Состояние учения в церкви апостольской

I. The state of teaching in the apostolic church in general. II. Monuments of teaching in the Apostolic Church. III. Exposition of the apostolic teaching. IV. Overview of its teaching in the Apostolic Church I. The State of Teaching in the Apostolic Church in General The time of service of the apostles was intended by the Builder of the Church to reveal, establish and replenish the truths of the new religion given by Him to the human race. Leaving his earthly career, the Heavenly Teacher still had many things that he felt obligated to tell his chosen disciples, but could not due to their weakness: the imam still has many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now (John 16:12). For more than three years, almost constantly addressing them both in public instructions and in secret friendly conversations, He communicated to them the first fundamental truths of His teaching, which gradually should have led them to further conclusions, but the most important and most difficult for their imperfect understanding either completely left, or hid for memory under the cover of allegory. If His closest servants were so little capable of fully understanding their Teacher, then all the less could this be expected from those who had less opportunity to listen to Him and were honored with less power of attorney. Thus, the work of religion, taken upon Himself by Jesus Christ, at the end of His earthly ministry clearly seemed insufficient, only the beginning and foundation of a magnificent building. For the completion of this building, as a spiritual work, Jesus Christ, Whom they saw in the flesh, and understood according to the flesh (2 Cor. 5:16), leaving the earth, promised to send His Spirit to the prepared workers, who, being the Spirit of power, had to shake in them all opposition between the mind, not yet completely alien to general prejudices, and the will, not yet cleansed from natural corruption; being the Spirit of wisdom, he had to drive away the innate darkness of the soul and completely illuminate before them both the duties of their service and the whole range of truths that they were supposed to proclaim; being the Spirit of fortress, he had to give them the necessary firmness and wisdom in the performance of these duties against many obstacles; being the Spirit of the fear of God, he had to restrain their will from their own creeping towards the untruth of the gospel: when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all truth (John 16:13). After His resurrection, He Himself began this work of the Spirit by explaining to them from all the scriptures, beginning from Moses and from all the prophets who spoke of Him (Luke 24:27), and in general by opening their minds to understand the Scriptures (24:45). Then he soon fulfilled the promise of the Spirit. Then all the verbs of Jesus, whose goals and relationships to themselves they had not previously easily comprehended, were remembered in the minds of the divinely enlightened; all His hints and instructions that had hitherto irritated their curiosity were resolved; their thoughts freely soared of their own accord to the highest mysteries of the kingdom of God; The Holy Spirit internally proclaimed to them the whole will of the Heavenly Father. They realized the height of their own destiny, saw the blindness of the human race, which expects enlightenment from them; their heart responded with fiery zeal for the calling of God, and they all offered themselves for the benefit of their brothers. Then, with the weapon of the mind, illuminated by the highest light, they rush against the false gods and wickedness of the pagans, with the sword of the word of God - against the fierce unbelief of the Jews, in order to captivate everyone into the obedience of faith, instead of slavery, to lead the children of God into freedom. In the same teaching, they deliver to everyone the food they need according to their strength, from infants, newborns in Christ, to mature men. To the greater glory of the grace of the Lord, who shares with everyone both gifts, and ministries, and actions for the benefit of everyone - and those who receive truths from them themselves receive the power to be instruments of their further dissemination, receiving from the outpouring of the Spirit either the gift of teaching, or language, or revelation, or telling (1 Cor. 14:26), so that before the harvest was many, but the workers were few, but now it was necessary to convince the believers, but not many there are teachers (James 3:1). When the Divine teaching in all the most necessary parts was already sufficiently revealed, approved and explained; when the word of Christ, having taken up residence in some, was so deeply rooted, so embraced their entire spirit, so embedded itself in their mind and heart, that even without direct Divine instruction, only with the help of this omnipotent word they were sufficient to teach (2 Tim. 2:2): then the source of immediate revelations and insights little by little began to shrink, and the dissemination of Christian teaching, as well as its explanation, became the responsibility of some rank people began to approach more ordinary paths. The Spirit of God, taking its living organs from the earth, gave them teachers of the church, but, so to speak, already naturally nourished with its own milk. However, the close proximity of all teachers to the first God-inspired preachers of the teachings of Christ, close contact with them, as well as deep knowledge of the secrets of the inner life, implanted and developed by experience in man, imparted to their words a certain special loftiness, simplicity and truth - it was the evening reflection of the rays of the sun of truth on the day of its most luminous appearance. This is the form in which the teaching of the apostles and the so-called apostolic men appears to us. II. Monuments of teaching in the Apostolic Church Monuments of the teachings of both have reached us. From the first, that is, from the monuments of the teachings of the apostles, a certain number of undoubted Divine origins were accepted by the Church as a permanent rule of belief and activity of Christians. This is the point, first: the four Gospels. And to testify to the conformity of his teaching with the teaching of Jesus Christ to the apostles, and for constant guidance in life, accurate and complete knowledge of the life and teachings of Jesus Christ was necessary for every believer. The four canes of four spirit-driven men depicted for us certain features of this great image, attempting to present in the tight frames of human words with the height and greatness of the nature of the Divine Redeemer, the humiliation and weakness of His human nature. Everything in this picture is Divine - light, shadow, word, and silence. Secondly: the book of the Acts of the Apostles, the second book of the new Testament. Beginning with the history of the ascension of the Lord, it contains the history of the first attractions of the peoples in the wake of Him who was ascended from the earth, according to the promise. The writers and the authenticity of these five books, which constitute the first historical part of the New Testament religion, are known and cannot be doubted. Thirdly: seven conciliar messages of moral and spiritual content, fourteen of Paul’s, covering primarily the dogmatic part of Christian teaching. According to the remark of Bl. Jerome, the first are as mysterious as they are compressed; they are short, he says, and extensive; short in words and extensive in rules, so that there are few people who completely comprehend them. The same church teacher in the latter hears not speeches, but thunders. Read, he says, the epistles of Paul, especially to the Romans, Galatians and Ephesians, where he is presented entirely in exploits, and you will see in the evidence he borrows from the Old Testament how skillful he is, how prudent, how secretive he is in his actions. It seems his words are simple, as if he were speaking ignorant and ingenuous; as if he doesn’t know how to either set or avoid nets: but no matter where you look, there’s all lightning. He is slow, but he takes everything he touches; turns back, but to win; pretends to run, but to kill. Of these (21) messages, some were not always or not by everyone attributed to those whose names they bear, and therefore were sometimes excluded from the Holy Canon. These are the essence: the Epistle of James, the second Peter, the second and third John, the epistle of Jude and the epistle of Paul to the Hebrews. Let's reveal the truth here. About the Epistle of James, Eusebius (historical book 2, chapter 23) writes this way: “the first of the so-called conciliar epistles is attributed to St. James, although some consider it inauthentic and counterfeit, and only a few of the ancient writers mention it.” Jerome (in the catalog of church writers) says: “they assure that this epistle was not written by James, but by someone else under the name of James, although over time it acquired importance equal to the others.” This is what antiquity opposes to the opinion about the authenticity of this message: but it is obvious that this evidence does not contain anything decisive in favor of the opposite opinion. Eusebius agrees that some of the ancients mention this message as genuine: the silence of others, of course, does not prove, but does not refute this. Against Jerome one can put many decrees of councils and the testimonies of as many ancient Fathers of the Church, from which it is clear that this message was accepted in the canon of St. books not otherwise than under the name of Jacob. The reason for doubting the authenticity of the apostolic origin of this letter may be given by the apparent contradiction of the teaching about faith contained in it with the teaching of Paul about the same. But this contradiction, upon careful examination, disappears by itself. Among the reasons why they do not agree to recognize the epistle of Peter, known under the name of the second, are: 1) the fact that it differs from the first in syllables, as Jerome also noted (in Catalogo); 2) that even in ancient times it was not accepted by everyone as such, as Eusebius writes (Histor. Eccl. L. III, p. XXV et L. VI, p. XXV); 3) that this epistle, or at least the last chapter of it, according to Grotius, which constitutes a special epistle, should be written after the destruction of Jerusalem: for it says that the last day of the world is near - which, says Grotius, none of the ancient Christians expected before the destruction of Jerusalem. And it is known that Peter died during the reign of Nero, when Jerusalem had not yet been taken. But these reasons are not so strong as to give anyone the right to take away this message from St. Peter: for in 1) the difference in style of this epistle from the first is not such as to force one to look for another writer for it. In both, on the contrary, brevity with special strength and majesty is visible - the well-known character of the word ap. Petra. It is necessary to take into account the age of the writer - this second epistle was written by him before the end of his life in old age (1:14) and the subject of the epistle (more prophetic and accusatory) is different from the first (more morally edifying). Jerome explained this difference in the style of the two epistles attributed to Peter by the fact that Peter did not write them himself, but entrusted them to one of his employees, and it could happen that these two epistles were written by more than one. (Et duae epistolae, quae feruntur Petri, stylo inter se et charactere discrepant structuraque verborum. Ex quo intelligimus, pro necessitate rerum diversis eum usum interpretibus). 2) The assumption that Chapter III. Peter's second epistle is a new epistle, as well as the basis for this assumption that Peter could not write to Christians to convince Christians of patience and constant waiting for the Lord about the nearness of the day of the Lord before the destruction of Jerusalem - are not important in themselves: the first because in this case the previous of these two epistles should have had the usual concluding, and the subsequent introductory formula. Secondly, because even admitting that the ancient Christians believed the coming of the day of the Lord not earlier than the destruction of Jerusalem, there is no reason not to admit the need to write about the first, when signs of the approach of the latter were already revealed and when in the concept of the Jews, and hence the Christians from the Jews, these two events should have been very close to each other. 3) What really is the writer of this epistle? Peter, this is obvious from the epistle itself: a) the name of St. Peter is the title of the letter (1:1); b) the writer calls himself a witness of the greatness of Jesus during his glorification on the holy mountain (1:16, 17, 18); c) ap. Paul is his beloved brother (3:15); d) he writes this second letter to the Jews (3:1). 4) Clement of Alexandria in the book of instructions (ύποτοπώσεων) attributes it to Peter, followed by Gregory of Nazianzen, Jerome, Augustine, Epiphanius. The second and third epistles of John are not recognized by some as his authentic writings, since the writer calls himself John not an apostle, but a presbyter, and in Ephesus, where John the Theologian lived for the most part and ruled the church, there really was a presbyter John. But 1) Clement of Alexandria (Stromat.). 2) refers to more, i.e. the first letter of John; This means that it admits at least one more of these two lesser ones. In the book ύποτοπώσεων (according to Eusebius Histor. VI, 14), the same Clement includes them among the canonical books of St. Scriptures together with other conciliar messages. Tertullian refers to the second Epistle of John as canonical (de Car. Christi p. 24). Origen says that in his time there were doubts about the writer of these epistles, but he attributes them to John. 2) The title of a writer as a presbyter may not be alien to an apostle, as the eldest in the church, which actually means πρεσβύτερος, and can hardly be produced from the humility of a beloved disciple of Christ. Objections to the authenticity of the epistle of Judah are usually borrowed from the epistle itself: 1) here is a prophecy of Enoch, which Moses does not have and which is considered to be taken from the forged writings of Enoch, known in later times among the Jews. - But nothing prevented a man enlightened by God from introducing into his work such historical words or actions that are not mentioned in the previous books of Holy Scripture - (as, for example, the Apostle Paul does when he mentions John and Jambres 2 Tim. 3:8), when he could not doubt the historical authenticity either by the unanimous testimony of traditions, or by the inner assurance of the Spirit. 2) Here we speak about the debate between the Archangel Michael and the devil about the body of Moses, which - they think - is borrowed from the heretical book περί άναλήψεως Μοϋσέως mentioned by Origen. The answer to this is the same. – 3) Judas, to confirm his words, refers to the words of the other apostles: but to point to the fulfillment of the prophecies of any inspired writer, even a New Testament one, is neither shameful nor low for an inspired writer. There are a lot of conflicting opinions about the writer of Hebrews. From the comparison of these, it is revealed: a) that the Apostle Paul could have been its writer, although he did not put his name at the beginning of the epistle, because being hated by the Jews to whom he wrote, he considered it most useful to remain silent about it completely; b) that this epistle, by its origin, belongs to the times of the apostles, is clear from the fact that St. Clement and the most ancient writers mention it; c) that all the Greek churches and most of the Latin churches recognized it as canonical; d) that although some in the Roman Church, and perhaps in the African Church, doubted it; but even in these very churches there were writers who recognized it as canonical; doubts were born in the 3rd century, and in the 5th century. stopped; e) the Greek fathers never doubted that this epistle was exactly Paul's, at least in thought or in the original: only some thought that it was written at the dictation of Paul or Luke, or Clement of Rome, or Barnabas, and others that it was translated from Hebrew into Greek by one of these three; f) in the Latin Church they were more hesitant to attribute it to Paul; on the contrary, they learned it either from Luke, or Barnabas, or Clement; g) finally, taking all the evidence in complexity, we will find more churches and writers in favor of Paul. If, without stopping at the testimony of the ancients, we look for the writer in the epistle itself, then we will find circumstances that cannot befit anyone but Paul. It seems that this message was written 1) from Italy, since greetings are sent to the Jews from the Italian brethren (Heb. 13:24); 2) written by a person who was in prison but awaiting release (10:34; 13:19); 8) a person who had Timothy as his companion and fellow prisoner (13:23). These three circumstances are not suitable for anyone except Paul. There are also places in this epistle where Paul’s character is indicated very clearly: he defends himself, citing his conscience as testimony (13:18 - Acts 23:1; 2 Cor. 1:12), asks for their prayers (Rom 13:18 - Col. 4:3), promises to see their face and greets them (13:23) according to custom. Finally, one can clearly see that this message does not belong to any of those persons who, besides Paul, are assimilated: not to Luke, since he did not have so much importance as to write to the Jews like that; the style of this epistle is very different from the style of Luke; Hebrew phrases are very common here; it seems that the writer was very knowledgeable in the rituals and mysteries of the Jews - which cannot be said about Luke, who was a pagan by origin; nor to Barnabas: of the ancients, only Tertullian gives this epistle under his name; Moreover, it differs in syllable from the original message of Barnabas, which is much more imperfect and less sublime than this; It is also unknown whether Barnabas lived in Italy and whether he was a prisoner there. It would be most fitting to attribute this epistle to Clement because of the similarity in style and character with his epistle to the Corinthians. It’s as if he’s trying to imitate the Epistle to the Hebrews, but there’s more than one syllable; the matter of the epistle to the Hebrews and the manner of presentation are different; Clement would not have spoken to the Jews with such importance; he would not have delved deeply into the rituals and secrets of the Jews. After all this, we have the right to conclude that this epistle was written by Paul. However, they also object that 1) its syllable differs from the syllable of Paul’s other epistles. All his other messages bear the same character, but this one is much more elevated than them, written in more selective terms, in a more even style; Not so many Jewish phrases are found here; there are terms that are not in other messages (αίώνες). To this we can answer that the writer’s style is not always the same; that Paul labored more on this epistle than on the others; that the subject of this message is much higher than others and that since those to whom he wrote are much more accurate and educated than the readers of his other messages, he himself was obliged to rise above his ordinary speech; 2) this apparently contradicts είς ήμάς Heb. 3:3. But this word should be understood per άνακοίνωσιν. Fourth: the Apocalypse, the wonderful history of the future destinies of the church, the last book of the New Testament, corresponding to the first of the Old, containing at the end, as it did at the beginning, a description of the new heaven and the new earth. Its writer, despite the doubts of some, is the Apostle John, which is clear: 1) from the text of the book; his name appears here (1:9); here he calls himself the witness of the Word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ and the great form (1:2, which especially befits him. John 19:35; 21:24; 1 John 1:1, 2, 3); adds that he was in an island called Patmos (1:9). 2) From the style and expressions found here, which actually belong to John; These are the essence of the name: Word, Lamb; expressions: who washed us from our sins with His blood (1:5 fn. 1 John 1:7); His own perforation (1:7 fn. John 19:37). 3) From the testimony of the ancients: Justin, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Epiphanius, etc. This is contrasted with: 1) the unusual thing for John in the gospel and epistles, and here the often encountered calling oneself by one’s own name: this becomes clear from the special need to verify through this the truth of one’s words - for a prophetic book, as we see with other prophets. To certify the truth of any prophecy, the name of a prophet is much more important than the name of a historian or writer to certify a historical truth that is known to everyone, or to confirm a teaching that has already been sufficiently revealed by others. This is explained by the example of other Old Testament prophets, especially Daniel: az Daniel ... 2) The difference in syllable, which, however, is also explained by the difference in content and the difference in speakers. 3) The omission in the catalog of canonical books from Dorotheus and the doubts about it by Anastasia, Dionysius of Alexandria and Eusebius are either unimportant or sinful from their own misunderstandings about 1000 years. Here is the entire composition of the books devoted to the church by the apostles! Despite the differences in writers, their particular goals, the particular circumstances of those to whom they wrote, the subjects they wrote about, they set out with amazing completeness and agreement the entire teaching of faith and piety and taught everything necessary to achieve eternal salvation for every Christian soul. But at the same time, like St. the apostles, moved by the Holy Spirit, compiled their Divine Scriptures for the benefit of the church, and when these Scriptures, having been separately given to different churches, had not yet been collected and put into such an order in which they could be introduced into general use; Some of the Christians, wanting to preserve for themselves and for subsequent times the acts and teachings of Jesus Christ and his apostles in greater purity than how they could be preserved in oral tradition, also began to conclude them in letters. So St. Luke, beginning his gospel, notes that many at that time had already begun to describe the events of the life of Jesus Christ and, he notes, to describe according to tradition from self-visionists and ministers of the Word. But Matthew, perhaps, and Mark did not write according to tradition from the self-visionists, being themselves self-visionaries and servants of the Word, traces. Luke does not mean them here; he alludes to such writers whose biographies of Jesus Christ lacked either completeness, criticism, or order: it was decided, he says, that after an accurate study of everything, I should first describe everything in order... With such shortcomings, there really should have been these private collections of legends about some of the incidents and teachings of Jesus Christ and the original spreaders of Christianity. Everyone wrote down what they heard; and in the time of the apostles there were those who did not purely preach the word of God: one could collect more, and another less: the preachers did not always offer their instructions to everyone in the same completeness and breadth, hastening to embrace all the countries of the world with the first news of the Divine teaching, the fullest revelation of which they represented with their writings. Further, some of these, wishing to add more importance to their collections, or out of simple zeal for the most successful dissemination of the gospel, put at the beginning of their works the name of one of the apostles and so issued them for use by others; Subsequently, such freedom was extended much further: some of the heretics began to deliberately distort traditions about the life and teaching of Jesus Christ and the apostles, impose their opinions on them, and compose messages unprecedented from them. And of course, if the teaching and deeds of Jesus Christ and the apostles had not previously, by the inspiration of the Spirit, been preserved in all purity and truth in the Scriptures of the Divine Apostles, or if, at the time when the traditions about this teaching and deeds began to become so damaged, it had not immediately begun to collect and testify to the Divine dignity of these authentic apostolic writings: Christianity would be mired in a multitude of absurd inventions. The spirit of darkness was transformed into all types of the angel of light: new gospels, new acts, new messages, a new apocalypse were written: but the church, having from God the Spirit the gift of distinguishing spirits, sacredly observed the Divine, separated the human from it, and put the seal of rejection on the satanic. Some of these forged works have reached us, some intact, others in fragments, and most of them are known only by their names. Among all, the first place in terms of its great proximity to the pure sources of gospel history deserves 1) the Gospel of the Jews or Nazarenes. It is nothing more than the Gospel of Matthew, multiplied and changed in places in the Syro-Chaldean language. Its origin is explained in this way: it is known that Matthew wrote his gospel to Jews who had converted to Christianity and lived in Jerusalem. Before Jerusalem was destroyed, the Christians withdrew and brought it with them to Pella. Most of them, still holding on to Judaism a little, formed the sect of the Ebionites. It was then that the Gospel of Matthew from some - the Nazarenes - received in addition a lot of legends, which, according to legend, were then accepted as true, and from others - the Ebionites - it suffered a lot of cuts and changes. Thus, among the additions that existed in the Gospel of the Nazarenes, Origen considers a) the following words of the Savior to the rich young man, when he, having received the command to distribute his property to the poor, was offended by it: “How can you say that you have fulfilled what the law and the prophets command, when it is written in the law: You shall love your neighbor as yourself, and when many of the children of Abraham are covered with rags and they are dying of hunger, but your house is full of property and none of it comes down to them. But turning to Peter he said "... b) In his interpretation of the Gospel of John, Origen from the same Gospel of the Nazarenes also cites the words of the Savior: “My mother is the Holy Spirit.” He took me by one of my hairs and carried me up to the great Mount Tabor.” c) Another saying of the Savior: “Be good merchants.” 2) In Jerome, who not only saw and read this gospel, but also translated it from Syro-Chaldean into Greek and Latin, - a) the legend of the baptism of Jesus Christ: the mother of Jesus and His brothers said to Him, it is written in the Gospel of the Nazarenes, John the Baptist baptizes for the remission of sins; Let's go and accept his baptism. Jesus said to them, “What have I sinned in, that I should go and be baptized by John?” Unless I speak out of ignorance. And after: When Jesus came out of the water, the Holy Spirit descended on Him, rested on Him and said to Him: My son! I looked for You in all the prophets, so that when You came, I might rest in You: for You are my rest and my Firstborn Son, reigning forever. 3) Another legend about Jacob: after His resurrection, the Lord came and appeared to Jacob; because Jacob swore that he would not taste bread from the hour he drank the cup of the Lord until he saw Him risen from the dead... and a little later: “The Lord said: Bring bread.” They brought bread and He blessed it, and broke it, and gave it to Jacob the righteous and said: dear brother, eat of the bread, - the Son of Man has risen from the dead. Obviously this legend is the tradition of the Christians of Jerusalem, for whom Jacob was a bishop. In this way we can judge other additions found in the gospel of the Nazarenes. It should be noted that Jerome used it to explain to himself some passages in the Greek translation of the Gospel of Matthew, for example. words έπιούσιος, - or Matt. XXIII, Zechariah the son of Barachi - instead of which in the Gospel of the Nazarenes it stands: Zechariah the son of Joiad, which is in accordance with the testimony of the Old Testament. Epiphanius testifies that the Nazarenes had the Gospel of Matthew very complete; that, on the contrary, what the Ebionites used was very incomplete, damaged and distorted; that the genealogy of Jesus Christ and everything that in Matthew precedes the history of the baptism of John was not in it; that it began with the following words: a man named Jesus, being about 30 years old, chose us: He, having come to Capernaum and entered the house of Simon Peter, said: walking along Lake Tiberias, I chose for myself John and James, the sons of Zebedee, Simon, Andrew and Thaddeus, Simon the Zealot and Judas Iscariot: I called you also, Matthew, when you sat on your tollhouse and you followed Me. I want all twelve of you to be my apostles for witness to Israel. After this inscription, the gospel began like this: in the time of Herod, king of Judea, under the high priest Caiaphas, there was someone named John. He baptized with a baptism of repentance in the Jordan; They said about him that he was from the root of Aaron, the son of Zechariah and Elizabeth; and everyone came out to receive baptism from him. – And further: when the people were baptized, the same Jesus came and was baptized by John. But when He came out of the water, the heavens opened above Him and He saw the Spirit of God descending and coming on Him in the form of a dove, and heard a voice from heaven saying: You are My beloved Son, in You I am well pleased; and then: Today I gave birth to You. Therefore, immediately a great light appeared in that place, and John, seeing it, said to Jesus: Who are you, Lord? Then I heard a voice from heaven: This is my beloved Son, in whom is all my favor. Then John, falling at His feet, said, I pray Thee, Lord, baptize me... Here are excerpts from the Gospel of Matthew, which was among the Ebionites! We now have neither the Nazarene codex, nor the Ebionite codex, nor even the translation made by Jerome. 