophan. For example, in in his Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans we read: "Having been baptized into Christ, we were baptized into His death. Obviously, baptism into the death of Christ is the mortification of sin. How is this so? - This explains the meaning and power of the death of Christ. Having died on the cross, the Lord Savior bore our sins on the cross and became a cleansing for our sins. In the death of the Lord on the cross is the cleansing power of sin, Who is baptized - immersed - in the death of Christ, he is immersed in the purifying power of sin. This power, in the very action of immersion, consumes all sin, so that not a trace of it remains. Here it is the same as if someone prepared a chemical composition that, when immersed in it, all uncleanness will be consumed. Likewise, the death of Christ, as the cleansing power of sin, consumes all sin as soon as someone is immersed in this death through baptism. There is no trace of sin left in the baptized: it is dead to him.” Here, another would see the most extreme idea of ​​justification in terms of its materiality. Obviously, in these all too tangible images, Rev. Theophan wanted to expound the doctrine that for the death of Christ a person’s sins are forgiven. However, following this description, Rev. Theophan hastens to make a reservation: “But,” he says, one must keep in mind that in this mortification of sin through baptism nothing happens mechanically, but everything is accomplished with the participation of a person’s morally free decisions.” And then the above disclosure of the inner side of the destruction of sin is set out 377. Thus, all these comparisons remain only comparisons, not expressing the very essence of the matter and are used only when one can limit oneself to one external side of the teaching, without touching its real meaning. But as soon as it comes to this last point, school formulas have to be abandoned and more vital definitions must be sought. Rev. Theophan in that work where he was supposed to explain not an abstract definition, but salvation itself, as it is given in life, and speaks about the actual vestment in Christ. In "Letters to one person in St. Petersburg" we read: "In order for the salvation of each person in particular to be accomplished, it is necessary that the needs of salvation, combined in the person of the Lord, pass into everyone and be assimilated by them. This is accomplished by the Holy Spirit. With the word of the gospel, he awakens faith in the power of the Lord's death on the cross and in the baptismal font washes the believer from original sin and from all arbitrary sins, renewing at the same time his spiritual life and making it strong to resist sin and to succeed in goodness. essential. As long as he believes only in Christ, these are his needs, but only nominally, as determined to him and ready for him; in the baptismal font they essentially become his property” 378. Thus, the righteousness of Christ is not credited only to the baptized, but is essentially accepted by him: he now “desires only one good thing and is strong to do it.” One external recognition of a sinner as righteous can, of course, console him, but it can excite him to do good, strengthen him in the righteousness he received involuntarily, only when a person desires this, that is, when there is a turning point in his soul, a turning from evil to good. The heterodox legal understanding of life cannot allow this turning point, because then a person would be saved by his own merit. If the matter of justification is limited to one formal aspect, the beginning of a new life in a person cannot be explained in any way. That is why heterodoxy must resort to self-propelled righteousness, which settles into a person and begins to act in him apart from and even almost contrary to his consciousness and will. Protestants, contrary to the holiness of God, believe this self-propelled righteousness to be a consequence of justification, and Catholics turn justification itself into a magical infusion of this righteousness. For Orthodoxy there is no need to resort to such a transformation, which is contrary to all laws of mental life. Salvation and, in particular, justification for the Orthodox is a free – moral state, although it can only be accomplished with the help of God’s grace. To be regenerated by grace, a person must contribute to his own regeneration. "When approaching the good Doctor," the sinner must, on his part, "bring tears - this is the best medicine. For this is what the heavenly Doctor desires, so that everyone heals himself with his own tears and is saved, 379 and not involuntarily undergoes only salvation. Before approaching grace, a person must first voluntarily remove from himself everything sinful, must destroy the beginning of sin in himself, so that grace can plant in him the beginnings of a new life. "Repentance, says St. Ephraim the Syrian, purifies the permitted compositions of the previous dispensation before grace, having dissolved with the mind, turns lead into gold. If you have seen how glass takes on the color of hyacinth, emerald and sapphire, then you will not doubt that repentance makes silver out of lead and gold out of copper. If human art knows how to dissolve one substance with another and give what was previously a new form; then how much more can the grace of God do more? A man puts sheets of gold on glass, and what was previously glass becomes gold in appearance. So the grace of someone who was a lawless person yesterday makes him a servant of God today, and not only superficially, but even in conscience, according to God. If a person wanted to mix gold into glass, then the glass would become golden-like; but avoiding waste; He came up with the idea of ​​achieving this by superimposing the sheet itself. Repentance, relying on God’s favor, dissolves the repentant with the grace of the Holy Spirit and makes man completely a son of God, so that he has no outer covering on himself” 380. If a person does not do anything himself, does not repent and does not strive to perceive that righteousness, does not prepare himself, then the sacrament cannot have its effect on him. He will leave the mysterious rebirth unregenerated. "Let us squeeze ourselves through repentance, says the same holy father, so that we do not lose the grace of forgiveness, like our real paint. Squeezing is the careful deposition of the opposite. For the color brought upon us in this way, having been hardened in our souls, will no longer come off. Carefully carve yourself with tears, as a dyer wears out a wave, surrender to humility and reduce yourself in everything; for in this way you will pre-purify yourself, you will begin ready to receive grace from God. Some of the repentant return to sin again, because they did not know the serpent hiding in them, and if they knew, they did not completely remove it from themselves, for they allowed traces of its image to remain there, and it soon, as if conceived in the womb, again restores the full image of its malice. When you see someone repenting and sinning again, understand that he has not changed in his mind; because all the creeping things of sin are still in him. The sign of one who brings firm repentance is a collected and stern lifestyle, the abandonment of arrogance, conceit, as well as the eyes and mind, always directed towards the longed-for Jesus Christ, with the desire, by the grace of Christ, to become a new person, just as a wave becomes crimson or a cloth of blue or hyacinth color” 381. Thus, the effectiveness of a sacrament depends on the degree of free participation of the person himself in it. In order to emerge from the sacrament as a new person, he must himself strive to be new and, as far as he has the strength, must destroy in himself the slightest remnants of the previous sinful dispensation. That is why the church fathers insist that the free decision and effort of man is just as necessary, although not sufficient in itself, a condition of justification in baptism, as is the grace-filled help of God. "Water is in our power, as well as immersing ourselves in it and coming out of it again, says St. Gregory of Nyssa" 382, expressing by this the need for the active participation of human freedom in the very production of rebirth. As much as by free will (ec proairesewz) we put aside the old man in baptism 383, so arbitrarily is sonification autexousioV h uioJesia 384, therefore that God left everything to the will of the sick person whom He wants to heal in baptism 385 “If there is no will, says St. Macarius of Egypt, God Himself does nothing, although He can by His freedom. Therefore, the accomplishment of a work by the Spirit depends on the will of man” 386. The rebirth of man is thus accomplished through a moral path, with the free-conscious assistance of man himself. “Renewal of life takes place in a person, says Rev. Theophan, not mechanically (that is, not in such a way that the grace of God expels sin from a person’s soul as something independent of the will of a person, and in its place righteousness also settles without the will, as Stefan Yavorsky tried to explain this), but according to internal arbitrary changes or decisions, it is done in baptism because the one who was forgiven in advance loved so Why, before immersing ourselves in the font, we, having renounced Satan and his works, are united to Christ the Lord in order to devote our entire lives to Him. This disposition in the font is imprinted by the grace of God and the power becomes effective. Coming out of the font with him, the baptized person is thus completely new, renewed in his moral and spiritual life - he is resurrected. Just as Christ the Lord was resurrected, and the baptized one, immersed in the font, dies, and, emerging from the font, is resurrected: he dies to sin and is resurrected for righteousness, for a new and renewed life. It is this mysterious and at the same time freely willing change that St. speaks about in this place. Apostle Paul: we are buried so that we can walk in newness of life" 387. Therefore, giving full power and meaning to the influence of grace on the human soul, the church fathers depicted the sacrament of baptism in the form of a covenant with God, that is, an action that directly presupposes freedom not only to perceive grace, but in the very fruits of grace. This internal merging of freedom and grace is especially clearly visible from the following passage of St. Gregory the Theologian. "The grace and power of baptism, says the Holy Father, does not drown the world, as in ancient times, but cleanses sin in every person, and completely washes away all uncleanness and defilement introduced by damage. Since we consist of two natures, that is, body and soul, from a visible and invisible nature; then the cleansing is twofold: by water and by the Spirit; and one is received visibly and bodily, and the other at the same time is accomplished incorporeally and invisible; one is figurative, and the other is true and cleanses the very depths; and this, assisting the first birth, makes us new from the old, from the carnal, as we are now, God-like, boiling without fire and creating without destruction.” However, this action of grace is not mechanical or involuntary, not magical. “For, continues St. Gregory, to put it briefly, by the power of baptism we must understand a covenant with God about entering into another life and about maintaining greater purity” 388 ; and this presupposes the desire to be kind and the decision to be one, and in fact work on oneself, and the free efforts of a person under the most mysterious influence. Therefore, a person who sins after baptism not only harms himself, losing the greatest gift of God, is not only ungrateful to God, not being enlightened by His mercy, but also directly sins, as an oathbreaker, as someone who has violated the “oath” given to him by God. “Very gravely,” says St. Tikhon of Zadonsk, Christians who are in holy baptism sin they swore, swore and promised to serve Christ the Lord, but they broke their vows and lied... All such violated the Christian oath; they did not keep their oaths and vows that were in holy baptism, broke the saving union with Christ and separated from Him and followed Satan, whom they denied and spat on, and then turned again; and they betrayed Christ, their Lord and King, to whom they swore allegiance” 389. Baptism, therefore, is not only a gift of God, but also a vow; not only grace, but also the free work of man. after this, the teaching about the fruits of the sacrament becomes clear. From the Orthodox point of view, the righteousness received by a person at baptism cannot at all be represented in the form of some kind of fourth force that would settle in the soul and act there besides the person himself. Shall we call this power poured-out righteousness or simply the power of God, which, according to Protestants, lives in a justified manner and, in spite of his desire, automatically produces good in him? According to Orthodox teaching, the righteousness of the newly baptized consists only in the restoration of the original disposition of the soul and, in general, the entire nature of man. In a sinful person, the soul and flesh take precedence; in a regenerated person, the spirit predominates. "The restoration of the fallen, which is the essence of Christianity, occurs precisely through the restoration of the spirit and the return to it of power over the soul and body and the cleansing of them from all the inclinations of habits and passions that have come into them illegally. To this end, both the economy of salvation in general and the accomplishment of salvation by it for everyone who is saved" 390. "Christ accomplished everything that depended on Him, sin does not fight against the law of our mind and does not captivates us, as before, on the contrary, all this has passed and ended; the passions, fearing and trembling at the grace of the Spirit, are pacified." if any of these distinctive properties of nature were to change. So, if being born again is done by re-creating a person, and this (listed above) does not allow for change; then we must consider with the implementation of which the grace of regeneration is complete. It is obvious that with the eradication of bad signs in our nature, a transition to the best occurs” 392. Before rebirth, a person lives according to the elements of the world, seeks only his own, “sin reigns in his mortal body,” and he “obeys it in its lusts, giving over his members to sin as instruments of unrighteousness (Rom. VI, 12 - 13). After rebirth, a person “presents himself to God as one raised from the dead, and his members to God as instruments of righteousness" (v. 13). rebirth, man lives for himself, after rebirth for God. The essence of justification, therefore, is not in a change in his spiritual-physical nature, independent of a person’s will, but in a change in his life definition, in a change in the direction of his will. Dying to sin and rising to righteousness. a person does not receive another soul or new strength in the soul, but only decides to live with the old soul in a completely different way. "In baptism, says Rev. Theophan, we not only die, but also come to life or are resurrected. We die to sin and are resurrected for truth and holiness. And in essence, moral and spiritual death, this should be so. When the soul dies to something, it does not die itself; for it is ever-living, but only turns away from what it dies to, and hates it with mortal hatred. But hatred and disgust is built in the soul in such a way that, turning away from one thing, it turns not to emptiness, but to something opposite to what it turns away. According to this law, hating sin and turning away from it, it at the same time turns to truth and holiness, and loves them. This love of truth and holiness is new life” 393. This is why the righteousness received in baptism can be lost by a person; a person may not be saved even after baptism if he does not retain the grace he has received. When this righteousness is recognized as a special power settled in a person through baptism, then it is completely incomprehensible why this righteousness turns out to be fruitless: after all, sin cannot drive it out, just as it could not prevent its settlement in a person. Moreover, the question is, how can sin so dominate a justified person, given the existence of self-acting righteousness in him, that its further presence in the soul becomes impossible? Meanwhile, if justification is not a magical matter, but a moral one, if its essence lies in a change in a person’s life definition, a change that only ends with grace, but is produced by the will of a person: then the need for further righteousness turns out to be only moral, that is, it is based on the free will of a person to follow or not to follow the vow given in baptism, to remain or not to remain faithful to the decision made to henceforth serve not oneself, but God. If (as we saw in the sayings of the Holy Fathers cited above) this decision was sincere and completely penetrated the soul of the person being baptized, then he has more hope of preserving the grace he received, his revival, so to speak, is stronger. If he accepted baptism only for appearances, for extraneous reasons, “if the bath, as St. Gregory of Nyssa says, served only the body; and the soul did not cast out passionate impurities, on the contrary, life according to the secret action is similar to life before the secret action; then, although it would be bold to say, I will nevertheless say and will not deny that for such, water will remain water.”394 “Man, says Rev. Theophan, “in whom the action of Divine grace in baptism and repentance is imprinted with a fiery zeal for pleasing God or unswervingly walking in the will of God, who, therefore, thirsts for the will of God - such a person immediately acts as soon as he realizes the obligation, despite any obstacles. Therefore, if this zeal never cooled and was not discouraged, and if, on the other hand, the moral feeling always had such perfection that it vividly and truly felt the power of the obligation to act and was so sensitive to the will of God that the smallest traces of it were reflected in it: then with these two forces it would be possible to replace all instructions in morality and all guides to piety, as this was the case with some ascetics. But since jealousy actually occurs in a person in different degrees of increase and decrease, and the moral feeling, according to its natural properties, is lively and exciting for one, dull and slow for another, more accustomed to some things, to others to other things, sometimes it is true, sometimes it is not true (for there is also a false moral taste), and in general a person encounters in his heart all sorts of unevenness and wrongness (why he prays: renew the spirit of rights), according to in which it is either unlawfully sensitive to one, or unlawfully cold to another: - then in many cases it must force itself, as it were, to impose an obligation on itself and introduce this feeling and heart” 395. Two thoughts are clearly expressed here: firstly, the essence of received righteousness lies in determining oneself for good and, secondly, the need for this determination even after baptism is based on the consciousness of “commitment", i.e., on fidelity to the goal once set for oneself. A person can preserve himself on the path of good only through the direct efforts of his will, forcing himself to good. “That our previous sins are buried in baptism is, according to St. I. Chrysostom, it is Christ’s gift; and in order to remain dead to sin after baptism, this must be a matter of our own zeal; baptism, show a change in disposition” 396 Although grace-filled help is always ready for the baptized, although he is in sincere union with Christ, however, only with the assistance of his will can a person take advantage of this grace-filled help. "The Evangelist," says the same holy father, "nowhere gives place to coercion, but shows the free will and independence of man; he expressed this even now. For in these mysteries (rebirth, etc.) one thing belongs to God - to bestow grace, and another to show faith to man. But then a lot more care is required from a person: for in order to preserve purity, it is not enough for us to just be baptized and believe; but, if we want to acquire perfect lordship, then "We must lead a life worthy of it. And God has provided this to us ourselves. Our mysterious rebirth and cleansing from all previous sins takes place in baptism; but to remain clean in the future and not allow any defilement in ourselves again - this depends on our will and care." It is the same in baptism, and it is the same with every other sacrament: human freedom is always preserved. “The honest blood of Christ,” says St. Cyril of Alexandria, “delivers us not only from destruction, but also from all impurity hidden within us, and does not allow us to cool to the point of indifference, but on the contrary makes us burning in spirit”; however, this is only with the voluntary efforts of the person himself. “It is necessary and useful that those who have once