Historical knowledge, which is the quality of historical being, is impossible without evaluation, and evaluation presupposes (§54 e.) the existence and a certain recognition of the God-man-man Person of Jesus Christ, who is at the center of the entire historical process. There are two ways to escape from this conclusion. First, you can replace Jesus with a collective person, for example, the Church, the Jewish people. But among the collective personalities that individualize the Human-Cosmos, there is a central one in each row. Its possibility and recognizability can only be substantiated by the Incarnation of God, which necessarily requires the Incarnation of God (§§ 82, 90). In addition, any collective personality is a developing concrete unity of individuals, and therefore is unrecognizable without a concretely individual God-man. The "historicism" of Judaism is the historicism of Christianity that has not been fully thought out. Secondly, one can try to understand the historical process from the beginning or, better, from the end of history. But the inadequacy of such attempts is already obvious to us (§§ 56, 59). Thus, the historical existence of the world necessarily presupposes the God-Man Jesus, who lived at a certain time and in a certain place. Without Him, there is no history. This means that without Him there are no other aspects of being and knowledge. After all, everything that exists is a historical fact, at least potentially; and it is possible to overcome the stiffness of abstract knowledge and the discontinuity of logic and natural science only if they also become historical knowledge.

Each person realizes all-unity in its special aspect. Therefore, the "life path" of a person is individual through and through; and the more individual the more perfect the personality. Just as there is no general abstract Truth, but only universal Truth, so there is no general abstract Good, but only concrete, all-one Good (§§ 19, 37, 48, 66). The moral ideal is always individually concrete: the personality always proceeds from itself, as from the center, embraces first of all its own sphere, and, as if concentrically expanding from itself, makes the world itself. It is only in the "depreciation into spirituality" – falling under abstract habits of thought and substituting ideology for idealism – that we try to distinguish between the end and the means (§§ 20, 71 f.l., 75) and to express morality in abstract formulas (§ 66).

Sinful activity (§§ 69-75) is also a misunderstanding of the nature and meaning of all human activity. It disrupts the natural movement from the center to the periphery by means of salto mortale into the void. Jesus precisely pointed out the first and last goal of man: first of all, we must seek the Kingdom of God, which is within us, and everything else will be "added," i.e., it will come by itself when necessary, it will reveal itself in the process of development. The same meaning in the advice not to worry about "tomorrow". "Today" is our sphere, in which, of course, there are also some thoughts about tomorrow, but, insofar as they are compatible with the concerns of "this day," i.e., they realize something in it, they "bear good fruit" in it as well.

The moral ideal of a person is his individual-concrete perfection, which is always not realized by him in empiricism. Empirically, the person only moves towards his ideal, never reaching it, although not only our ideal, but also our movement towards it, is justified and justified by the empirical personality and earthly life of Jesus. Through unity with Him (§ 90) we comprehend the eternal truth of our individual ideal, the meaning of our activity, our knowledge. It is not for nothing that Christianity alone is able to justify personal existence and personal life (§§ 47, 49). But for this a real unity of Jesus is also necessary, for otherwise even in Christianity there is a negation of empiricism, culture, body, matter. The real unity with Jesus is a "historical" unity, a unity in the movement towards perfection that He adores. He saves every person in all its concreteness, all that is dear and true, and the perfected fullness and perfection itself, and all the beauty of movement and flowering. In this way, the "historicism" of Christianity justifies not only the existence of the individual, but also his unity with all others and with the whole world.

92. We are in real unity with the people with whom we come into direct contact in one way or another, although through the medium of higher personalities. But no less real (though less) is our unity with those people whom we know only through the intermediary of others, according to other people's words and "impressions." (Intuitionist, think about it). In its essence, this unity is also immediate. True, by virtue of our materialistic habits, it always seems to us that we are not in the person of whom we are told, but only his "image" (§§ 26 f., 34 .e.). But such an assumption is both inconsistent and unfounded. If A, in communicating with B, is dual with him, and B in turn is dual with C, it is necessary to admit the duality of A with C. We cognize the alien in his self-personality; but sometimes it is only in itself and in us, sometimes in itself and in a third that is in us. And it should be remembered that our duality with another person ("direct" or "mediated-immediate" is all the same) cannot be only spiritual: it is always mental-bodily. All this makes the duality of each of us with Jesus somewhat clear (§ 90). We cannot empirically enter into "proper-direct" communion with Him: hear Him, see Him, touch Him; and yet our duality with Him is quite real, as "mediated-immediate." His name is not a sound for us.