2. Gospel of the Egyptians. Two passages from it are cited by Clement of Alexandria, in his third book στρωμάτων; Here's one for example; Jesus Christ says to Salome: I have come to destroy the work of a woman, that is, according to Clement, birth and death are acts of lust. This Gospel has not reached us. 3. The First Gospel of James, or the story of the birth, life and dormition of the Mother of God, allegedly composed by St. James, the first apostle and first bishop of Christians in Jerusalem. Here are excerpts of this story in abbreviation: Joachim was chosen from 12 tribes to make a sacrifice for the people. Reuben did not allow him to do this because he did not have children. Joachim withdrew into the desert and fasted here for forty days. Anna, his wife, also cried; One day she went into the garden and, seeing a bird’s nest on a laurel tree, began to complain bitterly that she did not have what God had given to the bird (children). Here an angel appears to her and tells her that she will have a daughter. The same angel appeared and also announced to Joachim; the promised daughter was born and began to walk at six months; she was fed by angels in the church; was given in marriage to Joseph, because from his rod, presented along with others to the high priest, a dove flew out and landed on Joseph’s head. St. Joseph, finding her pregnant, forced her to drink the water of reproof and so on. It is said about John that he was equally in danger from Herod, as was Jesus, that Elizabeth withdrew with him into the desert and only the mountain that parted before them and an angel could protect them from death. Meanwhile, Zechariah, the father of John, was actually killed between the altar and the church. 4. Gospel of Nicodemus, or a collection of stories about the suffering and resurrection of Jesus Christ, not found in the gospel history. Eg. Pilate sent his official to interrogate Jesus; this official, coming to Him, bowed to Him to the ground; The soldiers who were with him also did the same against their will; bowed before Him and the banners twice... To the question: what is truth? Jesus manages to answer... During the trial of Jesus, Nicodemus and those healed by Jesus Christ are interrogated, they call Veronica, healed by Jesus Christ from the flow of blood... In the story of the resurrection of Jesus Christ, the dead resurrected by him have a conversation with each other and make up the sign of the Cross. Finally, it is stated here that when Pilate persuaded the Jews in private to tell him their thoughts about Jesus, they recognized that He was definitely the Messiah. Both of these gospels, i.e., James and Nicodemus, are not considered among the works of heretics. The inscription in the latter says that it was found during the reign of Theodosius. From the gospels written by heretics, about whom the church fathers never spoke with respect, whose style is completely different from the apostolic simplicity and the teaching is opposite to the apostolic teaching: 1) The Gospel of St. Peter; 2) The Gospel of Truth - the work of Valentinian; 3) The Gospel of Perfection and the Gospel of Philip are works of the Gnostics. To experience how different the teaching of these heretical gospels is from the authentic ones, let us quote from Epiphanius a few words from the latter: The Lord revealed to me, someone says here, what words the soul should utter when it ascends to heaven and how it should respond to each heavenly power. Precisely: I recognized myself and gathered myself from everywhere; I bore no children to the prince of the world, but destroyed his roots; I have gathered my scattered members and I know who you are: for I am from the highest. “To say this,” Epiphanius notes, “according to the Gnostics, the soul of only such a person has the right to speak, who really did not have children in his life; whoever has it is not allowed into heaven until his children appear with him. 4) Gospel of Matthias; 5) Gospel of St. Thomas - among the Manichaeans; 6) Gospel of Bartholomew; 7) The Gospel of Judas Iscariot among the Cainites, who, according to the testimony of Epiphanius and Theodoret, revered Judas as an imitator of Cain; 8, 9, 10) Gospels of Thaddeus, Barnabas, Andrew. Everyone is known only by name, as indicated by some of the church fathers. The apocryphal gospels include 1) the story of the birth or infancy of our Lord Jesus Christ, where, for example, it is said how the Lord learned to read from Joseph. When Joseph spoke the first letter alpha, Jesus repeated it; when Joseph spoke the next vita; then Jesus stopped him: tell me, he said, what alpha means and then I will say vita; 2) the story of the birth of the Virgin Mary and the midwife, (coldless); 3) a book about the birth of the Virgin Mary, which was passed off by the heretic Seleucus as the work of St. Matthew. Its content: The Virgin Mary was born in Nazareth: her father’s name was Joachim, and her mother’s name was Anna. They divided all their property into three parts, assigning one for the church and the Levites, the other for the poor and strangers, the third for their needs; Having not had children for a long time, they made a vow to God to dedicate their child to Him if a boy was born. One day, on the Feast of Tabernacles Nesachar, the high priest rejected Joachim's sacrifice because he had no children. Joachim, embarrassed, retired to the shepherds; here an angel appeared to him and announced from God that Anna would have a daughter who would give the Savior to the world. The same angel appeared to Anna and told her that she would have a daughter who, after three years of upbringing in her father’s house, would live at the church. Joachim and Anna returned after this to Jerusalem, Anna conceived and gave birth to a daughter, whom after three years she brought to the church. The Child had visions every day and spoke to Angels every day. But beyond the age of fourteen, the girls were not kept at the church: Mary wanted to stay here and she announced that she was taking a vow of virginity. The Great High Priest, perplexed as to how to deal with the virgin’s request, calls a meeting; decided to ask God; a voice from the purification answered with the words of Isaiah: the rod of Jesse will come out, and the flower from its root will spring up. For this, the command was given to bring each member of the Davidic family a rod to the altar, so that whose rod would flourish and on whomever the Spirit of God would descend in the form of a dove, the virgin would be given to him. When everyone brought the wands; Only the elderly Joseph did not bring his own, and not one of those brought flourished. The high priest again questioned God and received the answer that the one who should receive the virgin did not present his staff. Thus Joseph was recognized and when he presented his staff, a dove flew from the sky onto his head. He took Mary for himself and returned her to her parents in Galilee. There an angel appeared to her; she was embarrassed, but not from the vision, since she was already accustomed to seeing angels in her place, but from his words: the angel told her that she would have a son. In conclusion, it is said that Joseph then saw her and found that she was pregnant. Some people think that this work is the original Matthew, only distorted. Just as to supplement the gospel history new gospels were compiled by various persons, and to supplement the apostolic history new and different acts were written. The first place among these deserves: 1. The Acts of Paul and Thekla. The writer of these is a priest from Asia, a disciple of St. Paul, as if inclined to invent the incidents told in this book, by love for his teacher and the apostle who then ruled Asia (according to Tertullian), John the Theologian (according to Irenaeus). However, the writer was demoted from the priesthood for this. The now known book of the acts of Paul and Thekla is not as complete as Tertullian found it, and of course it was altered from the ancient one; eg it lacks the story of the baptized lion and the women who baptized; It is only told that Paul converted one maiden in Iconium, named Thekla; convinced him to renounce the one to whom she was promised for marriage and take a vow of virginity; For this, the girl was accused by her fiancé and condemned to be devoured by wild beasts, from which she was later miraculously delivered. Some add to this that she died from another execution; and others that she was always delivered first from the fire, then from the oxen to which she was tied. This Thekla is mentioned by many Fathers of the Church. Further, in addition to the Gospel, four more works were attributed to Peter: Acts, Sermon, Apocalypse, Judgment; also the teaching of Peter, or the apostles. The Manichaeans had the Acts of St. Paul, where the apostles say that the souls of people and animals are of the same nature, and the same apostles work miracles by making dogs and sheep speak. The acts of St. Andrew are also known (among the Encratites, Apostolics and Origenists); the acts of St. John (among the Encratites); the acts of St. Philip and Thomas (in the Apostles); the acts of the apostles in general (among the Ebionites); the rapture or ascension of St. Paul (among the Caionites - a Gnostic work); memorial notes of the apostles (compiled by Priscillianists); description of the apostolic journeys; books about the death and dormition of the Mother of God, attributed to St. John; letters of Jesus Christ to Peter, which offer instructions to the apostles on how to perform miracles. Finally, there are the false apocalypses of St. Peter, St. Paul, St. Thomas, St. Stephen. Having shown the works that in ancient times were attributed to one of the apostles in particular, we should also mention such works that are attributed to the whole society of the apostles; this is the essence: the apostolic symbol and the apostolic rules. By the name of the apostolic symbol is meant an abbreviated presentation of the essential members of the faith, allegedly compiled word by word by the apostles themselves. Without denying that the members of the faith set forth therein were actually taught by the apostles in their time to believers, one can doubt that the very letter of this symbol belonged to them. 1) Silence about this from St. Luke, who, mentioning the Apostolic Council, at which rules regarding the observance of the ritual law of Moses were established, would of course have mentioned in his book about the council at which, according to Rufinus, they compiled this symbol - as an event of much more importance. 2) The silence of the ancient church fathers about this event until the fifth century, in which the first and only Rufinus testifies to this, noting, however, that this is how the ancestors convey it: tradunt majores nostri. 3) If such a symbol was given to the church by the apostles, then why did the church fathers of the first three centuries not use it in their debates with heretics, while they tried with all their might to prove that the teaching contained in the symbol of faith is truly apostolic teaching? Wouldn’t it be easier for the Orthodox to prove at one time the truth of their teaching, having once and forever confirmed the authenticity of the origin of this symbol from the Divine Apostles, than to take each member of the faith separately and about each in particular from the collection of traditions and teachings of each church founded by the apostles, to prove that it has origins from the apostles? Why then, for example. Was it possible for Irenaeus to prove the origin of his teaching from the apostles in such a way that he accepted it from Polycarp, and Polycarp was a disciple of John the Theologian, if he had at hand an immutable witness of their teaching - their symbol? When, moreover, could heretics rather deny this tradition of the apostolic teaching through Polycarp than the drawing up of a symbol as a public, open matter? 4) Contrary to the origin of one symbol from the apostles, accepted by the Roman Church, we find in the ancient churches and among the ancient Church Fathers symbols that are different not in content, but in appearance, which could not have happened just from reverence for every word of the inspired compilers of the symbol, if only it existed. In the 2nd and 3rd centuries. there were as many symbols as there were writers: even the same writer has different symbols in different places in his works; So Irenaeus has two, Tertullian has three. It is in vain to counter this that only in the Roman Church the apostolic symbol was preserved in its purity and integrity: the difference and multiplicity of symbols is also noticeable between the writers of the Roman Church, in Irenaeus and Tertullian. 5) Two or three members of this symbol, which is presented as apostolic, as is known, were not in it at all until the end of the third or even fourth century. Rufinus himself writes that the clause about the descent of Jesus Christ into hell was not in the symbol of the Roman Church (apostolic), nor in the Eastern symbol, and that instead of it, in this latter one was read about the burial of Jesus Christ, which Rufinus takes as one thing, or as an explanation of that. The same is noted about the member regarding the communion of saints. There was no member of eternal life in many symbols, and perhaps even in the Roman symbol, as they conclude from the words of Jerome: in the symbol of faith and hope of ours, according to the confession of the Trinity and the unity of the church, the whole mystery of Christian teaching lies in the resurrection of the flesh - (Epistol. 61). 6) Finally, all the passages from the Church Fathers cited in defense of the apostolic origin of this symbol of the Roman Church do not decisively prove a) the words of Tertullian: 1) Regula fidei una omnino est; sola immobilis et irreformabilis, credeudi sic licet in unum Deum omnipotentem, mundi conditorem et in Filium Ejus I. Christum et cet. (Ex lib. de veland. virginib). But there is not a word here about the origin of this regulae fidei from the apostles! – 2) Superest ergo, ut demonstremus, an nostra doctrina, cujus regulam supra edidimus de Apostolorum traditione censeatur, et ex hoc ipso, an cetera de mendacio veniant? (Lib. de Praescriptionib. Cap. 31). What's here? Tertullian wants to verify his teaching not with a symbol, but with apostolic tradition, and obviously he gives preference to this rather than that, and does not say whose rule of faith, or symbol. 8. Words of St. Ambrose (Lib. 1 Epis. 7 ad Siricium Pontif. Max.); credatur symbolo Apostolorum, quod ecclesia Romana intemeratum semper custodit et servat. This is the strongest of all protections of the apostolic symbol! But even here, is it not possible to understand the designation of a symbol as apostolic to signify the origin from the apostles only of the teaching contained in it, and not of the words? At least this is dark and requires the strongest confirmation, but it is nowhere to be found. Celestine 1 also says: Symbolum ab Apostolis traditum (iu Epist. ad Nestor.) - and nothing more. In Lucifer of Clareshan (Lib. 2. advers. Constant. Imperator.): forma disciplinae et regula fidei, per apostolos tradita. There is no decisive evidence in favor of Catholics here either. Rufinus's explanation of these words in the sense of the literal origin of the symbol of the Roman Church from the apostles is too late and unconvincing. So let the apostolic symbol be apostolic, but in the same sense as others written in ancient times by one of the Orthodox believers. The book of apostolic decrees will be subject to further consideration. It should be said about the monuments of the teachings of the apostolic men. These include: 1) Epistle of Barnabas. Clement of Alexandria and Origen had no doubt about the authenticity of his origin from Barnabas; Eusebius considers it among the apocryphal, but not because of its unknown origin, but because of its dignity, which does not give it the right to stand among the canonical books of the New Testament. Eusebius has three classes of apocryphal books: the first, which includes works that were rejected by some and accepted by others as canonical; the second, to which belong works that are not recognized by anyone as canonical, but are nevertheless written by non-heretics, which belong to the third class of apocryphal. According to this division, Barnabas' message must be in the first or at least second class. They notice in this letter much that is unworthy of St. Barnabas; Is it likely, they say, that a husband filled with the Holy Spirit and a co-worker of St. Paul was the author of such things as are in this book, such as: forced allegories, unusual and alien to common sense explanations of Scripture, fables about animals and many other similar dreams that make up the first part of this book? But did this force Clement, Origen, Eusebius to look for another writer of this epistle? Being closer than we are to the times of the apostles, having in front of them books written by their disciples, which no longer exist for us, they could better know the style and style of the writings of the apostles, their collaborators and disciples. So, if they found then that these allegories, these mystical explanations found in the epistle of Barnabas could belong to him, then what right do we have now to claim that they cannot belong to him? One must know well the spirit of the Jews and the first Christians, who grew up and were raised in synagogues, in order to consider such thoughts unusual; on the contrary - this was their character; they learned from the Jews to turn all Scripture into an allegory and make comments on the properties of animals that are prohibited by the Law of Moses. The Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians, so famous in antiquity, and the book of Clement of Alexandria στρώματα are filled with this kind of allegories and images. The allegory of the blood of Jesus Christ, depicted by the red rope of Rahab from Clement of Rome, is no less borrowed from afar, like the allegories of Barnabas. Finally, the author of this letter, apparently, represents the apostles before their conversion as too vicious: super omne peccatum peccatores... But explain this from the spirit of humility of the writer and you will have such a meaning of these words that not a single righteous person will refuse. 2. Epistles of Clement to the Corinthians. The first is genuine; The second passage is ancient, but not of the same merits as the previous one. The Apostolic Constitutions (Constitutiones Apostolicae), an ancient work, later supplemented with some errors and changed, does not belong to Clement, although it ascribes itself to Clement. Recognitionum libri X, known under the name S. Clementis acta, historia, chronica - forged works. 3. Epistles of Ignatius the God-Bearer. The zealous shepherd of the Church of Antioch had already been led to Rome to be devoured by wild beasts: on the way, busy with the condition of the churches, which he visited in passing, he wrote three letters from Smyrna to the Church of Ephesus, to the Magnesians, to the Trallians and sent his request to the Roman Church not to deprive him of the martyr's crown with the zeal of his prayers; having reached Troas, he sends from here another letter to the Philadelphians, to the church of Smyrna, and especially to its bishop Polycarp, entrusting his Antioch church to him. St. Polycarp, soon after his death, collected all these messages and sent them with his own to the Philippian Christians. Eusebius, Jerome, partly Irenaeus, and Origen testify to these letters of Ignatius. St. Ignatius, in his letter to the Smyrnans, refutes the error of those who denied that Jesus Christ was a true man, had true flesh and really suffered. He says that these heretics did not care about the poor and widows, and separated themselves from common prayers with the church and the Eucharist, because they did not believe that it offered the true body of Jesus Christ, who was nailed to the cross for us and then rose again. Convinces the Smyrneans to flee divisions, as the source of all evils, to obey their bishop, to honor priests and deacons and not to do anything without the permission of their bishop, not even allowing baptism and Christian suppers (άγάπη) without him. In a letter to St. Polycarpu gives excellent advice, urges to maintain unity in his church, to constantly watch over his flock and provide decent healing for the illnesses of his sheep, to treat the wicked with love and meekness, to pray to God unceasingly and ask Him for His grace, to work unceasingly, as befits the ascetic of Jesus Christ, Who, having been invisible and impassive, became visible and mortal to us. Inspires care for widows, and thereby obedience to the bishop; spouses mutual pleasure, love and purity; All marriages should be performed with the permission of the bishop, so that they are according to God, and not according to passion. Finally, he convinces all the faithful to obey the bishop, priests and deacons and work for the cause of their salvation. In the letter to the Ephesians he testifies to his joy in having seen Onesimus, their bishop, exhorting them to live holy, to be submissive to their bishop and elders and to live always in unity, declaring that those who separate from the bishop and are not present at the common prayers of Christians, which are ordered by the bishop, are outside the church and are deprived of the bread of heaven. Then he exhorts them to flee heresies, avoid heretics and believe that Jesus Christ is God and became flesh, and like God he is impassive, but like a man he is subject to suffering. Finally, praising them for their piety, he exhorts them to pray to God for the whole world, to gather more often for common prayers and to maintain an unbreakable faith. (He says here that the prince of the world, that is, the devil, knew neither about the virginity of Mary, nor about her birth, nor about the death of the Savior). In the Epistle to the Magnesians, after the exhortation to obey the bishop, not to do anything without him and to live in unity, he teaches not to get carried away by vain opinions, not to live like a Jew, but like a Christian, to believe in Jesus Christ that he is the Word of God, who did not come out of a state of silence (when he appeared to us), but was sent from God the Father and is our only hope. Finally, he commits himself to their prayers. In the epistles to the Philadelphians and Trallians, after expressing joy about their unity among themselves and general instructions to remove divisions, in the first he refutes those who did not want to believe anything except what is written in the Old Testament, and says that the Gospel is the fulfillment of what was typified in the Old; and in the other he proposes some dogmas of Christian teaching, namely, that Jesus Christ was born of Mary, was truly a man, suffered and died really, and not ghostly, as some heretics said. Finally, in his letter to the Romans, he expresses a strong desire for martyrdom and asks them not to take away this glorious crown from him by preventing him from being given over to be torn to pieces by wild beasts. All these epistles are filled with saving rules and most useful instructions, worthy of a Christian, a bishop and a martyr, and all are distinguished by anointing and piety. It is impossible to read them without noticing throughout that this saint was inspired by an absolutely Divine zeal for souls, obedience to the law of Jesus Christ and the strictest preservation of His teachings. In all his words, love for Jesus Christ, love for his brethren, affection for the teachings of the church and zeal for its peace are manifested. 4. From the messages of St. Polycarp Bishop of Smyrna, a disciple of John the Theologian, has survived one in which he forwards the epistles of Ignatius the God-Bearer to the Philippians, asking them, in turn, to provide detailed information about the death of this saint, if they have any. This message is full of advice, rules and exhortations borrowed from St. The Scriptures are written with great clarity and simplicity. 5. Papias, Bishop of Hierapolis (between Phrygia and Lydia, near Laodicea), disciple of St., also belongs to the apostolic men in time and instruction. John (according to Irenaeus and Jerome). He wrote five books entitled: Explanation of the Speeches of the Lord (λογίων Κυριακάν έξήγησις), of which only some passages have now been preserved by ancient and modern writers. This was the same Papias who gave rise to the opinion of antiquity about the temporary kingdom of Jesus Christ (this opinion was accepted by Barnabas, Justin, Athenagoras, Irenaeus, Clement, Tertullian, Lactantius), which was supposed to begin on earth a thousand years before the judgment, when all the elect, after their resurrection, would gather in Jerusalem to enjoy all kinds of benefits after a whole millennium. From Papias’s own testimony about himself, that he, trying to collect the most accurate information about the teachings of Jesus Christ, asked those who approached the elders (teachers): what Andrew taught, what Peter taught, what Philip, Thomas, James, Matthew, what the other disciples of the Lord taught; that Aristion and John the Presbyter preached - disciples of the Lord - Eusebius concludes that Papias was not a disciple of John the Theologian, as Irenaeus and Jerome testify, but of John the Presbyter. If from what is mentioned here about the two Johns it appears that Papias was not a disciple of the first, everyone has the same right to say that he was not a disciple of the last. Eusebius gives the following judgment about him: this writer in his writings gives out, under the name of legends, some strange parables and sermons of the Savior and the most fabulous legends: among other things, he says that after the resurrection of bodies there will be a thousand years of the bodily reign of Jesus Christ on earth: which I think, writes Eusebius, he took for the apostolic teaching, not understanding what they say in the mysterious sense and under images (έν ύποδείγμασι). For he was not very far in mind, as his writings testify: Eccl. Histor. lib. III, XXX, IX). 6. Square, disciple of John the Theologian, seer and martyr, apology, now lost. From the monuments of the teaching of the times of the apostles, more or less disputed in the discussion of their origin from those writers whose name they bear, there are notes: 1. Three books of Hermas: the book of visions, the book of commandments, the book of parables. Eusebius writes about them: you need to know that some had a dispute about this work, why it is not considered among those recognized as reliable books (όμολουομένοιζ). But others consider it very necessary, especially for initial instruction. From which, as we know, it is read publicly in churches, and some of the most ancient writers, as we remember, (κατείληφα) used it (lib. III, p. 3). 2. Works of Dionysius the Areopagite. About the heavenly and church hierarchy, about the names of God, about mysterious Theology and nine letters. Objections to the authenticity of these writings: 1. Writers of the first four centuries of Christianity are silent about the works of Dionysius the Areopagite. For the first time it was cited by the heretics Severians at a council that took place in 533 and was rejected by the fathers. Answer . The silence of the ancient writers is explained by 1) the fact that not everyone could have these books at hand; 2) to refute the heretics, when it would have been possible to mention the ancient writings of this father, they cited more evidence from Holy Scripture and the definitions of the councils. 