been worthy of Christ should try firmly and unswervingly to adhere to a holy life.” 398 so that, even at the highest levels of grace-filled illumination, a person still remains the cause of his actions and can always go the completely opposite way “And those filled with the Holy Spirit, according to St. Macarius of Egypt, have natural thoughts in themselves and have the will to agree with them” 399. Therefore, the Fathers of the Church always taught that the grace of justification is to a certain extent a temporary phenomenon, that is, temporarily felt and temporarily hidden from consciousness, and that it may finally be lost for a person. “Even the perfect,” says St. Macarius of Egypt, “while they remain in the flesh, are not freed from worries (i.e. about their salvation) because of freedom and are under fear, which is why temptations are allowed upon them.” And only “when the soul enters that city of saints, then only will it be able to remain without sorrows and temptations.”400 Righteousness is a fire kindled in us, which threatens to go out at the slightest inattention on our part. “The fire that we have received by the grace of the Spirit,” says St. I. Chrysostom, “if we want, we can strengthen; if we don’t want, we will immediately extinguish it. And when it goes out, there will be nothing left in our souls but darkness. Just as with the lighting of a lamp a great light appears; so with its extinguishing there is nothing left but darkness. darkness. Therefore it is said: Do not quench the Spirit (I Sol. V, 19). It goes out when it has no oil, when it is exposed to some strong pressure of the wind, when it is suppressed and embarrassed (for this causes the fire to go out); and it is suppressed by everyday worries and extinguished by evil desires... And so we will leave here, carrying with us ash and ashes, surrounded by great smoke, which will expose us that we have extinguished our lamps. For where there is smoke, it is necessary to assume that the fire has been extinguished" 401. "The gifts of God," says St. Demetrius of Rostov, "are like the morning dew: when the midday heat comes, the dew dries up. If the heat of sin is possible in a person, God's spiritual gifts will be taken away from him" 402 . However, there is no need to imagine a person’s subsequent life in such a way that his entire task will consist only in not somehow losing this righteousness he received. In this case, the best thing a person could wish for himself is to die immediately after receiving the sacrament, without beginning his renewed life here on earth. True, according to the Catholic idea, a person can increase his righteousness through his own labor, which, as a gift, is equal for everyone. Of course, it is tempting to receive a greater reward than others, but this, which is still quite conditional in itself, is accompanied by such a great danger of losing what one has that hardly many will not be satisfied with, although equal to the others, but already a sure reward for the righteousness of baptism. In this case, the fate of all those who remained alive after baptism would not only be aimless, as in Protestantism, but truly terrible, would pass in constant trembling for themselves. This trembling would nail down every thought, every good undertaking of a person. Why should he undertake anything, even if it is high in Christian terms? He has no time to think about the highest reward when every wrong step threatens him with ultimate death. It’s better to stay sleepy all your life, then at least there’s less danger of losing what you have, than by wanting more and losing everything. Then all church life would have been killed, there would have been no martyrdom; no true asceticism, no selfless service to others; because all attention would be absorbed by one’s personality and precisely its negative well-being: so as not to lose what I have. Of course, this fear for the grace received can and does exist in an Orthodox Christian, but only in the sense that no one should be frivolous and no one, relying on the grace of the sacrament, should indulge in moral hibernation. But let it not be that this trembling, selfish and suicidal fear is the main content of Christian life. We have received the power to be children of God, we have seen God’s love for us and can cry out to Him from our hearts: Abba, Father! He who fears is a bad Christian, “he who fears is not perfect in love” (I John IY, 18). Therefore, the Orthodox Church cannot place the task and meaning of the life of a regenerated person in the inactive and incomprehensible storage of the gift received or in the proud search for a greater reward than others. Orthodox teaching, indeed, gives this life its full meaning and task, directly arising from the essence of that rebirth, which is its beginning. “Prisoners who have been released from custody through repentance and turned their gaze from darkness to the true light will follow Christ, confessing Him and remaining bound at the hands with shackles, until through a good change they become worthy, so that He Himself will release them from the bonds hitherto considered inevitable.”403 A person in baptism decided from now on to serve God and do His will. Grace. The sacrament completed this decision and brought it to the level of a complete moral revolution. However, man did not receive a new nature: the decision he made must be fulfilled by his former nature, accustomed to serve sin. True, the weight of sin, its forced dominion over the forces of the soul is removed in baptism, Christ now dominates, to whom the soul of the baptized is directed; but for all that, this soul is still the same, its powers are not changed. Therefore, man’s caution is needed so that again. succumb to the habitual elements of sin, so as not to fall away from Christ a second time “Like a razor,” says St. Cyril of Alexandria, does not completely pluck out our hair from the very root, but only cuts off what has recently grown: so in us, the word of God does not pluck out the seed of lust that is innate in us to the very root” 404 . This is how it should be in the moral world, in the world of consciousness and freedom. You cannot become a saint involuntarily. It is necessary through labor and achievement to develop to holiness. In baptism and in the sacrament in general, man won the first and, one might say, decisive victory over sin. But in order to finally triumph over sin, it is necessary to completely expel it from one’s nature, one must completely cleanse one’s soul and body from the slightest signs of the old man. Then only the “fetters” of sin will finally fall away, and a person will fully assimilate eternal life. “The Lord accepts whoever comes to Him with repentance and faith, forgives him all previous sins and, sanctifying him with the sacraments, provides him with the power to overcome the sin that lives in him, but does not cast out the sin itself, entrusting it to the person himself to drive it out with the help of the grace given to him for this purpose” 405 . As a result of this, the positive side of rebirth - putting on Christ - is also only rudimentary, imperfect. Man is conformed to Christ, but only in the sense of a common idea and the beginning of life, in the sense that he chose Christ henceforth as His Lord and Teacher, and not at all in the sense of complete similarity to nature. Man has only determined himself to serve Christ, but has not yet fulfilled his determination, has not yet assimilated himself into the fullness of that life, which he henceforth called his duty and his highest good to live. “The soul, says St. Gregory of Nyssa, abounding (euforoV) in evil deeds, transformed (metapoih Jeisa) became thirsty, as if seasoned with the Divine salt of teaching, so that the depravity of the living would no longer increase, being fed by evil streams of water, but so that the salty and thirsty soul, having received a blessed thirst and being flooded with the collection of virtues, became a lake” 406. The soul, even in rebirth, has only just turned and entered into the Divine life; it is more likely to be ready to perceive this life than to enjoy it. “Baptism is only the predestination of resurrection from hell” - 407 “In Christians, as children of God, says St. Tikhon of Zadonsk, there must be a complete image of God, with which they must be like their heavenly Father.”408 “God sowed a good seed in human hearts, and made him good, and helps him and strengthens him to do good.”409 This seed is more definitely called by St. Tikhon “living faith,” that is, precisely the definition of oneself according to Christ 410. So, a person has only the “firstfruits of the spirit” (Rom. VSh, 23), or “the beginning of the image of God,” has only the seed. If the righteousness received by a person in baptism is more a possibility than a reality (in the sense, of course, of the complete likeness of nature), if it is only a seed, then further life becomes very clear and understandable. A Protestant cannot explain to us why and why he lives after baptism. A Catholic can, however, say that he wants to increase his crown, wants to add his own to the righteousness received by Christ. But this will already be his overdue merit and will depend on his personal desire: his duty is only not to sin, so as not to lose righteousness. Let's imagine that his desires to increase are already great, but the gift is not there; then the further stay of the reborn on earth will lose all meaning and content. If the righteousness of baptism is only a rudiment, then a person must develop it, must implement it, otherwise he promised God in vain to be righteous. A person who has not developed the received seed of eternal life not only does not increase his crown, but also loses what he has: for a talent buried in the ground, a person not only will not receive praise, but will also suffer punishment, although he can justify himself that he buried it for fear of losing (Matthew XXV, 24 - 30). “Holy baptism, in the words of St. Athanasius of Alexandria, opens for us (only) the path to enlightenment" 411, only gives us the opportunity to begin our salvation. “He who has taken the bath of rebirth, says St. Gregory of Nyssa, is like a young warrior who has just been included in the military lists, but has not yet shown anything warlike or courageous. Like him, having tied a belt and put on a mantle, he does not immediately consider himself brave and, approaching the king, does not speak to him boldly, like an acquaintance, and does not ask for the favors distributed to those who worked and struggled: so you, having received grace, do not think of living with the righteous and being counted among them, unless you endure many troubles for piety, you will not fight closely with the devil and courageously you will not be able to resist all the shootings of evil spirits” 412. Man received grace and was determined to do good; but “in every rational nature there are changes without number, and with every person changes occur hourly." 413. The habitual element of sin remains before the consciousness as a tempting principle and finds more or less sympathy for itself in human nature. Therefore, with inattention on the part of the baptized, the mortified enmity against God and his holy kingdom can rise again and make the reception of the sacrament in vain. “Let us not,” says St. Gregory of Nyssa, we will revive enmity in ourselves, but with our life we will show that it is dead, so that we, well mortified by God during our salvation, will not resurrect it within ourselves for the destruction of our souls with anger and memory, committing an evil resurrection of what is completely dead.” “It happens, says St. Macarius of Egypt, that in others there is grace, but the heart is still unclean” 415. Something similar takes place during the sacrament: a person has to struggle with the remnants of his former existence, with sinful habits, with the habit of generally living according to the elements of the world. Only after this struggle, when the possibility of sin is erased, can a person’s goal be considered achieved and his salvation completely complete. “Washing,” says St. Basil the Great, in itself is not enough to bring the washed one to the whiteness of snow or waves, but actions and no small thoroughness are needed, so that washing produces cleansing from filth, and the judgment of the sire and the acquittal of the widow deliver whiteness equal to the whiteness of snow or waves 416. Or, as St. I. Chrysostom says, "If you need to receive the kingdom of heaven, then it is not enough to free yourself from sin, but you also need to practice a lot in virtues. For you need to refrain from vicious actions only in order to free yourself from Gehenna (this is the meaning of life from a legal point of view); but in order to inherit the kingdom of heaven, you must acquire virtue" 417 . Whoever has been freed from sin in baptism will, of course, not be punished for previous sins; but even if he is satisfied with this cleansing, he still will not enter the kingdom of heaven. It is necessary to work on oneself even after baptism, since otherwise all a person’s promises, all his desires from now on to be righteous will turn out to be just an empty phrase: having rejected the previous life, a person must start a new one, and not remain indifferent. “If, says St. Gregory of Nyssa, the soul hates a sinful life (to amartanein), adopts a virtuous way of life if possible and accepts the grace of the Spirit, translating it into life, then it will become completely new and recreated.”418 Therefore, it is not enough to hate a sinful life and renounce it, it is necessary to uproot the slightest remnants of it; it is not enough to define yourself to life according to Christ, it is necessary to implement this definition, it is necessary to translate the received grace into life. In this sense, we can say that the grace of baptism can be increased or decreased “Spiritual grace,” says St. Cyprian of Carthage, which in baptism is equally accepted by believers, then by our behavior and actions either decreases or multiplies, just as in the Gospel the seed of the Lord is sown equally, but, according to the difference of the soil, some are depleted, and others multiply in varied abundance, bearing fruit thirty, sixty or a hundred times more" 419. Therefore, a long feat of gradual purification, further improvement, or ascent from infancy to the age of a perfect husband is necessary; the end of this ascent is Godlikeness or holy communion with God, that is, eternal life. “Who creates for us a spiritual spring and through proper cultivation, Who increases the human in us (to anJrwpinon), first, instead of shoots, beautifully throws out from nature everything that is earthly (gewdeV) and useless in it, cleansing it of excesses with confession, and then, with the rules of a more educated life, imposing on it some features of the desired bliss, as if with what color he announces the future the sweetness of figs" 420. "How soon, says the Rev. Macarius, the soul has loved the Lord, it is snatched from the snares (of the world) by its own faith and zeal, and together with help from above, it is made worthy of the eternal kingdom, and, indeed, having loved the latter, of its own will and with the help of the Lord, it is no longer deprived of eternal life” 421. Let us conclude this section with the words of Rev. Theophan, to whom we have turned more than once to check our understanding of the teachings of St. fathers. "He who has fulfilled all the commandments, writes the late saint, gracefully adorns his soul with all sorts of virtues and makes his heart a church worthy of being the abode of the Lord. He (the Lord) dwells in him then. He is in him from the moment of Holy Baptism and even more sincerely communes with him in Holy Communion. But, helping him in the holy life, he still does not completely calm down in him, because, not yet all the virtues are established in the soul through the fulfillment of the commandments - traces of passions still remain in it - the smell of sin is unpleasant to the Lord and He does not calm down in it, as if not trusting it, and only making for Himself a resting Abode in it, then He safely enters it, as into a house, and dwells calmly, undisturbed by the unpleasant movements of sin and passions. 422. Upon leaving the watery font of baptism or the tearful bath of repentance, a person sets out “to cleanse the soul and body from everything passionate and sensual, making our entire nature pure, to build from it a worthy church to the Trinitarian God, in which is an eternal life, which will remain from hereafter, his eternal property.”423 Having promised God in baptism to follow the path to His eternal kingdom and having made, with the help of the grace of God, a steady decision to really follow this path, a person, after accepting the sacrament, begins to walk, struggling with himself and more and more succeeding in knowing God and becoming like Him, until, finally, he is released from this world and enters the area of ​​light and holiness that he strived for in this life, thus, not a mechanical, collateral appendage, but a necessary addition to the freely willing and at the same time mysterious revolution experienced. a person in baptism. On the other hand, with the Orthodox concept of the essence of rebirth, one can easily explain the phenomenon that people are saved who died not only immediately after baptism, without actively declaring their faith, but also before baptism (the so-called baptism of blood). If the essence of the sacrament is to strengthen a person’s zeal for good, then it is completely clear that this zeal still makes him a member of the kingdom of heaven and gives him the ability to assimilate the bliss of holiness, even if in real life a person had to limit himself to only one verbal promise to live holy. When a person after baptism does nothing to improve himself, although he has the opportunity, this is a sign that he was only half baptized, that he actually does not have a love for goodness and a desire for holy communion with God. It is natural for such a person to be deprived of the reward promised to him: according to the mood of his soul, he is alien to the kingdom of God. But if a person did nothing only because he could not, or because death did not allow him to fulfill his promise, then, of course, the kingdom of heaven is open to him: he desires it with all his soul, with all his soul he wants to be a saint and with saints, he wants to follow Christ. His soul, therefore, is ready for the contemplation of the all-holy God and for communion with Him; This communication will therefore be his desired destiny. “The thief,” says St. Ephraim the Syrian, by verbally confessing, he is saved, because he did not have time to actually repent; by his change (by turning from enmity towards Christ to love for Him, from joy at the reproach of the righteous to reverent recognition of his holiness and the desire to at least be remembered in the kingdom of the Desecrated One), he showed in himself the desire to convert and actively, if time had been given to him; just as one can be condemned as ungodly for a word, so one can also be pious by a word.”424 And this is precisely because God does not seek external actions, not merits on the part of a person, so as not to give him bliss in eternal communion with Him for nothing, but seeks only the ability to perceive this communication and gives it: not how much He Himself can or wants to give, but how much a person can contain, “according to the thought of St. Macarius. Egyptian, will enjoy the promise to the extent that he loved it, and not to the extent that he labored; since the gifts are great, it is impossible to find worthy labors. But faith and hope must be great, so that reward is measured by them, and not by labor. The basis of faith is spiritual poverty and immeasurable love for God” 425. Since this love for God exists, since a person recognizes in his soul his insignificance without God and with all his soul sincerely strives for Him, then salvation will be granted to him, even if by deeds he did not have time to declare his irrevocable decision. “He who only wished well, but encountered an obstacle in doing it in some way, due to this impossibility in the disposition of his soul, is by no means less than the one who discovered his decision through deeds” 426. Therefore, even failure to accept the sacrament in the established form may not harm a person, since this essence of true Christianity has been formed in him - the desire for the kingdom of Christ. He who, for reasons beyond his control, did not have time to fulfill his desire to unite with Christ, nevertheless, is accepted on an equal basis with the baptized. “In this case, consent is valued as the deed itself, because (in this case too) the basis for the deed is laid down by will.”427 Baptism with blood replaces the sacramental baptism with water, of course, not in its external form, not with washing, instead of water, with blood, for there is martyrdom without the shedding of blood; it is the same with it in its inner meaning; both this and that come from the irrevocable