* * *

I note: I write, in fact, not about myself personally, but in general: about faith. Personal biographical material is for me only an illustration of general ideas. And, I hope, it makes more interesting, lively those "abstract" conclusions that are then made... For properly "abstract" ideas are not at all dry, dead formulas of the understanding; under them was and is the most vivid and concrete experience of living people; and from this "experience" of life the general conclusions are only "abstracted into concise formulas," into "abstract" ideas. In essence, however, the most so-called "abstract" philosophy, even mathematics, is nothing but the facts of life (whether personal or physical, spiritual or material). Or to put it another way: every human work fundamentally has personal biographical perceptions, experiences, feelings, intuition, thoughts. Everywhere it is possible, with a deep study, to reveal the personal, autobiographical underpinnings – which is usually done by biographers – of philosophers, economists, poets, musicians, etc. That is why I ask the readers of my notes not to complain about my autobiographical material. After all, the human soul is very homogeneous, similar: and aren't my experiences to a large extent common, typical of many others, at least from the intellectual class like me? I think so. And therefore is not my autobiography to a considerable extent, or at least to a certain extent, your autobiography? And isn't it because we are interested in and even understand someone else's autobiography that it is akin to ourselves? And if it is not kindred, not "congenial", then they would not have understood: "SIMILIS SIMILI GAUDET" ("like rejoices in like", as the Romans said).And the Lord Jesus Christ Himself in the Gospel of John explains why exactly the Jews did not understand and did not accept Him and why the disciples accepted Him: "You seek to kill Me, because My word does not fit into you." "Why do you not understand my speech? For you cannot hear My words." And why is that? You are not related to Me and My words, "Your father is the devil..." "Ye are of the lowest, I am of the highest; you are of this world, I am not of this world." "I am from God" (My Father) "went forth and came." "You are not of God." That is why "you do not believe Me." And vice versa: "He who is of God hears the words of God" (John, ch. 8)." Who wants" (not even yet creating, but only "wanting"... how little is required, but it is precisely this will and will that is required at the beginning) "to do His will, he shall know of this doctrine, whether it be of God" (John 7:17). This "willing" alone already shows the affinity of the desirer with the desired... Like is drawn to like... Already volition is the beginning of "understanding." Desire is an attraction to union with desire, even if it is also "instinctively".And in the Gospel of Matthew, the Lord explained this same religious epistemology, the path of knowledge through the affinity of souls. I mean a remarkable, though figurative, explanation of the Jews' rejection not only of Christ, but also of Him Himself. I'll write out this place." Whoever has ears to hear, let him hear!" But to whom shall I liken this generation (the Jews)? He is like children who sit in the street and, addressing their comrades (capricious, stubborn), say: "We played the pipe for you, and you did not dance; we sang sorrowful songs to you, and you did not weep. For John has come, neither eating nor drinking; And they say, "A demon is in him." The Son of Man has come, eating and drinking; And they say: "Behold, a man who loves to eat and drink wine, a friend of publicans and sinners".... Not to please the stubborn Jews... Answer: "And wisdom (truth) is justified by her children" (Matt. 11:15-19).The truth, Christ, was accepted, considered indubitable, correct, righteous ("justified" as true) – only "her children", the children of the truth. That is the essence: those who are dear to her, kindred, truly similar in spirit are like relatives, like the children of their mother...... Here, though very briefly, one of the basic laws of cognition, of all cognition in general (both the spiritual and the material world), is revealed: the similarity of the cognizer to the cognized... Otherwise knowledge is impossible... Here is the root of the basic idea of the philosophy of real-intuitionism (Lossky, Frank, Bergson, our Slavophiles - Khomyakov, Kireevsky and others) ... Man is like both the world (microcosm) and God (macrocosm, if we use these terms in such an application): man carries within himself both this "small" world and that "big" world. And therefore he understands both of them. If he does not accept "that" world, then a terrible illness has befallen his soul: "the likeness of God" has fallen... And then it is no longer possible to "prove" to him by any words or reason: there is no place to which the truth could cling. "You are blind." (John 9:39-41). And why is this?—From pride (Matt. 11:25).Then the question arises: how then can this likeness be restored? Only by a new revelation of God to man, a new manifestation of His "image" in his soul. And this is possible through the Son: "All things have been delivered to Me by My Father, and no man knoweth the Son but the Father; and the Father knoweth no man but the Son, and to whom the Son willeth to reveal" (Matt. 11:27)... Now it is revealed that the truth is God; and man's knowledge of Him is possible because and insofar as God is in man and reveals Himself to him; This is the essence of affinity... Truth is from God, God is from grace. Grace is the Truth. Grace also makes a person "kindred" in the soul: do you not know that you are "the temple of the Holy Spirit who dwells in you, Whom you have from God"... "both in your bodies and in your souls, which are God's" (1 Corinthians 6:19, 20). Or why does He leave our soul? Why couldn't Christ convert even the Jews? Why does grace not illuminate the minds of all people throughout the world? Here human free will, the sinfulness of the soul in general, appears on the way [1]... All sins (both carnal and especially spiritual) remove God and distort our likeness to God. "Those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit"... "All who are led by the Spirit of God are the Sons of God... This same Spirit bears witness to our spirit that we are the children of God" (Rom. 8:5, 14, 16), and vice versa — carnal — outside the Spirit of God (vv. 7-9).But especially terrible and dangerous is the spirit of pride, selfishness: it does not allow God Himself to dwell in the human soul and make it feel the truth within." You don't want to come to me to have life"... Why? "I know you: you have no love for God in you." And why is that? — "How can you believe, when you receive glory from one another?" — i.e., you are selfish, proud, and therefore "you do not seek the glory that is from God alone"... But when "another (the Antichrist) comes in his name" and not in God's, "you will receive him": he will be from you, from the devil, to whom both you and he are kindred (John 5). "I say what I have seen in My Father: but you do what you have seen in your father": "You do the works of your father" the devil (John 8:38, 41). Meanwhile, there is no other way:— Come to Me... and learn from Me: "For I am meek and lowly in heart" – these words are spoken immediately after showing the way to the knowledge of the truth: "To whom the Son will reveal" (Matt. 11:27-28). To whom? "Who will humble himself like Him. And then Christ will reveal Himself to him. And the first manifestation of this Humility is faith in His words, simply faith in Him... You will believe, and then His word will dwell again in the soul, and it will see the truth: "You ... you have not His (God's) word abiding in you, because you do not believe Him Whom He has sent" (John 5:37-38). likeness to God comes from grace in the heart; unbelief — from the loss of Godlikeness; return to the truth from the restoration of likeness to God through the Grace of Christ— Grace — Only given through Christ;— The path to Christ — faith in Him;— Faith — from humility, at least from the determination to believe, to humbly recognize the truth.Thus we came to important, but also simple conclusions — facts: faith — from grace; grace comes from humility. Consequently, as St. Barsanuphius the Great, "faith is humility." And unbelief, says St. Anthony the Great, "from frivolous audacity".Thus, all the most "abstract" things are connected with our spiritual "heartfelt roots". This is where autobiographical material comes in handy. Here you remember the truth of David's words, in which, against my will, against my "heart," my mind doubted: "He is a fool in his heart, saying, There is no God"... Thank God: my heart has never accepted this. I came to the academy with this. Rationalism was a light crust. "Everyone who desires evil hates the light, and does not come to the light; … but he that doeth righteousness cometh unto the light" (John 3:20, 21). ^

Chapter 7

* * *