3) What Eusebius and Jerome kept silent about them in their censuses of the works of church writers is explained by the fact that the former omits the works of some and other writers, for example. Athenagoras; and the second, as he himself testifies, made more use of the works and research of Eusebius in this work. Moreover, Dionysius himself, in his essay on the church hierarchy, asks Timothy not to give his works for general use. 4) The fact that heretics were the first to point out these works does not interfere with their authenticity; on the contrary, it seems to prove the church’s respect for the writer’s desire to keep them secret. The fathers of the council rejected it because they did not have a better way to resolve the false teaching of their opponents the first time; and then, having more closely examined the writings of the Areopagite, the church did not find anything in them contrary to the sound teaching of Christ, and handed them over for general use. From now on, Anastasius Sinait, Gregory the Great, the second Council of Nicaea, and Maximus, who wrote his notes on them, do not mention them. It seems that the ancients also point to them: Gregory of Nazianzen, when explaining that the threefold repetition of the saint means the equality of the dignity of the Divinity of the persons of the Holy Trinity, adds: how someone before us was beautiful and highly wise. This idea actually appears in the writings of Dionysius. Also: Clement of Alexandria, apparently, borrows from Dionysius his equation of an anchor, more attracting us to itself than being attracted by us, a person ascending to God. This comparison is found in Dionysius in the book on the names of God. Nicephorus Callistus writes that Juvenal, at the request of Emperor Marcian and Empress Pulcheria, gave them a legend about the death of the Mother of God from the writings of this Dionysius, as a tradition of the church. Age 2. The style is tense, far from the simplicity of the style of the writers of the first centuries of Christianity. Reply And in the Holy Scriptures the syllable is not always the same. The style depends on the subject and on the character and education of the writers. The apparent tension corresponds to the loftiness of the subjects that Dionysius deals with in his writings. Photius calls him, on the contrary, great in speech, but even greater in contemplation: magnus sermone, major contemplatione. In addition, his exercise in Platonic philosophy contributed to this tension, a certain gloominess of his writings. Age 3. The writer, posing as Dionysius, sends one of his books to Timothy, Pavlov’s student, and quotes the words of Ignatius the God-Bearer, who died and wrote after Timothy’s death. Reply They explain that the words of Ignatius were included in this work after someone else. This is proven by the words themselves, which, together with the previous point, cannot be taken as the original words of Dionysius. It comes down to the difference between the words έρως and άγάπη. Dionysius proves that it is proper to attribute άγάπη to the Divine. To this it is suddenly added: but to some of our expounders of Scripture it seemed that έρως is more Divine than άγάπη: as if the famous words of Ignatius are cited as proof: my love has been crucified and there is no passion in me for anything earthly. Obviously love here means not pure attachment to oneself and the world. III. Exposition of the Apostolic Doctrine When presenting the teaching of the Apostolic Church, we have in mind one source from which we must draw it: the authentic works of the apostles: since other monuments of the teaching of the apostolic times either contain only the errors of these times, or all consist of a presentation of what is contained in these authentic works of the apostles. But even of these, only the book of Acts and their epistles can testify to us about the teaching of the apostles. The Gospels can serve this purpose only in the sense that by their plurality they show how important a place in the teaching of the apostles was occupied by the presentation of the most detailed, most accurate information about the life and teaching of Jesus Christ. From these same writings, the book of Acts presents the experiences of the initial teaching of the apostles, both in relation to their own ministry and in relation to those to whom it was taught. For here you can see, firstly, how they began their preaching in Jerusalem, and secondly, what initial truths of the teaching of Christ they communicated to other peoples besides the Jews. Their messages are already their secondary instructions; since everything is written to Christians. There they repeat and explain what Jesus preached about Himself and what He above all demanded of His followers. It is worth paying attention to the first two conversations of the ap. Peter in Jerusalem (Acts 2:14–36 and 3:12–26) and two apostolic discourses of Paul (Acts 13:16–41 and 17:22–31). This is nothing more than an extensive summary of the first brief sermon of Jesus Christ, given by St. Mark: The time is fulfilled and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent and believe in the Gospel (1:15). For this, the apostles explained everything that they heard from their Mentor and that the Holy Spirit inspired them. We have no experience of such further instructions in Christian teaching or a complete presentation of their teaching. The Epistles mainly contain an explanation of only some of the truths of the doctrine they preach; much is said only in passing; much should be inferred from the conclusion. Leaving in this presentation of the teaching of the apostles what is known as the own teaching of Jesus Christ, we will try to briefly show what they set out and passed on to Christians to explain and supplement this teaching. The main subject of the teaching of Jesus Christ was 1) that He is the Messiah, Who came by His death to save the world and 2) that if anyone wants to be a participant in this salvation, he must have faith in the Savior. The application of this view of salvation to the church in general and in particular to every believing soul, as well as the establishment of a new life according to faith, depicted by Jesus Christ only mysteriously in parables, was left to the explanation of the apostles. The apostles explain the view of salvation in relation to the church: they teach, 1) that the death of the Messiah resolves its condition under the nurture of the law, that the law of commandments loses its force - Christ redeemed us to eat from the curse of the law (Gal. 3:13), and the ritual law with all its institutions is abolished, since Jesus Christ, having once sacrificed Himself for the sins of the world, became our intercessor to God forever; and so the shadow is not needed when the body itself has appeared (Col. 2:17); The priesthood is changed according to need and according to the law. The kingdom of grace and truth is coming. Jesus Christ pointed out this state to the Jews only with brief hints: if your son sets you free, you will be free indeed (John 8:36); and regarding the ritual law: it is not good to put a new patch on an old garment (Matt. 9:16). 2. That all nations are called into the kingdom of the Messiah, the distinction between circumcision and uncircumcision is destroyed; in Jesus Christ there is Greek and Jew, neither circumcised nor uncircumcised, barbarian and Scythian, slave and free, and although the Jewish people are temporarily separated from the body of the church, they will once again be drawn together: Jesus Christ said: Some sheep are not of this fold, and you must be brought in, and there will be one flock and one shepherd (John. 9:16). The apostles explain the view of salvation in relation to every believing soul; here they depict 1) all the misery of her condition outside of grace; show the corruption of all human powers; their complete inability to do good; incessant pursuit of evil. For the imperfect mind of his listeners, Jesus Christ could reveal this in no other way than through the images of the prodigal son and a man robbed by robbers. 2) Her renewal by the power of grace: her sins are forgiven not because of her righteous deeds, but through faith in the merits of Jesus Christ, truth and sanctification are imparted; The Spirit of God acts both to will and to do good will (Phil. 2:13); it becomes the church of God. Jesus Christ somewhat signifies this state of a renewed person in his conversation with Nicodemus, but in a deeply mysterious way: that which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit (John 3:6). Finally, the apostles are also engaged in organizing activities consistent with such a high dignity of the regenerated, adapting the general law of love given by Jesus Christ to all their relationships and states and extracting from here special duties for shepherds and flocks, parents and children, masters and slaves, commanding everyone to give their due, never allow evil to overcome oneself, but to overcome evil with good and always think about what is honest, what is just, what is pure, what is kind, what it is praiseworthy, which constitutes virtue and praise (Phil. 4:8). IV. Overview of its teaching in the Apostolic Church In order to have a complete understanding of the state of teaching in the apostolic church, one must also pay attention to the manner of its communication. The image of the message changed according to whom the apostles were dealing with, whether they were still unbelieving Jews and pagans, or with believing sons of the church, or with those introducing their errors into the church. Let's look at each in detail. a) the manner of teaching it to unbelieving Jews and pagans The apostles were sent into the world with the seed of the word of God: but before they could cast their seeds into the ground, they had to clear the field of many debris, stones, reeds and break and dig up its hardened surface. The harvests in the fields cultivated by the hands of the prophets were taken back in the time of Jesus Christ: I sent you to reap, where you did not toil, and others toiled, and you were able to do their labor (John 4:38). Those who, like Simeon, purely maintaining faith in the Divine promises, from day to day looked forward to the joys of Israel, when He walked around the cities and villages of Judea, Samaria, Galilee and the entire Jordan, had the opportunity to see Him, hear, believe in Him, cleave to Him, and from Him receive the hope of the revelation of His kingdom. But these were few, and not only to these were the preachers of Christ sent. They had to proclaim their teaching about God to already God-killing people or to peoples who were mistaken in polytheism. So the work laid before them here and there was to destroy in advance all the obstacles that could stop the first beginnings of Christianity. But it is obvious that this could not be achieved by the same means here and there - between Jews and pagans. It was necessary to direct the forces and weapons of truth against the errors inherent in both. There is not one cure for all diseases. The preachers of Christ knew this very clearly and their words were never sent to earth in vain. Turning to their brethren and relatives according to the flesh, they saw with regret that all their blindness and their misfortunes depended on the wrong thought that they had formed for themselves about the Messiah and His kingdom: instead of expecting in His person not only a king, a prophet, but also a high priest, they became attached with a dream to the glory of His royal ministry, which they also understood too sensually; without rejecting the prophetic ministry (John 6:14), they completely forgot about His high priestly ministry, which was supposed to unite the manifestation of the first two and without which neither he nor those guided by him could reach the throne of glory. From here it happened that, without thinking about the need to assimilate for themselves the universal purification by the sacrifice of the Messiah, as the only right to participate in all the benefits He brought to the entire human race, they proudly thought that their mere origin from the high family of Abraham and outward observance of the law could and should open the way to them. Thus, respect for all things sacred, for all rites of worship, for all duties related to the church, was strictly observed, and even more strictly demanded, as a necessary condition of righteousness before God, as an essential fulfillment of the law, while judgment, mercy and faith were abandoned; with the effort of external reverence, the inner, true and directed towards true objects, cooled. The name Judea alone was enough for you to rest on the law with your carelessness and only boast in God, and not fear Him: behold, you are called a Jew and rest on the law, and boast in God (Rom. 2:17). It seemed content only to understand the will of God and reason better, learning from the law to consider himself a leader of the blind, a light for those in darkness. But in fact, he who preached not to steal stole, who taught not to commit adultery, committed adultery, and abhorred idols - blasphemous (vv. 18-22). This is the state in which the Divine Apostles saw their compatriots, as one of them himself describes. How could they approach such people with their new teaching, which was the opposite of all their thoughts? Where to start your word? It was necessary to indicate the true Messiah. How can we prove its truth? The fact that it still had some effect on their religious feelings and that more strongly affected their external feelings. And so the apostles, as we saw, in their first conversations to the Jews, made it their first duty to prove to the Jews that Jesus is the Christ, or the Messiah, that this dignity of Him is proven 1) by the fulfillment in Him of everything predicted by the prophets about the Messiah and all the promises given to their fathers and 2) by the many beneficial miracles He performed. This is the main point of the original teaching of the apostles to the Jews. Consider the speeches of the apostle. Peter on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:14–36), after the healing of the lame man (3:12–26) and in the house of the Jewish proselyte Cornelius (10:34–43) and the speech of the apostle. Paul in Antioch of Pisidia (13:16–41) - everywhere you will find the disclosure of these thoughts in greater or lesser extent. But all the clarity of the fulfillment of the prophetic instructions over Jesus was overshadowed by the gloomy picture of the suffering and death of the Messiah. What kind of redemption could one expect from the One who himself, having been sold for the price of a slave, ended his wretched life on the cross? This was a temptation to the Jews. The apostles foresaw this, and were themselves internally confident that in this darkness the destinies of Jesus were truly divine destinies, they tried to prove to those tempted by the cross of Christ, 1) that this did not happen by chance, that this does not mean that Providence took part in this Sufferer no more than in any other, but on the contrary, everything happened according to the exact predestination and foreknowledge of God (Acts 2:23; 3:18; 13:27, 29); that His suffering and death were necessary. However, so that in this way the blame for the death of the Messiah, whose blood, despite the fact that it was shed for the salvation of the world, could not but be avenged on His murderers and their children, should be laid on God alone, they notice that although this happened according to the exact determination and foreknowledge of God, He was betrayed; You took Him and killed Him, the apostles said to the Jews; it was the hands of the wicked, and not the hands of God, that nailed Him to the cross (2:23); you denied the holy and righteous and asked to be given a murderer (3:14); When they had fulfilled all that was written about Him, they took Him down from the tree and laid Him in a tomb (13:29). Not content with this, the apostles imagined 2) that all the dishonor of the suffering and blasphemous death of Jesus Christ would be rewarded by the glory of His resurrection; God raised Him up by breaking the bonds of death (2:24). This was the height of the victory of Jesus Christ and the height of the triumph of the apostles, the main basis of their teaching, the subject of their strongest assurances. The apostles testified with great power to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus (4:33), Luke notes. But at the same time this was also the most difficult point in their teaching: to prove it they had nothing more to present except their own testimony; why, trying to strengthen it, they repeated it as often as possible: God raised this Jesus, to whom we all are witnesses (3:15); Explaining all the particular circumstances of the appearance of the Risen One to them, the Apostle says: God raised him up on the third day and caused him to be revealed, not to all people, but to us as a witness ordained by God, who was with him as food and drink, after his resurrection from the dead (10:40, 41): God raised Him from the dead, who appeared in many days to those who came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are now his witnesses to the people (13:30, 31). Finally, in support of this, they pointed to the extraordinary gifts they received on the day of Pentecost, and all the miracles performed by their hands, which all served as a sign of the power of the Risen One, Whom they preached. It is he who is exalted by the right hand of God, and the promise of the Holy Spirit is received from the Father, this is poured out, which you now see and hear (2:33). Men of Israel! Why are you wondering about this? or why do you look at us, as if we made him walk by our own strength or by piety? The God of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, the God of our father, glorified his son Jesus... and in the faith of His name, which you see and know, establish His name (3:12, 13, 16). Thus, the imaginary contradiction in the fate of Jesus, testifying to Him as the Messiah, led the apostles to a new and strongest confirmation of it. But while affirming the appearance of the Messiah and calling everyone to Him (13:40, 41), they tried at the same time to show that there is no other name under heaven given in men, by which we must be saved (4:12), that the remission of sins, which everyone must confess, can only happen through Him (13:33); neither works of the law, nor purification, nor ritual sanctification justify, but only faith: and from all of them, because it was not possible for you to be justified in the law of Moses, by this everyone who believes will be justified (39). So, this is how the apostles acted during their first conversations with the Jews, refuted their errors and confirmed in their souls the first principles of the true Divine religion. They expounded here mainly the doctrine of the Messiah; but, so as not to suddenly blind the eyes of those who began to see, the light of his Divinity, as it seems, was not suddenly revealed to them; They preached justification by faith, but the relationship of this teaching to legal activity was left to further instruction: too early liberation could harm unstrengthened forces. So wisely they balanced their teaching with the strength of their listeners! Turning to the pagans, the apostles saw that, despite the many gods they worshiped, they did not know the true God; that their deities are nothing more than embodied images of the powers, perfections and actions of the Highest Spirit, which, unable to be aggregated in one general idea and imagined in all their purity, were fragmented into many sensual, similar, only different in their own kind creatures with the highest degree of power: that having such images before their eyes, they involuntarily got used to looking at vice as a virtue, did not consider it necessary to set limits to any passions: for than the more violently and furiously they expressed themselves, the more they approached their absurd ideal; Having reached the point of insensibility, they indulged in lewdness to the point that they did all kinds of uncleanness with gluttony (Eph. 4:19). Considering such darkness in the mind and alienation of the heart from the life of God (18), where did the apostles need to begin in order to prepare the way for the Gospel? Without a doubt, first of all, to take advantage of what was still healthy in them, that holy feeling of the need of the Divine, which could not be lost in the multitude of distorted images of it, gave strength to that kindred attachment to the Divine, which involuntarily forced them to recognize the Invisible in the visible and changing things created by Him. Then to reveal to the blinded pagan from the beginnings of the same mind that everything that he attributes to his gods is the work of the one eternal Creator and Provider, that all the separate traits of goodness, power, wisdom, eternal beauty, having become alien to those, essentially belonged to this purest Spirit; that it is time to recognize Him, at least by the signs that we carry within ourselves, that it is time to hear His call, to change our former life, to heed the latest, recently sent preacher. This is the most natural plan that could be chosen for the first discussions with the pagans! It would be in vain to talk to them about the prophets and the fulfillment of prophetic predictions, since neither one nor the other had power with them; it was impossible to suddenly tell them that this preacher, sent from God, is God Himself: the pagan would only have erected a new idol for him in his shrine, and the preachers would have had nothing else to do. It was only necessary to tell them that this preacher proved his Divine embassy with extraordinary, Divine deeds; that if anyone does not follow Him, judgment awaits him, righteous judgment! – This will be higher and higher than their weak concepts of reason! – Let this be followed by strictly Christian instructions. This is exactly how the apostles acted at the beginning of their preaching among the pagans; we confirm this by the example of the speech spoken by Paul in the Athenian Areopagus (17:22-31). Part of the same is evidenced by the speech of the same apostle to the inhabitants of Lycaon. b) the way of teaching it to the believing sons of the church When those convinced by the original teaching, coming into tenderness and faith, had to be introduced into the church, or those already introduced into the church had to be supported and raised to the highest degrees of knowledge and piety, then a different kind of instruction was used here. In the first case they were called announcements; between the latter, the apostles distinguish two more types of instructions: some of them contain the milk of the word or principles (Heb. 5:12; 6:3), others contain solid food (Heb. 5:12, 14; 1 Cor. 3:1, 2). The first conversations that, as we have seen, the apostles had with the pagans and Jews and which, without a doubt, each time in greater or lesser extent, with greater or lesser changes in application to circumstances, were repeated when the apostles met new listeners, for those who wanted to join the church were not enough: since for this it was also necessary to have at least a separate concept of the persons of the Holy Trinity and a clearer information about the person of the Messiah - which was lacking there. Therefore, there is no reason to doubt that in the apostolic church new instructions, or so-called announcements, were not used for this kind of listeners, and they should have differed from those first conversations, since they were directed to a known, and not to an unknown and indeterminate class of people. What was the subject of these catechetical teachings? Without a doubt, the very first and necessary truths of the Christian confession, which for the memory of believers have been enclosed in symbols since ancient times. That is, this included the teaching about God the Father, Creator of heaven and earth, about the Son of God, crucified, died, resurrected, ascended into heaven, sitting at the right hand of God and from here coming to judge the living and the dead; about the Holy Spirit, about baptism for the remission of sins, about the resurrection of the dead and eternal life. Here 1), we note in general that criticism finds all these members of faith in the most ancient symbols; 2) that these last three members of the faith were part of the catechumen teachings even during the time of the apostles - there is no doubt because we saw them in the first speeches of the apostles about them and because we also find confirmation of this in the Epistle to the Hebrews, from which (6:1, 2) it is clear that they were known even to infants of faith (5:12, 13). In particular, the fact that the doctrine of the need for baptism for the remission of sins was set forth in the catechumen instruction is evidenced by the very nature of the work and history of the Acts of the Apostles (2:37, 38). The detailed instruction during the catechumens regarding the persons of the Holy Trinity is apparently contradicted by all those places in the book of the Acts of the Apostles where it is said that those who were baptized were baptized in the name of one Jesus Christ, from which we can conclude that initially during the catechumens the doctrine was set forth about only one Jesus Christ. The points of contention are: Acts. 8:16, 37; 10:48; 22:16. But here, says Irenaeus, in Christi nomine subauditur, qui unxit, et ipse, qui unctus est, et ipsa unctio, in qua unctus est. That baptism was preceded by an instruction about all three Persons becomes clear from the words of St. Peter to those who wish to be baptized: Be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and you may receive the gift of the Holy Spirit: for the promise is to you, both to your children and to all who are afar off, if the Lord God calls (2:38). And this, without a doubt, is a reduction of the catechumen teaching, now for the first time once again compiled and delivered by the apostles to those wishing to accept St. baptism. Later, when the number of believers increased, and for each convert it was difficult to find a special mentor, private and temporary instructions were turned by some into general and permanent ones - through the opening of schools: such a catechetical school was opened by St. Mark in Alexandria, as they guess from the stories of Eusebius (C. Ist. book V. 10. 10), who attributes the enlightenment of Alexandria with Christianity to Mark and very early derives from here and for the enlightenment of other countries of the world the mentors who ran this school and were educated in it. In addition, it is known that ap. Paul in Corinth, after unsuccessfully preaching in the synagogue, opened his school during his stay here in a school named Tyrannus (Acts 19:9) for converting to faith in Jesus Christ and instructing those coming to the church. In general, it is known that the apostles always tried to have more mentors (2 Tim. 2:2). Those who received initial instruction in Christian teaching, before entering the church, should then gradually be led to the knowledge of the highest and most hidden truths thereof. But both now and then, not everyone was capable of this. Ap. Paul reproaches the Jewish Christians that they should be teachers for the sake of years, and they again demand to learn what is the beginning of the words of God (Heb. 5:13); like the Corinthian Christians, despite the long time of their conversion, they find everything to be infants and more carnal than spiritual (1 Cor. 3:1, 2), which is why it was enough for them to repeat and instill in them what they had previously received, just as the Apostle Paul intended to do this for the Jews (6:3). Ap. Even if they were confirmed in the truth they contained, Peter did not find it superfluous to remind them of their calling and election, that is, of the first lessons they received in Christianity. But those who were most thorough and zealous in fulfilling what they knew, the Apostles willingly admitted to the highest mysteries. By these mysteries were meant in general or the highest Divine destinies, incomprehensible to man, acting and taking place and especially acting mysteriously in Jesus (1 Cor. 2:6-8), therefore, for some, the explanation of these mysteries consisted in depicting the entire life of the God-man (Luke 1:4), and mysteriously operating in His church (Eph. 3:2-6), or the secrets of the inner life. c) the eradication by the apostles of harmful and false teachings that arose in the church The apostles were no less active in eradicating harmful and false teachings arising in the church as in communicating and establishing the true. To see this, one must pay separate attention to the various types of errors that were born and prevailed in their time. In relation to their origin, they can be divided into two main types: to the first belong those who joined the church with people who were not completely cleansed of the previous prejudices and errors of their religion; to the second, those for whom the path to the church was opened by acquaintance with Eastern philosophy. Since those entering the church were from Jews or pagans by religion, they also introduced errors into it of two kinds. The Jews did not want to abandon their law, although they themselves understood little of it. In this attachment to the law, some acted out of the weakness of their conscience (Rom. 14:2), others out of bitter prejudice. These latest app. Paul calls them false apostles (2 Cor. 11:13) and describes them very often in his epistles in vivid terms. Beware of dogs, beware of evildoers, beware of the cutting (κατατομή) (Phil. 3:2); Many enemies of the cross of Christ walk, whose end is destruction, whose god is their belly and whose glory is in their cold, and who philosophizes on earth (Phil. 3:18, 19). I pray you, brethren, beware of those who create strife and strife, except for teaching, which you will learn and turn away from them: for such are not servient to our Lord Jesus Christ, but to their own belly, who with good words and blessings deceive the hearts of the gentle (Rom. 16:17; 2 Cor. 11:13, 14; Gal. 1:7). However, these false apostles must be distinguished from those false teachers and false prophets about whom Peter speaks (2 Pos. 2:1ff.) and Jude (vv. 4ff. 16, 18). These teachings more lead to the idea that they were Gnostics. Converts from the pagans, seeing that Christianity did not oblige them to fulfill the strict law of the Jews, abused their freedom, did not preserve what the apostles recognized as necessary to retain from it in the Christian church (Rom. 14:1 et seq.; 1 Cor. 8:1 et seq.; Acts 15) and neglected the weakness of conscience in this regard. Jews; from here, through further evasion from the correctness of action, a sect of Nicolaitans was formed, which, as it were, was deliberately fed up with all sorts of idolatrous impurities and which, most likely, to justify its action, accepted this name for itself from one of the seven deacons, Nicholas, a man filled with the Spirit, but with a careless word and action he tempted the brethren (Clim. Alex. Lib 3. Stromat. Theodoret L.III.H). Of the zealots of the Law of Moses, some, having adopted the name of the Nazarenes from the name of Jesus Christ Nazarite, and others, having adopted the name of Ebion and humbly calling themselves poor, combined with their adherence to Judaism the opinion of Jesus Christ as a simple man. Of these latter, some admitted His birth from the Holy Spirit in the womb of the mother Mary, others considered Him only the son of Joseph and Mary. Over time, the Nazarenes also adhered to these opinions. Performing circumcision, the Sabbath and other Jewish rites, they worshiped Jerusalem as the house of God, and rejected the writings of Paul, calling it an apostate to their law. Among the false teachers who borrowed their errors from Eastern philosophy are: 1. Philatians, who taught that the resurrection of the dead had already taken place (Timothy 2:17, 18). 