decision to serve Christ and the renunciation of one’s own sinful desires. Thus, the salvation of each individual person, according to Orthodox teaching, is not an event that occurs in the Divine consciousness alone, not a matter of legal imputation, according to which the Lord would award a person this or that fate on the basis of some external circumstances, that is, on the basis of either the merits of Christ or the person’s own merits. Salvation is necessarily mediated by man’s transition from sin and selfishness to the kingdom of goodness and love, which is anticipated by man here and will be inherited in its entirety in the next century. This transition begins in baptism, when a person, by the power of God, is confirmed in his decision to be a true Christian; – continues, in the form of natural (freely - grace-filled) development of the laid seed of eternal life, after baptism; and ends with a person’s entry into a place where, with the help of the means given to him, he has prepared himself, for which he has developed receptivity in himself, that is, into the heavenly kingdom of light, truth and love. A person “goes where the mind has its goal and what it loves” 428. After the real essence of salvation has been clarified, the Orthodox answer to the question about the so-called conditions of salvation, i.e., becomes self-evident. about what a person needs to have in order to be saved, whether faith alone or with faith also works. Non-Orthodox people cannot reconcile these two so-called conditions in any way because they falsely understand the meaning of human life, and hence salvation. They think that a person could be saved without his personal participation, if the truth of God did not require this participation. And this does not seem absurd to them because they have forgotten the true meaning of life and salvation: the meaning of life is not in pleasure, but in holiness, and the essence of salvation is in liberation from sin. Once this truth is forgotten, then the whole question is only to satisfy the truth of God, which, as if contrary to the desire and ability of man, imposes a curse on him. Hence the external idea of ​​the merit of Christ, etc. A person can satisfy the truth of God through his sacrifices, with which he will earn pardon and entry into the heavenly kingdom for endless self-pleasure. But this path in Holy Scripture is recognized as insufficient. The coming of the Son of God into the world makes up for this deficiency, i.e., the heterodox explain from their point of view, Christ brought for us such a payment that ensured us forgiveness before the truth of God. But, after all, not all people are saved? Where is the overflowing satisfaction with the truth of God? Obviously, this truth is not fully satisfied for everyone, but only for some. It is necessary to assimilate the merit of Christ, the Westerners answer. How does this assimilation occur? They respond to this by teaching about faith as an instrument for perceiving the merit of Christ. Once a person believes that Christ’s merit was brought for him, then this merit is considered to be his. Such a faith, of course, is difficult to reconcile with a person’s own deeds, and we saw above what tricks Western Christianity must resort to in order to avoid the conclusion to which it is fatally heading - to avoid, precisely, the reproach that it denies man’s self-activity in his salvation. Orthodoxy is not at all akin to such a conclusion. Recognizing the meaning of human life and the content of future bliss in holiness, Orthodoxy cannot, for this very reason, recognize salvation as some kind of externally judicial or magical event, generally devoid of human initiative. No matter what artificial measures we use, apart from the free consent of a person, we cannot make him a saint; we cannot force him to love goodness so much that for the sake of goodness he forgets about himself. From an Orthodox point of view, this is downright absurd. And since salvation loses the appearance imposed on it by the West; since it is an action or a better known experienced mood, arising and developing in the soul with the indispensable participation of freedom; – then the question about the conditions of salvation takes on a different and more natural meaning. You cannot ask why a person receives salvation, but you need to ask how a person achieves his salvation. Then faith and works take on the meaning of not external foundations, the strength of which lies only in the fact that they attract to a person the mercy of God, hitherto closed from him; but become causes that produce that disposition of the soul that makes a person capable of perceiving the mercy of God, of communicating with the all-holy God. In this case, these producing causes not only do not contradict or exclude one another, but are mutually complementary and in some respects even coincide. If, in the question of the conditions of salvation, we want to base ourselves only on the letter of Holy Scripture or Tradition, then we will be put in some difficulty. Both in Holy Scripture and in Holy Tradition we will discover two lines of data, of which some forcefully affirm salvation by faith alone in Christ, and not by works or with works, while others also decisively say that faith alone is not enough, works are certainly necessary. Thus, it would not be too strong to say that the preaching of the one saving faith permeates the entire New Testament and constitutes its main and most comforting content. “Whoever believes and is baptized, says the Lord, will be saved, and whoever does not believe will be condemned" (Matthew XYI, 16). Christ, the true Light, gave to those who received Him, to those who believe in His name, the power to become children of God" (John I, 12), and the meaning of the entire economy is "so that whoever believes in the Son of God should not perish, but have eternal life" (John 15.16, 18.36, etc.) The goal of the Gospel is that people “believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God, and by believing have life in His name” (John XX, 31). “You, the Apostle Peter writes to Christians, having not yet seen (I. Christ), but believing in Him, rejoice with joy beyond words and glorious, finally achieving through faith the salvation of souls” (1 Peter I, 8 – 9). Finally, in the New Testament there are the epistles of St. Apostle Paul, who devoted his entire life to preaching about the one saving faith "The gospel of Christ, he says, is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, first to the Jew, then to the Greek. In him the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith, as it is written: The righteous shall live by faith" (Rom. I, 16 = 16). "If you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord and "If you believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. Because with your heart you believe the truth, and with your mouth you confess to salvation" (X, 9 - 10). in Christ Jesus” (III, 26). “Salvation is by grace through faith” (Eph. II, 8) and many other places. But next to the Apostle Paul in the same New Testament we find the Apostle James with his denunciations of dead, i.e., inactive faith - an apostle who directly says that “a person is justified by works, and not by faith alone” (II, 24). “What good is it, my brother, if someone says that he has faith, but does not have works? Can this faith save him? If a brother or sister is naked and do not have daily food, and someone will say: go in peace, be warmed and fed, but he will not give them what they need for the body: what good is it? So faith, if it does not have works, is dead in itself” (II, 14 – 17) “You believe that there is one God: you do well; and the demons believe and tremble” (v. 19). Next to the sermon about the one saving faith in everything New. The Testament preaches about its insufficiency for salvation: “Not everyone who says to Me, Lord, Lord, will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father” (Matthew VII: 21 – 23). “If, says the same Apostle Paul, I have all knowledge and all faith, so that I can move mountains, but do not have love, then I am nothing” (1 Cor. XIII, 2). Two principles are necessary, conditioning and complementing each other, faith and love. “Neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has power in Christ Jesus, but faith working through love" (Gal. V, 6). "Circumcision is nothing, but all in keeping the commandments." (1 Cor. VII. 19). The main thing is that believers "live worthy of the gospel of Christ" (Phil. I, 27), because only under this condition will the lives of the members of the body of Christ be fully followed the covenant of Christ. “This is His commandment, that we believe in the name of the Son of God Jesus Christ and love one another, as He commanded us” (1 John III, 23). There are also, as it were, two currents in the patristic works. On the one hand, the idea of ​​a single saving faith is one of the most common and most beloved fatherly ideas. Salvation by faith was for them the good news that regenerated the world and led it to the knowledge of God. “This faith, says Clement of Alexandria, is the one universal salvation of mankind.”429 St. John Chrysostom in the ancient church, St. Tikhon of Zadonsk in our country can be called the same heralds of the one saving faith as St. Apostle Paul was in the apostolic age. 430 Others, although not so constantly, nevertheless pursued the same idea, thereby proving the unity of teaching among all 431. But this single saving faith in the works of the Holy Fathers is constantly opposed by the teaching about its insufficiency and the need, in addition to it and next to it, of good deeds as its necessary complement. “Faith without works does not save anyone,” says Bl. Augustine 432. "Faith requires works. St. Isaac the Syrian says, and hope in God is revealed in suffering for the sake of virtue. Do you believe that God provides for all creatures and is omnipotent? Let decent work accompany your faith; and then God will hear you. Do not try to hold the wind in your handful, that is, faith without works" 433. The same I. Chrysostom and with the same insistently instilled in his listeners the idea of the insufficiency of faith and convinced them to try to do things 434 Exactly the same is noticed in the works of other church fathers 435 . Obviously, we cannot rely on one letter: whether we say that we are saved by faith alone or whether we assert that faith also requires works, in both cases we can equally find justification for ourselves in Holy Scripture and the works of the church fathers. It is therefore necessary to carefully discern what this or that writer is talking about in a certain place. In this way we will eliminate a lot of sayings that literally seem to relate specifically to the issue of personal salvation, but in fact do not relate to it. First of all, very often in Holy Scripture faith in Christ is contrasted with unbelief, that is, stagnation in paganism or Judaism. A believer in this case will mean: a person who has been baptized and entered the community of Christ’s disciples. In fatherly times, another feature was added to this. At that time, almost continuous dogmatic disputes took place in the church. Therefore, a true follower of Christ in the mouth of the church fathers was only one who accepted all the dogmas of the Church. Thus, faith in Christ in a sense became identified with orthodoxy with to dogmaticon eidoV thV pistewV 436. Often this faith, i.e. Being in the church and accepting church dogmas is called in Holy Scripture and Tradition the only salvation of man. Church faith is called “life-giving faith" 437. But this, of course, is because in the minds of the sacred writers and church fathers the relationship between teaching and life was quite clear. They knew why they took upon themselves to follow Christ, they knew why it was necessary to stand for this or that dogma. This or that way of thinking was for them the banner of a whole way of life. “Let,” says the Venerable. Ephraim the Syrian will prefer faith in the Holy Trinity to you; because without this faith it is impossible to live a true life” 438. He who unfailingly maintains faith in the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit can only actually be “formed according to the sacrament" 439, that is, bear or have the image of a true follower of Christ. Only “correct (right) dogmas about God sanctify the soul" 440. But it goes without saying that a completely different order of things is possible. Quite a lot of people belong to Orthodoxy only because they never they did not ask themselves the question of what they believe in. Orthodox faith is for them only an inheritance from their ancestors, it may be dear, but only because it is an inheritance from their ancestors. In the consciousness of such people, there is no direct connection between dogma and life. Hence, orthodoxy for such people is no longer sufficient for salvation. It is necessary to convince them to live their lives according to the law of God. Thus, there are many places in the Holy Scriptures and the works of the Fathers that talk about faith and deeds. as two different and equally necessary principles of salvation. This series of data, of course, cannot influence our conclusions: here we are not talking at all about faith and works, but only about “cold faith,” as St. Cyril of Alexandria 441 calls it, about an external unfounded claim to the name of a Christian. Then the conviction to do good deeds with faith has only the meaning that it is in vain to consider oneself a Christian if one does not care about salvation. The meaning of such a conviction will be the same, for example, with with similar reasoning of St. I. Chrysostom: “Neither baptism, nor remission of sins, nor knowledge, nor the sacraments, nor the sacred meal, nor the reception of the body, nor the communion of blood, nor any other of these will be able to help us if we do not have a right and amazing life and free from all sin.”442 In other words, this is not about salvation, not about how it is accomplished, but about the need to accomplish it. In addition, in order to understand the fatherly teaching, one must always remember to whom this teaching was directed. It was directed towards an ordinary person, only half living according to Christ. For such a person, eternal life seems like an otherworldly reward; he separates its bliss from its content, that is, holiness. Accordingly, in the matter of salvation, the first place for him should come not from his moral side, not from delivering a person from sin and entering the path of truth, but from the final side - that decisive determination of a person’s fate, which will take place after death. In that case; that which actually serves as the direct beginning of salvation, predetermines it, for an ordinary person seems only to be some basis for receiving a still-to-be-coming salvation. Hence, the power that actually accomplishes or leads a person to accomplish salvation, from an ordinary point of view, seems to prepare only salvation. Thus, there are, as it were, two conditions for salvation: the power that produces matter; and matter itself: faith, which strengthens a person’s zeal, and good deeds, as the fruit of faith. These two possible points of view: strictly theological, scientific, embracing salvation from all sides, and ordinary, focusing on the final decision of man’s fate, must be kept in mind in order to correctly understand the biblical and patristic teaching about the conditions of salvation. So, speaking essentially, salvation is a person’s free and grace-filled transition from evil to good, from life according to the elements of the world and from enmity against God to a selfless life and to communion with God. What is the condition for such a transition? In the proper and strict sense, such a condition or productive cause can be faith in Christ. No matter how successful a person is in doing good, no matter what feats he undertakes, if he does not have faith in Christ, he himself will never comprehend the truth that God forgives him. Before the consciousness of man stands his countless sins and the inexorable law of truth, demanding satisfaction. Therefore, God Himself appears to them, only in the form of a formidable, punishing Judge, and appears hostile to man. Having nothing to say in his own defense, a person only trembles at God and is ready to quickly give up any thought about his salvation and surrender to atheism. He will not understand God’s love on his own and will not turn to It. “How can we call on someone in whom we have not believed?” (Rom. X, 14). How can we turn with a plea for help and forgiveness to Him whose love we do not know? “Our crimes and sins are upon you and we are melting away in them: how can we live?” (Jeo. XXXIII, 10). A sinner can ask God for mercy only when he knows that the Lord treats a person “according to His great mercy and according to the multitude of His mercies,” only in this case can a person ask for the abolition of God’s righteous sentence for sins (Ps. L, 3.6). The law of righteousness is presented to the consciousness of man in all its inexorable clarity: “I am aware of my iniquities and my sin always I have sinned against You, You alone, I have done what is evil in Your sight." Where is salvation? “You do not desire a sacrifice, you do not delight in a burnt offering" (v. 18). The Lord does not desire satisfaction, the execution of a sinner; humble” (v. 19). If a sinner expects from God only “reproof in rage and condemnation in anger,” then there is no salvation for him: “His iniquities exceed his head, weigh over him like a heavy burden,” therefore, moral strength leaves a person, he “exhausts and is crushed beyond measure,” he is “near the fall,” his only destiny is “tribulation.” But “in You, Lord, I trust; you will hear, O Lord my God.” This consciousness of God’s mercy is the guarantee of triumph over the enemies of his salvation, and it also gives a person the determination to turn with a prayer for mercy and help to the same Lord, Whose righteous anger he aroused with his sins. “Do not leave me, Lord my God, do not depart from me” (Ps. XXXVII). But how does a person know about this? “No one has seen God anywhere"; therefore, no one can know that He is love by himself. He was revealed to humanity by “the Only Begotten Son in the bosom of the Father.” “We know the love of God in this, that He laid down His life for us” (1 John III, 16). Thus, only the one who believes that can know the love of God Jesus, who suffered and was crucified, is truly the Son of God. And if anyone believes that Christ really suffered for our sake, can any trace of fear of God and alienation from Him remain? "If God is for us, says the believer, who can be against us? He who did not spare His own Son, but gave Him up for us all, how will He not also freely give us all things with Him?" Son, in order to “draw everyone to himself” (John CP, 32; Col. 1, 20 - 22), if for one lost sheep He left His ninety-nine unlost, - therefore, this sheep, with all its sinfulness, with all its alienation from God, continues to be dear to Him - with all its sinfulness, God came to earth for it and calls it to Himself. Sin, therefore, no longer lies between God and man; God gave His Son to convince man of His love for him and of His forgiveness. "Who (after this) will accuse God's elect? God, God Himself does not remember their sin, "God justifies them." Who condemns? who can threaten them with judgment and punishment? "Christ Jesus died, but also rose again" (Rom. 31 - 34). This is the eternal and most undoubted proof of God's love for the sinner. Thus, "through faith" in Christ Jesus, man “receives boldness and reliable, undoubted access to God" (Eph. III, 12). The Son of God, in the words of St. Ephraim the Syrian, “showed man the mercy of the Father, announced the sorrow of dark forces and enmity with earthly things. He convinced us to seek reconciliation, became a mediator of peace, promised reconciliation, indicated the way, namely, that peace would be acquired through the cross, and arranged things so that the slave came to the Master, the Son, and knew the Father” 443. Thus, faith in Christ is the means through which a person learns the love of God, i.e., the fact that the sin committed does not at all prevent the rapprochement of God with man, that God has forgiven sin and directs all his economy to somehow return sinful man to Himself. “The robe of Christians, covering the ugliness of our sin, is faith in Christ,” says St. Basil the Great 444. Once a person believes in Christ, he, therefore, believes in the love of God, and is not at all afraid, for the sake of his previous sins, to approach God with a prayer for forgiveness and help, knowing that the love of God is only waiting for his conversion. In this sense, an Orthodox person can say that faith serves as an organ of perception of the grace and mercy of God. A believer knows and believes in the all-forgiving goodness of God and therefore is not afraid of destruction. “A faithful soul, says St. Tikhon of Zadonsk, appropriates the blessings of God and the merits of Christ to himself, which