... I have run ahead of myself: I will have to talk even further about the laws of knowledge, about the ways of faith... But I think this is better: little by little it is easier for our simple mind and simple heart to accept so-called "abstract ideas." And if there is a lot at once, it will be more difficult to digest. And in the Gospel: now miracles, then parables, then teaching, again – works... But it's time to start talking about the academy. However, I will postpone this for a while. And I will cite from the Gospel a few facts, examples of how the Lord Himself connected His "abstract teaching" with the events of life, with facts, — or with analogies, comparisons, One can say that the entire Gospel of John, in the first 13 chapters, is full of this method of revelation... Perhaps someone does not know this? And very interesting; and this greatly simplifies the understanding of Christ's instructions, which for some reason seem to be unconnected, but as if only accidentally attached to events... Look.Chapter 1. Direct and clear testimony that Christ is the Son of God – contrary to the unbelief of the Jews: "He came to His own (the Jews), and His own did not receive Him." What is needed?Chapter 2. The Jews need to change their souls, just as wine was changed into water (Cana of Galilee). And Christ can do it: a fact. And he will prove it again. How? Resurrection (of His temple, His body). Is this change easy, alone?Chapter 3. It is very difficult. You have to put up with it... And Nicodemus was afraid of his own, he came at night: self-love. A radical, decisive change is needed. And this is possible only through the new birth of the Spirit. To do this, you must first believe in Christ. And for this, do what is right, do not sin. John the Baptist has already accepted: at least listen to this, Jews... And if not him, then at least a pagan... Chapter 4. The conversation and faith of the Samaritan woman – the harlot, the sinner and the semi-pagan Samaritans... But in his own country, in Judea (v. 44), they do not yet believe... Even Roman pagans, like the Capernaum courtier, had already begun to believe... "And he believed, and all his house." But the Jews persisted, the Jews are half-dead, weak: they do not want to get up, they cannot get up "on their own." They are paralyzed in soul. Healing of a paralytic 38-year-old. "And straightway he recovered." How easy everything is with God! And the Jews want to kill Christ. Worse not only than this paralytic, but even worse than the real dead: the time will come (and soon, at the resurrection: Matt. 27:51-53), "and it is now," and "the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God" (25). But you, Jews, do not hear, do not receive: neither My words, nor John the Baptist, nor even miraculous works. Why?Chapter 6. Because they are carnal, earthly.If I promised you earthly blessings, you would follow Me... Is it? — The miracle of turning 5 loaves into a multitude to feed 5000... Rapture... They decided to reign. They rushed to Him... But why? "For they have eaten bread and are satisfied" (v. 26). But this food is temporary. And you need to strive for eternity. Heavenly... What is it? One must believe (28-29). And Christ Himself is the Spiritual Bread: life in Him is eternal life (33). In particular, while still on earth it is possible and necessary to partake of this Bread – the Body and drink His Blood: the Sacrament of Communion... Such is the transition from the miracle of the loaves. But this "uninteresting" was incomprehensible even to closer students. They were tempted and left. Carnal thinking. They believed in the carnal mind: how can it be (41, 42, 52, 66)... But think of the manna of heaven (49)! Nothing helps. "The flesh profiteth nothing": the natural, carnal mind is helpless, useless, even harmful. What is needed is a "Spirit" who "gives life": His words are the Spirit (63)... And the Spirit is given by the Father through the Son (44-46). And those who are carnal, unrelated, intellectual, have departed. And at the same words about the Body and Blood, his kinsmen, the disciples, Peter, remained, for they believed "that Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God." And if you believe in this, then to whom should you go? "There's no one to go to... And if they believe in the main thing – the truth and Divinity of Christ, then everything else, even if it is unattainable partaking of His Body and drinking of His Blood, – must be accepted, and it is not difficult to accept (67-69)... They became related to Him... But even out of the 12, one still falls away — for he is the "devil," he is related to the devil... He is also carnal, like the Jews: a lover of money, a materialist, earthly... And Christ calls to the Heavenly Bread.Two loaves: earthly bread and "I am the Bread of Life" (48)... People chose the first and rejected the second. The miracle of 5000 explained: why – carnal... Here two opposite spirits of life collided.Chapter 7. Choose then, Jew, one thing: either the world, or Me, the living water (37-39) of the Holy Spirit... The Jews were divided: the rulers had already decided to arrest Him (30), and "many of the people believed" in Him (31). And already Nicodemus dares to defend: without a court of law it is impossible to decide about a man (51)... "And they all went home"... (53). How sorry for them. They dispersed helplessly. What is the reason for this stubbornness of rejection? Sinfulness, slavery of the spirit, which is based on the power of the devil over their souls. And this power and sinfulness are more terrible than any other sin. More terrible than the most terrible fornication.Chapter 8. Behold, these same judges bring him unto him, a prostitute caught in the place of adultery, v. 3. (And why did they not seize her accomplice, for if according to the law, then according to the law both should be stoned: Leviticus 20:10. Perhaps he was one of the same hypocrite Pharisees? And what happened? This harlot—blessed be she! — humbly waited for a fair trial... She did not argue, did not make excuses... And this "justified". She was pardoned: "Go, and sin no more"... "And I do not condemn you"... He who through Moses commanded to judge and even stone such people, He now "does not condemn." And how can one condemn one who has already humbled herself? "Neither a sword cuts a guilty head, nor a knife cuts it." She had already condemned herself and submitted to Christ—which was what she needed... And they? And what about the judges? They do not want to know the law, the zealots of which they are supposedly ... The law commands that the truth be admitted in the presence of two witnesses. There are two witnesses for Him: the Father and He Himself (17-18). And "which of you shall convict Me of unrighteousness?" (46). You have brought a harlot, she is a sinner. But you, Jews, are much more sinful than it... How? First, you cannot be the first to throw a stone at it, which was required by the law of pure witnesses (Deuteronomy 17:6-7) — for you yourselves are subject to beating for the same sin. But secondly, you are even more sinful, because you persist in unbelief and pride; for, thirdly, you are slaves, slaves to yourselves, slaves to your own sinfulness (34); fourthly, you slaves are the children of the devil (41-44)... That's how sinful you are... The harlot turned out to be incomparably better than you and has already been saved. And you can't. And only the Son could free you (36) from this slavery of falsehood and restore you to the truth (32)... But you don't want that. And then there is only one thing left for you: you will remain in this depravity, "you will die in your sins" (24). And then it is not for you to judge the sinner, but for you to judge My judgment and the Father's judgment (15:26, 50)... But they remained stubborn in spite of all their sinfulness, remained unrepentant, and did not humble themselves. And even they continued to blame Him: "Is it not true that we say that you are a Samaritan, and that a demon is in you" (48:52). And His works bear witness that He was sent from the Father (John 5:36). But it almost does not help. And at first they wanted to stone the sinner, but they did not dare, and now they took stones to throw at Him. But He hid unnoticed from the murderers... Chapter 9. Blind, blind, unfortunate! And there is nothing to be done with them: when they see, they do not see (39)? A man born blind can be made to see, rather than to be restored to the vision of the fact of the recognition of the Messiah Christ. ... The miracle of the healing of a man born blind... God, how alarmed the leaders are! A clear sign of God. And they just said that a demon was in Him. The Pharisees tormented this healed man and his old and poor parents so much that you even get tired of reading about these interrogations, verbal tortures: is it you? Were you blind? How do you see? Who healed him? Why on Saturday? Oh, poor blind people — stubborn... The former blind man believed in the Son of God (35-38). And those who see are blind (39).