2. Cerinthians. Irenaeus sets out the teaching of Kerinths as follows: “Kerinths taught that the world was not created from the Supreme God, but from a certain force completely alien to this supermundane principle and ignorant of the God who exists above all. About Jesus he showed that He was not born of a virgin (for that seemed impossible to him), but was born of Joseph and Mary, like other people; that he surpassed everyone in righteousness, prudence and wisdom; that after baptism, Christ descended on Him from that supreme principle in the form of a dove: then Jesus announced the unknown Father and began to perform powers, and finally Christ again flew away from Jesus, and Jesus suffered and was resurrected: Christ remained impassive, being spiritual.” Elsewhere, outlining the teachings of the Cerinthians, in conjunction with the teachings of the Nicolaitans, Irenaeus notes that both “called the (Supreme) principle the only begotten and gave to it the Son - the Word.” (Cont. Haeres. L. 2, 1, 11). From the testimony of other Church Fathers it is clear that Cerinthus considered it necessary to observe the law of Moses (Augustine): apost. He did not accept Paul, but respected Judas; taught that there will be an earthly kingdom of Christ when in Jerusalem we will enjoy all sensual pleasures and that 1000 years have been appointed for this (in Eusebius L. 3, p. 28. Caius the Presbyter of Rome, Dionysius of Alexandria in Book II of the Narratives). 3. Simonians. Simon called himself the highest power; taught that he, as the Son, appeared to the Jews, as the Father came to the Samaritans, as the Holy Spirit came to the pagans; He called Helen, his companion to the fornicator of Tire, the first thought (έννοιαν) of his mind, the mother of everything, through whom at the beginning he intended to create angels and archangels. This thought, Simon said, coming from him, knowing what her father wanted, descended and gave birth to angels and powers, from whom this world was created. But when she gave birth to them, she herself was held back by them because of envy: for these angels did not want to be someone else’s work. As a result of this, his ένυοια suffered from them all kinds of bitterness; then she was enclosed in a human body, and from century to century, as from vessel to vessel, she passed into women’s bodies; it was also in that Helen for whom the Trojan War was fought; finally passed into the body of the fornicator. Simon said that he came to seek the lost sheep, having been transformed and taking upon himself humanity, without previously being a man; that he suffered from the Jews, but only imaginary. Anyone who comes running to him and Elena with hope receives salvation and freedom to do what he wants; the moral law was introduced by evil angels and is destroyed by Simon (Irenaeus). 4. Menandrians. Menander was similar to his teacher Simon both in the audacity with which he called himself the Savior, and in the teaching in which he recognized the origin of the world from the angels and these from Ennia (thought). In his magic he promised weapons of victory to the creators of the world, and in baptism, in his name, immortality to the mortal being of man. 5. Finally, although not in St. We do not find any heretics in the books of the apostolic times, nor among the accounts of the heretics who were then, but from many signs in the writings of John the Theologian we conclude that even in the first century there existed a heresy that completely eradicated the entire foundation of Christianity, which rejected the reality of the appearance of Christ in the flesh, and considered all visible actions attributed to Him to be illusory. This is the Docet heresy, which was fully revealed and formed in the 2nd century. The second beginning of the heresies that existed in the apostolic age was Eastern philosophy. At the time of I. Christ and the apostles, a certain kind of philosophical teaching, composed of the opinions of the Chaldeans, Persians and Egyptians, prevailed in Syria, Palestine and other eastern countries. His followers collected, preserved and agreed among themselves various kinds of legends about the beginning of the world and evil, both physical and moral, and about various classes of gods and spirits, and they loved and respected the collected information so much that even when they went to church they did not want to leave them, but they tried to agree these legends with Christian teaching. The general foundations of the Gnostic teachings were as follows: two principles are coeternal: God and matter; the former is the source of all good, the latter the cause of evil. From God through various flows come the angels (or the demiurge angel, the creator) who created this world; from among these angels was the God of the Jews, who established the Old Testament and whom some (Marcion) called the righteous and strict God and distinguished him from the god or evil spirit and from the good God - the Father of Jesus Christ. since these angels ruled the world in disagreement with the intention of the Supreme God, the source of good and truth, the Father of Christ, and kept people in error, lusts and vices, or at least were unable to lead people to communion with this highest and true God, whom they themselves did not know quite correctly, then the Supreme Deity, having mercy on the human race, sent Christ the Savior, who was one of the first outflows, being the heavenly, which had to be clothed with flesh in order to reveal to people his father, and those who entrust themselves to his teaching and, renouncing their earthly shell, will be immersed in the contemplation of this most perfect being, will one day be brought into pleroma or the closest union with this Being, where, having left the flesh, they will spend a blissful eternity, without which the resurrection of our mortal flesh cannot be expected. What the pagans were then looking for from various peoples, the Jews already found in themselves in the Kabbalah or secret teaching, which, despite the antiquity attributed to it, in all likelihood, lent its origin to the Platonists, as Tertullian testifies, only with changes in some parts. They had their own genealogies or genealogies or sephiroth. Therefore, those of the Jews who, having been infected with this philosophy, converted to Christianity, introduced new errors into it. Considering these false teachings that arose in the church during the time of the apostles, we could notice that some of them, due to their extreme absurdity and contradiction with Christian teaching, did not deserve refutation, or at least to warn Christians against them it was enough to just mention them; those hiding their poison under some cover of truth demanded clear exposure and the strongest refutation. The apostles acted this way. Converts from the pagans, contrary to the definition of the Council of Jerusalem, ate things sacrificed to idols and thereby tempted their brothers from the Jews (Rom. 14:1 et seq. Cor. 8:1); These also observed some rites and regulations from the law of Moses: but they laughed at them. The apostles, due to the circumstances of the church, found it necessary to spare those who were weak in conscience and therefore wrote: he who is weak in faith, that is, who does not yet have enough faith to accept with joy the rejection of the law of rituals and especially about food, do not accept doubtful thoughts (without disputes about opinions). He believed in eating all the food, like those converted from the pagans and some already from the Jews, another weak, exhausted, ate potions. Let not the poisonous one reproach the one who does not eat, as of course the pagans did, who already despised the Jews for their exaltation and stubbornness against the calling of God, and the one who does not eat the poison, let him not condemn the one who eats as unclean and a criminal: God accepts him. Further in the discussion of the holiness of days; he then reasons from day to day (distinguishes day from day), honors one as a holiday, the other as fasting; But he judges for every day (about every day equally). Let everyone know by his thoughts: the day he philosophizes, the Lord philosophizes, thinks that he is doing what is pleasing to the Lord; and if the day does not philosophize, the Lord does not philosophize; he thinks that he is acting in accordance with His will (Rom. 14). In general, while affirming for the Jews that the practice or fulfillment of all the rites and institutions of the Law of Moses does not place us before God, the apostles at the same time commanded those who had converted from the pagans to beware, lest their power (freedom) make this stumbling block weak (1 Cor. 8:9). When this freedom of theirs increased to the impudence of self-will and corruption, when some, like the Nicolaitans, did not want to constrain their sensuality by the sanctity of the bonds of marriage and allowed themselves everything, then the apostles rebelled against them with strong denunciation. So in John the Theologian, the Lord Himself says in a letter to the church of Ephesus: however, this is good in you, that you hate the works of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate (Apoc. 2:6), and in a letter to the church of Pergamum (vv. 14, 15). They write with force against them, or at least against those guilty of the same vices. Peter (2 epil. 2:1, 2, 10, 13-19) and Jude (vv. 4, 8, 11, 12, 13). Against the false apostles and all those heretics who considered it necessary in Christianity to observe the Law of Moses in order to receive justification for themselves not from faith, but from works, the Apostle Paul fought in his entire letters to the Romans and Galatians. He taught that no one can fulfill all the requirements of the law and beyond. from the works of the law all flesh will not be justified before God: that by the law only is the knowledge of sin (Rom. 3:20), that the law produces wrath, and not mercy (4:15), that when the law has been surpassed, then through this sin has only multiplied (5:21), that without the law sin would have been dead, but the commandment that came brought sin to life, but I died: and this commandment was found in me, even unto life. death (7:7-10), that finally the end of the law is Christ for righteousness to everyone who believes (10:4). The Apostle reveals this last thought more clearly in his Epistle to the Galatians, saying that the law was given to us only as a nurturer in Christ; showing our weakness in fulfilling his commandments, he had to lead us to the Redeemer from the legal oath that lies on every lawbreaking soul (3:24). Seeing the worst enemies of the sound teaching of faith in the growing multitude of Gnostics, arrogant in their knowledge, the apostles, both by general instructions and by private refutations and prophetic foreshadowings, taught to recognize them, to beware and to preserve in purity the word of salvation that was handed down to them. - Oh Timofey! wrote ap. Paul to his disciple, keep the pledge, turning away from worthless idle talk and the contradictions of falsely so-called knowledge ψευδωνύμου γνώσεως 1 Timothy 6:20), which some took hold of and wandered away from the faith (21). Who exactly the apostle is talking about here is clear from the words ψευδωνύμου γνώσεως, from which the Gnostics called themselves. Impious and superstitious, vain idle talk are fictitious or strange, deliberately rude, names of higher powers, the doctrine of higher worlds and the spirits that control them. In another place in the same letter, he calls these nasty and women's fables. Deny nasty and old woman’s fables (4:7). Among these fables he includes endless genealogies (1:4), which they create even more than the building of God in faith. By these genealogies nothing else can be understood as calculations and investigations about these outflows from the Divinity, which were known among the Gnostics from the Jews under the name Zephyroth, and among the Gnostics from the pagans under the name Aeons; they were endless, since the Eastern fantasy, which gave them existence, was inexhaustible in its works. Valentinian, says Tertullian, invented 30 aeons, but many others were added to these; the first four gave birth to four more eons and so on. They produced more controversy than God's edification in faith; because although they tended to explain the view of God's salvation, they only complicated the correct and simple way of understanding it through faith (See Titus 1:14; 2 Timothy 4:4). In particular, against those who rejected the divinity of Jesus Christ (the Ebionites, Cerinthians and Simonians), the teaching about it was revealed by the apostle. John and Paul. At the very beginning of his gospel, John contrasts them with false opinions that Jesus is the son of Joseph and Mary - an ordinary man, that Christ or the Word - the only begotten son came upon him only at baptism, that the world was created and ruled by angels, contrasts the following truths of sound doctrine: that the Word is not the outflow of any Deity, but God Himself, existing from eternity: in the beginning there was no Word and God was not the Word and, moreover, a person separate from His Father - this has been with God from time immemorial; that all things were created by Him, and not by angels; that the Word became flesh and was so united with it that it would never leave it; that the Word and the Only Begotten are not two separate persons, but we have seen His glory, the glory as of the only begotten from the Father (John 1:1, 2, 14). In his 1st epistle he also arms himself against them: let him who is a liar be swept away, for Jesus is not the Christ; This is the Antichrist, reject the Father and the Son (2:22). That the apostle here is not talking about the Jews who still did not believe, but only about those who had turned to faith and did not want to recognize Jesus as the God-man, this is clear from the fact that we are talking about heretics who left the church (2:19). Next (6, 7, 8) three witnesses are given in heaven and on earth to also confirm that Jesus is the Son of God. If we accept, says the apostle, the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater (9). What kind of evidence is this? This is the testimony with which God testified about His Son. This also includes the conclusion of the letter (v. 20). Ap. Paul, in his letter to Colossae, contrasts the same heretics with the fact that I. Christ is the image of the invisible, eternal God, the Creator of the world and provident, the Head of the church; before suffering he was not divided into himself, but died and rose again: since it pleased the Father that all the fullness of πλήρωμα, that is, the Divinity, should dwell in Him, and not only appear for a while. The last words are directly opposite to the teaching of the Cerinthians in particular, who revered their Christ only by the outflow of πληρωμ” from the Divinity (1:15-19). In the second chapter, again against the same Cerinthians and in general against all those who reject the Divinity of Jesus Christ, the Apostle remarks: take heed, brethren, lest anyone deceive you with philosophy and vain flattery according to the tradition of men (this is the whole teaching of the Gnostics among the Jews and pagans), according to the material principles of the world, and not according to Christ: for in him dwells all the fullness of the Divinity bodily (σωματικώς - through the incarnation, 8, 9). Finally, in confirmation of the fact that in this epistle it was the apostle who had in mind Cerinthian and others like them in their errors, and together to show how the apostles paid attention and caution to Christians on other subjects of their teaching, it should be pointed out in the same chapter to verses 15-23. Here the apostle refutes the necessity of observing the provisions of the law of Moses (16, 17) and serving angels (18). But the first, in addition to some Jews, was also held by the Gnostics from the Jews, and the last is actually the teaching of the Gnostics, for whom angels are the creators of the world. John the Theologian especially rebelled against the teachings of the Docetes in his first two epistles. Every spirit, he says in the first (4:3), who does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh, is not from God (2 Last Article 7). For many flatterers have come into the world, not confessing Jesus Christ who came in the flesh: this is a flatterer and the Antichrist. The falsehood of this teaching was so obvious that it did not require refutation. Ignatius mentions him in his letter to the Smyrnae, who shortly after John wrote: ούχ ώσπερ άπιστοί τινες λέγεσιν, το δοκείν αύτόν πεπονϑέναι, αυτοί τό δοκείν όντες, καί καϑώς φρονούσιν καί συμβήσεται άυτοίς, ούσιν άσώματοις καί δαιμονικοίς. External structure of the Church during the time of the apostles The external structure of the church may be subject to consideration in relation to ritual and hierarchical. The ritual structure of the Apostolic Church was not complicated; concerned only the most necessary; where possible, it agreed with the Jewish, however, renewing it with abundant strength; emanating from the Spirit, it itself had a strong effect on exciting the spirit. Neither petty legibility, nor strict constraint, nor many demands, nor the deep mystery of the ritual Jewish law were visible in him: any rapprochement with the pagan was deliberately removed: it was only in accordance with the height and dignity of the internal education of the same church. It was not introduced suddenly, but gradually and in all its parts, due to the circumstances of the church, it has not yet reached full development in these times. And the Savior’s promise to primarily be with those who gather in His name and the spirit of unity and love that united the entire society of the first Christians, and the general and private needs of the church, concerning some of its individuals, encouraged believers, as much as possible, to gather together; but these meetings were neither strictly tied to a place like the Jewish ones to the church, nor definite regarding time, but monotonous in actions. At first, Christians had common meeting places with Jews: the temple and synagogues. In the church, the apostles taught (Acts 5:20), prayed (22:17) and performed some rituals (21:26). At first, believers in Jesus Christ also stayed in the church every day, after the miracle on the day of Pentecost and the sermon of St. Peter, as Luke notes (2:46). After the temple, the apostles taught (Acts 9:20), and Christians gathered (18, 20, 21) in synagogues. In Corinth ap. Paul also taught at the school of a certain Tyrannus (19:9). In Philippi he goes repeatedly with Luke and to the Jewish prayer book (16:13, 16). But when the need for a general meeting became urgent, and circumstances or a known goal did not allow choosing any of these places for it, then every private house became for believers a temple, a synagogue, a school, and a prayer book; or even more: because here, in one of their circles, Christians performed actions that they did not perform there. Here, and only here, they broke bread, or commemorated the mystical supper of their Lord (Acts 2:46). Such houses or upper rooms as in Troas (20:6, 7, 8, 9) on behalf of the assemblies themselves - έκκλησίαι also received the name έκκλησίαι (1 Cor. 11:22) churches, and were sometimes called έπισυναγωγάι (Heb. 10:25) or simply συναγωγαί (James 2:2). Meeting times were even less certain. In the beginning they happened every day and at every time of the day; Subsequently, of course, they were adapted according to the distribution of the time of Jewish sacred services, at which Christians were present (Acts 3:1) and which were then performed at the third, sixth and ninth hours of the day. Only the breaking of bread took place during the hours of the night (20:11). However, Clement of Rome also wrote that everything must be done strictly and in order (τάξει), that the Lord commanded at established times (κ ατά καιρύς τεταγμένας) to perform, i.e., offerings and liturgies (προσφορ'ς καί λειτουργίας ). In the history of the apostolic times we find evidence of preferential respect for Sunday under the name of the Lord's Day (Apoc. 1:10). Is this the day, of course, 1 Cor. 16:1 and Acts 20:7, called μία σαββάτων, is not visible from the text; This is how Chrysostom explains it (in Act. et Epist. ad Cor. 1. p.), Jerome, Ecumenius, Theophylact. The Lord himself, by a secondary appearance to his disciples on the same day a week after his resurrection, apparently established him for the primary memory of this resurrection; then - Passover and Pentecost (Acts 20:16; 1 Cor. 16:8). The actions of the meetings were also not constantly uniform, on the one hand, due to the new order introduced without special rules, on the other, due to the difference in different times of circumstances and needs of the church. The more common ones are: 1) Reading from the Old Testament, as it was done in the synagogues of the Jews, along with an explanation of what was read. So this was commanded by the apostle. Paul to the Church of Corinth (1 Cor. 14:29). It can be assumed that the books of the New Testament were also read in these collections. Thus Eusebius testifies that the ap. Peter instituted the reading of Mark's gospel in churches. 2) Singing sacred songs (though without musical instruments) and borrowed from Jewish worship, such as psalms (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16), following the example of the Savior and deliberately prepared (1 Cor. 14:26) or from a sudden admiration of the spirit, warmed by spiritual exercises, born in the congregation itself. 3) Performing prayers not only with the spirit, but also with the mind (1 Cor. 14:15), initiated by one, and concluded by the entire congregation, according to Jewish custom, with a confirmatory exclamation: Amen (16). But the most important, strictly Christian ritual in these meetings, often repeated, was the commemoration of the last supper of the Lord Jesus. This was required by love for Him; This strengthened the union of believers among themselves; in this everyone found food and reinforcement for his spirit. Connected with him was another act of love for his brothers, arranging a common meal for the rich and the poor from the feasible offerings of the former. This is why the administration of these two actions was preceded by the gathering of the sacramental and common meal brought for the supper. For the first, only bread and wine were chosen; everything else followed to the last. The chosen bread and wine were not simply offered, but were consecrated into mystical forms by pronouncing the words of the Savior Himself at the first establishment of the sacrament and with the blessing or prayer of the celebrant. This is confirmed by the gospels and 1 Cor. 11:23–25, where the apostle repeats the history of the establishment of this sacrament, as an example of its implementation, and where there are the words of I. Christ, and blessing or thanksgiving, and from the testimonies of writers of the subsequent century, who, speaking about the celebration of the Eucharist in their time, specifically indicate these actions of consecration, and due to the proximity of this time to the apostles and especially to the apostolic men, one cannot think that when performing such an important action, any action was allowed the change is against the first institution. Matt. 26:26. Illustration έδίδυ τοίς μαϑηταίς καί είπε λάβετε, φάγετε τέτό έστι τό σώμά μου. 27. Καί λαβών τό ποτήριον, καί εύχαριστήσας, έδωκεν αύτοίς, λέγων πίετε έξ αύτέ πάντες.... Mark 14:22. Καί έσϑιόντων έαυτών, λαβών ό Ίησύς άρτον, εύλογήσας έκλασε καί έδωκεν αυτοίς καί είπε λάβετε, φάγετε τέτό έστι τό σώμά μου. 23. Καί λαβών τό ποτήριον , εύχαριστήσας, έδωκεν αύτοίς, καί έπιον έξ αύτού πάντες. 24. Καί είπεν αύτοίς τέτο έστι τό αίμα μου τό τής καινής διαϑήκης τό περί πολλών εκχυνόμενον. Onion. 22:19. Καί λαβών άρτον, ένχαριστήσας έκλασε καί έδωκεν αύτοίς λέγων τέτό έστι τό σώμα μον, το ύπέρ ύμών διδόμενον, τέτο ποιείτε είς τήν έμήν άνάμνησιν. 20. Ώσαύτως καί τό ποτήριον, μετά τό δειπνήσαι λεγων τέτο τό πστήριον, ή καινή διαϑήκη έν τώ αίματι μού, τό ύπέρ ύμών εκχυνόμενον. 1 Cor. 11:23–25: Ό Κύριος 'Ιησύς... έλαβεν άρτον καί εύχαριστήσας έκλασε καί είπε; λάβετε, φάγετε τέτό μον έστι το σώμα τό ύπέρ ύμών κλώμενον τέτο ποιείτε είς την έμήν άνάμνησιν. 'Ωσαύτως καί τό ποτήριον μετά τό δειπνήσαι, λέγων τούτο τό ποτήριον, ή καινή διαϑήκη έστίν έν τώ έμώ αίματυ τέτο ποιείτε όσάκις άν πίνητε είς τήν έμήν άνάμνησιν. 1. Everyone says: λαβών άρτον; 2. Matt. and Mar. εύλόγησεν; Onion. and Pav. έυχαριστήσας; 3. all: έκλασε; 4. everything: this is my body; Luke: hedgehog for what you give; Pav.: the hedgehog is broken for you; both: do this in remembrance of me, and Paul also adds at the beginning of all the words: take, eat. 5. Matt. and Mar. λαβών ποτήριον; in Luke. and Pav. this lies in ώσαύτως; 6. Matt. and Mar. εύχαριστήσας, in Luke. and Pav. this is again contained in 'Ωσαύτως; 7. Matt. and Mar. έδοκεν; in Luke. and Pav. in ώσαύτως; 8. Drink everything from her. 9. Matt.: This is my blood of the New Testament, which was shed for many for the remission of sins. Mar. also only without the last words; Onion. and Paul: this cup is the New Testament in my blood: Luke. even for you it is spilled; 10. Paul: (as well as about bread): do this as often as you drink in remembrance of me. Irenaeus: Qui est e terra panis percipiens invocationem Dei, jam non communis panis est, sed eucharistia Lib. 4, cap. 34. Justin Martyr: ....deinde ei, qui fratribus praeest, offertur panis et poculum aquae et vini, quibus ille acceptis lavdem et gloriam rerum universarum Patri, per nomen Filii et Spiritus Sancti offert et eucharistiam, s. gratiarum actionem pro eo, quod nos donis suis dignatus sit, proliae exequitur (εύχαριστίαν έπί πολύ ποιείται). Atque ubi ille preces ei gratiarum actionem absoluit, populus, qui adest, omnis favsta approbatione acclamat, dicens: amen. Apolog. 11. Writer of the apostolic decrees: Memores igitur eorum, quae propter nos pertulit, gratias agimus tibi. Deus Omnipotens, non quantum debemus, at quantum possumus, et constitutionem ejus implemus. In qua enim nocte tradebatur, pane sanctis ac immaculatis manibus suis accepto, et elevatis oculis ad Deum suum ac Patrem fregit et dedit discipulis, dicens: hoc est mysterium novi testamenti: accipite ex eo: manducate: hoc est corpus meum, quod pro multis frangitur in remissionem peccatorum. Similiter calicem miscuit ex vino et aqua, sanctificavit et dedit iisdem dicens: bibite ex eo omnes: hic est sanguis meus, qui pro multis effunditur in remissionem peccatorum. Hoc facite in meam commemorationem. Quotiescumque enim manducabitis panem hunc et bibitis hunc calicem, mortem meam adnuntiabetis, donec veniam. – Itaque memores passionis ejus et mortis et a mortuis resurrectionis, atque in coelum reditus, nec non secundi adventus, quem idem facturus est, in quo cum gloria et potestate veniet judicare vivos ac mortuos et reddere singulis juxta opera eorum: Tibi Regi ac Deo panem hunc et calicem hunc offerimus, secundum constitutionem Ejus, gratias Tibi per Eundem agentes, quia nos dignos habuisti, qui staremus coram Te ac sacerdotio fungeremur Tibi; et poscimus Te ut super haec dona in conspectu Tuo proposita placate perspicias, Tu qui nullius indiges Deus et beneplaceas in eis ad honorem Christi Tui, atque supra hoc sacrificium mittas Sanctum Tuum Spiritum, testem passionum Domini Iesu: ut exstibent· panem hunc corpus Christi Tui, et Calicem hunc sanguinem Christi Tui, quo participes illius ad pietatem confirmentur, remissionem peccatorum consequantur, diabolo ejusque errore liberentur; Spirito S. repleantur, digni Christo Tuo fiunt, vitam impetrent, Te illis reconciliato, Domine omnipotens!. Constitut. Lib. 8, p. 12. The consecrated gifts were refracted and distributed to the people through the deacons according to the testimony of Justin: τών πειρόντων μεταλαβείν άπό τού εύχαρίστέντος άρτον καί όίνου καί ύδατος, καί τοίς ού παρούσι άποφέρουσι Apolog. 11. For this, a common meal was also expected - άγάπη (Tertullian). The reason for the establishment of these meals, in addition to motives of love, was the intention to act more strongly towards the destruction of the prejudice of the Jews against the pagans. In addition to this sacrament, in which all members of the church together participated many times, in the Apostolic Church some special sacraments were established for the special needs of everyone: for those who wish to join the church, the sacrament of baptism; for the baptized person the sacrament of ordination; for everyone the mystery of repentance; for those elected to be a mentor and shepherd of the church - the sacrament of the priesthood; for a marriage entering into a union - the secret function of marriage; for the weak - the sacrament of consecration of oil. When performing baptism, the time and place were not deliberately chosen, but were used as it happened; it was only required that there be water at the place of baptism (Behold water: what forbids me to be baptized? Acts 8:36) and a minister of the church. The right to perform this sacred act belonged to all degrees of the hierarchy from apostles to deacons. Anyone approaching baptism had to 1) bring repentance for the sins he had committed before: repent and be baptized every one of you (Acts 2:38). This was also required at the baptism of John: and I was baptized in the Jordan by him, confessing my sins (Matthew 3:6); in Ephesus many believers from Jews and Greeks came to confess their deeds (Acts 19:18). 