the man-loving God has shown and continues to show to all creation.”445 That is, this does not mean that a believer considers as his merit the work done by Jesus Christ and, for the sake of this payment to God, no longer fears His wrath or judgment for his sins; it means that a person, recognizing the work of Jesus Christ, through this very thing he learns that God is not a punishing Wrath, demanding vengeance for Himself and cannot forgive anyone freely, as the consciousness of man, oppressed by sin, imagined Him to be, - that on the contrary, God is all-forgiving love - that there is no sin that would defeat this love. As a result of faith in Christ, a person begins to recognize his Heavenly Father and feel His love, which did not impute his sins to him. Once such faith appears in a person, then the relationship between him and God immediately changes. Until now, God's love has not found its counterpart in man. Fearing the righteous judgment of God, man distanced himself from God and, instead of love, treated Him with enmity. Now his consciousness becomes clearer: he sees that God is not the Terrible Master, but the Father, that He did not spare His Son just to reconcile man with Himself. It is natural that enmity against God and alienation from Him disappears in man. Instead of alienation, he begins to strive for God; respond to His love with love. God is no longer a stranger to Him, he calls Him his own “My Lord and my God,” says the believing Thomas. “The property of heartfelt faith says St. Tikhon of Zadonsk to call God his God from the heart; so David says: Lord my God, although all the faithful are God." Thus, with the mercy of God, every faithful person is encouraged by the faith that lives in his heart; take heart, for God is merciful, and therefore will have mercy on you; He is true, and therefore he will fulfill his promise, he will hear you calling; He is omnipotent, and therefore can deliver You. Hence it happens that the faithful, with ardent love and boldness, calls God his God: God, my God, to you in the morning (Ps. IXII). My God, my mercy (Ps. LVIII, 18); calls it his fortress, affirmation, refuge, etc.: I will love You, Lord, my fortress! The Lord is my strength and my refuge, my deliverer, my God, my helper, and I trust in Him; my protector and the horn of my salvation (Ps. XYII 2 - 3). Such boldness of faith is also depicted in Psalm XC: living in the help of the Highest, etc. Tako Damascene, rejoicing in spirit and playing, sings in his songs to God: You are my strength, Lord! You are my strength! You are my God! You are my joy” 447, and the reason for this joyful appropriation of himself to God by Damascus is precisely that he recognized the love of God revealed in the coming of the Son of God into the world: “do not forsake the bosom of the Father and visit our poverty.” "Who will separate us from the love of God; tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or the sword? I am sure that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord (Rom. IX, 35:38 - 39). Instead of alienation, a person responds with all his soul to the love of God, rushes to Her call, the closest moral union, unity, is established between God and man. This is what St. says. Apostle John the Theologian: “Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God" (I John IV, 16). That is, not uttering certain words, of course, attracts God into the soul of a person. The Apostle then gives several instructions on how this spiritual union of man with God is accomplished. He further says that believers have come to know the love of God in the death of Christ. “God is love, and he who abides in God, and God abides in him. There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear. Therefore, believers no longer fear judgment (I John IV, 16 - 18). Let us love Him, because He first loved us (v. 19). Thus, confession is saving because it is necessarily accompanied by love for God, which casts out fear and unites a person with God. “Faith,” says St. Tikhon. Zadonsky, mysteriously unites the soul of the faithful with Christ, like the bride with the groom (communion of love), as the prophet says in the face of the Lord: I will betroth you to myself in faith, and hang you with the Lord (Hos. II, 20). And the apostle corresponds to this with the verb: I have betrothed you (to the faithful) to present a pure virgin to Christ to one man (2 Cor. XI, 2.3)” 448. "God describes this state of St. I. Chrysostom, who called us not to destroy, but to save. How can we see that this is exactly what He wants? “He gave His Son, it is said, to eat" for us (John III. 16). He so desires our salvation that He gave His Son and not just gave it, but to death. From such reflections hope is born. Do not despair, man, go over to God, Who is not spared even His Son. Do not be afraid of present disasters. He who betrayed the Only Begotten in order to save you and kidnap you from Gehenna will spare nothing more for your salvation? Therefore, we must expect everything good. For we would not be afraid if we had to stand before a judge who would judge us, who would show such love for us that he would sacrifice his son for us. because we have received the main thing if we believe (the burden no longer frightens us and does not drive us away from God, God’s love is recognized). But we see an example; therefore we will love Him. Otherwise, it would be extreme madness not to love the One who loved us so much.”449 From the knowledge of Divine love follows the destruction of fear and boldness, and then the union of love, a feeling of mutual closeness, appropriation to each other. There is no longer a depressing fear in the consciousness of a person: God is not alien to him, a threatening Judge, inexorable in his justice - God is his loving Father, who will not remember his previous sins, will not reprimand him for why he did not come for so long, where he squandered the property given to you. He, seeing him from afar, will come out to meet him and, without asking, will order him to be dressed in the best clothes and will rejoice at the salvation of the sinner. Protestants, having brought the accomplishment of a person’s salvation to this point, cut it off abruptly and say that the person’s salvation or justification has been accomplished, that he is with God, he has nothing more to do or desire. Henceforth, the grace of God dwells in man and produces only good in him. Faith begins to bear its characteristic fruits. Man's task on earth is over. From what is presented you can see what the fundamental mistake of Protestantism is. A person’s faith reveals to him only the truth that God will not punish him for his previous sins, that, on the contrary, He is ready to accept him and have mercy, to recognize him as His son. But, after all, this, if I may say so, only clears a person’s path to God, and does not produce anything with a person. Until now, man was afraid to turn to God, but now he recognized God and stopped fearing Him, on the contrary, he loved Him. But, after all, the person is still the same. He needs not only to love or stop fearing God, but also to actively, truly turn to Him. Of course, whoever has such faith is already half converted "No one, being in error, will want, says St. I. Chrysostom, to turn to faith, unless he first prescribes a good life for himself, and no one will remain in unbelief, unless he first decides to remain evil forever." They didn’t believe. After all, what does anyone want and think about and expect?” 451 What will a sermon say to a person’s consciousness about Christ the Son of God, who suffered for his deliverance from sin, if all his attention is directed to self-pleasure, if his God is the womb? If one day she becomes a captive and gives herself over to some kind of sin (plhmmelhmati) and if, moreover, she does not want to think about her own benefit, then even if someone inspired her dozens of times, he will not achieve anything, but as if completely deprived of hearing, she will not receive any benefit from the admonition, not because she cannot, but because she does not want to” 452 . Therefore, the presence of faith already shows the beginning of a person's conversion; because, as St. Athanasius of Alexandria, “faith is a sign of spiritual will" 453. In order to come to the idea that God is not angry for man’s past sins, that He, with all His holiness, is love, for this it is necessary first of all to feel a lot in your soul, you need to understand the severity of sin, recognize yourself as perishing and worthy of destruction. Only after this, when the soul suffers this consciousness, and the described faith in the love of God is possible, this a moral union that fills a person with such joy. He who does not understand the gravity of sin will not understand the sweetness of being undeservedly forgiven: just as he did not feel the wrath of God then, so now he cannot feel love “When, says St. Neil of Sinai, like a small swallow, we open the mouth of understanding. Having come to a sense of thinness and smallness and bodily humiliation, and turning to God with all my soul; then the grace of the Lord will not hesitate to visit us and, having come, gives food, like some chick opening its mouth and communicating, as they say, Divine consolations, Divine thoughts, Divine delight, Divine fear and wisdom and love, and Divine joy, and the revelation of great sacraments” 454. If there is no need, there can be no desire to satisfy it. “Look,” says St. I. Chrysostom, with what precision the evangelist tells: having said that (John) came preaching the baptism of repentance in the desert of Judea, he added: remission of sins; as if he said: he convinced them to consciousness and repentance of sins, not to punish them, but so that they would more conveniently receive the remission that followed this (i.e. repentance and consciousness). For if they had not condemned themselves, they would not have asked for grace, and without seeking it, they would not have been rewarded with remission of sins.”455 The beginning of faith, therefore, is in repentance, in the feeling of one’s sinfulness. "Through its own fault, having become covered with a cloud of untruth, the soul, says St. Ephraim the Syrian, wanders in sins, not knowing what it is doing, not noticing the darkness surrounding it and not understanding its deeds (this is the state before the inspiration of faith). But as soon as the ray of all-vivifying grace touches it, the soul comes into horror, remembers what it has done, and returns from a dangerous path, from its evil deeds ... with she sighs with great sorrow, mournfully laments, shedding streams of tears, and begs that she may be able to return to her former wealth through good deeds... Tears flow from her eyes for her lost beauty; her purulent scabs are numerous, and since she sees her great vileness, she runs away from it and seeks protection from all-generous grace" 456 . Thus, turning to grace presupposes a whole complex path of awakening from a sinful life, hating it, and an attempt, or at least a desire, to return to a virtuous life. "No one can come to me, says the Lord, unless the Father who sent Me draws him (John YI, 44). How does this attraction happen? "The Father who sent Me has Himself testified of Me. But you have never heard His voice, nor seen His face, and do not have His word abiding in you, because (as is evident from the fact that) you do not believe Him Whom He sent." Why does the word of God turn out to be ineffective in relation to these people? “You do not want to come to Me in order to have life.” They do not want to because this life of Christ is contrary to them. “I know you, you do not have the love of God.” All of a person’s attention is focused on this life, in particular, on his personal well-being and glory, does he have any consolation for himself in the consciousness of his faithfulness to this law? “I came in the name of My Father, and You do not receive Me; but if another comes in his name, you will receive him. How can you believe when you receive glory from one another, but do not seek the glory that comes from the one God? (John U, 37 – 44). Thus, believing in Christ is a very complex matter, embracing the entire spiritual life of a person, requiring not only attentiveness to the sermon, but also renunciation of oneself, or at least diverting attention from oneself. There is no doubt that the grace of God contributes to this attraction of man. “To believe in Christ, says St. Tikhon of Zadonsk, is nothing else than having learned from the law and heartily acknowledged one’s poverty and wretchedness, which comes from sin and the subsequent righteous wrath of God, from the Gospel having known the grace of God, revealed to all, to resort to Him alone under the protection of Him alone as the Deliverer and Savior from that disaster to recognize and have, in Him alone all salvation eternal, also in the feat against the devil, the flesh, the world and sin, during life, at death and after death, hope is steadily and relentlessly affirmed, as if it were the undoubted and unshakable foundation of salvation” 457. “To truly believe, therefore, is characteristic of a courageous soul 458, “sincerely disposed towards God” 459 and His holy law and kingdom. But with all its complexity, with all its depth, the state of the believer can no longer be more than a threshold and preparation for salvation or justification, and not salvation or justification itself. A person, however, reaches faith through repentance and self-denial. In order to draw a conclusion from simple knowledge about Christ, about God about your personal relationship with God, you need to mourn your sinful existence. But what happens when a person makes this conclusion? What happens is that a person learns about God’s love for himself, learns that there is no wall between him and God except his own sinful alienation from God. A person begins to love God and feel that God's love responds to this love, to feel the full possibility and actually enter into union and communion with God. But this state is in any case only contemplative. And, as such, it cannot regenerate a person without his will, it cannot be that self-propelled principle in the soul that would do good deeds for a person. In the same way, the grace of God, although present, although it contributes to the enlightenment of a person, cannot act by force, on the sole grounds that a person has learned about the possibility of receiving this grace and wants to receive it. "Assistance from above also requires our arbitrariness" 460. In order to actually turn from sin and accept grace, to enter into union with God, for this it is not enough only to be sincerely convinced of the mercy and closeness of God, but also to really give up sin and turn to God. A person is convinced that only in God is his salvation, but let him himself stretch out his hand to take the right hand of God that helps him. Otherwise, he will remain with only one conviction. It is not enough to wish, although Even if it were sincere, life according to the law of God, it is necessary and actually to begin it. “A man says St. Macarius of Egypt, not immediately, as he hears God’s word, he becomes worthy of the good part; then there would be no more feats or occasions for battle, or a field for struggle; but everyone, without labor (acamatwV), as he would soon hear, would achieve peace and a measure of perfection. In reality this is not the case. By asserting the opposite, we will take away a person’s will and deny the existence of an opposing force that counteracts the mind (if a person, as soon as he believed, immediately becomes virtuous, then either grace does everything for him, he is only the ground for extraneous actions, or there was no sin in him; in the first case, freedom is denied, in the second, the sinfulness of man). We say that the one who listens to the word comes into contrition, and then, since grace, according to God’s vision for the benefit of man, moves away from him, he begins to exercise and learn in battle, fights and strives against Satan, and after a long competition and struggle he wins and becomes a Christian. And if only by hearing, without difficulty, someone could reach the good part; then both the actors and all the fornicators would enter the kingdom and life (the kingdom of God would cease to be a holy kingdom). But no one will give them life without labor and achievement, because the path is narrow and cramped. It is this rough path that one must walk, and endure, and grieve, and thus enter into life” 461. The grace of God does not enslave the consciousness and freedom of man, but having revealed to him the love of God and the horror of sin, it allows man to strive for this love in holy communion with it. “Faith, deeds of virtue (catorJwmata), the kingdom of heaven, if you do not,” says St. Basil the Great, “you will not receive asking with difficulty and much patience; because you must first desire, and, having desired, really seek in faith and patience, using everything on your part, so that your own conscience does not condemn you in anything, as if you are asking, either carelessly, or lazily; and then you will receive, if it pleases God.”462 This free striving of man towards the grace and love of God and to a holy life, pure from sin, is accomplished, as we saw above, by man in reward through the sacrament. In this rebirth, man no longer sees only the possibility of union with God, but actually unites with God. The power of God strengthens his hitherto imperfect determination not to live for himself, but for God; sin is destroyed; and man, thus, no longer in the form of a possibility, but in fact, "understands the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge (Eph. III, 19). While a person only believes, he is convinced that God will forgive him. After rebirth, he actually experiences this forgiveness. Previously, a person only hoped that God would not reject him, now he actually sees that God has not rejected him. Thus, along with the affirmation of a person’s determination to no longer sin and to serve God, his faith is confirmed, and with faith, that joy in God, which delights in the tested and undeserved love of God, and love for God in response to His love, and the desire to be with God, to make the newly concluded union even stronger. Thus, indeed, faith saves a person, but not by the fact that it contemplates God, but not by the fact that it reveals Christ to man, but by the fact that by this contemplation it awakens the will of man. This moral power of faith lies in its great, central significance during rebirth. Indeed, we have seen that the essence of regeneration is the determination to serve God hereafter. This determination affirms grace. In it the mysterious union of grace and human freedom takes place. But what brings a person to this union? We see what faith alone brings. Since God in the consciousness of man appears only as a Judge, since His love and forgiveness are not known, man cannot approach God and perceive His love. “I will bring him (the leader) closer, and he will come to Me; for who will dare to approach Me on his own? - says the Lord" (Jer. XXX, 21). Not knowing the love of God, a person can only tremble before God and expect punishment and death for himself. “Let him be a righteous man, but even if he is a thousand times righteous, he is a man” 463, before God he is still guilty of His righteousness only more It will give him the opportunity to see his guilt more clearly, and will not drive away fear. Only faith, and it alone reveals to a person the love of God, only it can reveal to a person that the Lord Himself is coming to meet him. To believe in Christ is “His love and good deeds, shown to the whole world (which a person can know rationally), to appropriate to every faithful person... and to feel it in his heart, and not just speak with his lips.”464 Only when this love of God, which surpasses understanding, is recognized, can a person, without fear, although with the consciousness of his complete unworthiness, approach God and accept His ready help. Love God is recognized in faith and accepted by man “It is not He (the Spirit) alone who gives life (in baptism), being received for the sake of this grace-filled accomplishment (i.e., baptism) through faith, but must be preceded by Faith in the Lord, through which the grace of life is assimilated (paraginetai) by those who believe, as the Lord said, that the Son wills and lives” (John V, 21) 465. “When we,” says St. Irenaeus of Lyons, “turn our faith to the Son, “we will also have firm, unshakable love for the Father” 466. And this is not in one external sense, not in the fact that only by believing in the Son can a person go to baptism. Faith extends its action to the very recesses of the soul; it makes possible the very mysterious union of freedom and grace. By faith it is Christ who dwells in the heart of the baptized (Eph. III: 17). It is by the power of faith that a person makes his irrevocable decision to be with God, to unite with Christ. “Faith,” says St. I. Chrysostom, reveals to us what is true, and from sincere faith love is born, because he who truly believes