Communication or the "temporary duality" of any people rests on mutual self-giving, on the dialectic of being-non-being. Next to this are special types of duality (e.g., loving, §§ 39, 70, 83). However, our duality with Jesus must be strictly distinguished from any other. An "odd" person does not look for its "complement" in Him, similar to the "complement" of an "even" person in marriage, just as a mother does not look for a marriage complement in a son, a brother in a sister or brother. An "even" person relates to Jesus through his duality or through his fullness in marriage and as a dual-married spouse (for this reason the pagan spouse is "sanctified" by the Christian spouse). A dangerous and sinful "delusion" is the understanding of the relationship of the individual to Jesus in the categories of earthly love, which is so characteristic of Catholicism, which is inclined to understand the relationship to the Mother of God in the same way, and which is the subject of psychopathology. Every "soul," being a moment of the One Church and a "daughter" or "younger sister" of the Mother of God, is a "bride" and even a "spouse" of the One Christ. But Christ is her "bridegroom" not in Jesus, who can never be (contrary to the mystical hallucinations of some medieval legends) a "rival" of the earthly bridegroom, but in her chosen one, in her brother Jesus, or in herself as a twofold one. The Holy Spirit, Who perfects every duality, binds the person to Jesus in a different way, forgetfulness of which gives rise to "delusion." — It happens that an "even" person, unable to contain his loneliness, in search of a bride or groom, turns to Jesus or the Mother of God as to the "heavenly bridegroom" or to the "heavenly bride" (instead of the Mother!). She seeks unity (not marriage) with Jesus, but unconsciously seeks unity with the unknown, unnoticed or forgotten by her "betrothed". And through weakness and foolishness it "transfers" to Jesus that which can only refer to the "betrothed," through the duality with whom it must be twofold with Jesus. Hence the blasphemous filth.

Duality with Jesus is the relationship of an odd (dual in themselves) person or Christian couple to the Holy Family (§ 84): to the Mother and the Son. The marital or individual duality is "inside" this relationship and is subordinate to it; and it is fuller and more fundamental than any other. The duality of man with Jesus uniquely and absolutely actualizes man's relationship to the All-One Christ, and through Him to all people, which is revealed in historical development (§ 91). This duality substantiates the existence of the personality, its ideal and activity, certifies the attained overcoming of sinful ultimacy and the hope for the fullness of its overcoming through death and resurrection into transfiguration. If the God-Man Jesus loves a person, giving Himself wholly to him, the one who is loved by Him cannot but be, but must be resurrected and grow to the measure of the perfect stature of Christ. This is not dialectics, but a living religious experience, in which faith is given both the divinity of Jesus and the real duality with Him. "You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. All of you who were baptized into Christ have put on Christ" (Gal. III, 26 el.; cf. I Cor. XV, 12 el.; Rome. VI, 8; Stake. II, 10 el. and III, 3 el.). Of course, we can all become Christ only by grace. But "by grace" does not mean "in the likeness." God "in essence" is not so different from the "Divine by grace" that the latter is outside of God, but in such a way that God's is Divine from time immemorial, and "Divine by grace" is Divinely secondary: as an infinite and deified creature.

"Your thoughts are acceptable, if only you discard the mystical fog: it reminds me of something theosophical. But the way of presentation, the terminology, the language are simply unbearable."

93. In empiricism, the all-unity of the individual is not realizable; and even the empirical personality of Jesus is only a symphony of hierarchically interrelated qualities approaching all-unity (§§ 52 f., 85), although it is possible only as "flowing" from its true, empirically undetectable all-unity. In the same way, in the imperfection of being, true duality with Jesus is not attainable, but only loving agreement with Him, conforming to Him. However, precisely because this co-formation is only an empirical revelation and realization of duality, it is not an external repetition, assimilation, or "imitation." But not "imitatio", but "conformatio Christi".