—Are we also blind? they ask Him. — "If you had been blind (i.e., through ignorance did not acknowledge Me), you would not have had sin upon you; but as you say that you see, the sin (already consciously) remains upon you" (41). Of course! Perseverance is final.Chapter 10. We are strangers to each other... You are not My sheep; and I am not your Shepherd. For my sheep hear and know. My voice, it (the word, the Spirit, grace) lives in them... Some of you are my sheep of the Jews. But there will still be sheep from another pagan fold, and they will come in your place: "And there shall be one flock..." (16). And "you are not of my sheep" (26)... But no one will snatch My sheep; for the Father Himself keeps with Me. "I and the Father are one" (30)... "I am the Son of God" (36)... "Believe my works" (38), "to know and believe that the Father is in me, and I am in him" (38)... Again they grabbed the stones (31, 32, 33, 39). And "many there believed in Him" (42).Chapter 11. About Lazarus. His resurrection... Why did this come to mind? It is usually answered that Ev. John wrote down what others had omitted; and it was dangerous for the first three Evangelists to mention Lazarus, for he was alive and bishop on the island of Cyprus, and he could have been killed... That's true too... But not in everything, for example: all the other Evangelists speak of the miraculous feeding of loaves (Matt. 14; Mark 6; Luke 9). Also about the entry into Jerusalem, about sufferings, resurrections, appearances, etc. Were there other motives for the choice of events? — Undoubtedly. And I said: he chose such facts that gave him reason to recall the teaching expressed by the Lord about them, or to explain the consequences to which these events led. For a long time the Jews asked Him: "What sign will You give, that we may see and believe You?" (John 6:30). "By what sign wilt thou prove unto us that thou hast the power to do so" (2:18). And ev. Luke, telling in the parable "Of the Rich Man and Lazarus" how he asked to raise Lazarus and send him to the living brethren, so that they would believe and "not come to this place of torment", quotes the words of Abraham (which for a Jew was more convincing than the words of Christ Himself – see John 9:33, 37, 39): "If they do not listen to Moses and the prophets (the Scriptures), then if someone were to rise from the dead, they will not believe" (Luke 16:29-31).The Lord foretold the Jews that the resurrection of Lazarus would not help them either, for they did not want to know the truth at all, like the children of the liar devil. "From this day they determined to kill Him" (53). But even at the cross they will ask Him again: "Let him now come down from the cross, and let us believe in Him" (Matt. 27:42). And not only did He descend still alive, but He rose from the dead, from under the seal of the military guard; But they did not believe: "They gave enough money to the soldiers, and said, Tell them that His disciples came by night and stole Him while we slept; and if the rumor of this reaches the governor (Pilate), we will convince him and save you from trouble... And this word has spread among the Jews to this day" (Matt. 28:12-15). Thus, the resurrection of Lazarus was the last and extreme, even humanly, "proof" of the power of Christ; but they only became embittered and decided to kill... Along with this, the resurrection of Lazarus is given by Ev. John has reason to recall the revelation of Christ — that He is not a simple miracle-worker — like Elijah and Elisha, who raised the dead — but the Self-source of life." I am the seven resurrection and life" (25), He insistently assures Martha. Martha still does not believe and then says: "It already stinks!" (39). And He reproached her for her lack of faith: "Did I not tell you that if you believe, you will see the glory of God?.." (40)." And he came out dead" (44)." The people were shocked by the miracle" (12, 17-18). And many believed. And the rulers decided to kill Him, for which purpose they gave orders to arrest Him at His first appearance (11:57) among the people.12 chapter. The anointing with precious myrrh and the love of money of Judas the traitor... The request of the pagan Greeks to acquaint them with "Jesus" and the words of the Lord about recognizing Him after and for His death on the cross (20-33)... The people thought that Christ should live forever (34), but what about death? Christ did not answer this: it is fruitless to speak of His eternal existence... It has already been said (8, 51-53; 56-57; 11, 24-26)... They wanted to stone him for this. Therefore, He no longer proves, but simply invites you to believe: while there is still time, while He is among them: "While the light is with you, believe in the light"... And disappeared... And the meek, pure-hearted John marvels: how is it that his fellow Jews, after "so many miracles," did not believe in Him. He is looking for an explanation for this stubbornness. And he recalls the words of the prophet Isaiah: "They themselves have closed their eyes, that they may not see" (Isaiah 6:10; 53:1)... Stubborn: "For they loved the glory of men more than the glory of God" (43)... Carnality... Pride... If he stays, the court is for them. But it will not be He who will judge: "I have not come to judge the world, but to save the world" (47), but His very word, His teaching, which the Father gave Him... Otherwise, at the judgment the unbelievers will be unanswerable, for they have heard the Word of Christ.13 chapter. Washing the feet gives rise to the instruction on humility... Humility is the root of faith and love (12-15). Judas could not stand it. This had already become completely unacceptable to him: he wanted to see in Jesus an earthly king who gave ordinary bread, and not a teacher of spiritual "bread"... That is why it was then that the Lord foretold: "One of you is the devil" (Chapter 6). And now Christ the Lord says: "One of you will betray Me" (21)... Satan entered into Judas (27). Formerly, like the Jews in general, he was among the "children" of the devil possessed by him; and now it has happened much more real and terrible: "Satan" entered into him, and moreover himself.Judas went out to his evil deed as a tool of Satan and of the Jewish people in general. and said to them the last farewell conversation... Love one another (Chapter 13). I'm leaving... but you believe. I go to the Father... So that you can prepare a place there, and not here. I can lead you there, for I Myself am the way, "the truth and the life." For I am one with the Father God: "I am in the Father, and the Father in Me." "Believe me" in this, and if it is difficult for you to accept, then believe me according to the very works. And you yourselves will work miracles after Me, even greater than I. Only ask the Father for this, but in My name, for Me. And I will send you power for all things, the Holy Spirit. And I Myself will not leave you orphans: I will come to you. Secretly, hiddenly, into your hearts: and then you will know by experience that "I am in My Father, and you are in Me, and I in you." But only in order to be worthy of this, live holy, fulfill My commandments... For this reason I and the Father have loved you, "and We will come" "and make a dwelling place" in your hearts.... Gosh! How far all this is from the Jewish "loaves" and Judas' pieces of silver.It was difficult to understand, and now it is difficult for us, the reader, to understand: how can the Father and the Son enter into a man and dwell in Him? Isn't it a secret? This is the revelation of Christ. And Christ does not explain it, for they could not yet contain it... But then the "Comforter, the Holy Spirit," the "Spirit of Truth" will come, and He will "teach you all things" by experience... Again, the path of knowledge is experientially grace-filled, and not verbal. And even rejoice in My departure: it is better for you. I have done My work, which "the Father has commanded Me" (Chapter 14). But even after My departure, you abide with Me and in Me, like branches on a vine. How? — By faith, by keeping My commandments, by loving Me, by loving one another to the point of living like Me. Then you will be 'my friends,' but love one another'... And if the world does not love you, and even hates you – and this is exactly what will happen, the Lord warns – do not be dismayed, I am an example of this: the world hated Me before you, as a stranger, unrelated in spirit... And you are no greater than Me, do not be amazed when they persecute you for My Name's sake, for Me... They will be responsible for it as wrong; For I have taught them and performed miracles for them, "such as no one else has ever done" in the world. He will strengthen you in the truth. He Himself will bear witness to Me through you; and you will bear witness, because you are with me from the beginning, as my witnesses, reliable eyewitnesses (chapter 15). .... A bitter warning. They will hate, persecute, torture... But he warns you about it beforehand: "lest you be offended" when it comes... I've said everything... And I have done everything, "and now I go to Him who sent Me." Do not grieve: the Comforter will comfort you instead of Me. The Holy Spirit (Christ repeats about Him for the third time). He will instruct you also (4th time) and through you He will glorify Me also, which is joyful for you who love Me... Do not be sad. I Have Overcome the World (Chapter 16). Then He says a prayer to the Father, in which He says that He has fulfilled His mission and now prays to the Father to preserve the disciples and all believers "from evil", for for them He "offered Himself as a sacrifice". And finally he asks the Father for the future unity of all in Him, and through Him with the Father: that they may be one, even as We are one. And let the love of the Father be in them, and I in them (chapter 17). Christ's ministry — in teaching and works — is over... Now it remains to offer Himself as an atoning sacrifice... The betrayal, the judgment, the death, the burial, the resurrection, the apparitions, the ascension, and the embassy of the disciples to the world preaching are accomplished, with the comforting promise: "And behold, I am with you always, even to the end of the age. Amen" (Matt. 28, p. 20).These words could not be said by man, they are peculiar only to God... Unexpectedly for myself, I spread... But I am not sad. The Word of God itself is always active and living (Heb. 4:12), and "inspired by God and profitable... for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect"... (2 Tim. 3:16-17).And I hope that it will be useful to the reader as well... And if it was "interesting", or if it seems even unconvincing to anyone, then it is worth thinking deeply, deeply about this terrible fact: God's Word has become boring and weak... This led me to new memories of my attitude to the Word of God both in seminary and at the beginning of the academy. With this, I will begin my academic memoirs of faith.