in God will never agree to withdraw from love.”467 In faith, thus, the very essence of rebirth is mediated. Faith also presupposes the beginning of a new life in a person, life in communion with God. Love for God becomes the basic law of life, it determines all the doing and all the walking of a person. Therefore, turning away from sin and turning to a holy life rises to a new level. If before a person feared sin more than he desired righteousness, now, having come to know the love of God, he begins to love the law of God for God’s sake, in order to respond to love with love. The desire to be holy in order to avoid destruction turns into a desire for God in order to be pleasing to Him. The person’s personality is even more relegated to the background, and the beginning of life becomes complete self-denial. Thus, a person moves from fear of his destruction to faith, which, in turn, opens the way to love for him. That is why a true believer will never refer to his labors, will never demand a reward for them: his whole soul is filled with the contemplation of Divine love, love that is selfless and undeserved by man. That's why; and the thirst to be pleasing to God and to do His will in a believer has no limits. "Ask, says St. Isaac the Syrian, from God to let you come to the measure of faith. And if you feel this pleasure in your soul, then it is not difficult for me to say that there is nothing to turn you away from Christ. And it is not difficult for you every hour to be taken into captivity far from earthly things, and to hide from this weak world and from the memories of what is in the world. Pray for this without laziness, this ask with fervor, beg for it with great zeal until you receive it, and pray again so as not to weaken. And when God sees this will in you, that with all the purity of your thoughts you trusted God Himself more than yourself, and forced yourself to trust in God more than in your soul: then this unknown power will dwell in you - that power that, having felt in themselves, many go into the fire, and are not afraid and, walking on the waters, do not hesitate in their thoughts for fear of drowning; because faith strengthens spiritual feelings, and a person feels within himself that as if something invisible convinces him not to listen to the vision of terrible things and not to look at the vision that is unbearable for the senses” 468. "It is impossible, truly impossible, says St. Tikhon of Zadonsk, for someone who has the lamp of faith burning in his heart not to strive for these eternal blessings; and thus not to be in true repentance, and not to move away from all sin. Faith renews a person and turns him away from sins and the vanity of the world, and guides him to the future promised blessings, and it appears to him as visible" 469 . “Just as it is characteristic of fire to warm, water to irrigate, and light to enlighten: so it is characteristic of living faith to show good deeds” 470. Thus, faith, showing a person the love of God, morally makes a person akin to God. Man sees in God a Father who is ready to accept him. This moral rapprochement ends in baptism, in which a person, confirmed in the love of God or in the consciousness of this love, is truly united with Christ and comes out of the font created for good deeds. The enmity against God is destroyed, the oath is lifted, and between God and man there is a very close relationship of love. The salvation has been accomplished. The soul is betrothed to Christ and all belongs to Him. “Faith,” says St. Tikhon of Zadonsk, looking with reverence at the crucified Christ, thinks: who and how great is there, who suffered for his vile servant and what he gained through this suffering. From where the believer is aroused to mutual love and heartfelt gratitude, and strives in every way to fulfill this. But as soon as he sees that he cannot do this (what shall we repay to the Lord for all, what has he repaid us?), he falls before Him with humility and love, heartily confessing his shortcomings, and a single heartfelt desire for thanksgiving, zeal and love, which he can bring to his highest Benefactor in this age. From this, the faithful desire is aroused to endure everything for the name of the Lord Jesus, whatever the will of God pleases” 471. Having surrendered to the Lord and united with Him, the soul is cleansed from sin, which is destroyed in it and no longer threatens its salvation. “Christ cleanses such a faithful soul from sin and all filth, and makes it holy, takes away from it spiritual disasters - oath, condemnation, death and all spiritual troubles, and instead gives His spiritual benefits: blessing, deliverance and eternal life, as the Apostle teaches about this: Christ has given us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification and deliverance; and like a woman, having taken off her torn rags and washed them from the stench, she puts on her scarlet robe in pure righteousness, so that before the tosses of Him and His heavenly Father she will appear pure, and, like a royal daughter, her garments are speckled with a spiritual creature 472 After this, even if a person died immediately, his salvation is assured: like a thief, the Lord is also for him. says: “Today you will be with Me in paradise.” This is the state in which a person “has the desire to be with Christ—this is the state of a person who has emerged from the font of rebirth.” – The further life of a person, as we saw above, consists in the development of that seed of eternal life, which is laid in baptism. A person is gradually cleansed of sin, gradually improved and strengthened in goodness, and rises to the age of a perfect husband. However, even then, “the beginning of his life” 473, that “salt that keeps a person unharmed” 474 continues to be faith. "The support of the whole house, says St. Cyril of Alexandria, is the foundation, and the beginning of the ship is the keel, and for one who decides to do the right thing, the foundation and the first support is the knowledge of the truth and the unfalse teaching of faith in the one by nature and true God. For if you do not believe, you understand less (Is.VII, 9) ... Faith is the nourisher of understanding, and understanding constitutes for us the touchstone of what we should do" 475. "Faith, says St. Ephraim the Syrian, gives birth to a good thought, and a good thought is a river of living water. Whoever acquired it is filled with its waters. Without oil the lamp will not burn and without faith no one acquires a good thought 476. “Faith is the mother of every good deed, and with it a person achieves the fulfillment of the promises of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, according to what is written: “without faith it is impossible to please God.” 477 Once a person remembers the love of God, since the lamp of faith shines in a person’s heart and he clearly sees everything spiritual” 478, his zeal and power to do good has no reason to weaken. If for the sake of this consciousness of the all-forgiving the love of God, man was not afraid of the immeasurable burden of sin, if he then dared to enter into a struggle with the principle that had hitherto dominated in his soul and, with the help of the grace of God, defeated, abandoned evil and began to do good; then even more so now, when he is in union with God, when sin has already been defeated, overthrown, even more so will man strive to do the will of God and to destroy sin: even if a person happened to fall: let him only watch. he his faith - the disturbed harmony of his soul will be restored, his scattered forces will be gathered again and with new energy will rush against sin “Faith,” says St. I. Chrysostom, there is a head and a root; if you keep it, then even though you have lost everything, you will gain everything again with greater glory” 479. “Faith is power for salvation and strength for eternal life” 480. On the other hand, it is clear what will happen if a person loses faith. “Without oil a lamp cannot burn,” without a root, every tree will wither. “Without Me,” said the Lord, you cannot do anything.” Once faith is taken away, all meaning of life and all power to do good is taken away. There is no center that would bind a person’s efforts and make sense of them. Man does not feel the closeness of God, cannot understand His goodness, God is again for Him only the Punisher of unrighteousness. Will such a person convert? to God? And if he does not turn, then he cannot accept God’s help, His grace. So, having lost this “eye that enlightens every conscience” 481, his faith, a person loses all his spiritual wealth and perishes. In this regard, the features with which the Lord depicts the righteous and sinners at the final judgment are also remarkable. While the righteous, who have kept their faith, are amazed at the mercy of God: “When I saw You hungry, and did not drink?”; to sinners, God’s sentence seems unjust: “When I saw You, I hungered, and did not serve You?” They see God as hostile to them, willing and looking for an excuse to condemn them and deprive them of eternal bliss. The first lived in faith and therefore their whole soul is filled with a feeling of God’s undeserved mercy; they even now confess their unworthiness. The latter have lost faith, are not aware of God's mercy, they lived only for themselves, therefore, and now they rise to defend their "I". The first, by their faith, always saw the path to God open for themselves, because they saw the mercy of God. Seeing this, they always strived for God and were constantly in spiritual unity with Him: this unity naturally becomes their lot even after leaving this life. The latter, having lost faith, naturally lost the strength for spiritual unity with God, became weary of God: therefore, even after the transition to the future world, they do not have the ability to surrender to God, their lot is in the dark kingdom of selfishness, which gnashes its teeth about its destruction, not finding the strength to reconcile with this, at least, like a righteous man, in the thought that he suffered according to the will of God (Rom. IX, 3). So, faith revived a person, faith developed and educated him in spiritual life, and faith will lead him to eternal bliss. By believing, man here accepted the grace of God and could accept communion with God, despite the fact that until then he had lived in sin. This same faith in the love of God will give a person the opportunity to maintain this communion with God in the coming kingdom. "On the day of judgment, says St. Neil of Sinai, we ourselves will be our own accusers, convicted by our own conscience. Therefore, in this extremity, will we find any other protection or help other than faith in the most loving Lord Christ? This faith is our great protection, great help, safety and boldness and answer for those who have become irresponsible due to the unspeakable multitude of sins. For during our struggle and immeasurable fear, remembrance of the beloved Master Christ and firmly rooted and unshakable faith in Him, imagine, like what a benevolent, peaceful, bright and meek angel, they drive away trembling and shame, fill with complacency, and make the alienated one close to God” 482 . The movement of the believer, precisely for the sake of his faith, will not be from God (out of fear of Him), but towards God, whose mercy encourages man. That's why St. Tikhon says: “The whole essence of Christian bliss consists in faith, for whoever has true living faith has God’s blessing, the truth of Christ, holiness, deliverance, spiritual freedom, eternal life and bliss” 483. In order to avoid misunderstandings, it is necessary to repeat here once again that the Orthodox Church, believing in faith all the bliss of a person and considering faith to be the reason for the spiritual growth of a person, never imagines this faith in the form of some kind of self-acting force, which, as something extraneous, would almost force a person to a virtuous life and to communion with God. It is also impossible to think that faith only calls grace into a person, which then also, in the form of an extraneous force, does good in a person. Of course, a believer perceives the grace of God, with which he goes out to fight sin. However, the instrument for perceiving this grace is not faith in itself, not knowledge or contemplation of the mercy of God and His readiness to forgive and help, but certainly the free, desire and decision of a person. In the same way, faith is a “doer of good, the basis of righteous behavior” only because it “is the free consent of the soul.” 484 Faith only inspires the will of a person, but does not at all free him from efforts on himself. If a person is negligent, then his very lamp will go out, "Perhaps, says St. Cyril of Jerusalem, you will say: I am faithful, lust will not prevail over me, although I will often think. Don’t you know that over a long time the root often deepens into a stone? Do not take the seed into yourself; for it will crush your faith." You have a lamp; but keep it burning. Let your light, the light of good deeds, shine forth before men, and let not Christ be blasphemed for your sake, adorning yourself with good deeds. 486 “It is not only necessary to believe in Christ, says St. Macarius of Egypt, but also to suffer, according to what is written: for it is given to you not only to believe in Christ, but also to suffer for Him.” Philip. I, 29). Believing only in God is characteristic of earthly thinkers, or, I would not say, even of unclean spirits, who say: We know You who are the Son of God” (Mr. II, 24) 487 With faith, a free choice of good and a decision to do it are necessary. By stating this, we do not at all want to say; so that in reality such a state of inactive faith would be possible (unless in the form of some exception). He who does not want a holy life and communion with God will never believe, although he will affirm in words and thoughts that he believes in the Gospel. How will he understand that God is ready to forgive him when he does not understand why he needs this forgiveness, when life does not seem impossible to him even without it? If he understands with all his soul what Jesus Christ did for people, then he understands the horror of sin. Understanding this, he will not fail to turn to God, and, therefore, will make efforts to live virtuously. "Whoever says, I know Him, but does not keep His commandments, is a liar and there is no truth in him. But whoever keeps His word, in him truly the love of God has been perfected (he contemplates this love and has received it): by this we know that we are in Him" ​​(1 John 11:4-5). Whoever says that he believes, but does not have a life consistent with faith, is lying: he does not believe at all, he “philosophizes earthly things”, is guided by his worldly concepts - he does not know and does not understand God, as He revealed Himself to us. Falls, of course, are possible for a believer. But, precisely, only falls, when a person is carried away by passion, darkening the Face of God in his consciousness. The fall of a believer will be followed by rebellion. But “It is impossible, truly impossible, let us repeat together with St. Tikhon of Zadonsk, who has the lamp of faith burning in his heart not to strive for eternal blessings, and therefore not to be in true repentance, and not to move away from all sin” 488. Speaking about the need for a free striving for God and goodness with true faith, we only want to indicate the very way in which faith saves a person. It is not with its contemplative side, not as the state of the perceiver, that faith saves a person, so that a person can only inactively experience his salvation. Faith saves through its active side, the constant participation of good will in it (John VII, 17). A believer in his faith finds the boldness to turn to God and, thus, enters into communication with God, accepts this communication. The believer, strengthened by the power of God, rushes towards a holy life and thus begins it. Faith in this sense is “the beginning of our hope and the beginning of Divine mercy towards us, like a door and a path.”489 With some world soul, an impersonal substance and the fundamental principle of the world, one can enter into communication without one’s will, one can inactively surrender to it; but with the living God, communication is only possible personal and free. In order to bring into focus precisely this vital (and not formal) meaning of salvation, and precisely where we have to protect ourselves from Protestant fabrications, our church chooses from two formulas developed in the West, the one that attributes salvation not to faith alone, but to faith with works. “We believe,” says the 13th part of the Epistle of the Eastern Patriarchs, that a person is justified not simply by faith alone (i.e., as can be seen further not by its theoretical, perceptual side), but by faith promoted by love (by faith, as an active force, in that it produces love), that is, through faith and works... Not a ghost, the fathers also explain the definition, only faith, but the faith that is in us through works justifies you in Christ.” 490 Thus, faith undoubtedly justifies a person, but only real, true faith, the one that leads a person to true life, makes him work out his salvation. It is impossible to succeed as you should without faith. Faith motivates one to do good deeds, faith indicates them, faith also leads to obtaining strength to do good deeds. Why is faith an accomplice to good deeds? The main thing is business, and she is a benefit” 491. Salvation, then, lies in the fact that man works it out himself, but he comes to this work only by faith. An Orthodox person should not understand this definition in a Catholic way, i.e. so that by works a person earns his salvation. Deeds in themselves, as external actions or individual exploits, have no meaning in Christianity. Behavior here is valued only as an expression of the corresponding mood of the soul, a certain direction of the will, although in turn it influences the formation of this mood. "You have heard that it was said to the ancients: You shall not kill; whoever kills will be subject to judgment. But I say to you, everyone who is angry with his brother without a cause will be subject to judgment... You have heard that it was said to the ancients, You shall not commit adultery. But I say to you, that anyone who looks at a woman to lust after her has already committed adultery with her in his heart... You have heard that it was said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth. But I say to you: do not resist evil”... etc. All of this denies legal righteousness and in its place is given the righteousness of the Gospel, the righteousness of the spirit and truth, a righteousness that does not consist in correct behavior, but in internal renewal, in a change of soul. This spiritual righteousness alone gives a person entrance into the heavenly kingdom of spirit and truth. "If your righteousness does not exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, then you will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt. Y, 21 - 22. 27 - 28. 38 - 39. 