Orthodox teaching on salvation. Archimandrite Sergius (Stragorodsky)

home

Scud

Orthodox teaching on salvation. Archimandrite Sergius (Stragorodsky) - Orthodox teaching on salvation

Modern secular society has formed the opinion, taken up by neo-pagans, that the ideal of a Christian is self-abasement, passivity and lack of initiative.

In their books and articles directed against Orthodoxy, neo-pagans very often exploit such images, contrasting the “humble Christian” with the “free pagan”. In this regard, let us consider what the Orthodox doctrine actually says about man and his purpose, and also examine some concepts that are misinterpreted by atheists.

Is it possible to become a god?

The first lines of the Bible tell us about God's creation of our material world. The crown of His creative plan was man: “And God said: Let us make man in our image, after our likeness, and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on earth. And God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female he created them.” (Genesis 1: 26-27).

A modern Greek theologian, commenting on this text, wrote: “Creation in His image was such a gift that God endowed only with man and no one else in all visible creation, so that he became the image of God Himself.” This gift included reason, conscience, free will, creativity, love and desire for perfection and God, personal self-awareness and everything that puts a person above the rest of the visible creation, making him a person. In other words, everything that makes a person a person is given to him in the image of God.”

In the New Testament, the Apostle Peter says the following words, addressing Christians: “But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation...” (1 Pet. 2:9).

Orthodox Church, unlike many other religious movements, considers man as the crown of God's creation, the purpose of whose creation is very high. , who lived in the 4th century, wrote: “Know your nobility, namely, that you are called to royal dignity, that you are a chosen race, sacred and a holy language.”

Theologians today have exactly the same opinion on this issue. Missionary and theologian Metropolitan Anthony of Sourozh wrote: “If you want to know what man is... look to the throne of God, and you will see sitting there at the right hand of God, at the right hand of Glory of the man Jesus Christ... only in this way can we know how great man is, if only he becomes free..."

Constant monitoring of one's personal sins, remembering that a person is a “slave to earthly passions” protects a person from vanity and pride, that is, spiritual blindness. The Creator made man the master of the Universe and subordinated all creation to him. For the sake of man and his salvation, God, the Creator of the visible and invisible world, incarnated into an earthly, material body, accepted death and was resurrected, making man capable of deification.

A person must realize all his abilities in creativity and love in order to become like God through this, for “the limit of a virtuous life is likeness to God,” as St. Gregory of Nyssa says.

“Man is a magnificent imprint of a magnificent image, sculpted in the image of an ideal Prototype,” wrote Philo of Alexandria. These words are in perfect agreement with the thought of St. Gregory of Nyssa: “The end of a valiant life is assimilation to the Divine, and therefore the valiant with all care try to succeed in the purity of the soul, removing themselves from any passionate disposition, so that with an improved life, certain traits will be formed in them.” highest nature..."

Man was created by God as a free being, called to rise to the divine status bestowed by God by His grace, since man is called to realize in himself the likeness of God, literally created to become god.

wrote that man “is placed separately from all creation, being the only creature that is capable of becoming a god.”

“Man is predestined to become God... The Divine Logos did not become a God-angel, but a God-man”

According to the words of St. Irenaeus of Lyons, “God became man so that man could become god”—these words contain the entire dogmatic essence of the Christian teaching about man. The Holy Fathers especially emphasized the need to realize this. Thus, Saint Gregory the Theologian said: “If you think low of yourself, then I will remind you: you are a created god, going through the suffering of Christ into imperishable glory.” Based on the above, we agree with the conclusions of the modern theologian Father Andrei Lorgus, who, reflecting on Christian anthropology, wrote: “The path of Christian self-understanding lies not through the recognition of one’s insignificance, but through the recognition of one’s dignity, against the background of which even a small sin is noticeable.”

Asceticism is only a tool for personal ascent, but not the goal of life.

An Orthodox Christian, like an athlete in training, places himself in obviously worse conditions necessary to achieve personal perfection.

Who called whom a slave

As we see, the doctrine of human dignity and destiny in Christianity is extremely high. However, concepts such as “servants of God”, “meekness”, “fear of God”, etc. often become a stumbling block.

Speculation on this topic is widespread on the Internet in the form of numerous demotivators and discussions. Let's look at what Christians actually mean by these concepts and whether there is anything offensive and humiliating in them.

Spiritual freedom is the power of the individual over himself, over his egoism, his passions and sinful inclinations

In Christianity, they worship God, who is the Creator of the entire Universe, possessing all positive properties. He is absolute Good and Love. God endowed people with free will. The concept of freedom is fundamental in Christianity. The Apostle Paul calls: “Stand fast in the freedom that Christ has given us... You, brothers, have been called to freedom” (Gal. 5: 1-13). As religious scholar Archpriest Andrei Khvylya-Olinter writes, “Orthodoxy honors the internal freedom of will of a person, for this is a gift of God that is the cause of itself. Spiritual freedom is the power of the individual over himself, over his nature, over his egoism, his passions and sinful inclinations.”

Slavery literally means submission and loss of freedom. For example, an alcoholic or drug addict becomes so captivated by a destructive passion that he can no longer give it up on his own, although he understands that this will lead to his death. “For whoever is overcome by someone is his slave” (2 Pet. 2:19). It is from such slavery that Christianity protects.

The example of alcohol addiction is very indicative, however, passions are varied, but their effect is the same - enslavement of human freedom. To be someone's slave means complete independence from everyone else. That is why Christians call themselves “slaves of God,” recognizing the power of the Creator of the Universe Himself over themselves, but thereby becoming independent from any other manifestations that limit human freedom. In this context, the Apostle Paul says: “...just as you presented your members as slaves to uncleanness and to lawlessness, to do wicked works, so now present your members as slaves to righteousness, to do holy works. For while you were slaves to sin, then you were free from righteousness. But now that you have been freed from sin and become slaves of God, your fruit is holiness, and the end is eternal life.” (Rom. 6:19-22).

In a personal sense, Christianity does not imply any slavery. Christ conveys to all believers a prayer in which everyone addresses God as the Father - “Our Father” (see: Matt. 6: 9-13).

Christians are children of God, which is confirmed many times in the pages of the Bible

Christians are children of God, which is confirmed many times on the pages of the Bible: “To those who believe in His name he gave the power to become children of God” (John 1:12); “Look what love the Father has given us, that we should be called children of God. The world does not know us because it has not known Him. Beloved! we are now children of God; but it has not yet been revealed what we will be. We only know that when it is revealed, we will be like Him, because we will see Him as He is” (1 John 3: 1-2).

Christ especially clearly indicates this in the words: “And pointing His hand to His disciples, He said: Behold My mother and My brothers; for whoever does the will of My Father in heaven is My brother, and sister, and mother” (Matthew 12: 49-50). Nothing like this exists in other religions, especially among neo-pagans, who, flaunting loud phrases like “My god didn’t call me a slave,” logically receive the answer: “Of course, a tree stump doesn’t know how to talk.”

Authentic Slavic paganism had completely different ideas about the gods, who were worshiped with slavish humiliation and reverence. A modern apologist cites several historical evidence confirming this: “The Arab traveler Ibn Fadlan at the beginning of the 10th century describes the veneration of gods by the Slavs as follows: “So, he approaches a large image and worships it... He never ceases to make requests to one image, then to to another, asks for their intercession and humbly bows before them.”

And here’s how the German “The Tale of Otto of Bamberg” describes the reaction of the Western pagan Slavs of the 12th century when they unexpectedly saw a man with a shield dedicated to the god of war Yarovit, which no one should touch: “At the sight of the sacred weapons, the inhabitants in their rustic simplicity imagined, that it was Yarovit himself who appeared: some fled in horror, others fell prostrate to the ground.”

The Slavs experienced fear, humiliation and complete dependence at the sight of their idols. It is not surprising that Christianity was accepted so easily and freely by our ancestors.

A few words should also be said about slavery as a social phenomenon. Since ancient times, it has been quite commonplace that a person can be in a position of powerless property of another person. In antiquity, slavery was widespread. Slavery existed in pre-Christian times among the Slavs, contrary to the opinions of atheistic Soviet historians, who mistakenly linked the emergence of the slave system among the Slavic peoples with the beginning of Christianization.

Christianity never openly opposed this fundamental phenomenon of the ancient world. However, it was Christianity that destroyed its ideological basis with the words of the Apostle Paul: “You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus; all of you who were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is no longer Jew or Gentile; there is neither slave nor free; there is neither male nor female: for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Gal. 3:26-28). Literally this means that the slave and the master are the same and are brothers in Christ. Therefore, it is not surprising that slavery, with the gradual Christianization of popular consciousness, came to naught in all countries. And it flared up again with a departure from Christian morality, as, for example, happened in Rus' during the reign of Peter I and Catherine II, when serfdom took on monstrous forms.

An army without fear or reproach

Now consider what Christianity says about fear and courage. Such a concept as “fear of the Lord” also, as a rule, causes bewilderment. wrote: “Whoever fears the Lord is above all fear, he has eliminated and left far behind him all the fears of this age. He is far from all fear, and no fear comes close to him.” Believer, loving God, is not afraid of Him, but does not want to move away from him, to lose communion with God. Holy Bible says the following: “He who fears is not perfect in love” (1 John 4:18).

“Demons consider the timidity of the soul to be a sign of its complicity in their evil.”

But regarding cowardice and timidity, the holy fathers spoke very impartially: “Cowardice is an infantile disposition in an old, vain soul. Cowardice is a deviation from faith, in anticipation of unexpected troubles... He who does not have the fear of the Lord is often afraid of his own shadow,” wrote Saint John Climacus. Blessed Diadochos of Photikius said: “We who love the Lord should wish and pray so that... we may not be involved in any fear... because... the demons consider the timidity of the soul as a sign of its complicity in their evil.”