Chapter 8

* * *

In the seminary we heard boring stories about the "Holy Fathers," taught "about" their writings in church history and the history of preaching. But no one has ever picked up a single book from their creations. I'm afraid to blame, but I doubt that the teachers themselves are interested in them – outside the textbook... But for the time being, in fact, I do not want to talk about them, but only about one random passage.In the academy (not immediately) I had to read the works of St. John Chrysostom, I think, a commentary on the Book of Genesis. And in one place I came across the following thought in his mind: if you, he advises his listeners, do not understand something in the Scriptures, then do not grieve over it, but simply accept it on faith, without reasoning, for this is the Word of God, and God speaks only one truth... Accept it with all certainty, for one thing, that it is the Word of God... I read something similar, albeit in different expressions, and, like a former seminarian brought up in idolatry of the mind, I pondered with doubt: does Chrysostom himself really believe and think as he tells others? Is it possible that he believes the Word of God so "simply" as some peasant woman in the village? No, I thought, it was he who, for pedagogical purposes, persuaded only the simple to think and believe in the Word of God, in the Scriptures: but he himself could not think so. Why, for him, I judged by myself, it is impossible. How? He is such a brilliantly intelligent and learned person, and that he just believes in such a rural way?! It's not possible to fit into my head... Alas! I was not yet "kindred" to him from this side, and therefore "did not contain" (John 16:12) him. And it took me a long time to be able to accommodate it. Why? This incident gives me the opportunity to raise the general question of the significance of the "Word of God" or "Holy Scripture" for living faith.Perhaps it may seem strange to some: how could I, a seminarian, and a believing seminarian at that, be so suspicious of the words of Chrysostom, or rather, of the power of Scripture? I will lift the veil a little over this strangeness, which is probably not known to everyone.We, in the theological school, and even more so in the seminary, have established an extremely ridiculous attitude to the Bible, to the texts, to the Word of God: cold distrust... Even when we studied Metropolitan Philaret's Catechism at school (a thing worthy of all respect for beginners), the texts cited never had a convincing effect on us. For example: God is omnipresent. How can you see it? And immediately the words of the Psalmist are quoted: "Where shall I go from Thy Spirit? And where do I flee from Thy presence? If I ascend to heaven, Thou art there: if I descend into hell, there art Thou," etc., etc. The question is "proved" and settled... We learned, answered. But they were not convinced. What kind of proof is this, I thought in our little head. After all, the Word of God and God are all united together... It is the believer who confesses only his faith. And I need some extraneous "proof" that this is really, "objectively", right... How could this be done? The answer is ready: with the mind. All school wisdom was imbued with faith in the superiority of reason over faith, rationalism, and the scholastic method of "proving" the objects of faith. But neither our teachers nor we, infants, exercised their minds in the theological school. And therefore we remained dissatisfied... And in the seminary, this cold attitude towards the Bible grew even more. To begin with, we have never deeply not only felt in our hearts, but have not even thought about these very words: the word, the speech, the conversation, the revelation of God... God says... True, something in the 1st grade was told to us by the teacher of St. John. L.'s writings on this subject: on importance, on value, on reverent attitude [1], etc. But all this flew past our hearts: there was nothing to cling to, we did not yet love the Word of God... And only through love is knowledge given (1 Cor. 8:3). And very rarely, only in our answers, we called the Scriptures "the Word of God," and for the most part we talked about the Bible or the Holy Scriptures, or in short, about the Scriptures. And although we were taught that before reading the "Word of God" we need to pray, cross ourselves and even kiss it, we never did this (and I do not remember that the teachers themselves did). If they had done this, which, in fact, would have been true, and wonderful, and instructive for us, then we would have quietly laughed at such an eccentric. But when they stood in church, and at the all-night vigil, in orderly order, approached and "venerated" the Gospel, it was completely natural, venerable, and reverent... And they listened to the Gospel in church with true faith and holy reverence... But in the classroom it was completely different: studying, or something, but we never showed respect for the Bible. Neither to its internal content, nor even to its appearance. In the 1st grade of the seminary, we were given a copy of the Slavonic Bible as a gift from the Synod for the entire course of study. We took it and indifferently, with other textbooks, put it in the desks. There were, they say, other examples, that at the end of the seminary, students with malicious glee, tore up Bibles and swept them around the classroom. I don't remember such a general outrage. Only one or two of the mischievous people, and even then in the first grades, tore up the holy book, but the others did not do this, but were simply not interested. And so, by the 6th grade, many of us had Bibles disappearing somewhere... We don't know where. And in the last 2nd grades we already used the Russian-Slavonic New Testament.But if the Bible was the same textbook as the others (history, algebra, geometry, psychology, etc.), then the attitude towards it was completely similar: cold. Since it's a textbook, it's no longer interesting! But if there were something "forbidden", forbidden – then it would be a different matter. And the Bible never captured us internally. It was not that we did not believe in its content: we accepted everything, but we were indifferent to everything: whether the world was created out of nothing; the crossing of the Red Sea, the miracle of Jonah in the belly of a whale [2], etc. They believed everything: and school science also "proved" the possibility of miracles, trying to reduce the mystery of the miracle to the smallest detail, but at the same time to explain it as naturally and "realistically" as possible. Well, the whale may not be the whale itself with its small neck, which is incapable of swallowing a man [3], but a whale-like shark, or even a large fish, colloquially called a whale, etc. Or the water did not simply part into two walls: on the right and left sides of the Jews (Exodus 14:22), as it is obviously said in the Scriptures, but the wind drove it from the bay into the sea (the wind is also mentioned, Article 21). Of course, the teachers did not deny the words of Scripture, but they still wanted to "prove" somehow "naturally" and not supernaturally. And we, the seminarians, wanted precisely this, the mental proof. And we (and probably the teachers) were afraid of simple faith — as a matter if not impossible, then unreliable... This is how our whole school was organized: scholastically and rationally. Of course, this method was not always fruitless, but for the heart. For example, I now recall almost the only case of a cosmological "proof" of the existence of God... I was still a boy in the 1st class of the seminary; a "pupil" of the 5th grade, A—B, was walking with me along the bank of the Tsna River, and for some reason we started talking about God: he told me (from the philosophy course in the 4th grade of the seminary) about this proof: everything has a reason and a beginning, it is also necessary for the world, he himself could not appear from nothing; consequently, the creative action of another First Cause, i.e., God, was necessary. And when I heard this, my believing heart rejoiced and sparkled so much that I almost saw Him, "the Almighty, the Creator of heaven and earth, visible to all and invisible"... I was very happy... My heart has always sought strength in my faith. Later I learned about Kant's criticism of all the "proofs", but then I was glad. And other "rational" explanations still helped to hold on to faith against the waves of doubt and the onslaught of unbelief. Thanks to the seminary sciences for this... But, as I have already repeated, there was still more harm from this "intellectual" method: we had learned to fear "secrets," we degraded the simple "village" faith, considered it unworthy of the "educated" people of "our" intellectual age. And therefore the Scriptures were not convincing to us: they did not prove, but only affirmed. We wanted proof, "justification" of him from the outside. Thus, a complete perversion resulted: God wanted to reveal and affirm the truth through the Scriptures – about the world, about man, about history, about salvation – so that people would not be tormented by ignorance or fall into falsehood. And we did not trust God (!), but demanded confirmation of Him... Isn't it ridiculous? I read how a learned Englishman presented his king with a large scholarly work in defense of the Bible. The king accepted, thanked him, but sensibly remarked: "Hitherto I thought that everything else needed to be defended and proved by the Bible, and you defend it itself?" The same thing happened to us, the "spiritual fathers" and especially the seminarians. Only, unfortunately, we did not have such kings around us and did not yet have our own "king in our heads" and experience. We still had little genuine, ardent, deep faith in God; but there was also a lack of depth of mind to understand the real importance and extraordinary significance for the truth of the Word of God.That is why I did not believe the holy genius Chrysostom and his sincere simplicity. But, on the other hand, I could not suspect him of lying, even if it was well-intentioned, for the sake of "these little ones": this did not reconcile itself with the holiness of his countenance and with the sincerity of his tone. And I