In order to conform oneself to Christ Jesus, one must know Him, which is possible only through loving self-giving (cf. Chapter III), one must constantly listen to His words, peer into Him, empathize with His suffering; greedily catch the most inconspicuous features. There is nothing "unnecessary" or "unimportant" in Him: everything is equally and infinitely valuable. It is possible to "get to know" Him for a long time and still not know Him at all, to be far from Him. But then one of His words suddenly wounds your heart – it was spoken for you – and the miracle of all-unity takes place: His entire image, He Himself, immediately rises before you. Features that have hitherto been disparate agree of themselves. He comes to life, is resurrected in us. And you already know infinitely more about Him than you know. You know whether this or that tradition tells the truth or falsehood about Him, whether He could have done so or not. You know what He would have done in "that" case, though He never had such a case; you know how you, conforming yourself to Him, should act, for He is already with you in the most authentic way. By really accepting Him into yourself, you conform to Him, not in order to "repeat" what He has done and said, but in order to freely and joyfully "continue" His work in the conditions of your existence. The O lives in us, embracing the whole world, spreading out everywhere, continuing "Ours". And we ourselves live as if He lived in us. And it is already clear why "His yoke is sweet and His burden is light." Seek, always seek, tirelessly search for what words He has spoken for you and for you, for there are such words. But beware of being deceived and remember. "Near the transfigured Jesus was not only Elijah, the prophetic spirit, but also Moses, the founder of the Holy Scriptures. And Jesus was transfigured before James, Peter, and John, who were revered as pillars (styloi) of His Church.

But all this is only the ultimate basis, the true duality, which we belittle in empiricism. He who conforms himself to Christ Jesus harmonizes and hierarchically arranges his personal being, just as the moments of the person of Jesus are coordinated. In Him, self-giving of Himself to God is primary, and through God to His brothers and to the whole world. From this "flow" all the "virtues" of Jesus (§ 86), "composing" His Person. Conformity with Him consists in a different individualization of the Universal Christ, by Him, Jesus, who is most perfectly individualized, in the realization under different conditions and in a different concreteness of what He has already accomplished, in the new activity that is set before us in accordance with the spirit of Him. There are no general rules or regulations, nothing abstract, given in advance, for it is not a matter of slavish imitation, but of free, fraternal filial co-education. In the words and deeds of Jesus there is no definite indication of what we should do in this or that case, for he is jealous of our freedom; but in every word and in every deed of Him there is an answer to him who asks Him with love. In the same way, it is impossible to find and should not seek indications of Jesus' attitude to the tasks of our personal, social, and political life, to our states, wars, etc. All this must be resolved by us ourselves in the most inner conformity with Him (§§ 66, 21, 75).

For all the reality of our relationship to Jesus, it is "mediated" (§ 92). Our duality with Him is duality in all-unity (§ 7). On the one hand, duality with Him naturally becomes unity with people, who are also dual with Him. On the other hand, we always communicate with Him through the intermediary of others. In this way, a hierarchy is established according to the degree of mediation and the degree of completeness of real communication. This is the hierarchical system of humanity, fundamentally the Universal Christ, and in opposition to our creation to His Divinity, the Body of Christ or the Church. In its imperfection, humanity (and in it the entire cosmos) is not yet all one in itself and with Christ Jesus, but is only becoming Christ, approaching to the fullness of the Church's existence to varying degrees, dividing into many personalities, hierarchically arranged in themselves and in their relationships. To a small extent, the Church is expressed in all that exists. Imperceptibly and uninterruptedly, it passes to its fullness in the religious existence of mankind, from it to religiosity, which vaguely perceives Christ, anticipates and waits for Jesus. It is fullest of all in those who consciously feel and have the right to confess themselves members of the Body of Christ and who are most really connected with Jesus Christ by the holy sacraments. This earthly Orthodox Church, being the highest individualization and empirical focus of the Perfect Church, is not separated by a clear boundary from other, less perfect individualizations of the Perfect, from the potential-ecclesiastical (§5): so that it is impossible to say where it is not, although it is possible to say where it is. Empirically, the fullness of the Church is no longer realizable, because it has not been realized. Only a greater approximation to it is attainable, however, not by external cutting off everything less ecclesiastical, but only by completing and perfecting it. For in all that exists there is its own specific and irreplaceable, but only potentially ecclesiastical and therefore necessary in the fullness of the Church. Each of its individualizations, no matter how imperfect it may be, not only detracts from the Church's Truth, but is also a potentially special Person of the Church, which cannot but be perfect in the Church. Thus Israel must become a Judeo-Christian church, not by betraying its law, but by obeying it and rejecting only what is known to be erroneous. The misfortune of historical Christianity is that it still does not exist, and that the baptism of the Jews is connected with a depersonalizing renunciation of their law. Thus, the "pagan barren church" must from itself, from its quality, and not outwardly adopting the Jewish or any other foreign law, become true and fruitful. This is the meaning of the words of Paul, the "apostle of the Gentiles," who did not abolish the law for the Jews.