2) make a profession of faith (Acts 8:37). 3) renounce a life in sins and promise a holy and blameless life (1 Peter 3:21): and now we are saved not by the washing of carnal uncleanness, but by (questioning) a promise - (έπερώτημα - means both and shows that the promise was made by asking: do you promise....?) to God of a good conscience. Justin the Martyr also testifies to this: ύπησχνώνται (Apolog. 2). Baptism was performed by pronouncing the name of the Holy Trinity and immersing it in water three times. The pronunciation of the name of the Holy Trinity at baptism was established by Jesus Christ Himself and, without a doubt, was exactly fulfilled, as confirmed by the testimony of the writers of the next century; immersion, and not sprinkling only, is meant in the very name of baptism βαπτισμός and in its application by the apostle. Paul to the burial and rising of Jesus Christ, or to the burial by this action in the waters of the old man and the rising of the new (Rom. 6:34; Col. 2:12). Infants were also baptized: which can be concluded from the placement of this sacrament in the place of circumcision, from the baptism of entire houses, from the teaching of writers of subsequent times. Irenaeus (Lib. 2. p. 39) writes: Christus omnes venit per se ipsum salvare. Omues, inquam, qui per Eum renascuntur in Deum, infantes in parvulos et pueros et juvenes et seniores. Renasci - here means, by comparison of this word with other places in his work, regenerari per baptismum. Writers earlier than Irenaeus speak generally about the need for baptism for the salvation of everyone, from which we can conclude about infants. The writer of three books known under the name of Hermas, in one vision represents the apostles, after their departure from the world, going to baptize the Old Testament saints: only with water can they achieve peace, he says (Lib. 3 Simii., 9, n. 16). Having been washed from sins by the water of baptism, he received confirmation in Christ, sealing to God and betrothal of the Spirit through the laying on of hands, which at first was performed, as can be seen from the history of the apostles, only by the apostles, so that in those cases when these were lacking, the Holy Spirit, although it descended visibly on those who were baptized, but without the ordination of the baptizer (Acts 8:39). At the end of the second or beginning of the third century, ordination was replaced by the anointing of chrism. The first Tertullian mentions him. Caro abluitur, caro ungitur, caro signatur, ut anima muniatur (De Res. p. 8). Private repentance (James 5:16; 1 John 1:9) and public repentance for those generally guilty by the temptation of criminals (2 Cor. 6:5-11), of course, was accompanied by special works of piety following the example of the Jews, fasting, prayer, alms (Heb. 6:4, 5, 6). They were called to the priesthood either by revelation, like Timothy: (1 Timothy 4:14) do not neglect your gift that dwells in you, which was given to you by prophecy with the laying on of the hands of the priesthood, or by the separation of the firstfruits of believing paganism, since this caused great zeal for the faith, as Clement of Rome writes about this: κατά χώραν καί πόλεις κηρύσσοντες (άπόστολοι) καϑίστаѵоѵ τάς άπαρχάς αύτών δοκιμάζοντες τώ πνεύματι είς έπισκόπους καί διακόνους τών μελλόντων πιστεύειν (1Epist. ad Corin.) or by the general election of the whole church, like the seven deacons (Acts 6:3–5). It is not known whether they were elected to the degrees of the priesthood by lot. Example Acts. 1:23–26 does not testify to anything in this regard, since here the election was not for the degree of priesthood, but for the apostolic ministry and, moreover, as Chrysostom notes, μετείκον (Hom. 5, in Tim). However, it seems that it was only permissible not out of ambition to seek the degrees of the priesthood, even the highest (1 Tim. 3:1): the word is true: if anyone wants the episcopacy, he desires good deeds. In the case of electing someone by the church, it was required that the person chosen be distinguished by special and faithful virtues over other faithful ones and be tested in faith and way of life. Requirements of this kind for episcopacy and deaconry are set out by St. Paul 1 Tim. 3:1–10 and Titus. 1:7–9. He who was found worthy was consecrated by the hand of the apostles (Acts 14:23) or the bishops (Titus 1:5) after the common fasting of the dedicator and the dedicatee and prayer (Acts 14:23). There is no information about marriage as it was performed in the Apostolic Church, however, from the concept that the apostle gives about it. Paul (Eph. 5:32), one can guess that this was not left without special institutions. At the beginning of the 2nd century, Ignatius writes that those entering into marriage need the consent (γνωμή) of the bishop. To relieve the sick, the apostles commanded the method in which they themselves, using the power given to them from the Lord, healed the weak - namely, anointing the sick with oil with prayer and hope. Thus, God’s Anointed Lord Jesus, from the abundance of the Spirit resting in Him, through His apostles opened everywhere new sources of sanctification and power for His new church, and so that only the times of the apostles did not seem rich in a multitude of gifts of grace, grace is contained for all times and for all people, for all ages under the seven sacred seals of the seven sacraments. Finally, fasting also relates in some way to the ritual institutions of the apostolic times. However, it should be noted in advance that the apostles, wishing, as much as possible, to weaken respect for the ritual law of Moses, both in other cases and in the discussion of fasts, did not leave the church any general orders or commands regarding their time, or regarding the continuation, or regarding the severity of their observations, although they themselves very often used them as the most effective means for preparing their spirit for the highest spiritual exercise or for strengthening themselves in the most important exploits of his service. There was only one general fast in the apostolic church, which, so to speak, was ordained by Jesus Christ himself in memory of His suffering: the days will come when the bridegroom is taken away from them, and then they will fast. - But the historical evidence about it is so uncertain now that it is impossible to say in the affirmative whether this fast of Pentecost was forty days or forty hours or even less in ancient times. Irenaeus (apud. Ius. lib. 5. p. 24) about this he writes like this: άμφιοβήτησις, άλλα καί περί τού είδους αύτού τής νηστείας οί μέν γάρ οίονται μίαν ήμέραν δείν αύτούς νηστεύειν οί δέ δύο, οί δέ πλέιονας οί δέ τεσσαράκοντα ώρας ήμέρινάς τε καί νυκτέρινας συμμετρούσι τήν ήμέραν (νηστείαν) αύτών, καί τοιαύτη μέν ποικιλία τών έπιτηρούντων ού έφ ήμών γεγουτία, όλλά καί πολύ πρώτερον έπί τών πρό ήμών. - If you adhere to the present reading, then you must replace ήμέραν with νηστείαν, otherwise it will be absurd: counting forty hours of day and night in a day. If we do not change the text, but allow a period after τεσσαράκοντα, as in other codes it is read and τεσσαράκοντα is attributed to ήμέρας to the previous word, and not to ώρας - the subsequent word, then we get the following meaning: counting in days and daily and night hours; in the first case we will fast for forty hours, in the second - forty days. The external structure of the apostolic church in relation to the hierarchical Because there were people in the church who, imagining the original state of the church in the form of such a fraternal society, where there is no difference in the degrees of mutual subordination of members, where in everything and among everyone there is equality and independence, or at least one internal direct dependence on the invisible Head, argued that the first principles of power attributed to the times of the apostles were nothing more than the later abuse of the freedom of Christians and the anticipation of the rights of a simple multitude of believers, to no one in particular over all belonging, then having to consider the apostolic church in relation to its hierarchy, first of all we must defend the legality of its establishment. Firstly, history testifies that the initial establishment of the church hierarchy originates from the apostolic establishment: for as soon as the Church of Christ began, it is constantly under the order, management, supervision of the apostles, their assistants and associates. When the apostles gathered new churches for Jesus Christ somewhere, they appointed leaders for them, as can be seen from the letters to Timothy and Titus. Secondly, the apostles testify that God Himself entrusts to some special ministries and special gifts (1 Cor. 12:28; Eph. 4:11; Rom. 12:4, 9). But these gifts and services, depending on to whom, in what case, to what extent and at what time they were communicated, necessarily placed them in a certain respect above others and imposed new responsibilities on them, and forced others to obey them. Finally, thirdly, in the church, as in any society, there could not be order, degrees and a certain kind of power. Not all members of the church, even in early times, were equally strong and strong, not all were equally sufficiently and firmly instructed in the truths of the faith: who would bear the infirmities of the weak, support the weak, instruct and admonish unbelievers, if special builders and trustees were not chosen and appointed for this purpose? So it was necessary for some authority and authority to be in the church; history shows that it was; The apostles testify that God Himself established them with their hands. But it would be in vain for us to look in the general structure of church government for any of the boards of civil societies. Jesus Christ testified before the judges of the world that His kingdom is not of the world. But that which is not of the world is not structured in the same way as the kingdoms of the world are structured. There is one King and Head in it, but invisible in heaven; visible rulers, although with signs of power, are still servants: so let men hate us as servants of Christ; visible subordinates, although subjugated to the authorities, are to the King God the Father Himself, and let no one dare to shepherd this flock as if he possessed it (1 Pet. 5:23); it has the right, by a general verdict, to appoint shepherds for itself. This is the general concept of the structure of the apostolic church. Now we will show the general division of all members of it, the degrees of government officials and the rules of their administration. The entire society of the Apostolic Church was mainly divided into clergy and laity. Although there are traces of these names themselves in the writings of the apostles. in their times we do not meet, but the division existed, for we find the names: mentors and herds, which are the first to designate. Despite the fact that Jesus Christ made everyone priests to God, everyone had the anointing of the Holy One, everyone was confirmed and sealed by the Holy Spirit, no one denied having special builders of the mysteries of God and teachers. The apostolic church in its highest class contained: 1) persons extraordinary in their talents and service, and 2) those whose service was to become a title for subsequent times. The former included the apostles, prophets and evangelists, the latter: bishops, presbyters and deacons. No matter how high the appointment of the apostles was, the benefits given to their ministry were just as great. We say this only about the first 13 apostles, who had a second affirmative appointment to their ministry after the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Although these chosen messengers of the Lord had much in common with their successors - bishops and presbyters, since these too were called shepherds, teachers, primates, mentors, servants of Christ, builders of the church, since they also had the right to knit and decide, retain and forgive sins, preach, teach, baptize, break bread, feed the sheep of Christ, govern the church, lay hands on others: but when In all this, the apostles had such special gifts and rights that far exceed all the private gifts and rights of their successors. And Chrysostom had the right to call the apostleship the highest, the most spiritual, the supreme, the beginning of all principles αρχήν μεγίστην, πνευματικότατην, τήν άνω, άρχήν τών άλλων άρχών. The first advantage of the apostolic ministry was their direct calling and mission from Jesus Christ, as well as direct instruction from Jesus Christ in what they should proclaim to the world. There is no doubt about the eleven apostles who remained after the death of Jesus Christ. Matthias was chosen by lot, that is, by the voice of God, and chosen from among those who were with the apostles during the entire time Jesus was on earth and turned around - he began from the baptism of John even to the day in which he ascended (Acts 1:21-29); Paul, numbered among the apostles, was called to the apostleship at the same time as to Christ. God has deigned, Ananias his baptizer told him, that you too should see the righteous and hear the voice from His mouth, as if you would be His witness to all men of these things which you have seen and heard (Acts 22:14). And He who called him by His grace Himself deigned to reveal His son in him, so that he did not need to consult with flesh and blood, with mentors from men, in anything related to his ministry (Gal. 1:16). Elsewhere (1 Cor. 11:23) The Apostle Paul, retelling the story of the establishment of the Last Supper, says that he is passing on what he himself received from the Lord. This advantage of the apostolic ministry - to be called and sent to it from God Himself - is so important that the teachers of lies tried to assimilate it for themselves: Manes or the Manichaeans called themselves the apostles of Jesus Christ and Mohammed - the apostle of God. From the immediacy of this title it also followed that this service was uninterrupted; in the proper sense, the apostles did not have and could not have successors. Peter and Paul, says Irenaeus, handed over to Linus not the apostleship, but the bishopric. The second advantage of the apostolic ministry was such an abundance of the communion of the Spirit, which imparted to all their teaching and all the rules they taught the character of immutable truth, not requiring any further confirmation and evidence. Such were these messengers of Jesus Christ to be, who were promised that they would speak not their own words, but the words of the Spirit, which would convert all languages ​​to faith and be witnessed by God Himself in signs and wonders. It pleased the Holy Spirit and us - this is the basis of all their definitions and teachings that they betrayed to the church. From this power of the Spirit there is such strength and effectiveness of their teaching, so that one could also say about them what they said about Jesus Christ: no one ever said that! Their voice was similar to the voice that so amazed Saul that it suddenly made him Paul. Not only John and Jacob were sons of thunder; they all spoke with thunder and lightning. In truth, like their fiery tongues, inflaming their hearts with love for Christ! Truly these are the trumpets of the gospel, which with their sound destroy the visors of Jericho - the world and the devil! Truly their words are a sharp sword on both sides, a weapon that pierces the soul. Who wouldn't be surprised? Christ crucified - recently a victim of malice and hatred, slander - sends to demand from the world faith, worship and eternal obedience; the word of the cross and resurrection is preached, strange in the very nature of its teaching, a temptation to the Jews, madness to the Greeks, incomprehensible to the mind, contrary to nature itself, hostile to all religions, especially hateful to the flesh, inconsistent anywhere with any domestic laws, terrible to morals and passions rooted in evil: and behold! as if in an instant, thousands of people accept it, the feeling is carried away, the mind is inflamed, the heart melts, the conscience is convicted and relieved; priests, proconsuls, judges, philosophers - humble themselves; Sophists are embarrassed, orators stutter, tyrants shudder. Idols fall, oracles fall silent, the Jew weeps bitterly, looking at the pierced, the Greek and the Roman, the Indus and the Parthian, the Moor and the Ethiopian raise the banner of His cross, and not only the cities, writes the pagan, but everything is infected with the teaching of the Gospel. By what forces is all this produced? Not the leaders of Alexander, not the arts of the rich Caesars, not the pretentious word of Demosthenes or Cicero, not the lures of Mohammed, not the aspiration of riches, pleasures, honors, not the army of angels, not the appearance of Christ Himself from heaven or from the heavenly throne, no, all this was produced by the Divine power of the words of thirteen people, not noble by birth, insignificant in appearance, by strength weak, ignorant of sciences, persecuted everywhere, tormented, tormented. From this filling of the Spirit came their full power in government. They have already, as it were, sat on thrones; and from these thrones they give laws and judgment not only to the 12 tribes of Israel, but also to the whole world; They bind the conscience with commandments, prohibitions and punishments and release them from their obligation and from their fear. - They establish laws, remove the yoke of rituals from the Jews, prohibit pagans from idolatry, appoint bishops, establish church order, prescribe rules for the court of the church. They impose punishments: they come with a club, act without mercy, strike with terrible executions: Ananias falls dead at the feet of the apostles from one denunciation of Petrov; Elymas loses her sight; Hymenaeus and Alexander are bound by a curse; the Corinthian carnivore is excommunicated from the church and given over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh. The third distinctive feature of the apostolic ministry was the complete agreement of all in the teaching, so that whoever dared to contradict one, he contradicted everyone, he was already considered a false apostle, subject to damnation, and on the contrary, what anyone accepted from one apostle was generally recognized as apostolic. Hence, what John added to Matthew’s gospel in his gospel did not destroy it in the least and did not contradict it. Hence, it is unfair that Valentinus accepts one Gospel of John, Marcion - Luke, Cerinthus - Mark, Ebion - Matthew; It is in vain that they think to find a contradiction among themselves among the evangelists; in vain they oppose James to Paul; we must take into account that the apostles speak about the difference between living and dead faith, about different justification before God and before people, about different states of sin and grace - to different persons: some of them relied on the works of the law, others on faith, but on a vain, dead faith similar to the faith of demons. Thus wisdom will always be vindicated from her children. The fourth advantage of the apostolic ministry was the vision of Jesus Christ, of whom they were to be eyewitnesses, especially witnesses of His rising from the dead. That's why John says: hedgehog vidhem. That is why Peter places himself among the witnesses of His greatness. That is why Christ appeared to Paul both on the way, and in the rapture, and on other occasions. Luke conveys more what he heard than what he saw: for this reason he is not an apostle, as Jerome notes. To be chosen as an apostle, according to Peter, one must be a witness of the resurrection of Jesus Christ. And of course, what gave no little importance to the apostolic testimony was that they testified not only to what they had heard, but to what they themselves saw, saw often, saw separately many times, not alone, but also with many others - they testified with such consent, with such simplicity, with such firmness of spirit, in such dangers, that any suspicion of deception should be completely removed. The fifth advantage of the apostolic ministry is its ubiquity throughout the whole world, sending to all languages ​​to the last of the earth, to the ends of the universe, from east to west. Hence they were entrusted with the care not of any one church, but of all churches; hence the founding of churches throughout the city, their scattering from Jerusalem, traveling, preaching throughout the whole world; hence what was written by one was taught to others; what was established here should have been valid everywhere. Their voice is like the voice of heaven; their light is like the light of the rays of the sun, spreading over all countries. And those sent to preach the Gospel in all languages, Divine, are equipped with the knowledge of all languages. Therefore, it is impossible in the proper sense to call them bishops of any private churches: Peter - Antioch or Roman, James - Jerusalem, John - Ephesus, etc. The ruler of an entire region chose a city for his residence. The king has power not only over his capital, in which he lives, but over his entire land. No one divided the earth into thirteen parts for these messengers. how the promised land was divided among the 12 tribes of Israel; everyone has one ministry, one apostleship, although not being able to be everywhere at the same time, they were more or less here or here: James in Jerusalem, John in Asia Minor, Peter in Syria. The sixth advantage of the apostolic ministry was such an abundance of miraculous gifts that they seemed to be not an ability, not a strength, but as if they were a constant action of supernatural forces. They spoke in languages ​​unknown to them before, drove out spirits, destroyed the power of hell, healed the sick, and raised the dead. Their miracles are glorious in terms of the method of performance: for they were performed by word, and by touch, and by wave, even by a shadow in the eyes of countless people, in the eyes of their irreconcilable enemies; goals and actions are important in the discussion: for they were saving for the hearts of those being healed, timely and pleasant to the unfortunate, glorious to God, strong in confirming the greatness of God as well as in destroying the flattery of idols, all superstition, wickedness, and deceit. True, many others in the primal church abounded in the gift of miracles: but the very gift of miracles was not given to anyone except the apostles. δώρον μόνων τών δώδεκα ήν. Hom. The seventh, finally, advantage of the apostolic ministry was the right to write canonical works and here's why. Paul writes almost everywhere at the beginning of his epistles: Paul is an apostle... (as well as Peter, James, Judas); and that’s why, whatever he wrote to the churches, he set it as an unchangeable rule for them: in his letter to Timothy, he outlined an image of correcting his service to him in the church. Thus, Scripture also reveals its apostolic authority in its other epistles to the Corinthians and Galatians. Isn’t that why in ancient times the gospel of Luke, the writer and apostle, was attributed to Paul and the gospel of Mark to Peter? Is this not why Ignatius posits a difference between his writings and those of Peter and Paul? Not like Peter or Paul, he says to the Romans, I command you: they are apostles, but I am nothing έγώ δέ έλάχιστος. So here are the advantages of the apostolic ministry, which everyone has recognized since ancient times, and which not to recognize - to honor the apostles as ordinary teachers - means agreeing to admit one’s complete blindness. Already from the disclosure of these advantages of the apostolic ministry, it naturally appears that those who bore it in considering their rights should all be equal to each other and, therefore, that those who act unfairly are those who assimilate some kind of primacy of power to one of the apostles and humiliate others, making them subordinate to them. Everyone can see that this remark is directed against the important subject of the dispute between the Latin and all other churches about the primacy and power of St. Peter over the other apostolic faces, on which the Roman Church asserts the primacy and power over all other churches. The importance of this issue in the history of the church draws our attention to it. When it is resolved, we will first test the proposed reasons for its decision in the Catholic Church. Then we will examine whether it was really the intention of Jesus Christ to give the church the appearance of a one-man government and to entrust this unity of power to the apostle. Petra? Finally, how did the ap himself look at himself in this regard? Peter and how did his fellow apostles look at him? The Catholic Church claims that St. Peter was given by Jesus Christ Himself primacy of power over the other apostles, therefore supreme power over the entire church (for the power of the apostles was supreme in the church and to have primacy over the apostles means to have supreme power over the entire church) and asserts his opinion: 1) on the following words of Jesus Christ, ap. Peter said: And I say to you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church (Matthew 16:18). Apparently, here, for Petrov’s faithfulness to the confession, he is promised to be the foundation of the entire Christian church, or, what is also the head. But considering the various ways in which these words of the Savior are explained by ancient and new exponents of St. Scriptures, of which one is the words: on this stone they refer to Jesus Christ, which is intense, although in itself it does not contain a contradiction; others to all the apostles, which is not clear; others to one ap. I believe that this is not true, since no one else can be the main foundation than the one lying down, but the secondary one, which the apostle speaks about. Paul: having been created on the basis of an apostle and a prophet, they are all apostles; and so I repeat - comparing all these opinions with each other, we do not find closer to the true one by which in this stone this confession of Peter’s faith is indicated: you are Christ, the Son of the living God. You are Peter, he says in response, your name is stone: but why and for what is this name? Obviously, not for this confession, which, as the Savior Himself noted, was revealed to him by the Heavenly Father, but from the stone that you were first given to lay in the foundation of the church; from that confession, which is necessary for everyone who comes to church, as the basis of his faith. And the gates of hell will not prevail against her; the spirit of darkness with all the forces of hell will try to shake it at its very foundation: it will find tools on earth through which, having taken my life, it will attempt to prove to the world that I am not Christ, the Son of the living God: but the gates of hell will not prevail - I cannot powerfully keep the Son of God from death. I will rise and give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, I will give you the first to bring Jews and pagans into my church: and if you bind on earth, it will be bound in heaven, and if you loose on earth, it will be loose in heaven. By the power of the apostolic authority, you and the other brethren, at the inspiration of the Spirit, will proclaim the new law of grace, and you will abolish the old law of Moses. 