remained in thought, and no longer believed him... What you can't survive yourself, you don't believe in others! (all according to the same law of knowledge – affinity).I have noticed many times how unbelieving people did not believe in my sincerity in faith. And I could not understand: how was it possible, for example, not to read Gorky and not even be interested in literature at all? And when I heard about this from one of the most learned theologians, I sincerely ... I felt sorry for him: how "uneducated" he was! We all measure – by ourselves, by our own measure... And I, for a long time, continued to stay in the seminary's stripped-down clothes: I did not give strength to the Scriptures. I preferred to him "science", intelligence, "proofs"... But gradually, in the course of perhaps two years, I grew up and understood the complete sincerity of Chrysostom and the absolute faithfulness of his advice... This continued to become clear to me afterwards; and now I will bring together my experiences on the Scriptures, more precisely and better, on the holy Word of God, in order to share them with you.Yes, we seminarians were profoundly wrong in our attitude towards it, both from the side of faith and from the side of reason. This is now very clear to me and easy to prove. From the point of view of faith, it is the easiest. If I am a believer (and we were believers, but not deeply, not alive), then for me the Bible is the "Word of God," that is, God Himself, the Spirit of God, speaks through it. "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God" (2 Tim. 3:16). So how can I not take it? How can I doubt? How else can I look for support for him in anything inferior? "Quite obvious absurdity! So why didn't we see her then? Because they did not believe enough, they did not believe enough, they did not believe vividly... Faith was "according to tradition" more... And also because they were infected with excessive school "faith" in the mind, like all the intellectuals of that period (the nineteenth century, especially its second half). It was only later, when I gradually clarified the foundations of religious and any other epistemology (theory of knowledge). Then I saw the complete — to the point of self-evident — inadequacy of the mind in the sphere of the objects of faith, its complete unsuitability, inapplicability, even illegality in the sphere of the supernatural world, which is not characteristic of it... Fortunately for me, I was completely disappointed in the autocracy of mind and knowledge; I smashed this idol to pieces and threw it overboard my soul and my own mind: by my mind I was freed from the imaginary chains of the mind. And what freedom I got from it! But we will talk about this later... In the meantime, I will apply these conclusions to the Word of God... When I broke the chains of the mind, at the same time I realized (gradually, of course) that in order to strengthen the foundations and particular truths of faith, I did not need an incapable mind, but the self-revelation of that world. I already knew that the path of all knowledge is the direct revelation of being itself to the "knower," or more precisely, to the perceiving subject. And the same path is the only applicable one in religious "knowledge": God and His truths are revealed by Himself... It cannot be otherwise. This is true for a number of reasons. This is self-evident. And even if it were not yet "obvious", then it should be accepted for the time being by trusting in the reliable witness of the truth: God. There is no other basis for truth. In the same way, reason led me to faith: and he led himself away as an incompetent teacher here... I will set out my thoughts in more detail later. And inwardly, both by faith and from my mind, I understood Chrysostom's advice about the "simplicity" of perceiving the Scriptures... And little by little I stood firmly on this ground and stand on it to this day... True, I had already succeeded in this not quite "easy": it was necessary to go through a considerable school of philosophical struggle against philosophy, to understand and overcome the false path of rationalism, to return to the knowledge of the exceptional importance of revelation; it was necessary to grow in faith; it is necessary, in short, to return again to the "simplicity" of faith. But this new simplicity was no longer the old, childish simplicity according to tradition, and not even from the heartfelt attraction of my own soul to unreasoning faith — no, the new simplicity had passed through the testing fire of "knowledge," through a different experience in spiritual life; And therefore it can be said that it is a "conscious" simplicity, conscious, justified... And now it is stronger than inexperienced, "childish" simplicity. Now I am no longer afraid of secrets or miracles, I am no longer looking for wind for the walls of water, nor for a cetacean shark for Jonah. I believe the Scriptures as they are, for they are the word, the revelation of God himself! And I believe in God... Why I believe, and how I believe, is another question; More on it later. But I believe. I believe — well, if only because I have no other foundation for the truth — after the fragmentation of the mind. But there are other reasons for this. And I stand on the foundation of the Scriptures, lean on the Word of God. It became an authority for me. And now this is what I do. When some incomprehensible question comes before my consciousness, I turn to God's revelation and see: what is it, what does God Himself say? And even though I understood absolutely nothing intellectually, now these misunderstandings do not bother me in the slightest, as it was in the seminary; Even I rejoice at this incomprehensibility: this is how it should be for the mind, even if it "contradicts" – as one wrongly speaks of difference, of "opposite", but not of the "contradiction" of different worlds – to my mind; I calmly read the Word of God and accept what is said completely peacefully and convincingly: God Himself has spoken! What more? What is more beautiful? What is more evident? "I will take the celebration of the Sacrament of the Eucharist... It is frightening for the mind to think: bread and wine are transformed into the Body and Blood of Christ... This is no longer bread or wine, but the living Christ Himself! The God-Man Himself, God.. I personally heard how an unbelieving interlocutor with an undisguised smile of an "all-understanding" person told me that not only did he not believe it himself, but he was sure that I, "as an educated intellectual", also did not believe in this "impossible" thing and deceived others as if I did... I understood perfectly well all his unbelief: I had known it for a long time. But he could not understand me, for my experience of faith and knowledge was not yet accessible to him. I have declared to him and declare that I fully believe in the immutability of the truth of the transubstantiation of bread and wine into Body and Blood... But was it possible that my mind was not disappointed by this obvious perplexity and was not confused by doubt: how can all this be? "Oh, so many times!" They did not always come from faith. They are very diverse. But now, when I speak of the Scriptures, I will point out only one of them. Why do I believe this? This was absolutely categorically and repeatedly affirmed by the Lord Jesus Christ Himself, the Truth Himself ("I am... Truth", Jn. 14:6): "Take, eat: this is my body"... "Drink of it, all of you, for this is my blood..." (Matt. 26:26-28). "He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood abideth in me" (John 6:56)... By this the carnal minds of the Jews and even some of the disciples of Jesus were tempted by this, and they completely departed. But He did not stop them, nor did He say that they had misunderstood Him "simply" and not "symbolically." On the contrary, He even addressed the twelve: "Do you also want to depart?" – thus asks the self-confident Truth, not afraid of human weakness.. And the twelve did not depart. Peter said, "Lord! To whom shall we go?" Truly, there is no one else. And it is possible and necessary to come to Thee, for Thou alone "hast the words of eternal life" — both salvific and certain, true (John 6:67-69). So am I... The question is again different: why exactly do I believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and, consequently, in His Gospel... I will tell you about this further. But if I believe in Him, I accept His Words, His revelations, as indestructibly certain: God has spoken! No more questions! So it is! Such is the truth! And I accept in all its fullness and depth the Mystery for the mind, but the truth for the soul, about the Body and the Blood.. And these questions do not always arise. Although, as we know, we are not free in the logical associations of ideas; and they can come against even our desires; But still, there are no questions. And if they do, then you push them aside with the "hand" of all previous faith, intellect and experience – you calmly and firmly perform the sacrament further... There are other foundations for this faith of mine (the authority of the Church, the Fathers, the experiences of the saints, even some mental supports); but one of the strongest foundations is the Revelation of the Word of God, the Word of God Himself: "Speech and it shall be!" As long as this is not revealed to our spirit, then for the carnal mind this truth seems not only incomprehensible, but even seemingly unacceptable, also "contradicting" the "laws" of the mind: 3 and 1? "Impossible." But my "epistemology" has long ago proved to me mathematically that our little mind does not even dare to stutter at all about any "impossibility" in other worlds... This is already the final point for him! True, it is incomprehensible to him (and "me"). Undoubtedly! But that's all. No more! Not a single step further. "I don't understand" – this is correct and humble and logical. And I don't understand it intellectually. But for the time being (before the experience of "face to face" – 1 Cor. 13:12) I accept... On what grounds? Revealed, said, given! At least this one thing: teach and baptize "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit"! (Matt. 28. 