There is no sharp line between the Church proper and the world. The work of the Church is also carried out outside the visible fence of the Church, for it sprouts like a seed (§§ 48, 57). Who can appropriate to himself the mind of the Lord, who alone knows all His faithful and alone sees the soul of the crucified thief? Can we say who and how else will come to Christ, that is, already with Him in His Church? Nevertheless, the establishment of the Church is also the cutting off of the saved from the stagnant in sin, for it can be said where the Church is. Empirically, the Church defines and separates the world from herself, gathering in herself not only "internally" – by a true connection with Jesus Christ, but also "externally" (although she does not judge the external) – by the sacraments, hierarchy, and way of life. The sacrament of baptism, in which, through the realization of the approaching Kingdom of Heaven and repentance (which is universally realized both in baptism and in the sacrament of repentance), the absolution of sins takes place, i.e. the overcoming of ultimacy (§ 87), removes man from the sinful limitation of the world (§§ 78 ff, 85 ff, 71). In baptism "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." The Holy Spirit descends upon man as upon the newborn of God through the redemptive death of Christ, the Holy Spirit who gives life and perfects him, and man acquires personal existence and the foundation of his spirituality and soul-body, which is confirmed by the naming and the sacrament of chrismation (dissolved with baptism in Catholicism! cf. § 44 f.). Having immersed himself in the element sanctified by the Holy Spirit and having risen from it, man begins his new life in God, that life which the baptism of fire gives to those who have not accepted the "baptism of water unto repentance." "John answered everyone: 'I baptize you with water, but the One Who is stronger than me is coming... He will baptize you with the Holy Ghost and fire. His shovel is in His hand, and He will cleanse His threshing floor, and gather the wheat into His garner, and the chaff He will burn with unquenchable fire" (Lk. III, 16 el.; Mf. III, 11 el.; cf. I Cor. III, 12 el. — instead of the traditional comparison with Acts. I, 5: — «… whoever has a work burned will suffer loss; however, he himself will be saved, but as if from fire." Wed. §§ 77–79, 74, 60).

If the Perfect Church is the all-unity of those who have perfected their individualizations, among whom the earthly Church of Christ is the first of all, then this earthly Church is also a symphony of its individualizations. It is not an indifferent unity, not an abstract "general" obtained minus everything individual: Byzantine, Roman Catholic, Protestant-Germanic, etc., not an "international", a dead thought of the living dead. Having arisen empirically on the day of Pentecost, affirmed on the "third pillars" – James, Peter, John – it is first of all individualized as "catholic and apostolic" in the Ancient Universal Church. After the separation of heresies from it, and especially after the proud separation of the Church of Rome (§ 89), does it continue its earthly existence, on the one hand and most importantly, in the truly and only Universal Church, in the Orthodox Church, by the main and primary individualization? which is now the Russian Church, the Church of St. Andrew the First-Called, on the other hand, in the churches that have separated from the fullness of unity and are therefore sinfully diminished, among which the Church of Rome rises. The Church is empirically incomplete and limited, remaining immaculately universal only in Orthodoxy. However, all its individualizations are equally necessary, although they must overcome their diminution into a™ spirit of unity and love: not by the establishment of an abstract unity or the subordination of the many who are impersonal to one of all, but by agreement, by the conciliar principle. But the local churches are also real only as symphonic all-unities: as conciliar personalities. Where two or three are truly gathered in the name of Christ Jesus, there He is in the midst of them, and in Him is the Universal Church, her special person, and herself. In a sense, every Orthodox expresses the Universal Church, which is why even one St. Maximus the Confessor could defend the Universal Truth.