2) on the following words of Jesus Christ ap. Peter: I have prayed for you, so that your faith may not fail, and you, having once turned, strengthen your brethren (Luke 22:31) and 3) (John 21:15, 16, 17) feed my lambs and feed my sheep. But what follows from this to the assertion of the power of the ap. Peter over the apostles? Jesus Christ commands him to once strengthen the brethren: but he notices that he himself will fall before others and must think about conversion: having been converted. You will fall: you will renounce me, but I will raise you up so that you will strengthen, correct, and establish more firmly the other pillars of my church, your brothers, who also have to waver in their faith. Establish, but do not assert, your dominion over them. Shepherding the sheep was entrusted not only to Peter, but to all the apostles. In the place indicated, after a threefold confession of love, service to the flock of Christ is entrusted to him, because by his threefold renunciation of Christ he has made himself in the eyes of others unworthy of it. So the proposed foundations of Peter’s supreme power over the entire church do not themselves have firmness. Let us pay attention to whether such autocracy in the church still agrees with the will of Jesus Christ? The disciples had a dispute about which of them should be considered greater? The question is about our business. Let's just see how the Heavenly Teacher decided it; and from his answer we will deduce the solution to our question. He said to them: the kings of the tongue rule over them and those who possess them are called benefactors. But you are not like this: but let the pain in you be like mine: and serve as you grow old (Luke 22:25, 26). What can you see from here? it is clear that Jesus Christ did not want to give supreme, independent, autocratic royal power to anyone greater or superior in his church. Further he adds: and I bequeath to you as my Father bequeathed to me a kingdom; but here too the kingdom is bequeathed not to one, but to all; no one has been made the supreme administrator of it, all have equal thrones: and you will sit on the throne. True, Jesus Christ distinguished Peter from others by love and trust, for example. on Tabor, in the house of Jairus, on the Mount of Olives, in the Garden of Gethsemane: but never alone, but everywhere together with James and John, sometimes with Andrew; Moreover, John is also called primarily the beloved disciple of the Lord: Jesus is his beloved. But just as it is impossible to agree that Jesus Christ, by his excellent power of attorney to these disciples, wanted to give everyone the primacy of power, for this is impossible, it follows that neither this, nor one Peter, nor anyone else, Jesus Christ wanted to entrust the management of the entire church. Let us finally show how the apostle himself looked at this autocracy in the church and how he thought about himself in this regard. Peter, and what did the other apostles think about this? He who received his name from the stone of the church in his epistle indicates one living stone from a humble man, but chosen by God, to which all believers, like Peter, must approach, and they themselves, like living stones, will build themselves into a spiritual house (1 Peter 2:4, 5). Obviously, here between Jesus Christ - the foundation of the house of God and the believers, the built stones of the church, there is no other intermediary stone - Peter's or anyone else's - i.e. the whole building rests on one foundation; and since it is a spiritual church, then nothing from the world should enter its structure and there is no need to look for any human connections for its strength, for example. sole sovereignty. The same app. Peter, writing to the elders, calls himself their co-presbyter; teaches to shepherd the flock not as possessing it, indicates the only Chief Shepherd Jesus (2 Peter 5:1, 3, 4). It would be unusual for the supreme ruler of the church to write like this. Not the way the other apostles looked at the supreme ruler of the church, when, for example, the apostle. Pavel wrote: a) an apostle and a prophet were created on the foundation (Eph. 2:20), and did not distinguish any of the apostles here as the primary foundation. b) He gave the same apostles, prophets, evangelists, shepherds and teachers for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of service, for the creation of the body of Christ (Eph. 4:11), and did not say that for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of ministry for the building up of the body of Christ, the same Jesus Christ from among the apostles appointed Peter as the visible head of the church. When c) assimilates an equal area in the church with the area of ​​​​Peter: I am confident that the gospel will be preached to the uncircumcision, as Peter was to the circumcision (Gal. 2:7). When d) places between the pillars of the church not only Peter, but first James and, moreover, John (Gal. 2:9). When e) says that these supposed pillars gave him these right hands, that he might go into the tongues, and they into circumcision (Gal. 2:9), which should not have happened if Peter alone had the supreme right to dispose of all the ministries and ministers of the church. When f) says to Christians: whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or the life, or death, or the present, or the future: all your essence; you are Christ's, and the Christ of God (1 Cor. 3:22, 23), that he, and Peter, and all the apostles are equal ministers of the church in their rank, the church is Christ's, and Christ is God. When g) confronts Peter to his face at Antioch (Gal. 2:11). When h) the assembly of the apostles sends Peter and John to Samaria to teach the Holy Spirit. When the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them. Can a boss be sent by his subordinates? When, finally, i) in difficult matters they resorted to the decision of the council, and not the imaginary supreme primate of the entire church. So let us not deny that in many cases Peter had the primacy of order before the apostles, but never the primacy of power. Further, the prophets belonged to the extraordinary persons of the hierarchy of the apostolic times. In calculating the various degrees of service to the church, which the apostle does. Paul in his letter to Ephesus. 4:11 and 1 Cor. 13:28, they stand immediately after the apostles and above the so-called teachers. The service of their church consisted either in foretelling to the whole community of Christians, in particular to any of the members of the church, the future fate of what it actually means to prophesy, or in explaining the prophecies and foreshadowings of the ancients in relation to the teaching of Jesus Christ and the apostles: for one must know, says the apostle. Peter that no prophecy in Scripture can be resolved by oneself (2 Peter 1:20). The first kind - was for example. Agabus, who foreshadowed famine in Antioch to the whole land (Acts 11:27, 28), and in Caesarea to Paul the bonds (21:11); the latter - eg. Judas and Silas, who in Antioch confirmed with their teaching the definition of the apostolic council (15:32). But it could not be confirmed by predictions, but rather by an explanation of ancient prophecies related to this subject. In discussing the last order of prophecies, Paul gives special rules in his 1st letter to the Corinthians (14), namely: let two or three prophets speak (in one assembly), and let the others reason, that is, about what these say. If there is a revelation to another of those sitting; then be the first to be silent. For you can all prophesy one after another... (29:30, 31). And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets (32). The suggestions that come from God are not so violent that one cannot resist pronouncing them to others (as happens with the inspiration of the spirit of darkness); but one must resist when God himself, by the clearest revelation, commands one to speak to another; finally: my brothers, be eager to prophesy (39). Evangelists are writers and evangelists (Eph. 4:11). The degrees of hierarchy always included: Deaconesses. Their original condition is that of widows; position, not a degree of priesthood 75. Having given the church shepherds who were to represent the faithful in word, life, love, spirit, faith, purity (1 Tim. 4:12), the apostles, however, themselves and their successors set an example, at private discretion or at a general meeting, to establish new rules related to 1. preserving the purity of faith and morals and the integrity of teaching both in the whole community of the church and in each of those belonging to it and 2. until the establishment of as uniform and permanent order as possible in its external structure. The first concerned the internal, the second - the external welfare of the church. On the former depended and maintained the health of the whole body of the church; the latter were given appropriate clothing and splendor for the body. The first, as the most important, is contained by them in their own writings, the latter, for the most part, has been preserved for you in the form of tradition, more or less close to the apostles and more or less pure, in the writings of subsequent church fathers and especially in the so-called apostolic canons. For the same needs, in special cases, the apostles showed the example of resorting to a general meeting in their Jerusalem cathedral for the shepherds of the church of subsequent times. Let's talk about all these items in more detail. Protecting the purity of the faith and morals of the church, the apostles naturally had to keep in mind two types of people, those who preserve it and those who do not preserve it, and have concern for the healthy and the infirm or those who have already fallen away from the church. For this reasoning, we will also consider their rules regarding the preservation of this purity. For the first, the apostles set the top of their demands so that they would be obedient from the heart to the teaching that they accepted, and to the truth to which they accepted, they would completely enslave themselves: thanks be to God, that you, having previously been slaves to sin, became heartily obedient to the image of the teaching that you accepted; and having been freed from sin, they became slaves of righteousness (Rom. 6:17, 18); Therefore, they instilled in the believers that they should always maintain the pattern of sound words with faith and love in Christ Jesus and keep the deposit of the Holy Spirit living in them (2 Tim. 1:13, 14), that anointing from the Holy One, which teaches everything that is necessary for salvation (1 John 1:27), everyone experienced and retained good things (1 Thess. 5:20), not every spirit believed, but tested the spirits to see whether they were from God (1 John 4:1). Such people who teach otherwise and do not follow the sound words of the Lord Jesus Christ and the teaching that is according to godliness, who, knowing nothing, are infected with a passion for competitions and disputes of words, from which envy, strife, slander, evil suspicions are born, have been removed (1 Tim. 6:3, 4, 5). The heretic was turned away after the first and second admonition (Titus 3:10). As newborn babies loved one pure verbal milk, so that from it they would grow into salvation (1 Peter 2:2). And at the same time, they tried to achieve the unity of faith and the knowledge of the Son of God, to the maturity of a man, to the measure of the full stature of Christ, so that they would not be such babes as can be tossed to and fro by every wind of teaching through the wickedness of men, through the cunning art of deception (Eph 4:13, 14), not conformed to the age, but transformed by the renewing of the mind, in order to know what is good in relation to the will of God, acceptable and perfect; They did not philosophize more than they should philosophize, but they philosophized in chastity, as God divided the measure of faith (Rom. 12:2, 3), and served each other with the gift that they received, as faithful stewards of the manifold grace of God (1 Peter 4:10). 7:23); in case of need, they were judged better by their own people than by the unbelievers (1 Cor. 6:1-6); they obeyed God rather than men (Acts 5:29). Let him who suffers as a Christian not be ashamed, but let him glorify God in this part (1 Pet. 4:16). Let everyone remain in the rank in which he is called; Whether anyone is called to be a slave, do not worry; but if he can become free, take advantage (1 Cor. 7:20, 21); slaves must be obedient to their masters according to the flesh with respect and fear in simplicity of heart, as to Christ, not only serving publicly, as people-pleasers, but as servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the soul (Eph. 6:5, 6). The masters are obliged to deliver what is due and just, knowing that they themselves have the Lord in heaven (Col. 4:1). It is good for singles and widows to remain in their condition, but if they cannot abstain, let them marry: whoever firmly decides in his heart to leave his virgin unmarried does well (1 Cor. 7:8, 9, 37). If a brother has an unbelieving wife, but she wants to live with him, then he should not leave her (12). Let young widows marry, bear children, rule the house, and not give the enemy any opportunity to speak evil (1 Tim. 5:14). Let the husband give his wife her due; likewise is the wife to her husband (1 Cor. 7:3); however, let them remember that those who have wives should be as if they do not have them (29). Fathers should not grieve their children, but bring them up in the teaching and admonition of the Lord (Eph. 6:4). Children must obey their parents for the Lord. Young men - be of good behavior (Titus 2:6). The elders are sober, sedate, modest, sound in faith, love, patience; the old women would also dress decently for saints, would not be slanderers, would not be enslaved to drunkenness, and would teach goodness (2, 3). The pastors of the church were ordered to preach the word constantly, in season and out of season, to reprove, threaten, exhort with all long-suffering and teaching (2 Tim. 4:2), to read the word of God (1 Tim. 4:12), to avoid stupid and ignorant competitions, not to quarrel, but to be friendly to everyone, teaching, kindly, to instruct opponents with meekness: will it not allow to them God turns to the knowledge of the truth (2 Tim. 2:23–25). The flock was commanded to obey their mentors (Heb. 13:7), to remember them (7), to respect those who work and those in authority in the Lord and honor them primarily with love for their deeds (1 Thess. 5:12, 13), and to share all good things with the mentor (Gal. 6:6). In general, everyone was taught not to owe anything to anyone except love, to bear the infirmities of the weak, and not to please oneself; in a word, whatever they do, in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, giving thanks to God the Father through Him (Col. 3:17). In dealing with those in error, they begged each and every one to admonish the disorderly, to console the faint-hearted, to support the weak, and to be patient with everyone (1 Thessalonians 5:14). Anyone who, despite the admonitions and convictions of the church, does not obey the word of God, should take note of him and not communicate with him in order to shame him, however, not to consider him an enemy, but to correct him as a brother (2 Thess. 3:12, 14, 15). Whoever, while calling himself a brother, is a fornicator, or a lover of money, or an idolater, is a slanderer, or a drunkard, or a predator: do not even eat with such (1 Cor. 5:11), but cast out the corrupt from among you (13); those infected with grave sins, not only desecrating the name of a Christian, but also rare among pagans, are excommunicated from the church with public lamentation (1 Cor. 5:1, 2); those who confuse the church and pervert the Gospel of Christ are to be anathematized (Gal. 1:7–9); equally, whoever does not love the Lord Jesus Christ is anathema, maranatha (1 Cor. 16:22). In addition, the apostles sometimes struck opponents of the Gospel with miraculous bodily executions (Acts 13:11) or handed them over to Satan (1 Tim. 1:29) for the destruction of the flesh, so that the spirit might be saved (1 Cor. 5:5); but they left neither the right nor the power to do the same to the church. All these rules, which protected the purity of the teachings and morals of the church, are openly contained in St. Scripture. The rules concerning the uniform arrangement of the church order are for the most part preserved in one tradition. There is no need for us to limit the concept of traditions. Tradition, or what was left to tradition, supplemented the written rules of the apostles. The apostles were not engaged only in writing books, says Eusebius (L. III. p. XXIV; ποιούμενοι φροντίδα). Therefore, much of what they taught and what they commanded to various churches during their personal stay with them either should have been completely lost or preserved only in tradition. Irenaeus in his time actually (I. II. 2) referred to tradition as the remnants of the teaching of the apostles, preserved in the churches through the succession of elders. Eusebius writes about Papias, a disciple of John the Theologian, that he carefully collected information about what Andrew, Peter and other disciples of the Lord said, not hoping to receive as much benefit from reading books as from the oral instruction of those who remained in the lives of their listeners (ού γάρ τά έκ τών βιβλίων τοσούτόν με ώφελείν ύπελάμβανον, όσον τά παρά ξώσης καί μένεσης Eccles. III, p. 39). – This tradition contained, of course, more than just decrees concerning the church: Irenaeus calls to the court of this tradition the false teachings of heretics who apostatized from the church in the most important tenets of the faith. It is also known that the most symbolic teaching from the times of the apostles was preserved only through tradition. However, what was included here, partly special orders, and the establishment of the apostles regarding the order and deanery of the church, can be seen, for example. from the words of Tertullian in the reasoning of one church institution: si legem postulas scripturarum, nullam invenies: traditio tibi praetendetur auctrix, consuetudo confirmatrix, et fides observatrix (Lib. de coron. milit. c. 4. August. Epis. 118 et 119. See 1 Tim. 3:14, 15; 2 Sol. 2:15). Establishments of this kind were continuously preserved in the constant use of the church, and were at times accidentally or deliberately entered into books by the ancient fathers and teachers of the church. The first oldest monument of such a collection of traditions regarding the external structure of the church is the book of the apostolic rules. That the designation of these rules as apostolic should not be taken in the sense that they belong to the apostles exactly in the form and quantity in which we have them now: this cannot be doubted because we find among them those that could not have belonged to the apostles and even to their times; namely: Rule VII prohibits celebrating Passover with the Jews before the vernal equinox; but there was still a dispute about the time of Easter celebration at the end of the 2nd century; and if the apostles themselves had made an establishment regarding this, then it would have been convenient for Victor and the Asian churches to decide this by reference to the apostolic rule. Rule XXII prohibits an eunuch who has saved himself from being a cleric: Demetrius Bishop. The Alexandrian accused of this and for this demanded the deposition of Origen: but if this apostolic decree had been known at that time, then without a doubt this action of Origen would not have been defended by Alexander, bishop of Jerusalem and Theoctistus, bishop of Caesarea, who, when he was expelled from Alexandria on the accusation of Demetrius, gave him not only shelter, but also entrusted him alone with preaching the word (Eusev. Church. Book VI, chapter 8 and 27). Moreover, such a decree could not have existed in the time of the apostles and because, without a doubt, it should have been introduced in the event of increasing such disorder in the church; but in the time of the apostles the beginning of this was not visible. Rule XXVII allows marriage among those who entered the clergy in a celibate state only to readers and singers, but we do not find these degrees in the time of the apostles. Canons XXXIV and XXXV speak about the relationship of bishops to their first (τόν έν αύτοίς πρώτον) as the head (i.e., the metropolitan) and about the rights of a bishop only over his parikia: but we do not encounter either these firsts or the division of parikias in the time of the apostles. Rule LII, which deposes bishops and presbyters who do not accept those who turn to the church in repentance, is directed against the Montanist and Novatian heretics who existed in the 2nd and 3rd centuries. Canon LXVI subjects the clergy to the ejection and the layman to excommunication who fast on Saturday (except for one Saturday, the Great Saturday); but we do not find this custom in the time of the apostles; it was introduced by the heretic Marcion, but was condemned by the church for it, and it seems that this rule stands directly against him. Rule LXIX commands the observance of the fast of Pentecost and the fasts of Wednesday and Friday: but the first was still a subject of doubt in the time of Irenaeus; and about the latter we do not find any evidence from the ancients. Further, these rules speak of oil, gold and silver vessels, and veils; are calculated by St. books from the Old and New Testaments, which cannot belong to the apostles. Canons XLII, XLVI and XLVII reject the baptism of heretics: but this was not yet discussed at the time of the apostles. So it is obvious that these rules are not strictly apostolic, although they are ancient and collected no later than at the end of the third century. This is proven by the fact that among writers of the fourth and fifth centuries they are already given under the general name: canones or canones antiqui and canones ecclesiastici. (So Athanasius of Alexandria writes: ού γάρ νύν κανόνες καί τύποι ταίς εκκλησίαις έδόϑησαν, άλλέκ πατέρων ήμών καί βεβαίως παρεδόϑησαν et caet. έκκλησιαστικοί κανόνες also by Basil the Great and at the Council of Nicaea). This opinion is confirmed by the fact that there is nothing contrary to the customs and morals of these centuries. Regarding their present form, it should be noted that 1) these rules were originally compiled probably from the definitions of the councils that took place in the 2nd and 3rd centuries on the basis of apostolic traditions, for many of them are directly directed against the errors and heresies known in the 2nd and 3rd centuries; and councils in these times were frequent, and, as is known from the testimony of Tertullian, the councils were engaged, among other things, in general discussions about all the most ancient decrees (agentur praecepta per Graecias illas certis in locis concilio ex universis ecclesiis, per quae et altiora quaeque in commune tractantur, et ipsa repraesentatio totius nominis christiani magna veneratione celebratur): and the Council of Nicea - the 1st Ecumenical Council - did not introduce anything new, but decided to maintain ancient customs (τά αρχαία έϑη κρατείϑω Can. VI). 2) Moreover, it should be thought that these rules were not all drawn up suddenly: which is why some considered them less: for example. They were known to Dionysius the Less only in the number of 50; in the current collection there are 85 of them; In our Helmsman, 17 more rules are attached to this sim. Paul and 17 - Peter and Paul, and two common to all the apostles. The generally accepted number is an average of 85. 3) These decrees were collected and partially damaged by the writer of the apostolic commandments (Constitutiones apost.), who, in the last rule, proposed the calculation of the Old Testament and New Testament books as venerable and holy (σεβάσμια καί άγια), along with them he supplies the two epistles of Clement; Let us quote his own words: “the commandments (διατάξαι) to you bishops through me (δί έμού) of Clement in eight books, which should not, however, be made public to everyone because of the mysteries and acts of our apostles contained in them.” The damage to these rules lies in the fact that the collector published them on behalf of the apostles, and not as church definitions compiled on the basis of apostolic traditions; why in some places he wrote on behalf of the apostles: for example. in canon XXIX, where those who supply the degrees of the priesthood for silver are subject to eruption, it is added: “as I Peter did with Simon,” while in the above-mentioned collection of Dionysius the Less there is no mention of this. Rule V says: “as the Lord told us”; but in the Greek manuscripts and in the edition of Zonara and Balsamon it simply says: “as the Lord said.” So, turning to our main subject, let’s say again that the apostles themselves gave some rules before the establishment of the external order of the church. But since neither the internal nor the external state of the church could always be the same; since the divine teaching, as it moved away from the luminous times of the apostles, more and more required disclosure, and deviation from the original truth of morals - the strongest measures and barriers - and the organization of the external order of the church over time and with the intensification of these shortcomings - greater certainty and completeness; since the apostles foresaw that after their departure many wolves would enter the church, not sparing the flock, and from among its children themselves there would appear people who would speak pervertedly in order to draw the disciples after them: then these same apostles, who so actively tried to block every path of evil in St. the Church of Christ - while they themselves were on earth, they showed by their example the surest way to help all these needs of the church even after their departure - in general meetings and decisions of councils determined as a result of these. Despite the fact that each of these God-inspired men in himself could find a divine solution to the impending perplexities, the apostles in all such cases resorted to general reasoning. In the general meeting of the church, seven deacons were elected and installed; in a general meeting, Paul was ordered to perform a rite of purification on himself; in general meetings, he was commanded to reprove those who sinned (1 Tim. 5:20). But the fullest image of the production of these councils is shown in the Council of Jerusalem, at which they discussed the ritual law of Moses. In this place, we need to say no more than just about this image and order of production: for as for the dispute itself proposed and then resolved, this actually relates to the history of the teaching of the Apostolic Church. The fault of the council was such a subject on which, in the opinion of those disputing, salvation depends - you cannot be saved unless you are circumcised according to the rite of Moses (15:1), the Jews taught the brethren of Antioch. The council was attended by apostles and elders and representatives of controversial opinions on both sides. After a long discussion, in which, of course, the presbyters also participated, the highest members of the council offered their votes; and when they were found to agree with each other and were recognized by the whole assembly, a definition was drawn up from them and sent with special proxies to the church, which demanded a resolution of its dispute, as a definition of the Spirit of God itself. Finally, we would not yet have a complete and correct understanding of the entire composition of the external formation of the apostolic church if we imagined it only in the form of many fragmented parts, not folded together and existing independently of one another, if, seeing the harmonious formation of all parts of this body separately, we did not yet see their common union. We are no longer talking here about their internal union, in the unity of hope of faith, baptism, God and the Father of all, who is above all and through all, and in all (Eph. 4:4, 5, 6). We are talking about the external unity of churches, the basis of which, however, also lay in the continuity of the internal. Always observed by love in the heart, it burst forth with abundant fruits in deeds, as quickly as the needs of even distant and unknown brothers demanded it. In Samaria, those who believed were enlightened by baptism, but had not yet received the Holy Spirit: the Jerusalem church hastens to inform them of participation in high gifts, sending Peter and John to them. The Church of Antioch had an abundance of teachers and did not hesitate to let them go, as soon as the Spirit of God called them to preach among other nations. “There will be a great famine throughout the whole land,” said Agabus, “and the Christians of Antioch, each according to their wealth, decided to send relief to the brethren living in Judea and fulfilled it. The Church of Antioch suffers from discord sowed by false brethren: the Church of Jerusalem puts an end to the debate with conciliar reasoning. Similar disagreements of the Corinthian Church in their time are reconciled by the Roman Church. Due to such needs, other neighboring and tribal churches had frequent contact with each other, for example. Colossian and Laodicean (Col. 4:16) or the distant churches of Asia Minor, founded in various countries, mentioned at the beginning of the letter of Peter (1:1). Further, according to the effect of this same unity, all believers treated with primary respect the churches founded by the apostles themselves and distinguished by their presence, as for example. the churches of Antioch, Ephesus, Alexandria, Rome, or the wealth of spiritual gifts famous, especially before the fall of Jerusalem - the mother of all churches of the church of Jerusalem, originally gathered by Jesus Christ Himself and glorified by His conversion, preaching, suffering, death and ascension before others. Finally, this unity of private churches was expressed even more clearly in the unquestioning obedience of all to one common mentor - the apostles. However, this was not the result of any violence or coercion, but the action of a gentle spirit and undoubted confidence in the Divine purpose of their service. What was there to force when he called himself, made unhappy and worthy of pity and tears, whoever shied away from this unity or was excommunicated as punishment for his sins. Whoever left the union of believers, he himself testified that he was not from them and in this already had a clear sign of his eternal rejection. So this is what the unity of the apostolic churches consisted of; the unity of peace and love - this is the communion of saints, which only the name remains for us in the named apostolic symbol, which our Orthodox Apostolic Church asks every day from ancient times to this day in the union of faith, and which only in heaven can we enjoy. Morals of the Apostolic Church Before we begin to depict the morals of the Apostolic Church, I consider it necessary to express my thoughts regarding the necessity of the subject and the importance of this review in the general teaching of church history. According to the order of passage of church history chosen and assumed by us, in the presentation of the events of each century, period, or, say, general, separation, the first place should be occupied by a review of the spread of Christianity, as well as obstacles and aids to it, or an outline of the visible fate of the Christian church; the second is a depiction of the teachings of the church, considered both in itself - positively, and in opposition to emerging heresies, or a depiction of the internal structure of the church; the third is a consideration of worship, rituals and hierarchical regulation, or the external structure of the church. If we stop here, then our presentation of history, and hence the concept of the state of the church in a certain period of time, will not have proper completeness. It is not enough to know only where, by whom, with what labor and with what benefits the teaching of Jesus Christ was spread; how and in what form it was presented; what institutions were introduced to reinforce and facilitate it; Here I still do not find peace for my mind and heart, which, looking at the combined activity of the Divine and human forces in this incessantly ongoing work of instruction, education, or better yet, educating the human