Saint Theophan the Recluse warns: “Your fears are the enemy’s trick. Spit on them. And stand courageously."

Evagrius of Pontus calls for courage: “The point of courage is to stand in the truth and, even if confrontation is encountered, not to deviate towards what does not exist.” And Abba Pimen wrote: “God is merciful to those who carry a sword in their hands. If we are courageous, He will show His mercy.”

From the life of St. Basil the Great we know his conversation with the prefect Modest. After many convictions to renounce Orthodoxy, Modest, seeing the saint’s inflexibility, began to threaten him with deprivation of property, exile, torture, and death. “All this,” answered Saint Basil, “means nothing to me: he does not lose his property who has nothing except these old and worn-out clothes and a few books, which contain all my wealth. There is no exile for me, because I am not bound by place, and the place where I live now is not mine, and wherever they send me will be mine. What can torment do to me? I am so weak that only the first blow will be sensitive. Death for me is a blessing: it will sooner lead me to God, for whom I live and work, and for whom I have long been striving.”

Elder schema-abbot Savva (Ostapenko) answered the question: “What passions are the most destructive for modern man? - answered: “Cowardice and timidity. Such a person always lives a dual, false life. He cannot complete a good deed; he always seems to maneuver between people. The fearful one has a crooked soul; If he does not overcome this passion in himself, then suddenly, under the influence of fear, he may become an apostate and a traitor.”

Christians are called to sacrifice themselves without fear for the sake of their neighbors: “Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends” (John 15:13). Following it, Christian warriors were distinguished by their special courage and perseverance, often saving their comrades at the cost of their lives.

Among the saints of the Orthodox Church there are a huge number of warriors who, through their deeds and exploits, showed how Christians fulfill the commandment to protect their neighbors. Everyone knows Saints Demetrius Donskoy, Alexander Nevsky, Ilia Muromets. But there were a great many great warriors who achieved holiness.

For example, Saint Mercury of Smolensk, who lived during the time of the Mongol invasion, at the command of the Mother of God who appeared to him, went alone to the enemy camp, where he destroyed many enemies, including the giant Tatar military leader, who instilled fear in everyone with his strength. Single-handedly, Saint Mercury put the entire Tatar camp to flight, but he himself was killed in an unequal battle.

Saint Theodore Ushakov, personally commanding the Russian fleet, won many victories over the Turks, who at that time had a fleet that was several orders of magnitude stronger and more numerous. All of Europe feared his victorious fleet, but he himself remained alien to pride and vanity, realizing how little a person can do without the help of God.

Saint Michael the warrior was born in Bulgaria, he served in the Byzantine army. During the war with the Turks, Saint Michael inspired the entire squad with his courage in battles. When the Greek army fled the battlefield, he fell to the ground and prayed for the salvation of the Christians. Then he led his soldiers against the enemy. Having burst into the middle of the enemy ranks, he scattered them, brutally striking the enemies without harm to himself or his squad. At the same time, a thunderstorm suddenly arose to help the Christian soldiers: lightning and thunder struck and terrified the enemies, so that they all fled.

Images of meekness

Neopagans love to post photographs on their Internet resources Orthodox people kneeling in churches - in their opinion, this is the apotheosis of self-deprecation; usually in the comments they start talking about slave psychology, etc. It is not clear why neo-pagans claim that this reverence for God extends to other relationships.

However, for example, the word “Islam” literally translates as “submission,” and Muslims don’t even kneel during their prayers - they lie prostrate, but among the neo-pagans there are no daredevils to speak to Muslims’ faces about their “slave psychology.” And although Muslims are very militant, Orthodox Russia has defeated Muslim states many times. Orthodox Christians are called to fulfill the commandment: “Worship the Lord your God and serve Him alone” (Matthew 4:10). The Orthodox reverence the Most High Creator, recognizing His boundless Greatness, but this commandment does not apply to anyone other than God.

A modern parish parable tells: “A boorish-looking young man comes into the church, approaches the priest, hits him on the cheek and, smiling maliciously, says: “What, father?! It’s been said: if you hit the right cheek, turn the left one too.” Father, former master boxing sport, with a left hook he sends the insolent man into the corner of the temple and meekly says: “It is also said: with the measure you use, it will be measured back to you!” Frightened parishioners: “What’s going on there?” The deacon is important: “They interpret the Gospel.”

This story serves as a good illustration of the fact that, without knowing the essence of Christian teaching, one should not make bold generalizations. These words of Christ simply abolished the ancient law of blood feud and reminded us that it is not always necessary to retaliate for evil with evil. I would also like to especially note that, although atheists and neo-pagans are very fond of throwing snippets of quotes from the Bible at the Orthodox, demanding their literal understanding, the Christian teaching about the Holy Scriptures speaks of something completely different. The Holy Scriptures should be understood only in the context of the interpretations of the Holy Fathers. Saint Gregory of Nyssa wrote on this subject: “The interpretation of what is written that appears at first glance, if not understood in its proper sense, often produces the opposite of the life revealed by the Spirit.” Therefore, one must “revere the authenticity of those who are testified by the Holy Spirit, remain within the boundaries of their teaching and knowledge,” and the Fifth-Sixth Trullo Council of 691-692, in its 19th canon, decided: “If the word of Scripture is examined, then not otherwise they do not explain it except as the luminaries and teachers of the Church expounded in their writings.” Therefore, non-believing interpreters of the Bible are not a decree for Orthodox Christians at all.

Now let's look at such Christian virtues as meekness and humility. IN modern society these words evoke a disdainful grin, although in fact there is nothing shameful in these concepts, just the opposite. Meekness is the opposite virtue to unbridled anger and rage. A meek man never loses inner world, does not allow emotions to overwhelm his mind, is distinguished by self-control and composure. It is not surprising that many holy warriors were involved in this virtue. For example, King David, the famous Old Testament commander, was of a very meek disposition. The holy Emperor Constantine, the founder of Constantinople, who won a considerable number of battles, also possessed meekness. And the Orthodox Church calls Saint Nicholas “an image of meekness,” who beat a heretic who blasphemed God.

Humility is the opposite virtue of selfishness and pride: it defeats the obsession with one’s own “I”

The concept of “humility” also causes a lot of misunderstanding. In our opinion, a very precise definition was given by the Orthodox apologist Sergei Khudiev: “Humility is not the downtroddenness of a person who has nothing better left; this is a voluntary preference for the will of God, a willingness to serve, sacrifice and give instead of demanding service for oneself, being exalted and taking. This is a virtue opposite to selfishness and pride. Humility overcomes self-obsession.”

Modern patrolologist and apologist priest Valery Dukhanin notes: “Genuine humility, meekness, goodness are not weakness of character; on the contrary, it is the ability to control oneself, one’s passions and feelings, which presupposes internal strength and willpower. On the one hand, this is the ability to control one’s own anger so as not to throw it out without reason. And on the other hand, the ability to give the enemy a worthy rebuff when you need to protect your loved ones.”

So, we examined the Christian teaching about the destiny of man, analyzed the concepts of Christian ascetic thought and some passages of Holy Scripture, consciously or unconsciously distorted by neo-pagans. Christianity demands a lot from a person, it requires constant personal improvement, but the result of this path is disproportionately high.

Current page: 1 (book has 16 pages in total)

Archimandrite Sergius (Stragorodsky)
Orthodox teaching on salvation.

Biography

SERGY (Ivan Nikolaevich Stragorodsky), Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus' (1867-1944), Russian. Orthodox church activist and theologian. Genus. in Arzamas, Nizhny Novgorod province. in the family of a priest. Graduated from St. Petersburg. YES (1890), having accepted monasticism in his final year. In 1890-93 he worked as a missionary in Japan. Upon returning from Tokyo within 9 months. taught the course by St. Scriptures of the NT in St. Petersburg. YES, and then was sent by the archimandrite of the embassy church to Athens. In 1895 S. defended his master's thesis. “Orthodox. doctrine of salvation" (Serg. Pos., 1895), which immediately put him in the first rank of Russian. theologians. In 1899 he became an inspector, and a year later the rector of St. Petersburg. YES. In 1901 he was consecrated bishop. Yamburgsky. His participation in St. Petersburg dates back to this period. religious – philosopher meetings organized by *Merezhkovsky. In 1905 S. was appointed archbishop. Finnish and Vyborg (since 1911 - member of the Holy Synod). In 1917 he was transferred to the Nizhny Novgorod department. He took part in the Local Council of Rus. Orthodox Churches. Since 1927, S., as the Deputy Patriarchal Locum Tenens, devoted himself to the matter of regulating relations between the Church and the Soviets. government. In the period 1934-43 he headed Rus. Orthodox Church like Patriarchal Locum Tenens. During World War II, S. was inspired by patriotism. activities of his flock. In 1943, at a council of bishops, S. was elected Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus'.

The experience of revealing the moral-subjective side of salvation on the basis of St. Scriptures and works of the patrists. This is the title of the work of Archimandrite (later Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus' since 1943) Sergius (Stragorodsky). This work, for the first time for its time, reflects the Latin scholasticism that prevailed in theological circles (XVIII - early XX centuries) in Orthodox theology, and reveals the biblical patristic perception of salvation. The author perfectly shows the fallacy of Catholic and Protestant teachings about salvation.

Instead of a preface.

The question of personal salvation. (Speech before defending my master's thesis).

Introduction. Part I

The origin of legal life understanding. Catholicism. Protestantism as an amendment to Catholicism. The illusion of Protestant salvation.

Introduction. Part II.

Catholicism after the protest. An attempt to explain the beginning of a new life through a magical transformation.

Chapter 1. Legal understanding of life before the court of Holy Scripture and Holy Tradition

The need for good deeds. Self-love as the basis of a legal understanding of life. Traces of this understanding are in Holy Scripture and Holy Tradition. It is impossible from a legal point of view to explain God's relationship to man. Grace is the basic law of these relationships. Merit de congruo. Perversion of moral life with legal understanding. Denunciation of mercenaryism by St. fathers of the Church. How to explain the traces of legal understanding of life in Holy Scripture and Tradition.

Chapter 2. Eternal Life

Eternal life is like knowledge of God, like communication with God. Holiness as the content of eternal bliss. The intrinsic value of good and its naturalness for humans. The absence of alien moral principles in the Christian teaching about the highest good.

Chapter 3. Retribution

The relationship between present life and future life. The reason for the seeming otherworldliness of the latter. Origin of the concept of retribution. The doctrine of retribution as a natural consequence in Holy Scripture; – in Holy Tradition: among Sts. Irenaeus of Lyons, Gregory of Nyssa, Macarius of Egypt, Ephraim the Syrian, Basil the Great, Cyril of Jerusalem, John Chrysostom, Hippolytus of Rome. The concept of God's Truth.

Chapter 4. Salvation

The difference between Orthodox teachings about salvation from legal. The doctrine of salvation in the Old Testament. In the New Testament. The concept of salvation in Holy Tradition. Salvation is a moral matter, not a mechanical one. Forgiveness of sins. The failure of Protestant pronunciation. Imputation as a pre-peaceful assumption of the entire economy. Moral turning point as the inner essence of justification. The teaching about this is in Holy Scripture. U oo. Churches: Cyril of Jerusalem, Basil the Great, Gregory of Nyssa, Gregory the Theologian, John Chrysostom, Cyril of Alexandria, Ephraim the Syrian, Justin Martyr. Thoughts of the Rev. Feofan. Putting on Christ. The free act of decision, as the main one in the sacrament, despite the Western transformation. Conclusion about the nature of the righteousness received. Possibility of loss. The rudimentary character of the righteousness of baptism. The task of a person's subsequent life.

Chapter 5. Faith

The difference between the Orthodox and legal points of view on the question of the conditions of salvation. There is uncertainty in the answer to this question in Holy Scripture and Tradition. A way to clarify this uncertainty. Faith, as the only condition of salvation. The origin of faith and its reality in the human soul. Protestant mistake. The meaning of faith is in the most free and grace-filled act of human rebirth. Determination by faith of a person's future life. Faith is the beginning of life. What exactly is the saving nature of faith? Faith and works. Conclusion: Salvation is by grace through faith.

Instead of a preface

The Question of Personal Salvation

Your Excellence and Mm. years!

It's the same in religion. Knowledge about God will only make sense for a person when God is for him “the only saint,” the bearer of his ideals, the legislator of his life. And demons believe, says St. ap. Jacob, but they only tremble. It would be better for them not to know about God at all, and they would certainly prefer a state of ignorance to their present state. A person who lives only for the moment, who considers only his will, his desire as the law of his existence - such a person, of course, sometimes will not argue much about what faith he professes. For him, all faiths are equally abstract and meaningless, and, therefore, equally indifferent. The truths of faith can only interest him as a subject of debate, in which he can discover his knowledge, his wit - they will interest him, perhaps, as his natural, national heritage - in a word, they can be interesting for their outside and for random reasons. But such a person cannot understand and recognize the truth, but the objectivity and, therefore, the obligation for himself of this religious doctrine. He sees only philosophical positions and conclusions, sees only dogma and does not notice the way of life, which in fact, in reality, constitutes the content of all these abstract and incomprehensible subtleties of dogma for him. “Whoever says that he loves God and hates his brother is a liar and there is no truth in him” (1 John 4:20). The knowledge of God is valid when it is accompanied by a corresponding life - when a person arranges himself according to this knowledge.

But life is a judge of a person not only in this general sense, that is, not only in whether he believes or does not believe in what he preaches. Life serves the best remedy and to determine and clarify the true worldview of a person or one or another philosophical system, as well as to evaluate this worldview. In the question of God, the world and the general relations between them, one can sometimes limit oneself to one form, only the external relationships of concepts, without asking the question of what this form or this shell contains, without bringing abstract conclusions to tangible, vital clarity. These questions, abstract by their very essence, may sometimes not require (at least, it may seem that they do not require) such a correspondence in existing reality - this correspondence is assumed somewhere above, far from this life and from environment. But as soon as a person descends from the height of abstraction down to the ground to real life, as soon as he leaves being in its whole and concerns himself, in particular, with his own personality, he tries from a general basis to derive his personal relationships to this whole and to other similar individuals , - then he is immediately taken away from all possibility of limiting himself to one form, one distraction. No matter how harmonious his system is, no matter how well his various definitions and conclusions are adjusted to each other, neither he himself nor anyone else in the matter of life will be satisfied with this harmony. It will be necessary to show what actually corresponds to these harmonious concepts and conclusions. This is where the illusory, fictitious nature of many theories and systems can be revealed. All the carefully and effectively finished construction of some thinker can crumble into dust from this one contact with life, precisely from the mere impossibility of confirming one’s speculations with reference to experience. - If the worldview is true, then, when compared with life, abstract and obscure formulas and terms become clear, understandable, almost tangible - then real life will no longer seem like a strange negation of philosophy, not a crude mockery of its idealism, but, on the contrary, its explanation, commentary, - a direct conclusion from it.

The question of personal salvation represents precisely this point in the system of our religious doctrine, at which the latter comes face to face with reality, with real being, and wants to show in life, in practice, what exactly is the truth that it preaches. – At this point, each religion can find an impartial assessment. - Since here a definition of a person’s life goal is assumed, completely consistent with the arguments of reason and the requirements of moral consciousness, - since all abstract formulas and terms find full correspondence in the data of experience, leaving nothing dark, nothing unexplained - since the rest of the system, parts abstract, are directly assumed and in turn explained by this definition of life and do not contradict it in any way - this means that this religion is not a set of human inventions, but a direct snapshot of real life, that it does not distort the fact of life, but truly reproduces it - that, therefore, it is the truth. And, on the other hand, once facts are found in real life that correspond to the provisions and conclusions - once, therefore, the opportunity has presented itself to experimentally comprehend what life according to Christianity is, then the entire system of Christian doctrine is freed from obscurity, abstraction, formality. He who loves his brother has known God and seen Him, says the Apostle (1 John 4:7-8). Anyone who has actually experienced the essence of Christian life will understand what the life of God consists of, because the latter is not only a metaphysical foundation, but also a direct prototype and source of human life. In that (the Word of God) there was life and life was the light of men (John 1:4), presented to human consciousness and as an ideal.

Consequently, anyone who wants to know the true essence of Catholicism, Protestantism or Orthodoxy must turn not to their theoretical teaching, but to their concept of life, to their teaching, namely, about personal salvation, in which (the teaching) this concept is most clear expressed - he must ask each of the religions what it believes is the meaning of a person’s life, his greater good. The dogma of the filioque undoubtedly concerns the cornerstone of our faith, but did it express this dogma of all Catholicism and is it possible to think that with its elimination Western Christianity will make reconciliation with us? Only one of the many points of disagreement will be eliminated, only one of the many reasons for bickering will be less, and the division will not weaken at all. After all, Catholicism is not from filioque, but vice versa. The dogma of the papacy, of course, constitutes the main spring, so to speak, the soul of Catholicism, but again, it was not from the papacy that the perverted Catholic understanding of life arose, but from this latter the papacy, otherwise it is impossible to explain why and how the pope found and is finding so much for himself in the Western world obedient, fanatically devoted servants to him and so many silent followers - this phenomenon cannot be explained by forgeries and tricks alone, by Jesuitism and the love of power of Rome alone. In the same way, not as a result of the rejection of the sacraments and church tradition and not as a result of an exaggerated concept of the fallen nature of man, the Protestants came to their illusory, fictitious salvation, but, on the contrary, having distorted the very concept of life, they had to consistently distort the entire church structure and teaching. Suppose that all the errors in doctrine and structure are corrected - the distorted concept of life will prove that these corrections are only in words - after a while Protestants will have to create new distortions, new errors in place of the eliminated ones.

In the same way, Orthodoxy is not recognized from its theoretical teaching. Abstract propositions and formulas, by their very abstractness, are equally incomprehensible and inconceivable for a person, whether they are Catholic or Orthodox. Would direct logical absurdity reveal the inconsistency of the heterodox system? As an expression of precisely the objectively given truth, Orthodoxy is most deeply cognized where it most directly comes into contact with this objective truth, with the realm of real existence: in its description of the actual life of man, in its definition of life goals and based on this latter teaching about personal salvation. Only by finally having assimilated the Orthodox teaching about life can one be fully (not just by logic) convinced of the immutable, unconditional truth of Orthodoxy - one can understand, clearly understand this truth. After this, all those theoretical positions, all those dogmas that previously seemed only indifferent metaphysical subtleties will receive their deep, full-life meaning. All this will be one and the same, united in spirit and idea, a teaching about true life - only this time life is not considered For man, but in its objective reality, in itself.

I had to be convinced of these elementary truths in practice, and they wrote my essay for me. At first I approached the question of personal salvation with purely theoretical interest. I wanted to clarify this question for myself simply, as a dark, confusing point of doctrine, difficult to define. How can we more accurately express our doctrine of salvation? It is known that an Orthodox cannot speak as Catholics speak; that he is even less allowed to speak as Protestants speak; this is also beyond all doubt; but how should he speak?

To give myself an idea of this, I began to read the works of St. Fathers of the Church. I read them not only because I understood their, so to speak, canonical authority, not only as a church tradition obligatory for every Christian. My thought was somewhat different: I was looking for in the works of St. fathers of the description and explanation of life according to Christ, or the true, proper life, i.e. precisely that phenomenon in the objective world that they want to deductively deduce and define by the abstract formulas of dogmatics. I wanted to understand the views of the fathers on human life, so that from this objective basis I could then test the theoretical teaching and give it a more appropriate explanation.

This method of research is necessary in Orthodoxy. We know that Jesus Christ brought us more than one teaching, and that the work of the apostles and the church was not only to listen to the conversations of Jesus Christ and then pass them on literally from generation to generation: for such a purpose the best means is not oral tradition , and some tablets. We know what Jesus Christ brought to us first and foremost new life and taught it to the apostles, and that the task of church tradition is not only to transmit teaching, but to convey from generation to generation precisely this life conceived with Christ, to convey precisely that which is not conveyed by any word, by any writing, but only by direct communication between individuals. Theoretical teaching only generalizes and elevates this teaching about life into a system. Therefore, the apostles chose as their successors and deputies people who were the most successful, who most consciously and firmly assimilated the life of Christ proclaimed to them. Therefore, the fathers of the church are not recognized as those of the church writers who were the most learned, the most well-read in church literature, but the holy writers are recognized as the fathers of the church, that is, those who embodied that life of Christ, which the church received as its inheritance to preserve and disseminate. . If so, then you can form a correct concept of Orthodoxy not by analyzing its fundamental, abstract teaching, but by observing this real life according to Christ, which is preserved in the Orthodox Church. And since the recognized bearers, embodiments of this life, this vital tradition were St. Fathers, who in their writings interpret this life in detail, it is natural to turn to them for observations. That's exactly what I did.

The more I read St. fathers, it became clearer and clearer to me that I was moving in a completely special world, in a circle of concepts far from being similar to ours. I began to understand that the difference between Orthodoxy and heterodoxy lies not in some particular omissions and inaccuracies, but right at the very root, in principle, that Orthodoxy and heterodoxy are opposite to each other, just as self-love, life according to the elements of the world, the old man are opposite and self-sacrificing love, life according to Christ, a renewed person. Before me stood two completely different worldviews, irreducible to one another: legal and moral, Christian. I called the first legal because the best expression of this worldview is the Western legal system, in which the individual and his moral dignity disappear, and only individual legal units and the relationships between them remain. God is understood mainly as the first cause and Ruler of the world, closed in his absoluteness - His relationship with man is similar to the relationship of a king with a subordinate and is not at all like a moral union. In exactly the same way a person appears in his separately, he lives for himself and only with one external side of his being comes into contact with the life of the common - he only uses this common; Even God, from a human point of view, is only a means to achieving well-being. Consequently, self-love is recognized as the beginning of life, and the general sign of existence is the mutual alienation of all living things. Meanwhile, according to St. fathers, being and life in the proper sense belong only to God, who bears the name “He” - everything else, everything created exists and lives exclusively by its participation in this true life of God, this longed-for Beauty, according to St. Basil the Great. God, therefore, is connected with his creation by more than one absolute “let it be,” God literally serves as the focus of life, without which the creature is as unthinkable in its present existence as it is inexplicable in its origin. Translating this metaphysical position into the language of moral life, we obtain the rule: no one can and should not live for himself; the meaning of life for each individual being is in God, which practically means in the fulfillment of His will. “I came not to do My will, but the will of the Father who sent Me.” Thus, the main principle of everyone’s life is no longer self-love, but “the love of truth” (2 Thess. 2:10). Faithful to this law, man in his relations to God, the world and to people is no longer guided by a selfish thirst for existence (the conclusion from here would be the struggle for existence), but by selfless hunger and thirst for truth, as the highest law, to which he sacrifices his existence . In the legal understanding of life they sought happiness, here they seek truth. There, moral goodness, holiness, was considered a means to achieving bliss; here, true existence is attributed only to moral goodness, embodied in God - and human bliss, therefore, is considered identical with holiness.

After this, it is clear what will happen if we apply the legal framework of life understanding to the moral, Christian one. Of course, it will be possible to find a lot of literal coincidences - it will be possible to fit, squeeze in this or that Orthodox provision under each legal heading. But we must remember that the legal framework is much more formal, external than the moral one, that they cannot express the full depth and vitality of the moral understanding of life. A huge variety of concepts will turn out to be completely ungeneralized, left unattended - many things that must necessarily be presented as one will be divided, and, on the contrary, things that require strict distinctions will be brought together under one heading. The Orthodox teaching will therefore be presented, in any case, one-sidedly, not to say incorrectly.

This determined the content and nature of my work: I had to start with a critique of the legal understanding of life, so that later in the chapters: on eternal life, on retribution, on salvation and on faith, I would reveal the positive Orthodox teaching. My general conclusion is this: a person’s true life is in communication with God. It is possible to be a partaker of this eternal life only through assimilation to God (hence the need for good deeds, that is, spiritual and moral growth), but this assimilation is possible only when God comes to man, and man recognizes and accepts God. Therefore, the grace-filled help of God and faith in Christ and God are necessary, which makes salvation possible. “I’m standing at the door and knocking. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with Me. To him who overcomes I will give to sit with Me on My throne, just as I also overcame and sat with My Father on His throne” (Rev. 3:20-21). All the providence of God, the entire economy of our salvation, is directed towards this; this is the purpose and meaning of the ministry of Jesus Christ.

The basis of my research, as one of my venerable reviewers put it, is the idea of the identity of beatitude and virtue, moral perfection and salvation. How successfully and consistently I applied this idea to that department of the doctrine that I wanted to reveal is not for me to judge, but I console myself with the thought that in the theological work I recalled this idea, or more precisely, I recalled the need to keep it in mind in the dogmatic study of Orthodox teaching.

INSTEAD OF A FOREWORD
QUESTION ABOUT PERSONAL SALVATION.

To your enlightened attention I offer my best attempt to reveal, on the basis of Holy Scripture and the works of the patrists, the Orthodox teaching about personal salvation, that is, in what sense and in what way a person, each given person, receives the communion of true, eternal life.
It is not difficult to determine the motives that forced me to dwell on this particular department of doctrine. The question about life, about the purpose of existence - about how a person can live in order to live a true life - is truly the alpha and omega of every philosophy and every religious teaching. No matter how abstract, vague, sometimes strange and even absurd the logical constructions of this or that thinker may be, but since he is really a thinker, and not an industrialist of thought, since he wants the truth, wants the word coming from the mouth of God, and not bread, - the final end and at the same time the starting point of his philosophical work will still be himself, his own position in the world and one or another definition of his life task. Philosophy without conclusions for life is not philosophy, but an empty game of philosophical words.
It's the same in religion. Knowledge about God will only make sense for a person when God is for him “the only saint,” the bearer of his ideals, the legislator of his life. And demons believe, says St. ap. Jacob, but they only tremble. It would be better for them not to know about God at all, and they would certainly prefer a state of ignorance to their present state. A person who lives only for the moment, who considers only his will, his desire as the law of his existence - such a person, of course, sometimes will not argue much about what faith he professes. For him, all faiths are equally abstract and meaningless, and, therefore, equally indifferent. The truths of faith can only interest him as a subject of debate, in which he can discover his knowledge, his wit - they will interest him, perhaps, as his natural, national heritage - in a word, they can be interesting for their external side and random reasons. But such a person cannot understand and recognize the truth, but the objectivity and, therefore, the obligation for himself of this religious doctrine. He sees only philosophical positions and conclusions, sees only dogma and does not notice the way of life, which in fact, in reality, constitutes the content of all these abstract and incomprehensible subtleties of dogma for him. “Whoever says that he loves God and hates his brother is a liar and there is no truth in him” (1 John IV, 20). The knowledge of God is valid when it is accompanied by a corresponding life - when a person arranges himself according to this knowledge.
But life is a judge of man not only in this general sense, i.e. not only whether he believes or does not believe in what he preaches. Life serves as the best means for determining and clarifying the true worldview of a person or one or another philosophical system, as well as for evaluating this worldview. In the question of God, the world and the general relations between them, one can sometimes limit oneself to one form, only the external relationships of concepts, without asking the question of what this form or this shell contains, without bringing abstract conclusions to tangible, vital clarity. These questions, abstract by their very essence, may sometimes not require (at least, it may seem that they do not require) such a correspondence in existing reality - this correspondence is assumed somewhere above, far from this life and from the surrounding situation. But as soon as a person descends from the height of abstraction down to the ground to real life, as soon as he leaves being in its whole and concerns himself, in particular, with his own personality, he tries from a general basis to derive his personal relationships to this whole and to other similar individuals , - then he is immediately taken away from all possibility of limiting himself to one form, one distraction. No matter how harmonious his system is, no matter how well his various definitions and conclusions are adjusted to each other, neither he himself nor anyone else in the matter of life will be satisfied with this harmony. It will be necessary to show what actually corresponds to these harmonious concepts and conclusions. This is where the illusory, fictitious nature of many theories and systems can be revealed. All the carefully and effectively finished construction of some thinker can crumble into dust from this one contact with life, precisely from the mere impossibility of confirming one’s speculations with reference to experience. If the worldview is true, then, when compared with life, abstract and obscure formulas and terms become clear, understandable, almost tangible - then real life will no longer seem like a strange denial of philosophy, not a crude mockery of its idealism, but on the contrary, its explanation, commentary , – a direct conclusion from it.
The question of personal salvation represents precisely this point in the system of our religious doctrine, at which the latter comes face to face with reality, with real being, and wants to show in life, in practice, what exactly is the truth that it preaches. – At this point, each religion can find an impartial assessment. - Since here a definition of a person’s life goal is assumed, completely consistent with the arguments of reason and the requirements of moral consciousness, - since all abstract formulas and terms find full correspondence in the data of experience, leaving nothing dark, nothing unexplained - since the rest of the system, parts abstract, are directly assumed and in turn explained by this definition of life and do not contradict it in any way - this means that this religion is not a set of human inventions, but a direct snapshot of real life, that it does not distort the fact of life, but truly reproduces it - that, therefore, it is the truth. And, on the other hand, once facts are found in real life that correspond to the provisions and conclusions - once, therefore, the opportunity has presented itself to experimentally comprehend what life according to Christianity is, then the entire system of Christian doctrine is freed from obscurity, abstraction, formality. He who loves his brother has known God and seen Him, says the Apostle (I John IV, 7.8). Anyone who has actually experienced the essence of Christian life will understand what the life of God consists of, because the latter is not only a metaphysical foundation, but also a direct prototype and source of human life. In that (the Word of God) there was life and life was the light of men (John I, 4), presented to human consciousness and as an ideal.
Therefore, the one whoever wants to know the true essence of Catholicism, Protestantism or Orthodoxy must turn not to their theoretical teaching, but to their concept of life, to their teaching, namely, about personal salvation, in which (the teaching) this concept is most clearly expressed - he must ask each of the religions what it believes is the meaning of a person’s life, his highest good. The dogma of the filioque undoubtedly concerns the cornerstone of our faith, but did it express this dogma of all Catholicism and is it possible to think that with its elimination Western Christianity will make reconciliation with us? Only one of the many points of disagreement will be eliminated, only one of the many reasons for bickering will be less, and the division will not weaken at all. After all, Catholicism is not from filioque, but vice versa. The dogma of the papacy, of course, constitutes the main spring, so to speak, the soul of Catholicism, but again, it was not from the papacy that the perverted Catholic understanding of life arose, but from this latter the papacy, otherwise it is impossible to explain why and how the pope found and is finding so much for himself in the Western world obedient, fanatically devoted servants to him and so many silent followers - this phenomenon cannot be explained by forgeries and tricks alone, by Jesuitism and the love of power of Rome alone. In the same way, not as a result of the rejection of the sacraments and church tradition and not as a result of an exaggerated concept of the fallen nature of man, the Protestants came to their illusory, fictitious salvation, but, on the contrary, having distorted the very concept of life, they had to consistently distort the entire church structure and teaching. Suppose that all the errors in doctrine and structure are corrected - the distorted concept of life will prove that these corrections are only in words - after a while Protestants will have to create new distortions, new errors in place of the eliminated ones.
In the same way, Orthodoxy is not recognized from its theoretical teaching. Abstract propositions and formulas, by their very abstractness, are equally incomprehensible and inconceivable for a person, whether they are Catholic or Orthodox. Would direct logical absurdity reveal the inconsistency of the heterodox system? As an expression of precisely the objectively given truth, Orthodoxy is most deeply cognized where it most directly comes into contact with this objective truth, with the realm of real existence: in its description of the actual life of man, in its definition of life goals and based on this latter teaching about personal salvation. Only by finally having assimilated the Orthodox teaching on life can one fully (not just by logic) be convinced of the immutable, unconditional truth of Orthodoxy - one can understand, visually comprehend this truth. After this, all those theoretical positions, all those dogmas that previously seemed only indifferent metaphysical subtleties will receive their deep, full-life meaning. All this will be one and the same, united in spirit and idea, a teaching about true life - only this time life is considered not for a person, but in its objective reality, in itself.
I had to be convinced of these elementary truths in practice when writing my essay. At first I approached the question of personal salvation with purely theoretical interest. I wanted to clarify this question for myself simply, as a dark, confusing point of doctrine, difficult to define. How can we more accurately express our doctrine of salvation? It is known that an Orthodox cannot speak as Catholics speak; that he is even less allowed to speak as Protestants speak; this is also beyond all doubt; but how should he speak?
To give myself an idea of this, I began to read the works of St. Fathers of the Church. I read them not only because I understood their, so to speak, canonical authority, not only as a church tradition obligatory for every Christian. My thought was somewhat different: I was looking for in the works of St. fathers descriptions and explanations of life according to Christ, or true, proper life, i.e. precisely that phenomenon in the objective world that the abstract formulas of dogma want to deduce and define. I wanted to understand the views of the fathers on human life, so that from this objective basis I could then test the theoretical teaching and give it a more appropriate explanation.
This method of research is necessary in Orthodoxy. We know that Jesus Christ brought us more than one teaching, and that the work of the apostles and the church was not only to listen to the conversations of Jesus Christ and then pass them on literally from generation to generation: for such a purpose the best means is not oral tradition , and some tablets. We know that Jesus Christ brought us first and most importantly new life and taught it to the apostles, and that the task of church tradition is not just to pass on teaching, but to pass on from generation to generation precisely this life conceived with Christ, to pass on precisely that which is not passed on by any in a word, no writing, but only direct communication between individuals. Theoretical teaching only generalizes and elevates this teaching about life into a system. Therefore, the apostles chose as their successors and deputies people who were the most successful, who most consciously and firmly assimilated the life of Christ proclaimed to them. Therefore, the fathers of the church are not recognized as those of the church writers who were the most learned, the most well-read in church literature - the holy writers are recognized as the fathers of the church, i.e. who embodied that life of Christ, which the church received as its inheritance to preserve and spread. If so, then you can form a correct concept of Orthodoxy not by analyzing its fundamental, abstract teaching, but by observing this real life according to Christ, which is preserved in the Orthodox Church. And since the recognized bearers, embodiments of this life, this vital tradition were St. Fathers, who in their writings interpret this life in detail, it is natural to turn to them for observations. That's exactly what I did.
The more I read St. fathers, it became clearer and clearer to me that I was moving in a completely special world, in a circle of concepts far from being similar to ours. I began to understand that the difference between Orthodoxy and heterodoxy lies not in some private omissions and inaccuracies, and right at the very root, in principle, that Orthodoxy and heterodoxy are opposite to each other, just as self-love, life according to the elements of the world, the old man and selfless love, life according to Christ, a renewed man are opposite. Before me stood two completely different worldviews, irreducible to one another: legal and moral, Christian. I called the first legal because the best expression of this worldview is Western legal system, in which the personality and its moral dignity disappear, and only individual legal units and the relationships between them remain. God is understood mainly as the first cause and Ruler of the world, closed in his absoluteness - His relationship to man is similar to the relationship of a king to a subordinate and is not at all similar to a moral union. In the same way, man is presented in his individuality, he lives for himself and only with one external side of his being comes into contact with the life of the common, - only uses this common; Even God, from a human point of view, is only a means to achieving well-being. Consequently, self-love is recognized as the beginning of life, and the general sign of existence is the mutual alienation of all living things. Meanwhile, according to St. fathers, being and life in the proper sense belong only to God, who bears the name “He” - everything else, everything created exists and lives exclusively by its participation in this true life of God, this longed-for Beauty, according to St. Basil the Great. God, therefore, is connected with his creation not by one absolute “let there be”; God in the literal sense serves as the focus of life, without which the creature is as unthinkable in its present existence as it is inexplicable in its origin. Translating this metaphysical position into the language of moral life, we obtain the rule: no one can and should not live for himself; the meaning of life for each individual being is in God, which practically means in the fulfillment of His will. “I have come not to do My will, but the will of the Father who sent Me.” Thus, the main principle of everyone’s life is no longer self-love, but “the love of truth” (2 Sol. II, 10). Faithful to this law, man in his relations to God, the world and to people is no longer guided by a selfish thirst for existence (the conclusion from here would be the struggle for existence), but by selfless hunger and thirst for truth, as the highest law, to which he sacrifices his existence . In the legal understanding of life they sought happiness, here they seek truth. There, moral goodness, holiness, was considered a means to achieving bliss; here, true existence is attributed only to moral goodness, embodied in God - and human bliss, therefore, is considered identical with holiness.
After this, it is clear what will happen if we apply the legal framework of life understanding to the moral, Christian one. Of course, it will be possible to find a lot of literal coincidences - it will be possible to fit, squeeze in this or that Orthodox provision under each legal heading. But we must remember that the legal framework is much more formal, external than the moral one, that they cannot express the full depth and vitality of the moral understanding of life. A huge variety of concepts will turn out to be completely ungeneralized, left without attention - many things that must necessarily be presented as one will be divided, and, on the contrary, things that require strict distinctions will be brought together under one heading. The Orthodox teaching will therefore be presented, in any case, one-sidedly, not to say incorrectly.
This determined the content and nature of my work: I had to start with a critique of the legal understanding of life, so that later in the chapters: on eternal life, on retribution, on salvation and on faith, I would reveal the positive Orthodox teaching. My general conclusion is this: a person’s true life is in communion with God. It is possible to be a partaker of this eternal life only through likening to God (hence the need for good deeds, i.e. spiritual and moral growth), but this likeness is possible only when God comes to man, and man will recognize and accept God. Therefore, the grace-filled help of God and faith in Christ and God are necessary, which makes salvation possible. “I’m standing at the door and knocking. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with Me. To him who overcomes I will give to sit with Me on My throne, just as I also overcame and sat with My Father on His throne” (Apoc. III, 20-21). All the providence of God, the entire economy of our salvation, is directed towards this; this is the purpose and meaning of the ministry of Jesus Christ.
The basis of my research, as one of my venerable reviewers put it, is the idea of the identity of beatitude and virtue, moral perfection and salvation. How successfully and consistently I applied this idea to that department of the doctrine that I wanted to reveal is not for me to judge, but I console myself with the thought that in the theological work I recalled this idea, or more precisely, I recalled the need to keep it in mind in the dogmatic study of Orthodox teaching.

Speech before the defense of a master's thesis on the topic.

Archimandrite Sergius (Stragorodsky)

Orthodox teaching on salvation.

Biography

SERGY (Ivan Nikolaevich Stragorodsky), Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus' (1867-1944), Russian. Orthodox church activist and theologian. Genus. in Arzamas, Nizhny Novgorod province. in the family of a priest. Graduated from St. Petersburg. YES (1890), having accepted monasticism in his final year. In 1890-93 he worked as a missionary in Japan. Upon returning from Tokyo within 9 months. taught the course by St. Scriptures of the NT in St. Petersburg. YES, and then was sent by the archimandrite of the embassy church to Athens. In 1895 S. defended his master's thesis. “Orthodox. doctrine of salvation" (Serg. Pos., 1895), which immediately put him in the first rank of Russian. theologians. In 1899 he became an inspector, and a year later the rector of St. Petersburg. YES. In 1901 he was consecrated bishop. Yamburgsky. His participation in St. Petersburg dates back to this period. religious – philosopher meetings organized by *Merezhkovsky. In 1905 S. was appointed archbishop. Finnish and Vyborg (since 1911 - member of the Holy Synod). In 1917 he was transferred to the Nizhny Novgorod department. He took part in the Local Council of Rus. Orthodox Churches. Since 1927, S., as the Deputy Patriarchal Locum Tenens, devoted himself to the matter of regulating relations between the Church and the Soviets. government. In the period 1934-43 he headed Rus. Orthodox The Church as Patriarchal Locum Tenens. During World War II, S. was inspired by patriotism. activities of his flock. In 1943, at a council of bishops, S. was elected Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus'.

Instead of a preface.

The question of personal salvation. (Speech before defending my master's thesis).

Introduction. Part I

The origin of legal life understanding. Catholicism. Protestantism as an amendment to Catholicism. The illusion of Protestant salvation.

Introduction. Part II.

Catholicism after the protest. An attempt to explain the beginning of a new life through a magical transformation.

Chapter 1. Legal understanding of life before the court of Holy Scripture and Holy Tradition

Chapter 2. Eternal Life

Chapter 3. Retribution

Chapter 4. Salvation

Chapter 5. Faith

Instead of a preface

The Question of Personal Salvation

Your Excellence and Mm. years!

It's the same in religion. Knowledge about God will only make sense for a person when God is for him “the only saint,” the bearer of his ideals, the legislator of his life. And demons believe, says St. ap. Jacob, but they only tremble. It would be better for them not to know about God at all, and they would certainly prefer a state of ignorance to their present state. A person who lives only for the moment, who considers only his will, his desire as the law of his existence - such a person, of course, sometimes will not argue much about what faith he professes. For him, all faiths are equally abstract and meaningless, and, therefore, equally indifferent. The truths of faith can only interest him as a subject of debate, in which he can discover his knowledge, his wit - they will interest him, perhaps, as his natural, national heritage - in a word, they can be interesting for their external side and random reasons. But such a person cannot understand and recognize the truth, but the objectivity and, therefore, the obligation for himself of this religious doctrine. He sees only philosophical positions and conclusions, sees only dogma and does not notice the way of life, which in fact, in reality, constitutes the content of all these abstract and incomprehensible subtleties of dogma for him. “Whoever says that he loves God and hates his brother is a liar and there is no truth in him” (1 John 4:20). The knowledge of God is valid when it is accompanied by a corresponding life - when a person arranges himself according to this knowledge.

But life is a judge of a person not only in this general sense, that is, not only in whether he believes or does not believe in what he preaches. Life serves as the best means for determining and clarifying the true worldview of a person or one or another philosophical system, as well as for evaluating this worldview. In the question of God, the world and the general relations between them, one can sometimes limit oneself to one form, only the external relationships of concepts, without asking the question of what this form or this shell contains, without bringing abstract conclusions to tangible, vital clarity. These questions, abstract by their very essence, may sometimes not require (at least, it may seem that they do not require) such a correspondence in existing reality - this correspondence is assumed somewhere above, far from this life and from the surrounding situation. But as soon as a person descends from the height of abstraction down to the ground to real life, as soon as he leaves being in its whole and concerns himself, in particular, with his own personality, he tries from a general basis to derive his personal relationships to this whole and to other similar individuals , - then he is immediately taken away from all possibility of limiting himself to one form, one distraction. No matter how harmonious his system is, no matter how well his various definitions and conclusions are adjusted to each other, neither he himself nor anyone else in the matter of life will be satisfied with this harmony. It will be necessary to show what actually corresponds to these harmonious concepts and conclusions. This is where the illusory, fictitious nature of many theories and systems can be revealed. All the carefully and effectively finished construction of some thinker can crumble into dust from this one contact with life, precisely from the mere impossibility of confirming one’s speculations with reference to experience. - If the worldview is true, then, when compared with life, abstract and obscure formulas and terms become clear, understandable, almost tangible - then real life will no longer seem like a strange negation of philosophy, not a crude mockery of its idealism, but, on the contrary, its explanation, commentary, - a direct conclusion from it.

Archpriest Oleg Stenyaev, cleric of the Church of the Nativity of John the Baptist in Sokolniki, answers questions from viewers. Broadcast from Moscow.

- Hello. The program “Conversations with Father” is broadcast on the Soyuz TV channel. In the studio Sergei Yurgin.Today our guest is a cleric from the Church of the Nativity of John the Baptist in SokolnikiArchpriest Oleg Stenyaev.Hello, father. Bless our viewers.

Good afternoon. God help you.

The topic of our today's program is “Orthodox teaching on salvation.” What happened to the person that he had to be rescued?

This is a very important question because we cannot understand what salvation is if we do not understand what happened to a person as a result of which he needs salvation.

The Orthodox understanding of salvation is the restoration of a person to the dignity in which he was before the Fall. Therefore, we need to understand what happened in the Fall itself.

When God created the world, He created it “very well,” as the Scriptures say. And man, created by God, was a perfect man, whom God introduced into a perfect world. If there had been anything negative in man at the time of the Fall, then the blame would have fallen on the Creator of man. But man was created “very well.”

And God places the created man in a special place, this place is called paradise - the garden of Eden in the East. Paradise is not only a geographical concept, although we can establish that it is Mesopotamia between the Tigris and Euphrates. But paradise, as the holy fathers teach, is, first of all, a state of special closeness of pristine humanity to its Creator. People created by God were in a constant relationship with God, as evidenced by the expression “in the cool of the day,” that is, God constantly communicated with people, and there was even a certain time - “the cool of the day.”

A man lived in paradise, and there were two trees in it: the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. The tree of life allowed people to eat from this tree and live forever. But some fathers write: God did not create man eternal or mortal, but created him free. It was up to the person to live forever or die. After all, regarding the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, God said to man: “In the day that you eat from it, you will surely die.” That is, a person had to choose for himself: life through obedience to God or death through disobedience. God gave one commandment to people: not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

To understand what the Fall consisted of, one must understand what the tree of the knowledge of good and evil really represented and symbolized the right or priority of God to decide instead of and for man what good and evil are.

That is, before the Fall, people understood what good and evil were, just as God understood what good was and what evil was. Evil existed in the person of God's fallen angel Lucifer, who carried away a third of the angels who became demons, and some Eastern fathers wrote that God created people to replenish the number of fallen angels.

The devil suggested to man: eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and you will be like gods. The devil himself imagines himself equal to God and invites man to follow the same path. You will be like gods, knowing good and evil. That is, the Fall lies in the fact that, having plucked the fruit from this tree, people arrogated to themselves the right to decide for themselves what good and evil are. Consequently, salvation is, first of all, falling out of the spiritual vision of the differences between what is good and what is evil. And we can restore God's priorities in our lives if we obey God's commandments, because the Bible is a book that tells what is good in the eyes of God - these are commanding commandments: “honor your father and mother,” “remember holidays“And what is evil in the eyes of God is the prohibitive commandments: “thou shalt not kill,” “thou shalt not commit adultery.” When we submit our lives to the law of God, we restore the rights and priorities of God, so in our situation the true tree of the knowledge of good and evil is the Holy Scripture, the book that tells us what is good in the eyes of God and what is good in the eyes of God evil.

The problem with the Fall is that our nature was damaged. Man distorted his nature through the Fall so that, firstly, he became mortal. Created for eternal life: in God and with God, he now turned out to be dust that must return to dust. When the Orthodox Church teaches about salvation, it insists that it must be perceived not only subjectively, from the point of view of the salvation of an individual person, but also objectively, as the restoration of man and humanity to the dignity in which man was before the Fall. After all, even the name of the first man Adam in Hebrew means “man” in a general sense.

Each of us repeats Adam's situations in our lives. If we submit our consciousness to the will of God, His commandments, then we restore God’s priorities in our lives, His right to decide for us what is good and evil. If we violate the decrees of God, then we follow the path that the devil suggested: you will be like gods, knowing good and evil. All the evil that exists in the world comes from the fact that everyone has their own autonomous understanding of good and evil, which does not always coincide with other autonomous understandings. One says that this is evil, and the other says that it is good.

Until we all restore God's priorities, His rights in our lives, until we look at evil and good as God defines it, until that moment there will be chaos in this world.

Question from a TV viewer from Yekaterinburg: How to be saved in the world, in big city, where passions and vices surround you, and various demonic things tempt you?

In this regard, I am thinking about creating separate Orthodox settlements outside the city, where large families will earn their bread with their labor, pray, and thus give birth to a new generation, which will then come into politics, business and monasticism to offer their prayers for Russia.

In answer to your question, I must say that every person is self-sufficient if he is a believer, participates in the Sacraments of the Church and tries to subordinate his life and the life of his family to the commandments of God. This is completely obvious.

On the other hand, we live in a world where the most different people, where we are subject to a variety of influences, and in such a situation it is sometimes difficult to control ourselves and our children. But the Lord commanded us that He did not come to take us away from the world, He wants us to be in this world, perhaps like sheep among wolves. As it is said in the Gospel, the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness cannot embrace it. The Lord wants us to be the salt of this world.

The purpose of a believer in this world is to salt this world. Salt is a substance that protects everything from rotting. Likewise, Christians, if they are in the world, then their function is to stop moral and moral decay by their example. As it is said in the Sermon on the Mount: “Let your light therefore shine before men, so that they may see your good deeds and glorify the Heavenly Father.” Therefore, a Christian family should ideally set an example for other families to consider that they too can change their lifestyle.

If we talk about monastic service, which is performed at a distance from the world, then functionally monasticism has other goals - this is prayer. Believe me, no amount of solitude can save a person from temptation. One monk recently told me this monastic joke: “In the cell there is a lamp, but in the soul there is a lambada.” Outwardly, a person may look spiritually respectable, but what is happening in the soul can only be guessed at.

One should not think that the monastic path is an easy path. This is the shortest, but the most hard way to the Kingdom of God. Family people are also awarded a special blessing from God. The man who was taken from earth to heaven alive, Enoch, was a family man, he had children. The Head of the Apostles Peter had a mother-in-law, therefore, he had a wife, he could have had children, and this in no way prevented them from realizing their lives in accordance with the divine will.

Settlements of Orthodox people where children will be raised, on the one hand, it is good if we organize some kind of temporary conferences when families come together. But will children develop an instinct for spiritual self-preservation? After all, sooner or later they will have to return to the world, and it is very important to teach a person to survive in the world. There is a danger that such withdrawal from the world will turn into a voluntary ghetto, because the ghetto can end in a crematorium.

Therefore, instead of moving away from the world, we must leave this world, recognize the mission in this world as objectively evangelistic. The family is a small church, as it is called in the New Testament, and can show the world a testimony about Christ in a more objective world than a hermit monk, who is unknown whether they will understand. And solitude is not for everyone. As the Lord said, whoever can contain it, let him contain it. And for others the commandment still applies, given to people still for the fall: be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth.

Question from a TV viewer from Saransk: I’m 79 years old, I don’t leave my apartment, but my priest comes to me to confess and give me communion. Last time I missed some sins in my note, but I took communion, do I need to re-confess again or will they be forgiven?

If the sin has not been confessed, you can do it another time. We cannot decide for ourselves whether we should receive communion or not. If the priest allowed for communion, there can be no doubt that it took place. If you did not have time to name a sin, then name these sins at your next meeting with the priest, and he will read a prayer of absolution over you.

- How does the Orthodox teaching on salvation differ from Catholic and Protestant teaching?

The Protestant understanding of salvation is a kind of amnesty from God. But, as you know, an amnesty does not change anything in the soul of a criminal. This does not mean that he has improved, but he remains the same as he was, with all his bad inclinations. Martin Luther wrote that a person will always remain a sinner, no positive changes will happen to him, and he must always look for the source of salvation in his subjective, individual faith. It was the Protestants who proposed in soteriology such a concept as personal salvation, which is not found in historical church structures.

If we talk about the Roman Catholic understanding of salvation, it is much deeper, because Catholics try to adhere to the traditions of the holy fathers. Here the situation is somewhat different. For them, salvation is an indulgence not in a particular, but in the broadest sense of the word. For them, a saved person is a churchgoer who lives according to the canons of the Church, according to how he is led in the Church.

To understand the difference between Orthodox soteriology and them, you need to read the text of Holy Scripture, which is very important for the Orthodox understanding of salvation - this is the Epistle to the Romans, chapter 6, verse 4. It says, “Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, so that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life. For us, salvation is accomplished not de jure, but de facto, when a person begins to walk in newness of life.

The Apostle James also writes about this when he discusses saving faith: faith without works is dead. He asks the question: show me your faith without works, and I will show you my faith through my works. It's about about what the Lord spoke: by their fruits you will know them. If a person is religious in the Orthodox sense, then the result of his religiosity is a change in his lifestyle. The word repentance itself, in Greek "metanoia", means a change of thinking. That is, a person is saved not because he was given a paper with a stamp or an amnesty was declared, he is saved in reality, de facto, that is, he sees how his life changes.

For example, Orthodox Christians who have been attending churches for many years see their attitude towards sin changing. If a person is young, then he perceives sin even as some kind of adventure, fun. But over the years, if this person regularly confesses and receives communion, he already perceives sin as a problem. And when he actually achieves what is called churching, then this is already a disaster, a tragedy, a catastrophe, what the Apostle Paul called shipwreck in faith. If our attitude towards sins changes this way, it means that we ourselves change.

Although John of Damascus and other fathers teach that there is no transformation of nature: man will always remain a man, God will remain God, but by grace there is a transformation, transubstantiation, when, by becoming churched, we are transformed from the state of children of wrath into the state of children of God. Not a single believer who is regularly in communion with the Sacraments and prays can say about himself that changes are not happening. Our attitude towards the people around us, towards the Sacraments of the Church, changes; we begin to more thoughtfully perceive what we once could perceive as some kind of ritual, rite, without attaching deep meaning to what we come into contact with in the church.

Our viewer asked a question about why some Christians have not experienced any changes in their spiritual life for many years?

I don't think so. I don’t know a single Christian who has not changed his attitude towards what is called sin over the years. A person takes his actions more seriously and more carefully. A person acquires a quality called fear of God. It is about the fear of God that it is said that it is the beginning of wisdom.

The changes are sometimes so radical that I know people who, being in a state of sin, cannot sleep peacefully, have high blood pressure or, as happens to me, my sugar rises. But as soon as I confess, take communion, my sugar returns to normal. I once asked an elder why my body reacts this way to certain problems and reacts this way when I overcome them using church methods. The elder replied that this means that we are changing.

Just as bread and wine are transformed into the Body and Blood during the Eucharistic canon, so the life of a Christian who realizes his life eucharistically changes. We are truly transformed and transubstantiated by grace, and not by nature. If a person remembers what kind of prayers he had ten to fifteen years ago, and how he now prays and reads the Holy Scriptures, he cannot help but see the difference.

I recently spoke with a man who had never read the Bible until he was fifty, but now reads it back to back and has already read it all three times. If a person studies all this in his youth, all this enters his heart, his consciousness. This knowledge is easily stored in it. When, after many years, a person begins to study the Holy Scriptures and the Holy Fathers more intensively, he no longer succeeds as in his youth. But as they say in such a situation: better late than never.

When we read morning prayers, we must read the Apostle of the day and the Gospel of the day, the calendar indicates what is read in the Church on this day. This must be mandatory, and instructions are made for this in the calendar.

On the other hand, the Bible must be read in its entirety from beginning to end. First of all, an Orthodox Christian should start with the New Testament and read the four Gospels, maybe two, three, four times. Then the person reads the Bible from beginning to end. And when you go through the Old Testament and return to the Gospel again, you will begin to understand much of what you did not understand when reading the Gospel before. Because the Old Testament - according to the Apostle Paul, is a guide to Christ.

If the Old Testament talks about what God wants from us, the New Testament talks about what He has done for us. Therefore, we cannot limit ourselves to the New Testament, this would be a subtle version of Monophysitism, we must also study the law of God.

For example, there are military conflicts in the world now, and a person must know the biblical laws of war: who is called to military service who is not called up, how to behave in battle conditions. These are amazing laws. Let me give you a few: the Pentateuch says that if you are laying siege to a city, do not cut down fruit-bearing trees, because a tree is not a person and cannot escape from you. Or it is said that you can take a person to war who has reached the age of 21, so that he has already started a family, lived with his wife in the house that he himself built, there was a vineyard nearby that he planted, and he had a child. But if he planted a vineyard, but has never reaped the harvest or drank wine with friends, how can he be taken to war? Or he got married, but he doesn’t have a child yet, how can he be taken to war? He must have a continuation of his life, take place in this life. That is, biblical laws could make bosses wiser in how to treat their subordinates.

For example, in the Cossack army there was always a difference: if a Cossack had one earring in his ear, this meant that he was the only son of his mother. If there were two, it meant that he was the only one in the family. And when the ataman decided who was going into reconnaissance, into battle, he could always visually assess who needed to be protected. If he is the only one in the family, then he will be sent into battle last.

The Bible also has answers to everyday questions: how to sow the land, how to leave it fallow, and all this teaches us to live in this world. Because God’s will is for us to be established as good members of our family, for the Bible says: whoever does not take care of his family is worse than an infidel. We must succeed as citizens of our country, fulfilling our duty. And we must succeed as bearers of traditions. Both the Old and New Testaments teach us this.

When you read the Bible for the first time, read it in its entirety, under a bookmark. Do not ask or write any questions. If you read it a second time, many questions will be eliminated. The third time - write down all the questions that remain in a special notebook, come to the priest, he will answer these questions.

Question from a TV viewer: My husband and I had a legal marriage registered, and we got married. Then, for some reason, the legal marriage was dissolved, but we, as before, live together. My husband thinks we are roommates. Is he right?

The Church insists that before entering into a church marriage, a secular marriage must first be concluded. But this is done in order to protect the rights of each party.

In fact, for us, marriage is, first of all, a wedding. If you got married, you are a real family. If for some reason you ended your secular marriage, but this happened de jure, and de facto you continue to live together, you are not cohabitants at all, but real husband and wife. No one has debunked you; you can decide with your confessor the question of why the secular marriage was terminated.

- To what extent is the Orthodox teaching about salvation original and not similar to other teachings?

It is so different from other teachings that Orthodoxy can be called an original religion.

In the Orthodox worldview, salvation is conventionally divided into three stages. The first stage in the work of salvation is atonement. This stage corresponds to the biblical virtue - faith. Because it is said: he who comes to God must believe that God exists. This level corresponds to social status described in the Bible - slave. When a person from the world comes to God, he does not hope for any reward, just like the slaves who did not receive any salary, but only hoped for the mercy of their masters. Likewise, a person who comes to church with a huge load of sins seeks reconciliation with God. The entire neo-Protestant world in its soteriology stopped at this level.

The second stage is sanctification or churching. It is said that the will of God is our sanctification. This level corresponds to the social position described in the Bible - a mercenary. When a person becomes a church member, he really sees how his life begins to change. He prays morning and evening, has churched his marriage, sent his children to Sunday school, and has other relationships at work. He is already receiving his reward as a mercenary. He no longer just believes, but can rely on the results of his faith with full hope. This level corresponds to the biblical virtue of hope. Roman Catholic soteriology stopped somewhere at this level.

The third step in the matter of salvation is truly known only to Orthodox soteriology - this is deification. Deification is the stage to which the biblical virtue of love corresponds. You don't just believe, you don't just hope, you love. And love is an essential property of God. God is love. This level no longer corresponds to social status, you are no longer a slave, not a mercenary, but you are a son.

Only Orthodox soteriology understands deification, that is, holiness, by salvation. This is exactly what I was talking about Venerable Seraphim Sarovsky that the meaning of a Christian’s life is the acquisition of the grace of the Holy Spirit. He considered what is called churching to be a condition of a Christian’s life - fasting, prayer, and the main objective- acquisition of the grace of the Holy Spirit. Therefore, in the Orthodox understanding, a saint is one who is sanctified and experiences deification.

Through the Holy Sacraments we gain the opportunity to change. When we read prayers before and after Communion, we must pay attention to the themes contained in these prayers. Communion is the power that burns the thorns of our sins. Communion is a grace that can deify us if we carefully read all the canons and prayers. On his own, a person cannot achieve salvation in its Orthodox understanding. For us, salvation is not just quitting drinking and smoking, but something much more. As we already said at the beginning of the program, this is the complete restoration of man to the dignity that he had before the Fall. We cannot do this on our own; the task is very high.

As I often say, you can be a good Muslim because Muslims imitate one person, but a person. You can be a good Jew, because Jews also imitate certain people. But it will not be possible to be a good Christian, because we imitate the God-man. Moreover, Christ told us: be perfect, as the Heavenly Father is perfect.

Thus, in Christianity, a person is doomed to humility, a kind of kenosis, that is, self-abasement. And when we manifest it, here the grace of God touches us. As it is said: God resists the proud, but gives grace to the humble. When the apostle was asked who could be saved, he answered: it is impossible for men. But not to God, it is to God that everything is possible. “The Lord will not despise a contrite and humble heart.” Therefore, the first step to salvation is awareness of one’s sinfulness, one’s inadequacy. If we take this step, it means that there can be a next step and that it is possible to achieve the goal, what is called deification. Deification is a state of life that can arise at the very last breath, but if we experience it, it will be a return to the paradise of sweetness.

Christ said: without Me you cannot do anything. What is asceticism in Orthodoxy? Sergius of Starogorodsky, Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus', at one time wrote a book called “Orthodox Teaching on Salvation,” where he writes that asceticism does not save a person, but prepares him so that he can more easily accept the gift of salvation that is given by grace. That is, we fast, pray, fulfill God’s commandments, so that the gift of God’s forgiveness comes to us not as a result of our efforts - this is impossible for humans - but as God’s blessing. Because in fasting, prayer, and the desire to fulfill the law, that faith is revealed, about which the Apostle Paul writes that in faith we are saved.

If a person declares himself to be a believer, but nothing changes in his life, he does not pray regularly, then the very faith of such a person is called into question. It must be clearly said that we believe as we live, and live as we believe. That is why a theologian in the Orthodox understanding is not a candidate or doctor of theology, but a person who prays, a person whose life is changing.

It is very important to understand the truth that religious revelation must change us, transform us, transform us by grace from the state of children of wrath to the state of children of God. If this happens, that is, if there is practical use our knowledge, this means that our life took place.

- A little earlier you spoke about the fear of God. How to understand it correctly?

Scripture says: There is no fear in love. Because there is a lot of trust in love. But still there is a fear of love. What kind of fear is this? This is the fear of violating the will of the one you love. Watch how a father holds the baby that his mother brought home for the first time. He takes it with the greatest fear, because the love of this man is entirely concentrated on this baby.

The fear of God is when we are afraid to violate the will of the One whom we have loved. An example of such fear is the fear that Isaac experienced when Abraham sacrificed him on Mount Miriam. Isaac felt fear, and then Jacob swore by the fear of his father Isaac. What kind of fear is this that you could swear by? The interpreters explain: Isaac at that moment was not afraid of the stone sacrificial knife, he was not afraid of the fire, he was afraid, being bound, to express disagreement with what his father Abraham was doing, even with a gesture or look. Therefore, exegetes argue who was on a higher spiritual level: Abraham, who sacrificed Isaac, or Isaac, who wanted to become a victim, completely submitting to his father. This is an example of the fear of love we should have towards God. If we have loved God with all our hearts, with all our thoughts, with all our strength, then fear of God pushes us to tremble, lest we violate the will of the One whom we have loved.

- No wonder Isaac symbolizes the Savior.

Yes, Isaac symbolizes the Savior, and Abraham at this moment symbolizes God the Father, and their relationship is the complete submission of the son to the father, as He said in Gethsemane: however, not Mine, but Thy will be done.

Since Abraham is the father of all believers, this situation is an example for all believers. We must experience the fear of love. What kind of fear is said to be absent from love? This is panic, depression, despair. It is a bad motivation when a person begins to fulfill God’s law in order not to go to hell, or in order to certainly go to heaven. He won't succeed. But if the motivation is love in the desire to fulfill God's law, he will succeed. That is why Christ says: he who loves Me will fulfill the commandments. Love is the mechanism that changes our lives and transforms it. If there is love for God and neighbor, then this love invariably changes us.

Question from a TV viewer from the Kaluga region: In Psalm 102, I find a proclamation of the path of salvation in the words “Man is like grass, his days are like a field flower, so they will fade.” In principle, you have already given an answer to this question when you quoted Seraphim of Sarov’s phrase about deification. Is it correct to understand that this is a foreshadowing of salvation in Christ?

David, indeed, was a proclaimer of the truths about Christ, possessed a prophetic gift, and in his psalms we find many topics where Christ is spoken of in a representative manner. By the way, at Calvary Jesus Christ prayed with the words of the Psalter. Saying the words “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”, He read a completely specific psalm from the Psalter, teaching us to resort to this source of genuine prayer, to the divinely inspired Psalter, in which we can also find words that can enrich our prayer life, bring us joy.

The text that you remembered reminds us that earthly life is fleeting, and a person who thinks that he has settled on earth soon does not discover this place, because everything is changeable, quickly changes, and a person moves towards the moment when his meeting occurs with God blessing. Strictly speaking, earthly life was given to us so that we would gain the gift of salvation, for beyond the threshold of life nothing can correct a person. Earthly life is the only moment when we can either be saved or perish.

As St. Ephraim the Syrian writes: here the Lord will see your tears, here the Lord will hear your prayers, there is no place for tears, for prayer, for justification. Here is forgiveness, there is judgment.

Therefore, when we talk about the Orthodox teaching about salvation, we are not talking about something idle, but very important, about what every believer, Orthodox person should know.

- How do our good deeds contribute to our salvation?

I cited the statement of Sergius of Starogorodsky that asceticism only prepares our soul to accept God's salvation, which is poured out on us freely, by grace, regardless of our deeds.

But the very truth of salvation changes us, and works arise like fruit on a mature tree, testifying that we have a living and not a dead faith.

- The Scripture says that faith without works is dead. What specific cases are we talking about?

We must fulfill God's commandments, the Gospel commandments, and if we follow the path of salvation, then the grace of God will assist us in every possible way in this. Although a person cannot fulfill everything to the end, God judges not only our actions, but also our intentions.

- Can an Orthodox person say about himself: I am saved.

No, he can not. Because the Bible says that we are saved by hope. There is Christian hope for salvation, and the Church has everything the necessary conditions for salvation. If we live the church life, we have hope, about which it is said: and hope does not put us to shame.

Our show is coming to an end. Thank you for today's conversation. What would you like to wish our viewers in conclusion?

Christ save you all!

Presenter: Sergey Yurgin.

Transcript: Yulia Podzolova.

Sections