19). Everyone is equal, but the "name" is one. In abundance! I do not even dare to torture the mystery: "Mystery does not tolerate trial," says the church stichera... And my mind knows this exactly, clearly, even from philosophical conclusions. And my heart does not like to "torture" at all: it is audacious and sinful even for the sake of faith and from experience... Not to mention again: and contrary to the mind (the fool spoke in his heart...). And I believe, I believe in the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, I believe and confess! Revelation is given—not is—in the same way in the incomprehensible incarnation of the Son of God. So it is with the Grace of the Holy Spirit. To the future afterlife. In the sacraments. To the Church. Everything rests on the foundation of the Scriptures, on the unmistakable Word of God: God has spoken! And I began to read His Word, not in a seminarian way, but in a Christian way. Hitherto it had been chiefly an "external" authority for me: by believing in God, I was thereby induced to "receive" His word. But gradually and repeatedly, thousands of times, the truth of Scripture, and especially of the Gospel, began to manifest itself to me from within. I will explain this. There are two main ways of action of the word of God: one is natural, and the other is supernatural, one is more or less ordinary, heartfelt, intellectual, the other is spiritual, mysterious, grace-filled. You can add a third, additional, historical-critical one... And all of them are "scientific" – only in different ways... I'll explain.I'll start with the last one. Many scholars and defenders of the Gospels have tried to find out: What is the basis for the reliability of these sources of our faith? And there were many answers, almost from the very beginning of the Gospel and the Epistles, to the present day. There are a number of brochures in which this material is collected. I will not dwell on it now, but I will only mention, for example, an interesting preface by the secular writer, lawyer of St. Petersburg B. Gladkov [4]. In the preface to his interpretation of the Gospel, he reports from his autobiography that he was, like many of his comrades and contemporaries, an unbeliever, tormented by dissatisfaction, wondered at the peace of the soul among Christians, and wondered what it rested on them. — On faith in Christ the Savior. And what is their faith based on? — First of all, on the Gospel. What is the source of its reliability? Is it certain? "And he decided to examine the question historically and critically: how long ago and whether the Gospels were written down. And it turned out that there is historical evidence from the first century, and there is no need to talk about the second century, from which it becomes clear that the Gospels were very close to their events; the witnesses, or at least the hearers of the eyewitnesses of Christ, were still alive. And Gladkov accepted the Gospels and faith in Christ with them... A very interesting and instructive preface for beginners... Fr. John of Kronstadt greatly approved of the publication of this book. But I do not appreciate this method very much, although I recognize its relative value, especially for people who have not yet broken away from the worship of reason and "science"; And now it seems rather boring to me. I read this material without a flutter of heart; perhaps in the seminary I would have read with satisfaction, but then I still believed in the mind.Therefore, a slightly different method seems more convincing to me: the inner reliability of the Gospel. But first I will tell you about an outside witness. I have a friend, a Jewish Christian, the most learned philosopher in the world, a professor at the University of F [5]. I once asked him how he, a Jew, a very learned man, came to the Christian faith. And moreover, sincerely, not forced by anyone... And even after he had lived with his Christian wife for 13 years in Judaism, or rather, in intellectual indifference. And he wrote to me that the Gospel led him to faith... What exactly? — By its "inner authenticity"... That is, to him, as a very intelligent, open-minded and sincere person, when reading the Gospels, it became simply obvious that it was written by eyewitnesses, completely sincere people; that this is not a poetic legendary "work", but ingenuous notes "about events perfectly known among us" (Luke 1:1). But all this paled before the obvious certainty of the real facts. And there remained one of two things: either stubbornly, contrary to one's own conscience and mind, not to believe, or, on the contrary, to accept the facts, i.e., as they say, "believe"; although here, for the learned mind, in fact, faith was not needed, as "assurance of things not seen" (Heb. 11:1), but a simple acceptance of what was seen by others, but reliable, "who were from the very beginning eyewitnesses and ministers of the Word" (Luke 1:2). He did not persist: as an intelligent and sincere person, it would have been unbearable for him. And he was baptized... To the joy, of course, of the family, which never dared to "teach a scientist"... It is interesting, however, that later he nevertheless succumbed to the patina of doubts — moreover, completely logically unjustified — this is very indicative: here we are already faced with another way of affirming faith — grace-filled and experienced, and, consequently, this natural way of accepting faith — by trust in reliable witnesses and by the forced certainty of events — does not yet solve the whole matter. And it is understandable: until a person himself perceives something personally, directly, until then other people's testimonies seem to us to be half-dead alien capital, which we have only temporarily used. And it is quite another matter when the same reliable testimonies fall under a ready-made faith (whether it is traditional "childish" or already experienced, "one's own"), then "other" messages will be joyfully perceived, as well as our own. However, even without our faith, the undoubted inner authenticity of the Gospels led not only the learned philosopher, but also millions of other people to faith. This character of simplicity of records is especially characteristic of the Gospel of Mark, because it was written down from the words of the simplest fisherman Peter by his disciple Mark. The other Evangelists, Matthew (a former customs official, a publican), Luke (an educated physician and writer), and John (also a fisherman, but who gradually reached the height of contemplation) were more, so to speak, "cultured" and already had, each in his own way, plans and special tasks in writing his Gospels. And Peter, without any systems, told the main events from the life of his Lord. The believer asked Mark to write it down; And he tried—O God! — to capture guilelessly and literally. All this is obvious to any unbiased reader. And I would advise everyone to check it by experience: take this Gospel now and read it anywhere. Well, for example: about the calling of the apostles (chapter 1, verse 16 ff.), about the healing of Peter's mother-in-law, about the bringing to Jesus Christ "at the onset of evening, when the sun was setting" (32), "the sick and demon-possessed," and so on. and so on... I testify that having read the Gospel thousands of times, especially from Mark, I can say that I "saw" the events that took place in this "Holy Land"... And there was simply no doubt about the undoubted authenticity of all that was described; and if I did not accept it, then I would have to either go mad or speak against the obvious. And especially I have always and until now been pleased and strengthened by the thousands of details scattered here and there throughout the Gospels. I have already written a special small manuscript about this (it is in Sh.'s possession); "Details of the Gospel events": there are enough facts there. But in order not to refer my readers to this unknown source now, and fearing that they themselves will be too lazy to open the Gospel and read it for at least 10-15 minutes, and in order to immediately give live illustrations of the above thoughts for these notes, I will gladly devote a few pages to vivid examples of inner "authenticity"... It is pleasant for me to enjoy the "sight" of Christ... Moreover, I will especially note what sometimes passes by our attention. The Lord, the Son of God, the God-man, spent yesterday with His disciples, in the evening "He healed many who were suffering from various diseases; cast out many demons" (Mark 1:35), of course, he was tired like a man, and the apostles were tired with Him. Night fell; all fell asleep somewhere in a hospitable hut.The tired disciples, who had been tired from fishing before, slept soundly. And they did not hear what Jesus did. And while everyone was resting so sweetly — "in the morning, rising up very early" — when it was still dark, He probably "went out" unnoticed, so as not to disturb His tired co-workers and to be left alone: "And He withdrew into a deserted place, and there He prayed" (35). Then the disciples woke up. They began to look for Him. In the morning, of course, the people, who had seen with their own eyes so many beneficial miracles the day before, soon gathered, and asked: "Where is He?" "Simon and those who were with Him" nevertheless found Him and "said to Him, 'All seek Thee'" (36:37). Or else. "A great storm arose; the waves were hitting the boat, so that it was already filled with water. And He was asleep." Where is? "At the stern," and "at the head." Something was placed under His Divine, Divine-human head... The frightened students did not sleep. They wake him up. And getting up, He rebuked the wind and said to the sea: "Be still, cease!" And oh, the wondrous miracle: "The wind ceased, and there was a great silence"... And this is immediately – which is completely unnatural: the waves on the lake still beat for hours with the so-called "dead swell" after the storm has ceased (4., 37-39). Here is another amazing miracle of feeding five thousand people with five loaves of bread, not counting women and children... So it was about seven or eight thousand, probably. That was the interest of the Jewish Israel, which was chosen by God at that time. Is it so now?The Lord "commanded... Seat everyone in squads on the green grass. And they sat down in rows, a hundred and fifty (Ch. 6, 39-40)... And the miracle happened with his own eyes. "And they gathered up the pieces of bread and the remains of the fish, twelve full baskets" (v. 43). I confess that I was worried even in theological school, when at the litiya I heard all these words during the blessing of round, clean white "loaves": "Lord Jesus Christ, our God bless" at that time "five loaves and five thousand satisfying, bless Thyself" and now, here, now, Thyself bless "and the loaves... and multiply them: was it possible that all these things really happened? Five loaves of bread for five thousand? Oh, how I wished, anxiously wished, that it had been, that it had been! And the mind was still afraid, afraid of "miracles"... And I was worried about the consecration of the "bread". And much later, when I began to believe the Word of God simply and firmly, I myself pronounced these holy words with calm determination; for he already knew, historically reliably knew: it happened! For it was "on the green grass"... And they sat in rows... And "twelve full boxes" were carried later... And on another occasion, when "there were about four thousand," they had been fed with seven loaves of bread and had gathered six baskets (chapter 8), He commanded them to "sit down on the ground" (v. 6). There is no mention of "green grass": it means that there was ordinary dry Palestinian soil; and there was, probably, a lowland, on which the greenery had not yet been scorched by the southern sun, which drew the attention of an observant local resident, a fisherman. The Savior sent 2 for a donkey. "They went and found a young donkey"... Where? In what position? — "tied at the gate in the street." The whole picture: the gate, the street, tied... "And they untied him" (11 ch., 4)... Interrogation at the trial... At first, when the Lord was falsely testified, "He was silent and answered nothing": everyone already understood that there was not enough evidence for a murder according to the law. Then the high priest asked directly: "Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?" that is, God? Christ "said: 'I' (ch. 14, 61-62). Then the high priest tore his garments, and said, "What more witnesses have we to do? You have heard blasphemy; What do you think? And they all found Him guilty of death" (v. 63-65) They condemned the Lord for having told the truth about Himself: "I am the Son of God"... The myrrh-bearers saw an angel in the empty tomb, a young man sitting on the right side, clothed in white clothes, and they were horrified. Having heard from him about the resurrection of the Lord, "they went out and fled" — well, of course, they fled! — "from the grave; they were seized with trembling and horror"... And then? "And they said nothing to anyone, because they were afraid" (16 chapters, 5, 8)... Gosh! How obvious it all is, clear to both the mind and the heart... Truly, undoubtedly, inwardly authentic! And only a preconceived soul or a recalcitrant one is able to deny visual facts. Through this authenticity, we grow "from faith to faith."And how many cases have there been when, quite unexpectedly, while reading the Gospels, and especially in church at the Liturgy, I suddenly saw such the slightest detail that had not even occurred to me before. Here are two or three more small examples... They are going to Jerusalem. "Jesus went before them, and they were terrified, and following him, they were afraid." Then He apparently stopped and, "calling the twelve," "began again to speak to them about what would happen to Him" (Chapter 10, 32). He began to ask to heal him. "Jesus stopped." Became... Waiting... "Ordered him to be called." "A blind man is called and they say (it is not known who; passed through the crowd) to him: do not be afraid, get up, he is calling you"... It doesn't even say who, but just "calls you"... What about the blind man? "He threw off his outer garment, got up and came (and did not run, where can a blind man run?) to Jesus." And he regained his sight (ch. 10, 46-52). Why did he "throw off his clothes"? I don't know. And now I don't understand. The detail is completely unnecessary. On the contrary, even: if he is "calling", then there is no need to think about clothes, but go quickly. And he threw it off. Perhaps you, the reader, can think of something? Interesting... Yes, all this was, was, was... Well, and the last detail. About the rooster. Only Peter himself knew the details of this terrible betrayal and, of course, remembered them: should he forget it? Other Evangelists (Matt. 26, Lk. 22, Jn. 18) speak of only the crowing of a rooster. And Peter (in Mark) speaks of two. With the help of John, "who was known to the high priest" (John 18:16), he entered the inner courtyard and warmed himself with others by the fire. It was a cold night. "One of the maidservants", "looking at him", recognized him: "And you were with Jesus..."Apparently, out of curiosity she went to look at the Wonderworker more than once: the servants know a lot from the masters... "But he renounced": "I don't know and I don't understand"... However, he was timid. And as soon as the servants left, he quietly "went out into the front yard." There were two fences." And the rooster crowed"... There were the "first roosters"... 9 p.m. But the maidservant, apparently a restless person, and had become infected by the hosts' enmity towards Jesus and the disciples, and went out a second time. She did not find Peter in the first courtyard, perhaps she asked the others where he was, and went out into the outer courtyard, "seeing him again, she began to say to those standing there, 'This is one of them'... Oh, how plausible all this is for a woman. You see?! "He denied again"... The maid is gone... "After a while," it was already approaching midnight, "those who were standing there" began to interrogate him again: "As if you were one of them." "And he began to swear and swear, I know not this man." "Then the rooster crowed a second time." It was the time of the "second roosters", as we used to say in the village. "And Peter remembered the word which Jesus had spoken to him" (Mark 14:72): "Before the crows twice, thrice shalt thou deny me" (30)... It came true... The other evangelists did not mention the "first roosters." And Peter remembered well... "And he began to weep" (ch. 14, 66-72) Ev. Matthew adds, "bitterly"... The renouncer himself did not dare to add this word: it would not have been humble for him to mention it himself... And he left the yard... Where did he go then with his tears? What was his ardent soul going through, which had just promised three or four hours ago: "If everyone is offended, but not me"?! (29) It is unknown... I think for a long time he wandered through the dark streets of sleepy Jerusalem and cried... and cried... and cried... And how not to cry?! And by morning he had already arrived at the place where the apostles usually gathered and spent the night. And he fell into a heavy sleep. But not for long. In the morning, probably, he was silent. His soul was tormented: he renounced.. Three times he renounced... And he continued to cry...

* * *

... Have they felt, have they seen with certainty now how plausible, how authentic they are – in their very inner content, in the simple spirit of the narrators, in innumerable real details – how obvious the Gospels are?! And there is not even anything "supernatural", mystical, mysterious here; On the contrary, the mind, observation, intellectual intuition, if you like, "internally-scientifically", the truth arises in an indubitable form. Therefore, if I said before that religious supernatural objects are completely inaccessible to the mind, then I understood their very essence, and not their existence; it is beyond and above reason: God, the Trinity, the Incarnation, Grace, the other world are incomprehensible to the mind. But in Christ the God-Man, His natural side, the human one, is completely similar to our nature, and should be accessible to both perception and understanding (again, according to the law of affinity of our common nature), and was understandable. And here it is quite proper and even obligatory for our mind to seek certainty in the most natural ways: considerations, psychological comparisons, a sense of truth, etc. And the learned philosopher F., when he began to read the Gospel, without any difficulty "came to the evidence" of events with his mind. And I, from my experience, strongly advise reading the Gospel when we want to strengthen our faith, to rejoice in it, or when we find some doubt: no academies, no historical-critical research, no logical proofs can give as much as the "simplest" reading of the Gospels... This is an experience... And you understand why St. Seraphim [6] read all the Evangelists every week; why the mission begins with the most ordinary story of the events of the Gospel: why the Bible, and especially the New Testament, is published in all languages in millions of copies and is read more than any other book in the world. Nothing lifts the veil on the mystery of "the other world" so much; Nothing "reveals" so clearly the reality, truth, and objectivity of supernatural existence as precisely "revelation".And if we are lazy and cannot read a whole Evangelist a day, then at least we should devote some 3-5 minutes to it. Sometimes that's enough. Suddenly, you will unexpectedly find a new pearl or just refresh your soul with already known, but fading with time facts... And again the heart will play; and faith will be revived, like greenery sprinkled with morning dew... In extreme cases, read at least in doubts, in case of weakening of faith, in case of sorrows; and you will find both truth and comfort." Search the Scriptures," Christ Himself commanded the Jews, "but they bear witness of Me" (John 5:39). "Thou hast known from childhood the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith in Christ Jesus," says the Apostle Paul. Paul to Timothy (2 Tim. 3:15).And you need to read "simply", with an open heart, an unprejudiced mind. And then you don't even need to "search" for evidence, but only read simply. And the truth will shine from within. The face of Christ will be manifested with our own eyes... And how many such examples have there been...

* * *

But this is what I have sometimes noticed and heard from others: one and the same Gospel at one time will sparkle with such a living rainbow of colors, so powerfully and convincingly reveal the truth, and at another time everything in it appears as if dead, cold, inactive. And the same details of events, completely irrefutable and reliable for the mind, do not make an impression this time. Professor F. also wrote to me about this about himself. And the seminarians read and taught, and all the knowledge fell only as a cold layer on the memory, but did not penetrate into the heart... And vice versa, sometimes your whole being trembles, trembles from two or three words read, especially in church." And so, the woman of that city, who was a sinner, having learned that He was reclining in the house of the Pharisee, brought an alabaster vessel with myrrh, and standing behind (in front of Him was the table around which the guests were "reclining" — Metropolitan Benjamin) at His feet and weeping, she began to pour tears on His feet, and to wipe the hair of her head, and kissed His feet, and anointed Him with myrrh" (Luke 7:11). 37-38). What sinner's heart would not have stood next to this happy woman (and the Lord did not call her a harlot, but "this woman", a venerable name (7, 44)... And how many tears have been shed in the world over her and with her for 2000 years... Why does such a difference happen? I have already noted that when reading the Gospels, it is not necessary to set any unusual, even decent goals, for example, to collect material for a future sermon, to mark important passages for composition, to try to memorize them, to turn them into material for lessons, lectures, etc. All this is extremely harmful to the action of the spirit of the Gospel, drives it away. I remember, for example, how, when I was already a teacher at the academy, I read the Gospels in my cell... It was light in the soul, interesting and lively for the mind... But so I decided to combine another task: to mark for my works some passages about the "Kingdom of God"... And as soon as I began to engage in this applied work, the light of the Gospel instantly went out. I tried to repeat, to chase two goals on the next day and on the third. Alas! Fruitlessly. The Gospel was dead... And I had to abandon the second task, and, asking the Lord for forgiveness, I humbled myself and began to read as before, "for the salvation of my soul"... And the dead man came to life... Here we are dealing with a religious law: the grace of God or God does not allow a person to use them not for Divine purposes, but for outsiders, earthly ones. This, in essence, is the Jewish materialistic approach to God, the Savior: you seek Me because you have "eaten the loaves," and you do not love Me Myself... And then the Lord hides His face... "He went through the crowd and disappeared." God, grace, and the Saviour cannot be "servant," slavish instruments in the hands of His creation: God is the Lord, the Lord of all, and not their instrument. Otherwise, a sin is committed against the 3rd commandment: "Thou shalt not receive the name of the Lord thy God in vain." But sometimes a person does not set himself practical goals, he reads simply, and the Word of God pales for him. And vice versa: when it does not expect, suddenly it will light up with an inner light and heal and revive... And then it is so irresistibly convincing that no doubt is even conceivable: the truth stands in the heart and mind with absolute certainty and power. The Word of God is God speaking. In the Word of God is hidden the power of Divine grace. And it, like everything of God, is not subject to the coercive laws of action. It is in her will either to manifest herself, or not to reveal herself, or to conceal herself. And then no natural conditions of ours – neither historical-critical calculations, nor facts of internally convincing reliability – will help us. On the contrary, they can even hinder the power of the light of truth, for we want to forcibly subjugate the higher Power with our lower powers: and this is beyond our power. This can threaten us with the danger of falling into magic. Grace is gone. And when it is gone, the outer shell of truth, the words, alone remain powerless and ineffective. Or in other words: the power remains in the word, but it is retained from us (or from me alone, and not from all) in action. And vice versa: when God Himself is pleased, then the light of life will shine even from simple words. In short: the truth, the Holy Spirit, Christ are hidden in the Scriptures, in His Word, they themselves are revealed to man. They themselves give their grace-filled light: and already in this light the light of Scripture begins to shine for us. I have already made a comparison: the sun illuminates the darkness of the night, and everything is visible. There is energy in electrical wires, but if it is covered, nothing can be seen; That is why the reading of the Gospels in church is furnished with the most reverent preparations: Let us hear... Wisdom!.. Let us listen to the Holy Gospel... Peace to all... Let us listen. The Gospel in wonderful covers. On a high table. With candles in front. During the reading, a special blessing is asked for reading; and he [7] told about his fellow academician N: he had lost his faith. Suffering from unbelief, he came with grief to E. F., of whose faith he was well aware. He asks for advice on what to do so that faith returns. E. F. gave him, apparently, a very simple answer: "Read the Gospel." The latter began to object incredulously, that he already knew it almost by memory and that nothing would come of it. He only told me to read "quite simply". Finally, he agreed. It was summer. The doubter occupied a rather high position of an official; and went on vacation to Finland. So it was this time... Autumn has come. The official again visited his friend, E. F., and happily declared that the faith had returned: he had read the Gospel during vacations... Another case. I was at a youth dinner in the Czech Republic. One of the students shared how he, the former "atheist," found faith again. "It turns out that he read the Holy Scriptures. Writing; But at first it was both uninteresting and fruitless. And then he came to the story of Saul's conversion. And the fact of this miraculous appearance of Christ to the persecutor seemed to him to be so indubitable, obvious, and authentic: the whole conversation, then the blindness, the meeting of Ananias, the faith, the baptism, the epiphany — that the extinguished faith burned in him again. And how many striking incidents are told in the lives of the saints: the conversion of the Venerable Martyr Eudocia, the departure of Anthony into the wilderness, the conversions of St. Vladimir, and so on and so forth. Yes, it can be said that the entire mission is the result of the action of the oral or written Word of God... And here, in America, the Apostle – the Aleuts, then in Siberia – the Yakuts, Koryaks and other pagans – Bishop. Innocent (Veniaminov) [8] first taught orally; but soon he began to translate the Gospel into local languages. The Kingdom of Heaven to him! Eternal memory! For "wisdom shall not enter into a wicked soul" - Auth. ^ The passage of the Jews across the Red Sea is described in the biblical book of Exodus, and the sojourn of the prophet Jonah in the belly of a whale is described in the book of the prophet Jonah – Ed. ^ I have read several cases of actual ingestion. And even recently: in the Red Sea, a sailor was swallowed by a whale and was still alive when the animal was caught. I myself read this in the newspapers - Author. ^ Gladkov Boris Ilyich — public figure, writer, champion of people's sobriety, author of a number of works of an apologetic nature ("The Bible in Public Stories". — St. Petersburg, 1915; "The Gospel of the Four Evangelists, Brought Together in One Narrative." St. Petersburg, 1908; "Yes, Christ Has Really Risen!" — St. Petersburg, 1906; "A Public Interpretation of the Gospel." St. Petersburg, 1906; "Help me return to God." St. Petersburg, 1910; "The Root Cause of Our Atheism." - St. Petersburg, 1911) - Compilation. ^ We are talking about Semyon Ludvigovich Frank (1877-1950), a religious philosopher and psychologist who went through a difficult path in his life from atheism to faith, from Marxism to service to Orthodoxy – Ed. ^ St. Seraphim of Sarov († 1833) was a holy elder who possessed the gifts of healing, foresight. He taught about the "acquisition" of the Holy Spirit as the highest goal of a Christian's life – Comp. ^ Bishop Theophanes, in the world Vasily Dmitrievich Bystrov (1872-1940), was rector of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy. He had a great influence on the future Vladyka Benjamin, being his spiritual father – Sost. ^ St. Innocent, Metropolitan of Moscow, Apostle of America and Siberia († 1879). He was canonized by the Russian Orthodox Church in 1977. ^

Chapter 9

* * *