20). The entire conversation on the mount is built on this idea about the insufficiency of external good deeds alone and the need for internal change, which is actually how the kingdom of heaven is acquired by a person. Therefore, mercy shown to a prophet or disciple is only valued when it is shown “in the name of the prophet” or disciple, in the name of faith (Matt. X, 41 - 42). “If, says St. Apostle Paul, I give away all my possessions, and give my body to be burned, but do not have love, it is of no benefit to me” (1 Cor. XIII, 3). What could be higher and more perfect than self-sacrifice in the name of Christ or the Gospel? “Everyone, said the Lord, who leaves houses, or brothers or sisters, or father or mother, or wife or children, or lands for the sake of My name, will receive a hundredfold, and will inherit eternal life” (Matt. XIX, 29). If we are guided by the letter and demand external works for salvation, it will appear that those who sacrifice their lives or earthly well-being can buy themselves the kingdom of heaven. But the Lord immediately after these words added: “Many will be the first last, and the last first" (v. 30). One cannot look at appearances. The Apostle explains in more detail: the essence of salvation is not in exploits, such as these, not in external zeal; both exploits and zeal must flow from a regenerated, changing soul; otherwise they are nothing before God (Tim. IY, 2), therefore, it may happen that two the mites brought by the widow outweigh the entire multitude of offerings from the rich, and the sinner-tax collector turns out to be closer to God than the righteous Pharisee; those who came at the eleventh hour and did nothing receive equal rewards with those who worked all day and endured the heat of the day. From a legal point of view, this cannot be explained: great work requires great reward (unless we deny the possibility of any good deed on the part of man). With the Orthodox, this does not require explanation: the Lord wants to save everyone equally and strives for everyone equally, but one has more desire for God, the ability to perceive His communication, while another has less. In this case, it may happen that a newly converted person who has done nothing will be equal or even higher in reward than someone who has grown old and accomplished feats. The Kingdom of God is not a reward for one’s labors, but a mercy offered to the tuna and received according to the acceptability of each. The question, therefore, is where the soul is directed, what it wants, how it lives. If her desire is for God; if she does not live for herself, then in addition to her behavior, in addition to her external deeds, she is justified; this is the guarantee of future pardon, and exploits and labors are important only for the return and strengthening of this desire. "Reward, says St. Isaac the Syrian, is no longer for virtue, and not for labor for it, but for the humility that is born from them. If it is lost, then the first will be in vain." internally) on the day of judgment they will turn out to be like the five holy fools, who, because they did not store spiritual oil in the vessels of the heart, that is, the spiritual effectiveness of the virtues they represent, were called holy fools and were not allowed into the bridal chamber of the kingdom. And the feat of virginity for the lack of virtues, because there was no effective infusion of the Holy Spirit in them, was imputed to them as nothing. Just as when cultivating, for example, grapes, all care and all labor are taken for the future enjoyment of the fruits and as soon as no fruit is found in the vineyard, all the labors of cultivation have become vain and vain: so if with complete certainty and spiritual sensation we do not recognize in ourselves the effectiveness of the Spirit produced fruits of love, peace, joy and humility, long-suffering, faith and others, which the Apostle counted, then it is in vain the feat of virginity turns out to be, and the work of prayer, fasting and vigil is vain... The fruitfulness of the Spirit in virtues is the spiritual pleasure of incorruptible pleasure produced by the Spirit in the hearts of the faithful and humble” 493. Only then can a person consider himself saved when he is in a spiritual union with God, and when he does good precisely from consciousness and in the light of this mysterious union, when he is ready to say that “it is not he who lives, but Christ lives in him.” But this comes from faith and by the power of faith: “I live by faith in the Son of God,” and precisely because only faith sees the Son of God, “who loved me and gave Himself according to me." Consequently, it is not those who do who are saved, but those who are always spiritually with God, who live for God's sake. “Those, says St. Irenaeus of Lyons, who strive for the best and bear the fruits of the Spirit, at the same time are saved because of (precisely this mysterious) community of the Spirit."494 Of course, doing must reflect the inner disposition of the soul: a good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and he who lives with God cannot do evil (I). John III, 6). But a tree is not good because of its fruit. “A good tree, says St. Tikhon of Zadonsk, is shown to have good fruits, but is not made good. The tree must first be good and then do good deeds, for an evil one cannot do good.” "The first thing is to be planted in Christ and thus create the fruits of good deeds: you must first become good and then do good. An evil tree cannot produce the fruit of good."496 In the same way, the soul is saved not from its external deeds, but because its inner being is renewed, that its heart is always with God. Of course, at the last judgment the book of everyone’s life will be opened, and everyone will give an answer for everything. deed and word, for every thought, no matter how insignificant and fleeting it may be, the Perfect One cannot be called not perfect. But this revelation of life for some will only be a source of humility, will only lead them to the consciousness of the undeservedness of pardon and will tie them even more closely to God; for others, the conviction of conscience at the trial will bring despair and will finally tear them away from God and the kingdom. “And these go into eternal torment, but the righteous into. eternal life." Thus, in faith is all the bliss of a Christian. Acquiring faith in itself is a treasure: a person cannot believe in the mercy of God otherwise than by deciding to serve not himself, but God and the law. Having believed, he cannot help but love God, and having loved, he cannot help but strive for God. Striving for God, uniting more closely with Him, a person comes to know God’s love even more, a person’s faith becomes even stronger and, in turn, has an even stronger impact on the will, attracts a person to God even more strongly, until, finally, freed from earthly vanity, a person sees God face to face and perceives His kingdom no longer in fortune-telling. Faith, therefore, is not only the reason, the driving force in the spiritual development of a person, it is rather the focus, the very heart of spiritual life. As faith grows, love grows, as love grows faith: the moral development of a person finds both its expression and its fruit in the strengthening and growth of faith. “The certainty of faith,” says Rev. Isaac the Syrian, in people of high souls, is revealed to the extent that their morals are attentive to living according to the commandments of the Lord" 497. Faith promotes works, and faith is perfected by works (James II, 22). Faith in truth is the alpha and omega of moral life, like the Lord Himself, whom it reveals to man 498. Leading to love, in which the essence of eternal life (I John III, 14; John XVII, 26), faith thereby gives a person the opportunity here on earth to begin eternal bliss. Upon transition to the future world, faith turns into knowledge, and the love that connected a person with God continues into eternity. So, man has not satisfied God with anything for his sin: he only recognizes God’s mercy, but does not deserve it. Without knowing mercy, he will not approach it and, thus, can never receive power over sin. Only faith gives a person the determination to turn to the mercy of God, despite all his sins. “I give thanks for salvation through faith, and this is not the gift of God from you” (Eph. I: 8). Since man could not throw off the heavy burden of sin and again love and call on God, the Lord “Himself came to those who had departed from His grace and tore up the handwriting” of sins 499, drew man into fellowship with Himself. “We,” says the apostle, are messengers in the name of Christ, and as if God Himself exhorts through us, in the name of Christ we ask: be reconciled to God (see what God did to call you) for He made him who knew no sin to be sin for us, so that in Him we might become righteous in the sight of God. But we, as fellow servants, beseech you, that the grace of God may not be received in vain by you... I have these promises, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God" (2 Cor. Y, 20 - 21; VI, 1; YII, 1). “Do not be afraid,” says the Rev. Ephraim the Syrian, to begin a good path leading into life; just wish to go this way; and, if you find yourself ready, the path will immediately be arranged for you... In order not to encounter difficulties on the path leading to life, the Lord Himself, for your sake, became the path of life for those who wish to go in joy to the Father of lights” 500. Apologia Ausb. Conf. II (2). In our citations of the Lutheran symbolic books we use the Hase edition: “Libri sumbolici ecclesiae evangelicae.” Lipsiae. 1846. Page 60. Tota doctrina adversariorum partim est a ratione humana sumptas, partim est doctrina legis, non Euangelii. Apologia. III (166). Hase. 119. Cp. Zwinglii Artic. Y. Ed, Niemeyer "Collectio Confessionum in ecclesiis retormati publicatarum Lipsiae". 840. Page 5. We use this publication for all symbolic books of the Reformed Church. Arol. III (144).Hase 113: "Opera iucurunt hominibus in oculos. Haec naturaIiter miratur humana, ratio, et quia tantum opera, cernit, fidem non intelligit, neque considerat, ideo somniat, haec opera, mereri remissionem peccatorum et justificare. Apol. III (167). Hase 120. The first reformers, as we know, listened with great attention to the voice of some of the church fathers, especially Augustine, whose words are more than once quoted in the most symbolic books of Protestants. For example, Zwing. Expositio fidei XI, 103. Niem. 58. “If Aristotle had not had flesh and blood, I would not have hesitated to consider him the devil incarnate.” An example of Luther's eloquence at Aristotle's address. In Schenkel's "Das Wesen des Protestantismus". 2-te Aufi. Schaffhausen. 1862 s. 34. Conf. Ansb. I, 20. Hase 17. Conf. Ansb. I, 20. Hase 16. Cp. Apol. III (196). Hase 127: Quid est hoc aliud, quam transferre gloriam Christi in opera. nostra., quod videlicet propter opera. nostra piaceamus, non propter Chrictum." Conf. Belgica. Art. XXII: "Necesse enim est ant omnia quae ad salutem postram requiruntur in Christo non esse: aut si sint in eo omnia. eum, qui fide Jesum Christum possidet, simul etiam perfectam habere salutem. Itaque horrenda est omnino in Deum blasphemia, asserere Christum minime sufficere, sed .aliis quoque rebus opus esse. Inde enim seqneretur, Christum ex parte tantum esse servatorem." Form. Conc. I, 2. Hase 579: Hominis intellectus et ratio in rebus spiritualibus prorsus sint coeca. nihilque propriis viribus intelligere possint.. Ex nobismet ipsis, tanquam ex nobis, non sumus idonei, ut aliquid boni cogitemur; quod vero idonei sumus id ipsum a Deo est.” Nulla opera edere possumus quae non sint carnis nostrae vitio polluta, ac proinde supplicio poenisque digna. Conf. Belg: XI1Y. Niem. 376. Conf. Scot. I, Art. 15. Niem. 348. “We believe, teach and confess that our truth before God is precisely this, that the Lord forgives our sins out of sheer goodness.” Form Conc. I, art. III (4). Hase. 584". Wed. Conf. Gall. art. XVII. Niem. 334: “We believe that all our righteousness consists in the remission of our sins, which is, as David testifies, our only happiness.” Wed. also Conf Belg. XXIII. Niem. 374. Eg. Apol. III (40). Hase. 90, says, “that justification signifies not only the beginning of renewal, but also the reconciliation which we receive afterwards.” Instificare dicitur non sensu physico, sed forensi et indiciali, a reatu culpae et penae absolvere et iustum aestimare, declarare." Ilollaz in Brettschneider. "Systematische Entwickelung aller in d. Dogmatik vorkommenden Begriffe. Leipzig. !841. S. 64t. Apol. III (131). Hase 109. Form. Conc. I. Art. Sh (17). Hase 585: The word “justification” in this case means: to declare righteous, to free from sins and the eternal punishment of sins, for the sake of the righteousness of Christ, which is imputed by God to faith.” Or above: “God grants and imputes to us the righteousness of the obedience of Christ, for the sake of this righteousness we are accepted by God into grace and are considered righteous. Art. III (4) Hase 584. Instificare consistit in mutatione morali, quae constituit homine iustum actione iudiciali et eidem pura extrinseca. h. e. tali, quae nou in homine, sed circa hominem peragitur." Quenstedt in Bretschneider, Op cit. 641. Ibid. 642. Cp.Art..Smalcald. III. Art.XIII(I).Hase 336: “Although sin is not yet completely destroyed in the flesh and is not yet dead, yet God does not want to impute it to us, nor to remember it.” Our sins, as Cat puts it. maj. II, art. III (55). Nase 500, non nobis noceant in christianitate constitutis: ubi (which shows the identity of salvation with justification) nihil aliud, quam assidua et indesinens est peccatorum remissio.” Nos fatemur vitam aeternam mercedem esse, quia est res debita, propter promissionem, non propter nostra merita.” Apol III (241). Hase 136. “To justify” in this place (Rom. Y, I) means “to free the guilty and declare him righteous” in the legal sense (forensi conspectu), but for the sake of someone else’s righteousness, i.e. Christ's; this alien righteousness is communicated to us through faith. So, since in this place our righteousness is the imputation of someone else’s righteousness, then we need to talk about righteousness here differently than when we in philosophy or in court seek real righteousness (proprii operis).” Apol. III (184–5). Hasel 25 – Catech. Palat. to the question Quomodo iustus es coram Deo? - He answers: “Without any merit of mine, out of God’s mercy alone, I am imputed and given (if only I could receive these benefits with true spiritual confidence) the perfect satisfaction, righteousness and holiness of Christ; as if I had not committed any sin, and there was no ulcer in me; even more: as if the obedience that Christ represents for me, I represent myself.” Pars II, art. LX. Niem. 443. Wed. Couf. Helv. post. XV. Niem. 494: “Deus imputat institiam Christi pro nostra.” This teaching is very clearly expressed by Biedermann (Christliche Dogmatik. Zurich. 1869. S. 447), precisely as a characteristic feature of Protestantism: “Whereas, according to the Catholic understanding, iustificatio in its content consists of the infusio justitiae of Christ, based on which (Infusio), a person himself has to increase his salvation to the degree of righteousness achieved by his own strength - according to the Protestant understanding, justification consists rather in the applicatio “satisfactionis” of Christ. Moreover, the applicatio is two-sided: negatively, it is the remission of sins, remissio peccatorum, the objective Divine destruction of eternal punishment for sin (which is subjectively perceived as an alleviation of the feeling of guilt), and positively, it is reconciliation with God, reconciliatio cum Deo, God’s objective acceptance of man into restored correct life communion with Himself (which subjectively makes itself felt in the feeling of granted sonship).” See, for example, Scheele’s review of Hengstenberg, who “at the end of his days identified justifying faith with an active life of faith in the Son of God.” Scheele shares the opinion of “the most illustrious teachers of their church, who unanimously explained this as a consequence of Hendstenberg’s senile infirmity, which had darkened the previously so clearly shining aura of this man.” Theologische Symbolic. Leipzig. 1886. Theil. II. 8.59. For admixture we can point to Martensen On page 369 of his Christliche Dogmatik. (Berlin. 1856) he says this about justification: “Justice contains both positive and negative aspects, which mutually determine each other!” It is impossible to possess a new life otherwise than in a good conscience, cleansed from the consciousness of guilt and condemnation of God: and vice versa, remission of sins and cleansing of conscience cannot be conceivable without actual life communion with Christ, when his perfection and righteousness are made the animating beginning of an individual’s life.” This is exactly the same as in symbolic books. And there, too, good conscience (respect., legal pronunciation) is accompanied by the indwelling of Christ as an animating principle. And for Martensen, this infusion does not serve as a force acting in justification, but only as a consequence of it - the root, the source of justification is again in legal pronunciation. Apol. (III 128 – 9). Hase 108 – 9: “We are not talking about idle knowledge, which even the devil has, but about faith, which resists the fears of conscience, encourages and comforts fearful hearts... This faith, since it is new life, necessarily gives birth to new aspirations and deeds.” Wed. Conf. Heiv. XV Niem. 485 – 6: “In this case, we are not talking about a fictitious faith, vain and idle, or dead, but about a living and life-giving faith, which for the sake of Christ (Who is life) and gives life to those perceived by it - it is and is called living and reveals its vitality through living deeds.” “Good deeds will follow true faith (unless it is a dead, but a living faith) most certainly and without any doubt, like the fruits of a good tree. Form. Cons, IY (6). Hase 589. “That faith which perceives the remission of sins in a heart that is afraid and flees from sin, does not remain in those who remain in passions, and mortal sin does not exist.” Apol. III (23). Hose 86. "The main and especially characteristic feature of this (justifying) faith in our church, says Scheele (op. Cit. 61), is that it is “fiducia specialis", that is, personal heartfelt confidence in Divine grace in Christ. Here, next, the matter concerns not only the highest and deepest aspects of the human spirit, since for self-loving and earthly-oriented human nature there is nothing heavier determination, with the negation of oneself and everything created, to establish oneself (bauen) exclusively on the promises of Divine grace; but with true faith, a moral influence is also inseparably connected, a certain transformation of the innermost property: where the love of Christ takes the place of a natural selfish mood (Sinuesart), there, at the same time, the very core of sin breaks out so that there can be no talk of mortal sin, for then the selfish nature would again take root in the soul, and the justification or righteousness of faith would be destroyed.” This is precisely what symbolic books want to say when they try with particular force to prove that faith is not at all an easy thing, that it requires the highest tension of energy and even exceeds human strength. For example, Apol III. (128 – 9). Hase 108–9: Talis fides neque facilis res est, ut somniant adversarii, neque humana potentia, sed divina potentia, qua vivificamur, qua diabolum et mortem vincimus. Conf. Belg. ert. XXIY. Niem. 375. Catech. Genev. I. Niem. 139: “Fidem esse radicem. ex qua nascantur omnia bona odera.” “Justifying faith, as such, should not be confused with anything alien to it, nor with that internal struggle preceding justification, in which a person still stands on the eve of communion with God and therefore strives to penetrate its sanctuary, nor with the struggle of sanctification, the task of which, among the various relations of earthly life, is to give form and image to the seed of Divine life planted from above, in order to bring to light the hidden treasure of the heart and unfold before the eyes of people. The first forms, undoubtedly, an assumption, and the second, as fruit and action, follows the act of justification.” Wed. Conf. Scotic. I art. 12. Niem. 346: “Spiritum Sanctum, sine omni meriti nostri respectu sive sit ante, sive post regenerationem, nos sanctificasse et regenerasse.” Catech. Genev. And, to the question: Anne sic a bonis oneribus separari haec iustitia potest, ut qui hanc habet illis careat? Niem. 139 Wed. Conf. Scotic. art. 13: “As soon as the Spirit of the Lord Jesus, whom God’s elect remember through true faith, takes possession of anyone’s heart, immediately revives and renews that person.” Niem.346. Formula Concordiae distinguishes with remarkable certainty between these two concepts (justification and the nourishment of the essential truth of God, or God in a justified person). “The question of the dwelling of the essential truth of God in us requires correct clarification. For although God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit (who is eternal and essential righteousness) dwells through faith in the elect who are justified by Christ and reconciled to God... yet this dwelling of God is not the truth of faith that Paul speaks of and calls it the truth of God, for the sake of which we are declared righteous in the presence of God. the indwelling of God follows the preceding truth of faith, which (truth) is nothing other than the remission of sins, the acceptance of the sinner into grace, for the sake of obedience alone and the most perfect merit of the one Christ." Pars. II. art. III (54). Hose 695. Scheele. Symbolic, s. 59. See above note 4 on page 17. (There is an obvious typo in the book, there are no notes on page 17, most likely they mean note 1 on page 27. See Since faith perceives Christ - our truth and is completely surrendered to the grace of God in Christ, therefore faith is given justification, precisely for the sake of Christ, and not because it is our work." Conf. Helv. XY Niem. 495. “Faith does not justify or save because it is a valuable thing in itself, but only because it perceives the promised mercy.” Apol. II (56). Hase 70 Wed. ib. II (86). Hase 76. Catech. Palatin. LXI: Cnr sola zide te iustum esse affirmas? "Not because I please God with the dignity of my faith, but because the satisfaction, righteousness and holiness of Christ alone are my truth before God. And I can receive and assimilate it to myself in no other way than by faith." Niem. 443. Bredschneider, op. cit. 652; “Faith alone justifies and not good works (pona opera), whether we understand them in the sense of pious exercises chosen at will, or in the sense of the actual fulfillment of duty (Apol. VI; Ansq Conf. art. 4: Form. Cone. art. 3), because faith alone appropriates the merit of Christ, by which a person is justified (Artic. Smalcald. pars II art. 1).” For example, Scheele. Or. cit. 62: “Faith perceives Christ as the one