race for heavenly life, could not help but arouse me to deep attention and expectation of a solution worthy of this activity. I need to know what was the result of all these works, benefits, institutions? What effect did this Divine teaching have on the human heart? What response was formed to the Divine calling, from the action of the Spirit of God over him, from the influence of his own forces, from the influence of the age of the whole humanity, the spirit of the age, the quality of mentors, etc.? I know that every seed bears fruit according to its kind, although not every soil is equally capable of nourishing it; before my eyes they entrusted the seed to the earth; with my own feelings I experienced his qualities and kindness; I later saw how the farmer tried to establish the safety of his field by strengthening the fence and guards: after that, wouldn’t I want to know what this field rewarded the farmer for his sweat and labor? So exactly, when history shows us at a certain time and in a certain place the sowing of the Divine word; we certainly want to see the fruits of it. True, from our review of the history of the church from the three sides shown, one can already see the first beginnings of the action of this life-giving seed, for example. belief and conversion to Christ of any people; but this is not yet fruit, but only preparation for fruiting, a pledge and pre-betrothal of the true fruits of Divine teaching. Christian teaching has as its subject and goal not only the enlightenment of the mind with the most correct concepts of the Divine, but most importantly the correction of the heart and will; it is the teaching according to good faith (1 Tim. 6:3), the truth according to godliness (Tit. 1:1), the sacrament of faith revealed in a clear conscience (1 Tim. 3:9). It must mean and give birth to a new life in a person, change his way of thinking about himself, about his life, about his relationships on earth, put into him new holy feelings striving for heaven: adjust his will, accustom a person through feasible experiences to that high service that he is destined to share with higher powers in eternity. This is where the fruit of the action of Divine teaching takes place! Here's what else you need to know in order to have a complete understanding of the state of the church: with what fruits and in what abundance it was adorned! - With what virtues and virtues and in what glory did she flourish at a certain time? This is what we first assign for research in this department about morals, which, however, does not exactly correspond to the subject by its name. But they will oppose this: that these virtues and the glory of spiritual exploits are fully known to the one God, but for the human eye for the most part they are completely hidden; or - that the image of them, even at different times, will always be uniform: since Jesus Christ is yesterday and today, the same and forever; His word is unchangeable and endures forever; His Spirit is always the same, acting entirely in everyone. So. We cannot see all the richness of the glory of the church within; and the secrecy that is so dear, and the remoteness of times, and the insufficiency of monuments, and the weakness and impurity of spiritual vision itself - everything prevents us from seeing all the features of her Divine face in separateness; the full revelation thereof was reserved for the day of the Lord, the last day of the world, and that which shall not be revealed (1 John 3:2). Let us admit even more that not everything could be depicted even if everyone could see; the greatness of spiritual affairs often depends on the complexity of such circumstances, the multitude and diversity of which could not possibly be contained within the narrow framework of historical outline; and spiritual virtues, born from a heart flaming with love for God, sometimes understandable to our cold heart, which responds to them with a sweet trembling, soon cool when they turn into a dead word: but then, should we therefore deprive ourselves of that last radiance with which, from the twilight of centuries, the guiding light of the church, which has already reached the heavenly refuge, strikes our darkened eye? Let's at least use what we can. Only the features of the peculiarities of certain times of the church will elude us: but it cannot but be obvious when more and when less light is shed from its rays, and what virtues were more common to it at one time or another. The name of the ascetic or some of his exploits may be hidden from us, but even during his lifetime they were reflected in his age, if not in a visible and tangible way, then certainly invisibly: the sum of the gifts, so to speak, received by the worthy from the Spirit of God, never lingers in them alone; she would weigh them down like the milksuckers of a mother who has no one to feed; these gifts are necessarily poured out onto everything contemporary with him, if not further; let for example If anyone had this most secret gift - to intercede in his prayers in solitude for the preservation of the purity of faith, his work remained undistinguished, unknown: but the church does not tolerate anything from this; history sees his light in the intensifying light of his time. – What is the need for a name when the same Spirit acts everywhere? As for the opinion that this picture of the morals or high virtues of Christianity should always be the same, then anyone can be convinced of its injustice from the following reasoning. Just as in private members of the church, animated by the presence of the Spirit of God, the same all-sanctifying grace operates; but the difference in inclinations and dispositions of spirit remains in them, and depending on why one is distinguished by such, another by other virtues, this by mercy, that by asceticism: so in the entire continuation of the church from its beginning, nothing prevents us from seeing in places and at times different and special virtues from the natural inability of the human race to suddenly complete revelation in all parts and the destiny of only time-based and gradual and generally varied development. But merely indicating the virtues that adorned the church over a certain period of time in the history of morals is not enough. In its present state it cannot be all clean, so as not to have any stains; There will always be within its borders both good land and rocky land overgrown with thorns. This is not enough - history in many cases cannot even hide the noticeable thickening of darkness over the area of ​​​​light. So, when depicting the morals of each age or period, it is necessary to pay attention to the works of darkness, as the beginning and continuation of the work, which must be destroyed in its final consequences along with the fate of the universe. And here is the necessity, importance, subject, purpose, main division of this department on morals. Following these remarks, we proceed to the depiction of the morals of the apostolic age, which we will offer: 1) in a general judgment about them; 2) in the private disclosure of some of the predominant virtues of this age; 3) in indicating some special institutions, exercises and actions of piety of these times; 4) in the outline of the biographies of some men, especially strong in their inner perfections, and finally 5) in the meaning of both the shortcomings and weaknesses of some members of the church of these times. The apostolic age was the age of the internal glory of the church, unattainable for subsequent times. All the private societies that belonged to it in various distant countries were not yet numerous, not always noticeable to contemporaries, and did not have any external glory at all: but always, standing above all their virtues, they were alive, healthy, strong, worthy members of the great body of Christ. If one can liken this body to the body seen by Nebuchadnezzar - however, not meaning here Jesus Christ in the form of a stone destroying it, but in the golden head of the body itself - then to signify the dignity in the whole body of the church - the apostolic church, nothing can serve closer than the silver of the arms, breasts and muscles of that vision, to which only the corresponding, so to speak, back country can be represented by the church of the next two or three centuries. It is in vain that they want to subordinate the growth of the church to the general course of humanity: it ripens towards its visible perfection, but this diminishes and shrinks, so that at the end of time the false mind, constantly enriched by new successes and discoveries in the imaginary field of truth, will sit in the church of God, like God, and will pretend to be God (2 Thessalonians 2:4), and in the church the Son of Man, having come to earth, will hardly He will also gain faith, but love for the increase of lawlessness will completely dry up. So, let us not judge the work of God as a human work: the church, it seems, is not growing, but decreasing: we may be the last guardians of the last parts of this body; all the glory, all the dignity of these parts is in proximity to the head. And here the first place, not only in the order of time, but also in internal perfection, is occupied by the apostolic church. The internal state of the church is the higher and more perfect, the more the Spirit of God acts in it: and here, if I may say so, He appears in the most intense action, and He Himself testifies to the fruits of His action not only in some selected individuals, but also in entire societies or churches. Let us collect this evidence as irrefutable proof of the high glory of the internal apostolic church. Is there any need for more praise for the Church of Jerusalem, when the word of Scripture speaks of its Christians, that they constantly continued in the teaching of the apostles and in fellowship and in the breaking of bread, and in prayers, and further: all the days enduring with one accord in the church and breaking bread in the house, receiving food in joy and simplicity of heart, praising God and having grace with all people (Acts 2:42, 47); But the people who believed were one in heart and soul (4:32). Antioch is the mother of churches gathered from the pagans, in which Paul and Barnabas worked so actively, which was glorious for its teachers, which the apostle loved so much. Paul, who at the beginning and at the end of his apostolic travels always considered it as if it was his duty to visit her, how small did he portray his zeal for the teaching received from the apostles, when, despite the persecution that arose everywhere for it, the first one accepted and transmitted to the believers of all countries and all centuries the name of Christian. How much the Church of Roman Christians flourished with internal glory can be seen from the fact that their faith, according to the word of the Apostle, was proclaimed throughout the whole world, that this Apostle is testified by God himself, Whom he serves in the spirit with the gospel of His Son, that he constantly remembers them and always prays in his prayers, so that the will of God will finally arrange for him the way to them: for what? so that, he says, I may be comforted with you by the common faith, yours and mine (1:8, 9, 10, 12). Who says that? Apostle Paul. - Further, the same apostle thanks God for them, that, having previously been slaves to sin, they obeyed from the heart the image of the teaching that they accepted and, freed from sin, became slaves of righteousness (6:17, 18), that the Spirit of God lives in them (8:9), that they are full of goodness, full of all knowledge and can instruct others (15:14). – The Church of Corinth, despite its divisions, the weakness and vices of some members, still showed that the testimony of Christ was established in it, and that it was not lacking in a single gift over others (1 Cor. 1: 4-7). But even these very weaknesses did not overshadow her dignity: I see, St. wrote to the Corinthians. Paul, that the letter in which I denounced you saddened you; but I also rejoice: for this very sorrow is yours for the sake of God, look what zeal has produced in you, what apologies, what indignation at the guilty one, what fear, what desire, what jealousy, what severity: in everything - you have shown yourself to be pure in this matter (2 Cor. 7:8-11). The Galatians, the same apostle testifies, began by the Spirit (Gal. 3:2), they did not despise the temptation of Paul in the flesh and did not abhor it, but received him as an Angel of God, as Christ Jesus. Oh, how blessed you were then, the apostle adds to this: for I testify of you that if it had been possible, you would have plucked out your eyes and given them to me (4:13-15). You walked well: who stopped you from submitting to the truth? (The Galatians were outraged by the false apostles.) But I am confident about you in the Lord, that you will not think otherwise, and those who trouble you will be judged, no matter who they are (5:10). The Christians of Ephesus were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit (Eph. 1:13). they were no longer strangers, but fellow-fellows of the saints and members of God’s household (2:13); and with what tenderness the shepherds of the Church of Ephesus said goodbye to the apostle. Paul for the last time of his stay in Ephesus! They shed copious tears, writes Luke (Acts 20:37–38) and threw themselves on Paul’s neck, kissed him, grieving especially for the word that he said, that they would no longer see his face, and accompanied him to the ship. He who held the seven stars in his right hand knew the works and labor and patience of the Angel of the Ephesian church, and that he could not endure the depraved (Apoc. 2:1, 2). But no one, it seems, rejoiced Pavlov’s heart as much as the Philippian Church, which was the first to be founded after the calling of a certain Macedonian in a vision; always in every prayer he says, for all of you I offer my prayer with joy - for your participation in the Gospel from the first day even until now... I have you in my heart and in my bonds in defending and establishing the gospel - you are all my partners in grace; further, he informs them about the successes of his gospel; already having a desire to be resolved and to be with Christ, he is hampered by the need of his stay in the flesh for them and assures that he will remain and abide with them for their success and joy in faith (Phil. 1: 4, 5, 7, 12–15, 23–25). Finally, he says to them: therefore, my beloved and longed for brethren, my joy and crown, so stand steadfast in the Lord, beloved (4:1). To the Colossians, the word of the truth of the gospel, from the day they heard and knew the grace of God in truth, increased and brought forth the fruit of faith in Christ Jesus and love for all the saints, as it is in the whole world (Col. 1:4, 5, 6); The Apostle ascribes to them such a dignity, in which alone the height of Christian perfection is expressed: you have died, he says, and your life is hidden with Christ in God (3:3). The Thessalonians were imitators of the apostles and the Lord, having received the Holy Spirit with joy among many disasters, and became a model for all believers in Macedonia and Achaia (1 Thessalonians 1:7, 8). The apostle says that with many desires he tried to see their face: for what is our hope, he continues, or joy, or a crown of praise? Are you not before our Lord I. Christ at His coming? For you are our glory and joy (2:17, 19, 20. See 2. Epistle 1:3, 4). We could also point out the deeds, sorrow and poverty, however rich, of the church of Smyrna, the firmness of the faith of the church of Pergamum, which lived where the throne of Satan is, which did not reject it even when the faithful witness of God, Antipas, was killed, the deeds, love, service, faith, patience and the latter are greater than the first of the church of Thyatira, several names in Sardia, who did not desecrate their vestments and walk in white, as they are worthy (Apoc. 2:9, 13, 19; 3:4). But isn’t this evidence already enough to have the right to conclude, on the basis of the high perfection of so many private churches, about the high internal perfection of the entire church in apostolic times? It will be much more difficult for us to show after this what were the predominant virtues of this luminous age of the church: everyone seems glorious in it, everyone is sublime, everyone is Divine. But of course, it will not be strange for anyone if we call the first highest virtue of the Apostolic Church love for Jesus Christ. This virtue is the sea of ​​all virtues. Dive into it as much as you like, you will not touch the bottom; You will not reach its depth, you will not measure all its waters. This is the inexhaustible key of all spiritual perfection, since in its streams the image of the all-perfect God is reflected; each one approach it, and in each its streams will have their own effect: in one of those who tasted from this life-giving source you will see meekness, meek and humble in heart; in the other - zeal for the glory of God, the one about whom it is written: zeal for your house consumes me; This is the deepest self-sacrifice - let him not come do his own will, but the will of Him who sent him; in this is the love for the brethren who laid down his soul for us: in a word, whatever virtue or whatever praise - everything flows from here, from the love in Jesus Christ; This love in every Christian and in the spirit of every age is depicted in one form or another: but to contain it in all its infinity and inexhaustibility was left to the breadth of the hearts of the apostles and their closest disciples. What will separate us from God's love? Is it tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword? As it is written, for you we are killed every day; we are treated like sheep doomed to the slaughter. But we overcome all this by the power of Him who loved us. For I am confident 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, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Jesus Christ our Lord (Rom. 8:35–39). Here is love in all its infinity and inexhaustibility! No one had ever felt her like this; and in such completeness it would tear apart every tight heart. Will they demand from us the clearest evidence that this sacred feeling filled all the apostles in such abundance? We will point out the Divine exploits of the apostles in the whole world, the dangers to which they were exposed in their travels from fellow tribesmen, from other nations, in the city, in the desert, at sea, among false brothers; to their labor and exhaustion, vigil, hunger, thirst, often nakedness, prisons, wounds, clubs, stones, crosses, swords, and let us only remember the words of one of those who endured almost all of these torments: the love of Christ entices us to reason like this: that if one died for all, then all died, all must die. There is no further need to answer: there is no need to talk about the other apostles, because they were all moved by one spirit. But so that we do not attribute to all members of the church, even the apostolic one, the same height and perfection, we will also point out other virtues that are distinctive of this age, which, however, are nothing more than private modifications or separate branches of the common root of all Christian virtues, love for Jesus Christ. This is the essence: zeal for the name of God, renunciation of oneself and everything earthly, love and concern for one’s brothers. How they flow from their first source is obvious. Let us also note that they all bear the character of their age, which had a special purpose to further the spread of Christianity as much as possible and leave a model of life for subsequent generations; and that indeed in these three directions the image of the most perfect life of a Christian is reflected in his three most important relationships: to God, to himself and to his neighbor. Such should be the virtues of the exemplary century; that is what they were. Zeal for the name of God appeared in many Christian preachers: in the beginning, when the church most needed people capable of further spreading and establishing it, the Spirit of God, at the first consecration of baptism, was poured out on those baptized in various gifts related to this ministry, such as the ability to prophecy and discernment of spirits, in communicating the knowledge of various languages ​​and the interpretation of them, or words of wisdom and words of knowledge. Equipped with these gifts, coming under the direct supervision of the supreme builders of the church - the apostles, they labored with tireless activity in the field of the ministry entrusted to them. How many of these preachers are mentioned in the epistles of St. Paul, although everywhere he speaks about them only in passing; eg Luke is praised throughout all churches for the Gospel (2 Cor. 8:18); Timothy, working in the work of the Lord, like the apostle himself and serving him as a son to his father (1 Cor. 16:10; Phil. 2:19–22); Tychicus, a faithful servant in the Lord (Eph. 6:21); Epaphras, faithful servant of Christ (Col. 1:7); Aristarchus, Mark, and Justus are fellow workers for the kingdom of God and Paul’s delight (4:10, 11); Apollos (1 Cor. 16:12), who, still having been instructed only in the rudiments of the teaching of the Lord and knowing only the baptism of John, fervently taught about the Lord in Ephesus (Acts 18:25). How many of them we will find in the brief history of the apostolic acts! But most accurately, this assurance of the apostle vouches for the zeal of the preachers. Paul that even before the destruction of Jerusalem, according to the foreshadowing of the Lord, their voice had already spread throughout the whole earth and their words to the ends of the universe (Rom. 10:18). Compare with this the successes of the spread of Christianity in subsequent centuries: how slow and insignificant they are compared to these! Further, self-denial and complete composure towards everything earthly: these were, so to speak, the domestic virtues of the first Christians. They did not seek any advantages over the brethren in the society of the church: they willingly obeyed all his orders and sacrificed everything to the Gospel. Thus, the Jews of Thessalonica, persecuting the preachers of the Gospel, forced the faithful to remove and escort Paul from Berea to Athens; and Timothy and Silas remained here in the midst of all dangers (Acts 17:14, 15). In Ephesus, Pavlov's disciples save him from the rampage of an angry crowd, without fear of being torn to pieces by it themselves (Acts 19:30). Paul had already been predicted in Caesarea that he would be bound in Jerusalem: the believers could not refuse his journey here, and they themselves went with him to share his fate (Acts 21:14, 15). The Apostle Paul reminds the Jews of former days, in which they, being still only enlightened by faith, accomplished a great feat of suffering, sometimes themselves being reproached and insulted before everyone, sometimes taking part in those who were in the same state: for you, he continues, shared in my bonds and endured the plunder of your property with joy, knowing that you have for yourselves a better and eternal possession in heaven (Heb. 11:32–34). Priscilla and Aquila, says the same apostle, laid down their necks for my life (Rom. 16:4). The house of Onesiphorus was not ashamed of its bonds (2 Tim. 1:16). The Macedonian churches not only gave what the apostles hoped for, but gave themselves first to the Lord, then to them according to the will of God (2 Cor. 8:5). The Galatians would have wanted to give their eyes to Paul, if only it had been possible. – Thus, among the leading Christians, internal self-denial was always ready for all external sacrifices. We will see this in subsequent centuries: but there it will be a public virtue, here it will be a domestic one. Finally, love and concern for the brothers. In this age, which begins with the birth of the Son of eternal love and ends with the death of the beloved disciple of incarnate love, there was no other relationship of believers to each other except the relationship of love. They did not call themselves anything other than brothers and sisters, and did not think of owning anything alone. It is in vain that they consider this a cunning art of attracting a larger number of followers. Whoever wanted to enter into this holy society with the appearance of self-interest, and not out of sincere affection, would be afraid of the fate of Ananias and Sapphira! From the influence of these virtues of the century on everyone’s own activities and in accordance with its main purpose, special institutions, exercises and actions of piety took place. This is the essence of: a) the supper of love, b) almsgiving to the saints, c) the fellowship of wealth, d) the kiss of the world, e) ascetics. a) Love Suppers: how, when, in what spirit, for what reasons they were performed is already known. b) Alms to the saints. Tact was the name given to all alms collected for the maintenance of the brethren from the poor and disadvantaged, mainly in Judea. In some churches, as is known about the Galatian and Corinthian churches, Paul established that these should be carried out on Sunday, leaving each one to give according to his zeal (1 Cor. 16:1), however, always trying to dispose this zeal towards large donations; For this purpose, he encouraged the zeal of some with the greater zeal of others (2 Cor. 9:1-4) and with the promise of the blessing of the harvest - blessing to the sower and an abundance of thanksgiving to God, and the prayers of those who receive for those who give (12-14). Adding to the fact that money, like manna, does not last until the morning of eternity, it is necessary to deal with it in the same way as Moses decreed to do with it in his time, so that the one who has collected a lot will have no more, and the one who has collected a little will have no less (2 Cor. 15; Exod. 16:18). The Macedonian churches were especially generous (2 Cor. 8:2, 3), and among them the Philippian church (Phil. 4:15–18). People of proven fidelity and zeal were used to collect these offerings and forward them to those in need (2 Cor. 8:22, 23). c) Communication of estates. This is how it is depicted in the book of Acts (2:44, 45): all who believed were united, and everything was in common: I sold the acquisitions and possessions, and gave them to all whoever required them. This is said about the very first Christians. Further, the same is confirmed about the church, which had already multiplied quite a bit, but was still confined within the boundaries of Jerusalem: the large community of believers had one heart and one soul; and no one called anything of his property his own, but they had everything in common... There was no one poor among them, for all the owners of estates or houses, when selling them, brought the price of what was sold and laid it at the feet of the apostles: and to everyone it was given what he needed (4:32-35). Based on these words of Scripture, the prevailing opinion from ancient times is that the spirit of brotherly love prompted the first Christians to completely renounce all property and introduce complete communion of acquisitions among themselves. However, even if we agree to this, we cannot help but call the establishment of such communication such a deviation from the natural order, which should have been allowed only at the request of the supernatural order. Indeed, it seems that the first manifestation of Divine life in humanity was so strong that it could not help but break through all the connections of the order of nature. For subsequent times, churches could remain in it as a model only of the spirit and disposition with which the first Christians looked at all earthly property: in fact, Christianity never demanded the destruction of the ordinary social structure of mankind, but on the contrary, it still sanctifies it with its spirit and indicates only new cases and incentives for the exercise of appropriate virtues - in the real inequality of the wealth of all existing societies. Meanwhile, although we present this way of communication as our own only to the primal church, we do not avoid all difficulties; for we see that the leading Christians did not constitute any separate society - in the civil sense of these words; but remained in the same civil relations; no one ever reproached them for violating public order and regulations. And how can we imagine their reverse transition from this perfect communication to the ordinary civil dispensation? Moreover, we also find in the history of the Acts of the Apostles something that seems to contradict such communication. Peter speaks clearly to Ananias: did not what was not sold belong to you, and what was purchased by sale was not in your power (5:4)? Acts 6 talks about giving alms to widows, not about a public fund to support an entire community. In ch. 12:12 We find in Jerusalem a house that Mary, Mark’s mother, owned as her own, which means that it was not sold in favor of the general treasury. From these indications it is clear that property rights were not completely rejected in the first church. Therefore, the words of the scripture: and not only that from their possessions the verb said to be, but that everything was common to them, as it seems enough to understand only about such a disposition of brotherly love of the first believers, according to which each of his property no more considered his own, as well as his needy brother and was ready to share it with him. Accordingly, we should discuss the sale of estates and houses. A general fund was established, from which the needs of the majority of the poor members of society were satisfied and from which, perhaps, all expenses for arranging the love feast were made; and to replenish it, the rich sold their estates. It was something similar to what was in the society of Jesus Christ with Himself, and what was later established by the ap. Paul in the churches of Gentile converts. Be that as it may, in both minds, the communication of possessions will always remain evidence of unparalleled 1) self-sacrifice, 2) trust in God, 3) spiritual wisdom, hiding treasures in heaven, and 4) love for neighbor of Christians of the primal church. However, there were people who in this institution found food in laziness and idleness: but these, of course, forgot the apostolic rule that only the one who has worked has the right to eat food. d) The holy kiss of peace is the seal of purity, a living expressive sign of brotherly love, holy unity, mutual peace, joy of heart, equality in spirit and peace with God; believers greeted and escorted each other; they preceded and concluded the sacramental supper (Tertullian). e) Ascetics. This name is pagan, but it was adopted from ancient times by high Christian ascetics, who zealously practiced self-sacrifice. Like some of the ancient prophets, these too, striving for the highest spiritual perfection, excommunicating themselves from marriage, left their home and property, exhausted their flesh with fasting, labor and vigil, feeding on unceasing prayer. Unfairly, opponents of all pious institutions in the West are trying to prove that in the time of the apostles such feats were unknown and even contrary to their teaching. It is unfair to include here the words of Paul about those who heed the teachings of demons and forbid to marry and withdraw from food, as God created to be consumed (1 Tim. 4:1-3), and about self-willed humility (Col. 2:18); in both cases, it is not the holy exercises of Christians that are condemned, but the absurd teachings of pagans who introduce their errors into the church; The apostles themselves set a high example of the church in them: Paul said to the unmarried and to widows, It is good for them, if they continue as I did (1 Cor. 3:8), he mortified his body and enslaved him, so that he himself would not be enslaved by preaching to others (9:27), he remained many in vigils, many in fasting (2 Cor. 11:27), so as not to tempt his brother, he also refused to eat meat forever (1 Cor. 8:13). The high guardian of the Virgin Mother of God was himself a virgin after the death of her Divine Son (see the preface to the Gospel of John in the Slavic Bible). Jacob is a relative of the Lord, sanctified to God from his mother’s womb, he did not taste wine or strong drink; did not eat animal meat; the scissors did not touch his head; he did not anoint his body with oil and did not wash his body in baths; His knees, from frequently falling to God in his prayers and at the request of others, were covered with growths like a camel’s, as Eusebius describes him (II book, chapter 23), collecting information about him from Josephus and Egesippus. Jerome adds to this that he also observed virginity. Even though the beginning of all these exploits was laid in Judaism according to the law of the Nazirites, but continuation until the very end of his life makes him a Christian ascetic. Ignatius the God-Bearer in his letter to Polycarp says: whoever can remain pure (i.e. celibate), let him abide in the glory of the Lord's flesh - only without vanity. If he boasts about this, he is lost; and if he considers himself greater than the bishop, he will perish... (Isn’t it clear from these last words that virgins had the right to special respect from the church over others: otherwise there would be no point in equating them to bishops?). There are many, many, 60 and 70 years old, who, having become disciples of Christ from childhood, live in virginity; and I would like to show such to the entire human race,” says Justin in 139 AD in his apology (1. § 18). Some people confused the lifestyle of these ascetics with the establishment of monasticism: but no matter how similar they are to each other, they nevertheless differ quite a bit in 1) in that among their first rules the monks included complete withdrawal from the world and in appearance; why they lived either alone in special cells or, if in society, then at a distance from cities - in the mountains and deserts: while ascetics lived in cities just like others and did not differ in anything from others, except for the most zealous desire to achieve the highest virtues of Christianity; 2) the fact that monks, according to the original establishment, had to be laymen, since the duties of the priesthood, tied by their rank to the world, could not be combined with their solitude: the ascetic life did not contain such inconvenience, therefore it was the path to perfection for all ranks and states in the church; 3) the monks adhered to the well-known rules or regulations of their founder in their exercises: among ascetics, all rules of activity were determined by their own zeal and reasoning. - Eusebius, however, finds, even in the time of the apostles, a whole society of ascetics who secluded themselves and followed the general rules in Egypt, in Alexandria. Having said about the Evangelist Mark that he preached in Egypt and founded a church in Alexandria itself, he adds: “so many husbands and wives who believed then remained in strict philosophic asceticism from the very beginning, so that Philo also found it worthy to describe their exercises, meetings, feasts and the whole way of life in his book: περί βίου ϑεωρητικού ή ίκετών αρετών)… He calls these ascetics therapists, and their wives - therapists; This name was derived either from the fact that they, as doctors, cleansing the souls of those who came to them from evil passions, in some way healed and healed them (ϑεραπεύειν), or from their pure and sincere service (ϑεραπεία) to the Divine. Whether Philo himself gave them such a name, reflecting it on their way of life, or in fact, their superiors called them that even before (οί πρώτοι), when the name of Christians was not yet known everywhere, there is no need to argue about this. Next, Eusebius extracts the contents of this book in order and shows between all the exercises of these ascetics the closest similarity with the ancient and contemporary customs of the church. He attributes their renunciation of estates and living outside the city in secluded meadows or gardens to the zeal of the faith of that time and finds similar in the primitive society of the Church of Jerusalem. This kind of ascetics were scattered in various countries of the universe, although their main residence was in Egypt: which apparently also befits Christianity. - In each house they had a special sacred room Μονασιήριον, where in solitude they performed the mysteries of the holy life, bringing nothing into it - neither food nor drink, nor everything necessary for the body, but only the law, prophets, spiritual songs (ύμνους) and other similar things, thereby increasing and improving knowledge and piety. All time of the day from morning to evening was devoted to the exercise (άσκησις) of reading the Holy Scripture. books and (any wise) allegorical explanation of ancient wisdom, seeking the hidden meaning in all their words. At the same time, Eusebius notes that only someone who has heard the explanations of our saint can speak like this. Scriptures that these ancient works are nothing more than the gospels and the writings of the apostles; that by allegorical explanation we must mean the interpretation of the ancient prophets, of which we find experiments in the epistle to the Hebrews and in other epistles of Paul. But they not only engaged in contemplation, but also composed songs (άσματα) and hymns (ύμνους) to the glory of God. Having laid the foundation of abstinence (έγκράτεια) in their hearts, they taught other virtues on it: they did not take food or drink before sunset, considering their exercise in philosophy alone a worthy activity of the day - the time of light, and leaving only the night - the time of darkness - to bodily needs. Some of them fasted after three days; others barely partook of the necessary food on the sixth day. - Eusebius notes: this is clear and without any doubt, Philo says about the first men of our faith, - and further writes: around the celebration of the Passion of the Lord, they all especially spent time in fasting, vigils and reading St. books: and Philo also describes all this in the same form as is observed among us; he mentions the vigils of the great holiday, the pious exercises associated with them, our usual songs, and how, following one measured, modestly beginning psalm, others, who at first only listened to him in silence, also begin to sing and the endings of the songs are sung together; how on these shown days they completely abstain from wine and do not eat meat at all, but only drink water and nothing for bread except salt. For this he describes the degrees of primates, that is, those who correct our church services, then deacons and finally bishoprics, as the highest intercession over all; - all this, Eusebius concludes, does not allow us to doubt that Philo had in mind anything other than the first preachers of the apostolic teaching and the rules devoted to them (Evs. Tser. Is. book II, chapters XVI, XVII). Jerome and Epiphanius agree with Eusebius. The first, of course, borrowed this opinion from the indicated place of Eusebius (since in general the history of church writers, in which this work of Philo is spoken of, he drew from the history of Eusebius), however, probably not without criticism. Epiphanius himself, without the direction of Eusebius, was led to the same thought about these Alexandrian or, better, Mareotian (from Lake Mareota, located near them) ascetics: which is clear from the special name that they were given, namely Jesseev, assuming in Philo’s name the therapevts only a translation of this and deriving the name Jessean from the name Jesus, just as other believers were called from the name of Christ. Against this evidence, they present: 1) that Philo gives his society of therapists the name of ancient founders (παλαιοί αρχηγέται) and attributes to these founders many monuments of allegorical teaching (τής έν τοίς άλληγορουμένοις ίδέας); 2) that these therapists, according to his own testimony, performed various hand movements and dances during the service (έπιχειρονομείν καί έπορχείσϑαι); 3) that such a difference in food was observed, which, as it seems, entered the church much later. But these objections can also be partly answered: 1) under the name of the ancient founders of the society of therapists, Eusebius himself understood and pointed out to others to understand the apostles, when at the beginning of his discussion on this subject he noticed that Philo wrote this book of his long after how I was in Rome and met the apostle. Peter; track. Enough time must have passed since the first establishment of this society of St. Mark before Philo wrote this book; and therefore, in the absence of accurate information about the beginning of it, looking at the strict order of this society, which is introduced in ordinary human institutions not quickly, not suddenly, but for many years, he could call the founders of the society ancient and consider the books they used to be also ancient (if we do not mean here some explanations of Holy Scripture in an allegorical spirit, which existed among the Jews even before the apostles); 2) from the various body movements used by therapists during worship, one can only conclude that they have not yet completely abandoned their former Jewish rituals and the laws of the elders; 3) regarding the antiquity of distinguishing food during fasting, we have other ancient evidence; so among the apostolic decrees there is a rule (Book V, Chapter 18) with the following content: fast (six days before Easter) and do not eat anything except bread, salt and plants, and drink nothing except water (νηστεύετε μόνω χράμενοι άρτω καί άλί, λαχανοις, καί ποτώ ύδατι). That this decree is quite ancient is evident from the fact that Epiphanius himself calls it διάταξις τών άποστόλων (LXXV. paragraph 5). Tertullian writes about the fasts of Christians of his time that they consisted of simplici pabulo puroque aquae potu (De patient. Cap. XIII). Pane et aqua victi abant (De Jeiun. p. 13). This is the dry eating so much praised by the most ancient writers of the church! The writer, under the name of Hermas, introduces his shepherd by saying: illo die quo ieiunabis, nihil ommino gustabis praeter panem et aquam (Herm past. lib. III. 1. 5). Finally, these ascetic therapists are considered to be the other half of the Essenes, the speculative: but this opinion is based on a misunderstanding of Philo’s words. Beginning a book about therapists, he says this: διεπόνη σαν βίον έѵ άπασιν, ή τό γούν εύφορητότερον είπείν τοίς πλειστοί μέρεσι, διενεγκόντες αύτίκα καί περί τών ϑεωρίαν άσπασαμένων άκολουϑία τής πραγματείας έπόμενος, τά προσηκοντα λέξω. Postquam de Essaeis disseruimus, qui vitam activam exercent omnibus, aut quod minus invidiosum dictu est plerique felicius: ordo postulat, ut deinceps de iis qui contemplationi dediti sunt, dicamus ea quae dicenda sunt. – But whether he wants to talk about the Essenes exactly as above is not clear from here. In the continuation of the essay, those once called by therapists are not called Essenes anywhere, while this name, as a common name for both active and speculative, would not be indecent to occur here. To the order we have suggested, we should now add comments about the lives of people who are especially glorious in their inner perfection: by this we mean first the apostles, and then the apostolic men. But the history of the first, how many monuments there are about whom there are in the book of the Acts of the Apostles, which is not subject to any doubt regarding its authenticity, has already been set out by us in parts - when reviewing from various sides the history of the church, of which they were the first visible movers: and most of all - the history of the apostle. Paul, then Peter, partly John and two James. We would like to see traces of other events in the lives of these apostles, for the information available about them is very brief; I would like to know at least something positive about others: but there are very few reliable monuments for this. The most complete information could be provided by the historia certaminis apostolici of Avid of Babylon, who poses as a contemporary of the apostles and a disciple of Jesus Christ, but this disciple of Jesus Christ in his work often refers to Hegesippus, who lived in the 2nd century, and Julius Africanus, who lived in the 3rd century. Neither Eusebius nor Jerome mentions him in the catalog of church writers. In his composition there are so many fables about Jesus Christ and the apostles that it is impossible to attribute it to a disciple of Christ. So eg. mention is made of 75 churches in one province during the time of the apostles (?!). The same kind of essence: the life of St. John, a work attributed to Prokhor; two books about the sufferings of St. Peter and Paul under the name Lina. In the first example. it is said that ap. John, when the lot fell to him for the apostleship in Asia, fell at the feet of the other apostles so that he would not be sent there; that when he emerged unharmed from the boiling oil, the believers erected a church in his name. The second says that Peter was killed against the will of Nero; that part of the Roman government consisted of Christians, and is indicated by the correspondence of Paul with Seneca. The act of suffering of St. is also considered dubious by critics. Andrew, written by the presbyters of Achaia: the work is sound in itself and important in its content, only it began to be cited from the end of the 8th century (see Historia ecclesiastica Natalis Alexandri T. III, p. 46. 6). For our church, this monument is especially remarkable for the teaching it contains about the Holy Spirit, in accordance with the teaching of the Greek Church: a Patre procedere, et in Filio permanere. In addition, there is private fragmentary information about some events in the life of the apostles from the ancients from Irenaeus, Clement Alex., Eusebius, Jerome, Ambrose, Augustine. Later writers of church history present these details and more, but do not provide evidence for their stories. Such is Nicephorus, a 14th-century historian. Having thus cleared away the inaccuracies of the private biographies of the apostles, we will collect, as much as we can, the scattered features of these in the writings that cannot be doubted. Egesippus (de Ex. Indaico L. III, p. 2) and Ambrose (orat. in Auxent.) write that Peter aroused Nero against himself by defeating Simon the Magus in raising the dead and in destroying Simon’s attempt to fly upward; that during the danger, according to the conviction of the faithful, leaving Rome, he saw the Lord going to Rome, who told him that he was going to the second crucifixion; Having understood the meaning of these words, he returned. The Apostle Peter was crucified in a perverted position because he considered himself unworthy to die exactly the death of the Lord. The act of suffering of St. Andrew contains his debate with Egei, his tormentor, about death, being in life and being consumed at the mystical meal of Jesus Christ, his torment, and being attached with a rope to the cross, a two-day teaching from the cross, the conversion of the tormentor and the desire to remove the apostle from the cross, but finding the saint already dead. (You can read more in the Four Menaions under the 30th of November). In addition to the historical information that we have from the Acts of the Apostles about John the Theologian, it is worthy to be included in 1) the legend of Irenaeus, who says that when the apostle met the heretic Cerinthos in the same bathhouse, he not only fled himself, but also advised others so as not to perish with the enemy of God (L. III, 3; 2). The legend of Eusebius, who is from Clement Alex. gives the following story: after the death of Tyrannus, leaving Patmos, John returned to Ephesus; On the way, he was in one city, not far from Ephesus, where, while engaged in establishing the brethren, he entrusted to the local bishop a young man, strong in body, beautiful in face, fiery in spirit, saying: “I entrust him to all your care before Christ and the church.” The elder took the young man, raised him in Christianity and enlightened him through baptism. But his former comrades again corrupted him; he became the leader of a gang of robbers. John happened to be in this city again: having corrected his affairs, he approached the bishop and said: Give me the treasure that I entrusted to you before Christ and the church. The bishop was at first amazed, thinking that the apostle was demanding money from him that he had not entrusted to him. But when John said: I demand the young man and the soul of his brother, the elder, bowing his gaze, wept and said through tears: he died. How? John asked him, by what death? He died to God, the bishop answered: for he became a robber and now with his gang occupies a nearby mountain. The apostle, tearing his clothes and hitting himself on the head with great crying, said: I have found a good guard for my brother’s soul!.. Then he said: give me a horse and a guide, and immediately set off to the shown place. Here the guard gangs seize him; but he neither ran nor resisted, but only shouted: that’s what I came for; take me to your commander, who meanwhile stood in arms and was waiting for the prisoner to come to him; but as soon as he recognized John in him, he ran away out of shame. The old man pursues the runner, forgetting his years and shouting: my son, why are you running from your father, a poor old man? Have pity on me, dear son; don't be afraid; there is still hope of salvation; I will give an answer to Christ for you; I will suffer death itself, if necessary, just as Christ did for us. I will give my soul for you; Believe me: Christ sent me to you! Hearing this, he first stopped, but with downcast eyes; then he threw down his weapon, suddenly trembled and cried bitterly. The Apostle brought him to church, prayed and fasted for him for a long time, taught him various teachings for a long time and did not leave him until he completely returned him to the church. 3) Jerome’s saying that in his old age, when he entered the assembly of believers, he always said: children, love one another, and when the brethren, bored with these repetitions, asked him: why does he keep saying the same thing? He answered: because this is the commandment of the Lord; and if there were only one, then this would be enough for us (Lib. III, in Gal. cap. 6). This should conclude the indication of historical details regarding the life of the apostles, because we find nothing more than this in the ancient writers, except for some random remarks about the place of the sermon or the manner of the death of the apostles. The same should be noted about the history of the closest colleagues of the apostles - Luke, Mark, Barnabas, Timothy. Scripture testifies to their zeal; the legend adds some remarks about their death, and nothing more. Providence, it seems, hid all the glory of the life and deeds of the apostles so that the work of spreading Christianity would seem more divine. Of the apostolic men they flourished with the glory of the perfection of the Christian saint. Clement, bishop Roman, St. Ignatius, bishop Antioch, St. Polycarp, bishop Smirnsky, Simon, bishop. Jerusalem. It is not so much their life that is known as their death, and the death of only the first can be attributed to the first century of Christianity. At the beginning of the persecution of Trayanov, he was expelled from Rome and exiled to imprisonment in Kherson, where he died, having still received from the apostle. Paul's sweet assurance that his name is written in the book of the living (Phil. 4:3). Finally, it should be said about the shortcomings and vices known in the church during the time of the apostles. - That the church even in the time of the apostles was not completely clean from the defilements of the world, it is enough to quote one passage from the 2nd epistle to the church of Corinth (12:20, 21): I am afraid that when I come, I will not find you such as I do not want; also so that you do not see me differently than what you want; so as not to find discord, envy, anger, quarrels, slander, gossip, pride, unrest among you. So that again, when I come, my God will not make me sad with you and so that I will not mourn for many who sinned before this and did not repent of the uncleanness, fornication and lewdness that they did. – Constantly turning among the wicked and corrupt pagans, Christians, and especially those who had not yet been established in the rules of their faith, could conveniently become infected with their vices, in which they themselves had previously walked and to which they had become accustomed. (To warn against these dangers for morals, it seems, the Apostle James wrote his epistle, commanding us to guard against pride (James 1:9–11) and lusts (12–16). – They generally notice that, especially around the time of Nero’s death, the purity of the morals of the church began to decline due to the increase in false brethren, and the church weakened in its former zeal; she is found in this state throughout the reigns of Vespasian, Titus and Domitian; but under Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian and the Antonines, she again appears in her former glory of purity and jealousy. We find confirmation in the words of Lactantius Lib. d. mortibus persecutorum: rescissis igitur Actis Tyranni (Domitiani) non modo in statum pristinum Ecclesia restituta est, sed etiam multo clarius et floridius enituit; secutisque temporibus, quibus multi ac boni Principes Romani imperii clavum regimenque tenuerunt, nullos inimicorum impetus passu, manus suas in orientem occidentemque porrexit, ut jam nullus esset terrarum ungulus tam remotuo, quo non religio Dei penetrasset, nulla denique natio tam feris moribus vivens ut non suscepto Die cultu ad institiae opera nutesceret. Lactantius says nothing about the state of the church between the deaths of Nero and Domitian, but right after depicting the persecution of the former, he moves on to the latter, without mentioning the cruelties of this sovereign, describing in vivid colors the flourishing state of the church under subsequent sovereigns: clarius ac floridius enituit, which means that before that it was not so glorious and pure. Eusebius, having proposed in his history to show the successors of the apostles, cites very few and notes: how many of these successors and who exactly, as true imitators of the apostles, were recognized by them as worthy to shepherd the churches they founded, it is not easy to say, except perhaps those who are directly mentioned in the epistles of Paul. All his legends relating to this time are collected not from genuine works of this time, but from writers of the second and third centuries, and, moreover, often with the addition of λόγος κατέχει; παλαιός κατέχει λόγος. At this time, it seems, the reproach falls to the angel of the Church of Ephesus, by which, as the first of the seven mystical churches, they mean the first period of the existence of the whole church: for thou hast forsaken thy first love. Remember where you slept from, and repent, and do the first thing (Apoc. 2:4, 5). This, it seems, most closely includes the prophetic instructions of Jesus Christ in the edifying conversation to the apostles about their ministry (Matthew 10:21, 22) and in the last terrible prophecy about Jerusalem (24:10, 11-14), and the apostle. Paul (Acts 20:29, 30; 1 Tim. 4:1, 2, 3), apostle. Peter in 2 epistle and Jude. From all these indications it is clear that the church was threatened by close enemies not only of faith, but also of morals. For just as every teaching that deviates from the correctness of Christian teaching introduced its own errors regarding the activities of Christians, so there were especially such teachers of wickedness who directly acted to corrupt morals. – On the basis of Christian freedom, they a) followed the flesh and its evil lusts and b) despised the authorities, being boldly self-righteous and not afraid to slander the higher ones (2:10). Anna tribus nupsit, Ioakim, Cleopha Salomeque. Et quibus ipsa viris peperit tres Anna Marias, Quas duxere loseph, Albhaeus Zebedaeusque Prima lesum; lacobum, Ioseph, cum Simone ludam Altera dat lacobum dat tertia datque Iohannem. But this pedigree is largely unsupported resolution of Zechariah's language. – The amazement of those present at this event (63) and the rumor that spread about it throughout Judea (65) are completely independent of Zechariah’s song. Expression of surprise: what will happen next? shows that those who pronounced it were not aware the prophetic song of Zechariah, in which it was stated quite clearly for that time that this would happen in the boyhood So the wise men mentioned in the gospel were from Persia, or more likely from Babylon. Justin Martyr, carried away by the application of the words of Isaiah 8:4, thought to see the Arabians of Damascus in the Magi (Dialog. cum Tryph. cap. 77, 78). So does Tertullian adv. Marcionem III, 13. But this explanation did not hold up in the church. The oldest testimony can be found in the First Gospel of James, where in chapter 21 instead of: από άνατολών, according to other copies it reads: έχ Περσίδος. Clement of Alexandria (Strom. I p. 359) calls them Persian magicians; Basil the Great (hom XXV r. 510) έϑνος Περσικόν οί μάγοι; Diodorus of Tarsus (Phot, (cod. 223), Chrysostom (hom. VI and VII) and Theophylact (on Matthew ch. 2) too. But others, mainly Western, are looking for the homeland of the Magi in Babylon (See Evseb. Alexandr. orat. advers. astronom.). There are three of them - probably according to the number of gifts they brought. But the author of Op. imperf. in Matthaeum (Opp. Chrysost. Vol. VI, XXVII) counts them up to 12. However, the generally accepted opinion does not really extend beyond three and calls them kings, it seems, in accordance with the prophetic application of Isaiah 49:7. What do you mean by star? – Ignatius the God-Bearer speaks of a simple star (Ephes. cap. 19. Also in the Syriac text, only with omissions). Origen (Contr. Cels. 1:60), Theophilus of Alexandria (Ep. Pashal. II), Ambrose (in Evang. Luc. II. cap. 48), Jerome (in Esaiam cap. 19) admit that this fulfilled the prophecy of Balaam and see a comet in the star. So Basil the Great sees in this a new extraordinary star (hom. XXV, 210), as well as Gregory the Theologian. Others denied the star nature in this phenomenon. Diodorus, Chrysostom (VI hom. in Math.), Theophylact saw in the star an “invisible force”, and not a material star. The Antioch school thought to be more rational than others. The star’s path is extraordinary; her stop to enlighten travelers shows that she was not one of the ordinary stars. Others admit that spiritual power was clothed in the stellar substance We find this uncertainty not only where the name of bishops is used without distinction with the name of presbyters, as in Acts. 20:17, 28, but also where apparently we should understand the words of Scripture about bishops alone: ​​a) in the epistles of St. Paul to Timothy. Although here he is prescribed such rules that, it would seem, could not apply to a simple presbyter, but what a simple presbyter did not have the right to do, did not an apostolic co-worker, such as Timothy, have the right to perform? c) in the letter to Titus. Art. 1, 5 with 6 and 7. From the apocalypse nothing can be concluded about the origin of the bishopric from the apostles For detailed information about the ranks of the church of this and subsequent centuries, one can usefully read from Switzer under their private names and in historical discussions: 1) About the ranks of the Greek-Russian church; 2) About the beginning, importance and signs of church vestments; 3) About ancient liturgical singing; 4) About the similarity of the altar decorations of our church with the ancient ones. Moscow 1817 You might be interested in: