– The Apocrypha is a venerable literary tradition. Many of them have a very detailed account of Christ's earthly life, much more detailed than the four canonical Gospels accepted by the Church combined. But, nevertheless, the Church insists on the authenticity of these four Gospels. On what basis were all the other Gospels numbered among the apocrypha, that is, considered false or distorted?– The Church did not choose anything, firstly, because for the most part these pseudo-Gospels appeared after the Church had become accustomed to its canonical Gospels. And secondly, the Christ presented in the Apocrypha is not at all the image of Christ that was dear to the heart of the Church and was preserved in the Church of the martyrs of the first centuries of Christianity. "The son of Annas the scribe sprinkled the water that Jesus had collected. When Jesus saw what he had done, he was angry and said to him, "You worthless, godless fool, what harm have the puddles and water done to you? Behold, now you will dry up like a tree, and you will have neither leaves, nor roots, nor fruit. And immediately the boy was all dried up, and Jesus went away and went into the house of Joseph. But the parents of the boy who had dried up took him, mourning his youth, and brought him to Joseph, and began to reproach him for his son's doing such things! After that, He [Jesus] was walking through the settlement again, and the boy ran up and pushed Him on the shoulder. Jesus was angry and said to him, "You will not go anywhere further," and the child immediately fell down and died. And Joseph called the boy and rebuked him, saying, "Why do you do that because of which people will suffer and hate us and persecute us?" And Jesus said, "I know you don't speak your own words, but for your sake I will be silent, but they must be punished." And immediately those who accused Him were blinded. And after that no one dared to contradict him, lest he should be cursed and be mutilated."[1] There is nothing of the kind in the canonical Gospels. There are no miracles for the sake of miracles. There are no miracles for the sake of intimidation and obedience. All the miracles of the canonical Gospels are meaningful: they reveal the meaning of Christ's ministry. In the canonical Gospels, Christ sacrifices Himself, not those who disagree with Him. In the apocrypha we see ordinary folklore, and sometimes very vengeful, which is generally characteristic of folklore and magical consciousness. Moscow, 1989. Pp. 142–143. ^

Answer 44

– Do you see a difference between the traditions of Orthodox and Catholic missionary literature? If so, what is it, and can the adoption of this or that tradition influence the reader's choice of confession in the future?– I think that there is no fundamental difference between Orthodox and Catholic fiction (if it is serious). I cannot say what the difference is, for example, between Gogol and Dickens, Bunin and Hugo, Shmelev and Exupery. Of course, each of them has his own authorial style and peculiarities, but I cannot say that this is the Catholic vision of the world, and this is the Orthodox one. On the contrary, there is even something similar, for example, in the book "Father Arseny" and the novel by the Catholic Graham Greene "The Power and the Glory". Both books are honest, not commercial. By the way, I consider "Power and Glory" to be a missionary novel par excellence and would recommend reading it to every young man who is going to enter the seminary. This is a good introduction to church life.However, one word about Graham Greene.In the 70s of the XX century, it was fashionable in Italy to conduct a dialogue between communists and Catholics. And to one of these meetings, the communists invited Graham Greene as a representative of the Catholic intelligentsia. Tense anticipation hung in the hall. But Graham Greene relieved the tension and won over the audience with his very first phrase. He came to the podium and said, "You know, you Communists and we Catholics have a lot in common." Green waited until the end of the applause and continued: "Both you and we have blood on our hands up to the elbows."

Answer 45

– I asked this question because there is an opinion that Catholic fiction develops a person's attitude to many religious issues from the position of "common sense". But faith and "common sense" often come into direct contradiction. The Apostle Paul directly writes that often "common sense" is foolishness before God [1]. From this point of view, is there a danger of using Catholic fiction for missionary purposes? This is a very conventional and conditional thing: each era has its own. I would put it this way: "common sense" is the stereotype of my grandmother's era. So, the "common sense" of the Apostle Paul's era is the prejudices of the grandmothers of the pagan era, and the "common sense" of the 20th century is the prejudices of the grandmothers of the 19th century. Prejudice – literally: something that is absorbed with mother's milk before a person has formed a personal critical view. The "superstition" of our age is conscience mixed with Christian leaven. Therefore, I am convinced that today, against the background of crazy "talk shows" in which all kinds of perversions, occultism and paganism are preached, the position of "common sense" is the voice of tradition, and therefore the voice of Christianity. There is a place for "lyrics" - the author's experience and conjecture. Therefore, comparing fiction books with catechism is an unmerciful task. But can you imagine a situation when an icon is thrown away only because a crack or scratch appeared on the board? Can't you? Then why do we throw away a whole book just because some small grain of it does not fit into the Orthodox mosaic? And at the same time, they absolutely do not take into account those ingots of missionary, philosophical, and spiritual gold that are contained in this book. 1, 20; 3, 19.– Ed. ^

Answer 46

– So, there are no differences between Catholic and Orthodox missionary work in terms of means?– The difference is that Catholics first of all want to be Catholics (from the Greek – atholios – "universal, universal"), and Orthodox Christians first of all want to be Orthodox (orthodox), that is, the immutability of tradition is put in the first place. Catholics are very afraid of losing any part of their flock, and Orthodox Christians are afraid of losing contact with past generations, that is, with the experience of the Church. Therefore, Orthodox Christians are often ready to sacrifice part of their potential flock for the sake of preserving a living tradition and church experience. This explains the rejection of various "advertising actions" by Orthodoxy.

Answer 47

– What advice would you give to young people on how to educate themselves in the spiritual sphere?– If you are seriously engaged in this, then I would advise you to make a schedule for yourself for the year. For example, in September-October I will study the history of the Church, then in November-December I will study the symbolism and history of divine services; in January-February – Christian philosophy, and, say, in the summer I will reach dogmatics. That is, you need to be able to set a goal for yourself – for a year, for a month, for every day. Pick up literature for such and such a month on such and such a topic – and work with it, master its language, its logic. Another thing is that the selection of literature is not a simple thing, it is impossible to choose the right book without having a certain taste, and taste is made dependent on the circle of reading. Therefore, maybe it is easy to remember the names of good authors, and through their books to reach those whom they recommend.

Ответ 48

– А каких авторов вы бы посоветовали?– Я бы советовал обратиться к трудам блаженного Августина, прежде всего, его "Исповеди"; к Иоанну Златоусту, особенно его толкованиям Евангелия; письма святителя Феофана Затворника и его книга "Что такое духовная жизнь и как на нее настроиться". Из авторов ХХ века – это книги митрополита Вениамина (Федченкова), книги и беседы митрополита Антония (Сурожского). Из богословских работ – протоиерея Георгия Флоровского, Владимира Лосского, отца Александра Шмемана, отца Иоанна Мейендорфа, отца Александра Ельчанинова (замечательная книга была его – "Записки"). Среди современных богословов – работы А.И. Сидорова и протоиерея Георгия Митрофанова. По церковной истории: чтобы понять, что такое Церковь, чем она живет – надо найти редкую книжечку отца Сергия Мансурова "Очерки по истории древней Церкви". Отца Сергия арестовали где-то в 30-х годах, поэтому свою рукопись он смог довести только до третьего века христианской истории, но то вИдение Церкви, которое он дает,– просто блестящие портреты церковных деятелей. Увы, скуднее всего сегодня наша литература по библеистике. Тут не обойтись без журнала "Альфа и Омега", а также трилогии современного католического библеиста Брюса Мецгера ("Канон Нового Завета", "Текстология Нового Завета", "Ранние переводы Нового Завета").Буду рад, если у вас дойдут руки и до моих книг.

Ответ 49

– Если не брать в расчет Священное Писание, то какова, по вашему мнению, роль книги с точки зрения прихода человека к вере?– Люди разные, и их пути к вере тоже – разные. Бывают пути совершенно "некнижные". Этим летом я был в украинском городе Новоазовске и беседовал там с одним священником. Он недавно пришел в Православие, а в начале 90-х это был активный баптистский проповедник. Он поведал мне историю своего обращения. Однажды он решил зайти в православный храм, чтобы там подискутировать со священником. Священник был занят и сказал: "Знаете, у меня сейчас абсолютно нет свободного времени – надо срочно ехать на требы; но если уж вам так нужно поговорить, то за время, пока я буду переоблачаться, мы, возможно, успеем пообщаться". Батюшка заходит в какую-то комнатку, начинает переоблачаться; сзади же стоит этот молодой баптист и расстреливает его пулеметными очередями евангельских цитат, якобы опровергающих Православие. Священник слушает молча, без всяких возражений, и вдруг, снимая с себя наперсный крест, он поворачивается к этому юноше, резко подносит крест к его лицу и говорит: "Целуй!"...Когда этот бывший баптист (нынешний православный священник) рассказал мне эту историю, он добавил: "Не знаю, что вдруг со мной произошло, но я без всяких споров поцеловал протянутый батюшкой крест и почувствовал себя как младенец, нашедший, наконец, титьку матери. Младенец успокаивается, ему ничего больше не надо. Так и я почувствовал, что этот храм – мой дом, и здесь живет истина, которую я так долго и безуспешно искал. Мне никуда больше не надо идти, я нашел Ее!"Так что бывают случаи абсолютно "некнижных" обращений (я думаю, что их даже большинство). Но я бы сравнил книгу с лекарством, лежащим на аптечной полке. Есть какое-то лекарство, которое не нужно всем, а кому-то даже и вредно, но если оно нужно и помогает хотя бы одной десятой доле процента людей, то такое лекарство должно быть в каждой аптеке (например, инсулин).Точно так же и в мире церковном – книги нужны не всем, но есть люди, которым они необходимы. Книга дает возможность избавиться от засилья газет и газетных сплетен. Книга дает возможность мыслить, в отличие, например, от телефильмов, когда поток информации с большой скоростью проносится мимо тебя, не давая возможности регулировать его течение. Книга же дает возможность спокойно осмыслить какой-то эпизод, вызвавший недоумение или, наоборот, поразивший тебя. Вновь и вновь открывая нужную страницу, можно обдумать этот эпизод с разных сторон, подыскать аргументы "за" или "против".Книга восполняет нехватку знаний, мудрости, рассудительности у твоих обычных (или случайных) собеседников.Книга помогает увидеть мир глазами былых поколений, а не нынешних журналюг.

Ответ 50