through whom both the wrath of God and the personal inner unrest of the sinner are overcome.” Ansh. Conf. 1, 6. Hase II. Apol. II (76–8). Hase 73–74. Apol II (36). Hase 66. Wed. Conf. Belv. XV: “We do not share the benefit of justification, a part of the grace of God or of Christ, a part to us, love or works or our merit, but we give it inseparably to the grace of God in Christ through faith. And our love and deeds cannot please God if they are done unrighteously: we must first be righteous in order to love or do." Niem. 465. Ansb. Conf. I, 4. Hase 10. Apol. II (112 – 3) Hase 81, We believe, teach and confess that faith alone is the medium or instrument by which we perceive Christ the Savior and with him that His righteousness that can appear before the judgment of God” Form. Conc. p.I art. III (5), Hase 584. Cf. Conf. Belg. art. XXII. Niem. 374:. fides tantum est velut instrumentum, quo Christum iustitiam nostram apdrehendimus.” Apol. III. (73.75). Hase 96 According to the teachings of the Apologia itself, i.e. Melanchthon. See above. The only exception is Confessio Helvetica posterior, art. XVI (Niem. 498 – 499); where essentially the same theory is stated: “we do not think that we are saved through good works and that they are so necessary for salvation that without them no one has ever been saved. We are saved by the grace and gift of the one Christ, but works are born of faith necessarily.” However, “the works we do through faith are pleasing to God. Since those who do good deeds, which are done from above by the Holy Spirit by the grace of God, are pleasing to Him, for the sake of faith in Christ. God gives a great reward to those who do good... However, we attribute it not to the merit of the person receiving, but to the goodness, condescension and truth of God, the promiser and giver, who, although he did not owe anyone, nevertheless promised that He would reward His true worshipers, and gives it to those who honor Him.” Form Conc. I, art. IV (7).Hase 589: “Good works penitus excludenda sint, but only when it comes to justification by faith, but when de salute nostra seterna, disputatur.” Apol. III (80) Hase 97: “We praise and demand good deeds and give many reasons why they should be done.” Wed. Conf. Hello, post. XVI. Niem. 498: about good deeds “about true, non-false, or philosophical virtues, about truly good deeds, about the real duties of a Christian man, we teach diligently and, as much as we have the effort and strength, we instill in everyone, denouncing the carelessness and hypocrisy of those who praise and profess the gospel with their lips, but vilely disgrace them with their lives - offering for this the terrible threats of God and His great promises and generous rewards, for conviction, for consolation and reproof.” “If,” says Martensen (Dogmatik.366–70), the Roman Church asserts that this teaching is allegedly dangerous to morality, then it will forget the constant teaching of the Evangelical Church that justifying faith cannot be conceived in the soul in a dead or only dormant state, but that faith, like a living fruitful seed, contains within itself a powerful productive force, which will necessarily give rise to the development of a holy life. “If, according to Biederman (Dogmatik. 451), Catholic dogma was inflamed with zeal for the need for good deeds and imposed anathema on those who deny deeds, then this was a simple misunderstanding or malicious distortion of Protestant teaching, which is still the case, however, Catholic polemics are trying to show off.” “Deeds must be done either for the sake of the command of God. either for the exercise of faith, or for the sake of confession and giving thanks." Wed Apol. III (68). Hase. )95. Wed. Basileen.. prior, conf. Disp. XXIV: “Deeds are performed by the faithful, not for the satisfaction of sins, but for the sole purpose of showing by them that we are in some degree grateful to God our Lord for the great benefits shown to us in Christ.” Niem. 100. “If sanctification consisted only in the external, legal imputation of the merits of Christ to us, and if even after it we remained in sin, our justification, the grace of God and redemption would be only external: then the truth of God would be destroyed, since He would see us as saints, which we would not be, and would not see us as sinners, which we nevertheless would be.” N. Klee. Katholishe Dogmatik. Mainz. 1835. Th. III, 67. Perrone. Praelectiones theologicae Paris. 1842. "Tom. I. 1391: “Justification, according to the Catholic understanding, consists in internal renewal through grace, which for the sake of the merits of Christ our Savior is attached to the soul (of man).” Thus, according to Thomas Aquinas, iustiticatio impii est. with one article, and remissio peccatorum (see collection: Petri Lombardi, Sententiarum libr. IV... nes non. Thomae Aquinati summa Theologica. Paris. Vol. II, 950). In addition, there is a positive point in this judicial act - justification is translatio ab eo statu. in quo homo nascitur filius primi Adam, in statum gratiae et adoptionis filiorum Dei per secundum Adam Jesum Christum, salvatorem nostrum." Sacrosanctum, oecumenicum Concilium Tridentinum. Editio reformata. Tridenti. 1745. pag. 30 – 31. “If anyone says that people are justified without Christ’s righteousness, which He has earned for us, or that they are righteous through it only formally, let him be anathema,” reads the 10th canon of the Council of Trent. Tridenten. pag. 39. The possibility of such a distinction in justifying the subjective and objective aspects is beyond doubt from a Catholic point of view. This is how, for example, his recognized teacher says: “Righteousness in a man can be accomplished in the sense of a movement which is directed from the contrary to the contrary, and in this sense justification brings about some change from the state of unrighteousness to the state of promised righteousness... And since the movement receives its name more from the term “ad quem” than “a quo”, therefore this kind of change by which someone is changed from a state of unrighteousness to a state of righteousness through the remission of sins, receives the name from the term “ad quem” and is called “iustificatio impii”. Thomas Aquinas (Vol. II, 966) tries to recognize the participation of man in justification and at the same time avoid the concept of merit. He says: “A person is justified through faith, not in such a way that he deserves justification by believing, but in such a way that while he is justified, he believes, because justification requires a movement of faith.” But Perrone (I, 1438) can serve as clear proof that a legal point of view, strictly carried out, requires merit here too. Perrone attempts to push grace back to the reception of the first grace, and to recognize sanctifying grace as a reward for merit, although not de condigno. He says: “The division of merit (into de condigno and de congrue) is based on the teaching of the fathers, especially Augustine, who teaches that the wicked by faith deserve remission of sins; for he says: “And the remission of sins itself does not occur without some merit, since it is based on faith (si fides hanc impetrat). By no means, after all, is the merit behind the faith by virtue of which that man said: God, be merciful to me a sinner, and went away justified by the merit of the believer’s humility. However, this is not merit in the strict sense taken or de condigno, as St. continues. Teacher; “Are there really no merits and no righteous people? Obviously there is, as long as they are righteous. But in order for them to become righteous, they had no merit for this.” So that merit which precedes is justified!” is merit de congruo “and is not called so in the proper sense.” Council of Trent: “Nothing that precedes justification, whether faith or works, nothing deserves the grace of justification itself; for if there is grace, it is not from works: otherwise, as the Apostle says, grace is not grace.” (Tridentinum pag. 33). He follows Klee (III, 62), when he considers only the first grace to be undeserved, as the first, as the beginning and grace of justification, as the foundation of all merit." Compare Thomas Aquin. Vol. II. 965: "Before grace, in a state of sin, a person has obstacles to deserving grace, obviously in sin itself; and after someone already has grace, this latter, as already existing, cannot fall under merit; because reward is the end of deeds, but grace is the beginning of every good deed in us... If someone deserves any gift by the power of prevenient grace, then this will not be the first grace. From this it is clear that no one can earn the first grace for himself.” “Grace,” says Klee (III, 47 – 48), is not given according to merit, because 1) then the concept of God’s goodness and His full right in distributing it would be destroyed, as well as the concept of grace, since where there is merit in the proper, strict sense, there appears in the proper and strict sense a debt or legal relationship, it is not grace that is required and given, but right and property; 2) because grace is the foundation and condition of all merit, - therefore, grace cannot fall under merit (principium meriti non саdit sub meritium); because God, according to Scripture and experience, gives grace to the unworthy; 4) because the biblical axiom that God does not look at persons, taken in its fullness and breadth, does not allow such an exclusion at all.” Bretschneideg. Wed. сit. 643. Thona Aquin. Tom. II, 961: “No nature can be sufficient for such an act as would merit eternal life, unless it surpasses a certain supernaturale donum, which is called grace,” Klee (III, 25): “By the grace of God here we mean the power and action of God in creation, aimed at preserving or restoring and perfecting its relationship to Him, as that in which lies its salvation, its truth, freedom and blessedness.” Perrone. I, 1241. Ср. 1. 1399 (gratia habitualis). Тhoma Аquinat. Volume. II. 952 Ср. can. XI Council of Trent: “If anyone says that people are justified either by the imputation of the righteousness of Christ alone or by the remission of sins alone, without grace and love, which is poured into their hearts by the Holy Spirit and cleaves to them; or says that the grace of God is only good will; let him be anathema.” Trident„ раg. 39. A clear proof of such a humiliation of the human will and, at the same time, the materialization of the entire process of salvation can be the words of Klee (III, 56): “The will, much more than consciousness, needs the renewing and strengthening touch of the finger of God, the very core of our being must be reborn in it, a new life must be founded: the will is more perverted than consciousness, there is sin in it; but not only because it has fallen and, moreover, so deeply, but because in it our own selfhood, and finite selfhood - the will must be received by grace, converted and raised to God.” Gratiam sanctificantem non cadere sub meritum de condigno (Perrone, vol. I, 1447), - therefore, it is obvious that fides, as Peter Lombard says, although causa iustificationis, however at the same time, and ipsa est gratia et beneficium, quo hominis praevenitur voluntas et praeparatur. See the above-mentioned “Collection of Petri Lombardi Sententiarum”… et caetera, Volume I, Col. 201. “Righteousness, in the words of the Council of Trent (Trident. pad. 37), “is called ours” only in the place of its, so to speak, application, because, as a result of its clinging to us, we are justified; but it is also the truth of God, because it is poured out on us as a result of the merit of Christ.” Klee. Ш, 20: “Good deeds are concrete formations and manifestations of faith, hope and love, the manifestation of the inner habitus of faith, hope and love in individual internal or external actions and expressions, or diverse and varied statements, divisions of one great and abiding work of God, faith, hope and love, in our internal or external world.” Klee. III, 23: “Works are the conditions for the full presence, revelation and increase of righteousness in us,” “Isti boni motus (for example, diligere etc.), says Peter Lombard (0p. cit. I, 205), vel affectur merita sunt er dona Dei, quibus meremur et ipsorum augmentationem.”, That this is not Lombard’s private opinion is proved by oo. Cathedral of Trent, which is in Can. XXIV de iustif., having anathematized the one who denies that righteousness increases before God in Can, XXXII, directly explain how this increase occurs, precisely in the sense indicated: si quis dixerit, that the good works of a justified person ... not vere tereri augmentum gratiae (not truly worthy of an increase in grace), let him be anathema (Trident. pag. 41. 42). Wed. Perrone. I. 1437. “Those who are thus justified (that is, through Christ in the sacrament of baptism), according to the words of the Council of Trent (page 34), ascending from virtue to virtue, are renewed, as the Apostle says, from day to day: that is, by mortifying the members of their flesh and presenting them as an instrument of righteousness for satisfaction (in satisfactionem). Through the observance of the commandments of God and the church, received through Christ, they grow with by promoting faith through good works, and are justified even more.” Reggope. I, 1440. Wed. Trident;. pag. 37: “To those who strive well to the end and trust in God, eternal life will be offered, both as the grace graciously promised to the sons of God in Christ Jesus, and as the reward which, according to the promise of God himself, will be given to their good works and merits.” Thomas Aquin. II. 959 – 60. Ibid. 966: “Our work has the meaning of merit because it comes from free will, insofar as we do something voluntarily; and on this side there is merit by correspondence (meritum congrui), because it is a correspondence that while man uses his virtue for good, God acts in a superlative degree in accordance with his superior virtue.” Apo1. II (19). Nase 63: "And that (Catholics) invent a distinction between the merit congrui and the merit condino, they are only deceiving, ne videantur aperte pelagiani Vein. For if God necessarily gives grace for the merit congrui, then this is no longer a merit congrui, but a merit condigno. As if they do not see what they are saying. After that gift (habitus) of love, they invent, a person deserves de condigno. And yet they make one doubt whether this talent is present. How, after this, do they know whether they deserve de congruo or de condigno? Thoma Aquin. II, 963: “If we talk about opere meritorio, as coming from the grace of the Holy Spirit, then the merit of eternal life is accomplished ex condigno, because the dignity of the merit (valor meriti) is determined by the virtue of the Holy Spirit, moving us to eternal life (about this 1 John 4, 14: He will become in him a source of water flowing into eternal life); the price of the deed (pretium) oregis) is determined by the dignity of grace, by the power of which man, having become a partaker of the Divine nature, is adopted by God, so that he, as the son of God, according to the very law of adoption, should own the inheritance.” We do not distort Catholic teaching by presenting the mental life of a person in the form of such a material, physical phenomenon. Mechanism and sensuality are the hallmarks of Catholic thought. Trident, pag. 31 (grattam praeveniri). Catechismus ad parochos. Vieunae. 1827. pag. 456: (Homines) – adiutores et admiuistri Dei gratiae.” Kirill Alex, vol. III, 294. Creations. Translation at Moscow. Spirit. Academy. In all quotations, the Russian letter “t” means a volume of Russian translation; Latin t – volume of the Greek series Patrologiae Migne. St. Justin Martyr. Conversation with Tryphon. 44. See Writings of Ancient Christian Apologists. Edition of the Holy P. Preobrazhensky. M. 1867. Pp. 214. Chrysostom. In Io Hom. XXI, 3 (Migne S. G. t. LIX, col. 132). Kirill Iepyc. Catech. IX, 13. Migne S. G. t. XXX II, col. 652: “(like an ant) ​​gather for yourself the fruits of good deeds for future ages.” Cassian. Scriptures. M. 1877. Pp. 210. Gregory Niss. vol. VII, 447. Athenagoras. Apology. 12, Ed. Preobrazhensky St. 82. Creations. M. 1848 – 51. vol. 1, 97. The ascetic word. vol. III, 323. The ascetic word. Kirill Iepyc. Creations. M. 1855. Pp. 327. Ogl. word XVIII, 4 St. Hippolytus. Against Plato, 3. See Clark's Ante-Nicene library for an English translation of his works. Vol. IX, p. 50 We apologize for the diversity in the quotations: we were forced to be content with every edition of St. fatherly creations, which only fell into our hands. Moreover, some oo. We quote churches either from Migne or simply from the Russian translation. This happens because we read these works twice: the first time, while at the St. Petersburg Academy, we had the original at hand, which we could not have the second time. See, for example, the previous quote from St. Kirill Jerusalem. De hominis opif. With. XXII (Migne. t. XLIV, col. 209) vol. I, 170. St. Chrysostom. De statues. Hom. XIII, 3 (Migne t. XLIX, col. 140). T. II, 529 (ed. 1858). T. II, 98. Ed. 1858 The Word on Non-Acquisitiveness (to Magna) ch. I. Catech. XV, 23 (Migne. XXXIII, 901). Ladder. Ed. M. 1873. Page, 222. De Placilla (Migne. t. XLVI, col. 889 – 92). T. VI, 756. Creations M. 1855–1859. In Math. Hom. XXXIV, 3 (Migne. t. LVII, col. 402). De Lazaro. VII, 9 Migne. t. XLVIII, col. 1044. Creations. Translation by Karneev. St. Petersburg. 1847–50, vol. IV, 13. Creations. Kyiv. 1879, vol. I, 351. Bl. Augustine, vol. IV, 307. creations. Kyiv,. 1880. Advers. Maced. X (Migne t. XLV, col. 131. t. VII, 35. Vol. V. 307. Letters sent XIX. Creations, M. 1875. Ephraim Sir. vol. IV, 224. Word on those who have fallen asleep in Christ. Conversation IX, 5 on Last. Hebrews, Page 172. Liturgy of St. I. Chrysostom. De libert. mentis. VIII (Migne t. XXXIV, col. 941). Russian translation. M. 1852. Pp. 597. Gregory God. Vol. II, 25. Sl. 14. Ephraim Sir. vol. I, 280. Touching word 1st Wed. Bl. Augustine v. III, 386: "We are absolutely unable to thank Him properly for those blessings that we exist, that we live, that we see heaven, that we have mind and understanding, with the help of which we find Him Himself, who created all this. But what heart, what tongue is able to thank Him sufficiently for the fact that He did not completely abandon us, burdened and burdened with sins, turned away from His light and darkened by love for darkness, that is, to indecency, but sent to us His Word, which is His only begotten Son, so that we might learn from Him, who was born in the flesh and suffered for us, how highly God values man, so that by this one sacrifice we would be cleansed from all sins and so that, having received into our hearts the outpouring of love from the Holy Spirit, despite all the difficulties, we would achieve eternal peace and indescribable sweetness of vision. Him.” “This is what St. Gregory of Nyssa says (de beatud. or. VII. Migne. t. XLIV, col. 1280)” vol. II, 454), such a great Being (tw toiootf cai tosoutf pragmati), that it is impossible to see Him, nor to hear, nor to comprehend with a thought, is appropriated, imputed into nothing among beings, man - this ashes, this hay, this is vanity, he is accepted into a son (eiV uiou taxin) by the God of all. What can be found worthy of thanksgiving for this mercy? Where is such a word, such a thought, such a movement of thought to glorify such an abundance of mercy? Man goes beyond the limits of his nature, becomes immortal from mortal, immutable from perishing, eternal from ephemeral, in a word, from man God.” v. IV, 9 Spiritual Treasure, paragraph 3. Ephraim Sir. I, 45. A word to overthrow pride. t I, 223. Po. XXXII, 5. Ed. 3rd. 1891 De Lazaro VI, 9 (Migne, t. XLVIII, 1041). “To the People of Antioch” vol. I, 185. vol. II, 285. About true Christianity;. § 220. Same, vol. III., 319–320. Sl, 75. In Genes. Horn. XXV. 7 (Migne. t. LIII, col. 229). “Conversations on Genesis”, vol. II, 53 – 54. St. Petersburg. 1851–53. In I Corlnth. Hom.” XII, 2 (Migne t. LXI. col. 98) Against heresies, book. IV, 18.6. See the English translation in Clark's “Library” vol, V, p.436. In Rom. Hom. VIII, 7 (Migne, t. LX, 462–3). Russian translation Page, 176. In Genes Hom. XLII, 1 (Migne t. LIV, 38G). Translation, vol. Sh, 5 – 6. In Math. Hom. XVI, 1 (Migne. t. LVII, 251). Translation, M. 1886, vol. 1, 329–330. De stat. Hom. II, o (Migne. t. XLIX, 41). To Antiochus. t. I. 232. Zlatoust In. Genes. Hom. XXV, 7 (Migne. t. LIII, 228). T. II, 51–2. Tikhon Zadonsky. T. IV. 11. Spiritual treasure, paragraph 4. In Rom. Hom. XII. 2 (Migne. t. LX, col. 496). Translation Page 259. Gregory of Nyssa. In Psalm. I. 8. (Migne. t.. XLIV, col. 468). T. II, 4I. Creations. M, 1851–54. T. IV, 57. That is why, with a legal understanding of life, it is impossible to understand why the Word of God and all patristic literature insists with such force that a person is saved only by faith in Christ and only in the church. If, together with the Protestants, we say that outside of Christianity a person cannot be virtuous; then in response to this they will point out numerous traces of a virtuous life in paganism (although, of course, there is no completely complete example in paganism); in any case, the life of an ordinary Christian is not so sharply different from the life of a decent pagan that it is obvious why the first is more deserving of salvation than the second. Why does the Lord accept the first, but not the second? The publican was more sinful than the Pharisee, the thief committed, perhaps, many such deeds from which the scribes would have retreated with horror. Why are the first two pleasing to God, but the Pharisee and the scribes are not? There remains only one difference: believers recognize God as their Master, but unbelievers, etc. do not recognize God. For a lawyer, this reason is quite sufficient: the most important crime in a legal union is lese majeste. But our moral feeling is not calm when we apply the same to God: from Him we expect the highest justice, which values ​​a person’s actions according to their essence, and not according to this or any other relation to the Judge. T. III, 292. Word on Holy Baptism. Stromata. Book IV. 6., Clark's “Library” Vol. XII p. 152. Stromata. IV, XXII. Ibid. p. 203. T. III, 283. The same word. De vita Moys (interpret) Migne. T. XLIV, 429. Transl. T. 1, 378. To Antiochus. T. III, 63. About contrition. II, 13. St. Petersburg. 1848 In Rom. Hom. V, 7. (Migne. T LX, col. 431. Translation. pp. 95–98). To Antiochus. T. II. 327 – 28. About Repentance. Demon. IV, 3. Discourse XIII, 4 on the Epistle to the Hebrews. Page 233. T, IV, 36. Farewell Address 42. T. III, 312, On true Christianity, § 434. De beatud. orat. III. (Migne. t. XLIV, 1221). T. II, 389. Iu Io. Hom. LXXVII. 4 (Migne. t. LIX, col. 418). T. II, 390. Stromata. IV, VII. Clark's Library, vol. XII, p. 163. T. III 324. Creations. M. 1859–60 Ascetic words. Page 351. Ed. 1854 Sl. 56. T. VI, 118. About the city of B. book. Х1Х, 3. T. VI, 40. Compare: “The kingdom of heaven is contemplation.” Ibid Letter to the Caesarian monks. De mortuis. Migne. t. XLVI, col. 504–5. T. IV, 483. Cf. Gregory the Theologian vol. V, 345: "What is the kingdom? The contemplation of God, His praise and song together with the angels." Clement Alexander. Stromata IV, 22. Clark's Library, v, xii, 203. Ephraim the Syrian, See vol. IV, 421. Sl. 142. Gregory of Nyssa vol. II, 442 – 3. Wed. literal repetition in St. Athanasius V. on Matthew V, 8, volume IV, 478. T. V, 61 – 2. Word on asceticism 2nd. vol. II, 478. About the beatitudes. VIII. At Rev. Theophanes in “Inscriptions of Christian Moral Teaching.” Page 34 – 35. Ed. 1891 In. Cantic. cant. Horn. IX. Irenaeus Lyon. Against heresies, book. V. ch. XII, 4.Clarks Library. v. IX 85. Gregory, God. vol. 11, 37. Vasily V. T. IV, 345. Demon. 23rd. In Cant. cant. Hom. III (Migne. t. XLIV, col. 824). T. III, 79. De profess. christian. Migne. t. XLVI, col. 245. Clement Alex. Stromata. IV, 22. Clark's Library, v. XII, 203. vol. II, 397. Word 37 on the second coming. vol. IV, 416. Ps. CXVIII, 40. I. Zlatoust. In Rom. Horn. VIII. (Migne. t. LX, col. 456). Transl. page 159. Ep. Feofan. Letters to a person in St. Petersburg. St. Petersburg. 1881. Page 63. Letters on the Christian Life. St. Petersburg. 1880. p. 198. Orat. catech. With. V (Migne. t. XLV. col. 21). vol. IV, 15–16. The saint here explains the parable of the prodigal son. Feofan. Outline. Page 32. Gregory of Nyssa Inscription. Psalm. I, 1. v. 2. Aka Ibid. Migne. l. XL1V. col. 433. vol. II. 4. "The pagan sages, according to St. Basil the Great, indulged in speculation about the end of man, but they differed in the concept of this. Some argued that this end is knowledge; others - successful action; others - the varied use of life and body; and others, becoming bestial, said that this end is pleasure. But according to our teaching, the end for which we do everything and to which we strive is a blessed life in the next century. And the end This is achieved when we imagine God reigning over us. Reason has not yet invented anything better than this for rational nature.” vol. I, 289. Ps. XLVIII, 1. 1st ap 21. Ed. Preobrazhensky, pp. 59. About contrition I, 16. To Antiochus. vol. III, 18. Demon. V in Romans. Page 98–99. T. V, 153. Poems. “about humility.” Bl. Augustine. About the city B. book. X, 6, vol. IV, 112–113. Demon. on Ps. I. vol. I, 152 – 153. Ed. 1891 St. Gregory of Nyssa De profess, christ. Migne. t. XLVI, 244. Gregory of Nyssa. De virginit. With. XII. Migne. t. XLVI, col. 372 – 3 vol. VII, p. 345. In Psalm CXLIV, 1 (Migne. t. LV, col. 465). Inscription. Page 35 – 3G. Protestants need this idea to substantiate their teaching about the impossibility of communicating with saints, praying for the dead, etc. Instruction to monks vol. V, 59. On virtues and passions ibid. page 125. Ephraim the Syrian. Sl. 127 about repentance. Vol. V, 105. Hom. XLIV, 9. Migne. t. XXXIY. col. 785. Page 387. Vasily V. Ps. XLY, 5. vol. I, 282. De orat. II. Migne. t. XLIV. col. 1145. In Rom. Hom. KhSh, 8. Migne. t. LX. col. 519. Hom. XXXVI. 1. Migne. t. XXXIV, col. 749. Page 343. De patient., XX1X. Migne ib. col. 889. Page 539. Ephraim, Sirin. Plot. on Amos. IX, II. Vol. VIII, 163. On Life III, 22. Vol. VIII, 297. About the truth. Christ. book I, 199. vol. II, 260. About heresies book. I, 3. vol. II, 72. By connection of thoughts, I remember “Moralphilosophie” by Catlirein. a Jesuit, whose reasoning, as, so to speak, a sworn preacher of a legal understanding of life, can serve as a very suitable example for what has been said. 0 shower and sunday vol. IV, 259–261. Migne. t. XLVI, col. 88 Against heresies, book. IV, ch. XXXIX, 4. In English translation in Library Clark'o, vol. IX, 18. Against heresies, book. V, ch. 27 – 28. Library Clark vol. IX, 129 – 130– Ouc estin epein curiwV antidosin twn eu bebiocotwn genesJai thn thV zwhV metusian, cai thmwrian to empalin. To gar anagcaiwV epomenon antidosin ec catacrhsewV onomazomen. De infant. Migne. t. XLVI, col. 177. vol. IV, 342–345. De anima et resurr. Migne. ibid. col. 88 t. IV; 264 – 265. Ibid. col. 84. t. IV, 261. Hom XL1V, 5 (Migne. t. XXXIV, 781). Page 333. Hom XV, 2 (col. 576). Page 146. De perfect, in spirit, (col. 841). page 485. Hom. XXIV, 9 (col. 785). p.387. Sl. 142. vol. V, 418 – 419. 420. Word on words: Place, O Lord, in storage….. Sl. 69. vol. Ill, 29C – 7. This reasoning is literally repeated by Rev. Isaac S. Page 378 – 9 To Amphilochius. Ch. 9. Vol. III, 216 – 217. Plot. on Is. 1, 31. vol. II, 75. Demon. in EUR V I, 4. p. 118. In Rom. Horn. X, 3 (Migne. t. LX col. 478). Paideuomenoi eiV to genesJai epithreioi eiV thn twn mellontwn agaJwn upodochn. Page 214. On ps. LXXVII, 45–47. Library, vol. VI. 426. Ephraim Sir. Sl. 141, 27. t. V, 313 Letters to one person. page 106. Razg. with Trif. 47. p. 219. (Published by Preobrazhensky). 1st Apol. 15. Ibid. page 51. Demon. 9. God is not the author of evil. T. IV, 137. Ed. 1892. Macarius Egypt. On storing the heart II. page 464. Stromata. IV, XXII. Clark'e Library vol. XII, b. 152. Razg. with Trif. 86. Page 292. Ed. Preobrazhensky. Sl. 117. Instruction for monks, vol. V. 65. Ps. 44. 8 vol. IV. 171–172. St. Tikhon of Zadonsk. vol. 11. 59. Gregory of Nyssa De orat Migne t. XLIV, 1189). vol. I, 466. I. Zlatoust. De stat. Hom. XII, 2. Migne. XLIX. 130. Irenaeus L. Against heresies, book. IV, chapter XXXVII, 6.7. Library Clark vol. IX, 40. Odc estin anagch caloneinai. I. Zlatoust. In. I Corinth. Hom. II. 3 Migne. t. LXI, col. 21. Aka Ibid. Horn XIV, 3. vol. I, 245. Kirill Iepyc. Catech. I, 3. Migne t. XXXIII, col. 373. Isidore Pelusiot. vol. I, 394. Irenaeus L. Against heresies, book. IV, ch. XXVII, 2. Clark's Library. vol. V, 468. Gregory of Nyssa. Contra Eun. erat. III. Migne t. XLV, col. 609. 2 Cor. Demon. XI. Page 161. Sunday Canon 8th Tone. Song 4. Ephraim the Syrian. Funeral chant. 12. t. VI, 32. Ephraim the Syrian. Sl, 99. About repentance. vol. IV, 169. Rev. Feofan. Interpretation on Rom. vol. 1, 334. Isidore Pelusiot. vol. II, 436. Ta prwta exaleifetai. Kirill Jerusalem. Catech. XV, 23 Migne t. XXXIII, 904. The infant, as not yet using his will at all, is renewed under the indispensable condition of being raised in Christianity Wed. The rites of confession. Procatech. (Migne t. XXXIII, col. 336. Catech. 1, 3. Migne. ibid. col 372 – 373. Pracatech. I–V. col. 332–341. Page 11 – 14. Catech. I, 2, col. 372. pp. 20–21. Catech. XYII, 36. Ibid. col. 1009–1012. Page 323. Procatech. VIII, Minge. t. XXXIII, col. 345 – 348. Catech. USh, 15. p. 4". [ Brief rules 12. vol. V, 200 – 201. On Is. I, 14. vol. 11, 49. Be vita Moys. (interpret.). Migne. t. XL1Y, col. 382. Publicity sl. Ch. 40 vol. IV, 106–107. Orat. catech. XXXV. Migne. t. XLV, 89. t. IV 92 In Eccles. Horn. VII, Migne. t. XLIV, 725. vol. II, 326. I Cor. Demon. XI, 2. vol. II, 363–364. In Rom. Horn. X, 5. Migne. t. LX, 481. In Ioan. Horn. 1, 3, Migne. t. LIX, 28. vol. I, 11. On Rom. Demon. X. Page 219. In EUR Demon. IV, 2. Page. 162 About worship in spirit. book 3rd. vol. I, 146. Trif. 141. Ed. Preobrazhensky. Page 378 – 379. Against heresies, book. IV, ch. XLT, 3: Clark's Library vol. IX, 52. Letters to one person Page. 70 – 71 Letters to one person. Page 97. Interpretation of Rom. vol. I, 332. St. Tikhon Rear. vol. IV, 281. Hom. XXVII, Migne. t. XXX1V, 709. Page 292. In Cant. cant. Hom. XI. Migne. t. XL IV, 1008. vol. III, 287. In Rom. Hom. XXIV, 4. Migne. t. LX, 627. In I Corinth. Hom. VIII, 4. Migne t. LXL 72. T. I, 143. T. IIL 317. Morals. right 20.2. Demon. XI on the Song of Songs. vol. III, 283 – 287. De profess, christ. Migne. t. XLVI, 244. Plot. on Is. VI, 1 – 3. Vol. VI. 182. About worship in spirit, book. 15. vol. III, 142. Letters on the Christian Life. Additions. Page 235. Interpretation on Rom. vol. I, 331 – 332. Ephraim Sir. Sl. 10. vol. I, 296. Sl. 99. According to ed. 1818–5 vol. IV, 175–176. Orat. catech, XXXV. Migne t. XLV, 89. Kirill Jerusalem. Catech. III, 15. Migne. t. XXXIII, col. 445. It's him. Catech. Y1I, 13. col. 620. I. Zlatoust. In Genes. XIX, 1. Migne. t. III, 159. Hom. XXXVII. 10. Page 352. Interpretation on Rom. YI, 4. vol. 1, 334. Feofan. Letters to one person. Page 76. I. Zlatoust. In Rom. Hom. XI1I, 7. Migne. t. LX, 483, Page. 229. Gregory of Nyssa. Sl. Ogl. Ch. 40. vol. IV, 107. Interpretation in Romans. VI, 4. vol. I, 334. Publicity sl. 40. vol. IV, 107. – Letters on the Christian Life, pp. 176 – 177. In Rom. Hom. XI. (Migne. t. LX, 483). Page 229. In. loann. Hom. X, 3 (Migne. t. LIX, 76). vol. I, 1–22 – 123. 0 worship in the spirit of the book, 17. vol. Ill, 250 – 251. Hom. XII, 8 (Migne t. XXXIV, 561). page 128. Hom. XXVI, 23 (Migne. ib. 689) pp. 273–274. In loan. Hom. L. 3. (Migiie. t. LIX, 282. Christ. Reading. 1842. Vol. IV. 480 – 481. Vasily V. Interpretation. on Ps. V, 19. vol. II, 186. Feofan. Letters to one person. Page 57. In Psalm. I, 8 (Migne t. XLIV 477). Vol. II. 50–51 Ephraim Sir. Sl. 99. vol. IV, 191. “Living faith is the gift of God, and is like a certain Divine seed, which is infused into everyone who is baptized at baptism” Vol. I, 71. Plot. on Ps. XII, 7. t. IV, 166. De Bapt. Migne. t. XLVI, 429. vol. VII, 448–449. Isaac Sir. Sl. 46 Page 239. De perfect, form. Migne. t. XLVI, 261. vol. VII, 234–235. • Horn. XXVI, 25 (Sligne t. XXXIV. 692). Page 275. vol. II, 58. Interpretation. on Is. I, 18. On the last to Ephesus. XVI, 1 p. 274. About the purpose of life according to God vol. VII, 272. Gregory of Nyssa. in Cant. cant. Horn. V (Migne. t. XLIV, col. 873). Vol. III. Hom. V, 10 (Migne. t. XXXIV, 505), p. 65. Letters to one person. Page 26 – 27. Gregory Nisski. De beatad. or. V (Migne. t. XLIV, 1252). Ephraim the Syrian. Confession. vol. I, 234. Macarius Egypt. Hom. XXVI, 18: “Opou ecei ton scspon d nouV, cai dpou agapa, exei procwpei” (Migne t. XXXIV, 685). Page 269. Teacher I, IV. Librarv Clark'a. vol. IV, 135. “God, says St. I. Chrysostom, not only saved but also justified and led to praise, not needing our works, but demanding faith alone (In Rom. Hom. VII 4. Migne t. LX, 446 p. 134). “Do not tell me: again hopes, remove expectations, faith again (after baptism). Through this you were saved in the beginning; this is the only wine you brought to the Bridegroom. So observe it and keep it" (Horn. X1V, 6. Ibid col. 532. P. 349). St. Tikhon of Zadonsk: “The Son of God came to save sinners, not such and such, but all kinds, no matter what, if only they repented and believed in the sinners who came to save Jesus Christ: and paradise is opened to them by the hand of the cross of the crucified Christ. Repent then, you sinner, and believe in this holy and sweet gospel, and without a doubt you will enter paradise with the thief” (vol. IV, p. 18X Basil the Great “This is perfect and complete praise of God, when a person is not exalted by his righteousness, but knows that he does not have true righteousness, and is justified by faith in Christ alone (Demon. XX. vol. IV, 290). Gregory the Theologian “Truly, there is nothing richer than grace. You do not need, says Scripture, to ascend into heaven to draw Christ from there, nor to descend into the abyss to bring Him out from there from the dead, curious either about the first nature or about the last economy. Near it is said, the verb is. This treasure has a mind and a tongue: the first, the last believes, if he confesses. What is more bearable than this wealth? Which gift is easier to acquire? Confess Christ and believe that he raised their dead; and you will be saved. For to believe alone is already justification, to confess and add boldness to knowledge is perfect salvation” (vol. III, p. 156). Gregory of Nyssa: “Then we were expelled from paradise for disobedience, but now by faith we dwell in paradise” (in Chtisti resurr. or. IV. Migne. t. XLVI, col. 684. vol. VIII, p. 90). Or even more decisively: One cannot be a participant in good things except if faith in Christ gives what one desires” (Contra Ennom. Iib. XII. Migfte t. XLV, col. 925. t. VI, 284). Cyril of Alexandria: “Those who are moving away from worldly life and demonic dominion, as if from some Egyptian land, should be led to sanctification and hope in God by a direct and completely short path - faith in Christ and justification in Him (vol. 1, 138). Neil of Sinai: “On the day of judgment we ourselves will be our own accusers, convicted by our own conscience. Therefore, in this extremity, will we find any other protection or help other than faith in the most loving Lord Christ? This faith is our great defense, great help, security and boldness and answer for those who have become unrequited due to the unspeakable multitude of sins. For during our struggle and immeasurable fear, the remembrance of the beloved Master, Christ, and the firmly rooted and unshakable faith in Him, appearing like some kindly, peaceful, bright and meek angel, drives away trembling and shame, fills with complacency, makes the alienated one close to God" (vol. III, 368 - 369). "And to believe in Christ The Savior is justification, but to confess with His lips is perfect salvation” (vol. II, 261). Cyprian, Carthage: “Truth stands by faith and from here comes life” (vol. II, 18). At Klee in Dogmatik. Bd. III, 22. Anm. In Rom. Horn. V, 4, i.e. in the very work where St. teaches about the one saving faith. I. Chrysostom says: “You cannot rely on faith alone: at that judgment seat your deeds will also be weighed (Migne t. LX, col. 425. p. 83) “Confession will be not only by faith, but also by deeds, so if there is no latter, we are in danger of being punished along with those who reject the Lord” (De Anna. III, 5. Migne t. LIV, col. 659. Discourses to the People of Antioch, vol. II, 64). Gregory the Theologian: Just as deeds without faith are not acceptable, because many do good for the sake of glory and out of natural disposition, so faith without works is dead. And do not let any of the people flatter you with vain words, who willingly allow everything under one condition: that you adhere to wicked teachings and offer a bad reward for the worst. So show faith by works, show the fertility of your land (vol. II, 289). Gregory of Nyssa: in the same Contra Eunom. lib III: “Stones become children of Abraham when through faith and deeds they establish kinship with him” (Migne t. XLV, 605). “Faith requires the companionship of its sister good life, which may we be rewarded with the good will and help of God” (De Baptism. Migne t. XLVI, col. 432. t. VII, 450). Cyril of Alexandria: “Just as faith without works is dead, so, on the contrary, beauty and honesty in deeds are completely dead, if there is no knowledge of God and the word consistent with piety has not taken up residence in our souls” (vol. III, 88). Cyril of Jerusalem: “Abraham was justified not only by works, but also by faith” (Catech. V, 5). Migne t. XXXIII, 512). Neil of Sinai: “Love of wisdom is the correction of morals with the true knowledge of Existence” (vol. II, 3). “Because of your great faith and good deeds, the Spirit dwells in you” (vol. III, p. 115). Theodoret: “Faith alone is not sufficient for salvation, but work and perfection are needed” (vol. I, 147 – 148). “At the coming of the Savior, not everyone receives salvation, but those who believe and live according to His Divine laws” (vol. VI, 49 – 50). Isidore Pelusiom: Will virtue not be dead, not animated by faith, as if by the soul? And how will faith appear without virtue by which it acts? Just as a skilled musician, if he does not have a lyre, will not show his skill, so piety, which is not demonstrated through deeds as through instruments, appears to be dead and ineffective, not only according to the judgment of worldly scientists, but also according to the words of the Divine Scriptures, for it is said: faith without works is dead" (Vol. III, 237 - 238). Finally, Tikhon of Zadonsk: "One should not conclude from carnal wisdom that when tuna is alone By faith, and not by good deeds, good things are obtained from God, then good deeds are also indecent. This opinion is erroneous. Whoever has such an opinion has no faith, because where there are no good deeds, there is no faith, which is known from good deeds, like a tree from its fruit... For this reason, we must have faith and testify to it with good deeds, so that by faith we will receive God’s promise” (vol. II, p. 350). Kirill Jerusalem. Catech. V, 10 (Migne. t. XXXI1I, col. 417). Irenaeus. Against heresies, book. III, ch. III, h. Library Clark vol. V, pag. 262. Gregory of Nyssa. Adveps. Maced. XV (Migne t. XLV, col. 1320): Auih esiin h morjh iou cata io musihrion memorjwmenou. I. Zlatoust In loan. Horn. LXXXII, 1 (Migne. t LIX, 443). At Klee's. Dogmatik. Bd. III, 22. Anm. In dicta Pauli: nolo vos ignore... Ephraim Sir. cl. 41 on heretics vol. III, 77. Interpretation on Isa. IX, 1 – 7. Vol. II. 257 – 258. vol. III, 10. Wed. p. 64; 147. Meditation XII. vol. 1, 197. About true Christianity 283. vol. III, 11. About true Christianity. § 283. Vol. III, 15. I. Chrysostom On the 1st Epistle to Thessalus. Demon. IX, 4. Page. 151. On John. Demon. XXVIII, 3. I, 325. On the letter to Col. Demon. II, 4. p. 30. I. Zlatoust In Genes. Hom. XIX, I. Migne t. LIII, 158. vol. I, 327. Commentary on Luke. VIII, 50. vol. IV, 503. Letters, book. IV, 25. vol. III, 416. In Math. Hom. X, 2. Migne. t. LVII, 186. vol. I, 173. Sl. 141. 4. t. V, 217 – 218. On true Christianity § 340. vol. III, 125. Neil of Sinai. Letters, book. II, 218. Vol. III, 127. I. Chrysostom on the Epistle to Heb. Demon. XXIII, I. Sir. 356. Neil of Sinai. Letters, book. II, 218 vol. III, 127. Hom. XXXVII, 20. Migne. t. XXXIV, 708. Page. 292–293. Ascetic charters ch. I. vol. V, 354. Migne t. XXXI. 1337. De Lazaro VI, 9. Migne. t. XLVIII, 1041. To Antiochus. adv. Vol. I. 185. Tikhon Zadon. Cell letters 11. vol. V, 8. Gregory of Nyssa. Advers. Maced. XIX. Migne t. XLV, 1325. t. VII, 48. Against heresies, book. IV. Ch. VI, 2. Clark's Library. vol. V, 389. On 1 Tim. Demon. II. Page 25–26. Spiritual treasure p. 139. vol. IV. 348. Homily on the Day of the Assumption vol. I, 69. About true Christianity 283. vol. III, 14. Isaac the Syrian, Word 85. p. 493. Ephraim the Syrian. Sl. 152, 12. t. VI 361–3. On Worship in the Spirit, book. 6 vols. I, 291. A lesson to the Egyptian monks. 25th vol. II, 186. Spiritual treasure, etc. 77. vol. IV, 150. In Math. Hom. XXXIII, 2. Migne. t. LVII, 390. vol. II, 77. Clement of Alexandria. Stromata. book II, ch. XII. Clark's Library. vol. XII, 34. Kirill Iepyc. Catech. V, 4. Page 75. Migne. t. XXXIII, 509. Clement Alex. Stromata. book V. ch. XIII. Library Clark a. vol. XII, b. 272. Catech. II, 3. Migne t. XXXIII, 385. p. 26. Epist. II. Migne. t. XXXIV, 420. Page. 438. Spiritual treasure, paragraph 139, volume IV, 348. Christ. Reading. 1838 vol. I, 81. Letters to one person. Page 99. Instruction to monks vol. V, 63 – 64. Against heresies, book. V, ch. XI, 1. Clark's Library. vol. IX, 81. This concentrated meaning of faith is presented very well and correctly by Rev. Theophan in the second part of his “Inscriptions of Christian Moral Teaching”. The meaning of life, so to speak, its main spring, rests here in the constant vision of God, in the consciousness of one’s spiritual union with Him. This presupposes a certain degree of moral development, and in turn serves as a spring from which all the variety of spiritual life is born. Akathist to the Most Holy Theotokos. You might be interested in: