That is why the Eastern Church in the Liturgy of the Transfiguration notes that the breakthrough of Divinity on Tabor is not only the individual illumination of the humanity of Jesus, but also the deification of the entire human nature. Christianity proclaims that deification is the ultimate goal of man and his happiness, and that people in this state, as stated in the catechism approved by the Council of Trent, will resemble gods more than men ("potius dii quam homines viderentur"). [65] The transfiguration of Jesus on Tabor was precisely the beginning of such deification. The Byzantine liturgy of the feast of the Transfiguration often repeats that Christ "on Mount Tabor, having changed Adam's blackened nature, enlightened and made God" (Little Vespers)[66], for sin had blackened and darkened human nature. "In all Adam, O Christ, Thou didst clothe the blackened, having changed, Thou didst enlighten the nature of old, and by the change of Thy form Thou didst make God" (Matins, Ode 3). [67]

      According to the Eastern Church, the deification of human nature occurs when the Divine prototype violated and crippled by sin is restored in man. At Great Vespers, the Eastern Church sings that Christ was transfigured before the Apostles, "manifesting the splendor of the principle of goodness" (litiya). [68] However, the prototype of man is none other than Christ Himself (more on this later). After all, in Him and by Him everything and everything was created, which means that man is also created. The prototype of man shines in Christ in its primordial power and becomes the pledge of universal deification ("pignus futurae gloriae"). At the moment of the transfiguration, the Divine power deified the human nature of Christ, and this same power will deify our nature, for our nature is the same as it is in Christ. The divine prototype of humanity in Christ is manifested quite clearly, and it will also be manifested in us. The event on Tabor is the appearance of the prototype of man in Christ and thereby an indication that this prototype will be finally restored in all mankind. Without a doubt, the path of the deification of mankind is the path that Christ walked. And this path leads through death and resurrection. In fact, our hope of being deified begins with Tabor, for it was the Transfiguration that showed and confirmed that human nature, as the Byzantine liturgy says, is worthy of Divine glory (cf. Great Vespers, troparion). And since human nature in Christ is the same as in all people, the deification of humanity in Christ indicates that our nature is also worthy of divine glory.

      But it is not only the deification of man that is indicated by the transfiguration of Jesus on Tabor. In the event on Tabor, the Eastern Church also sees the beginning of the transfiguration of the cosmos. Western Christians have long been accustomed to perceive the Grace of the Lord in a moral and psychological sense, and to limit the sphere of its influence to the life and being of man. Little is said in the West about the transformation of nature as a whole, about the transformation of the universe. And in theology this idea has not been developed either. It is usually mentioned only in connection with the bodily resurrection at the end of time. Meanwhile, in the Eastern Church, the transfiguration of the cosmos is one of the main Christian truths. The Eastern Church sees confirmation of this truth in the Transfiguration of Christ on Tabor. The Byzantine liturgy has created a multitude of images with which it attempts to express and make this truth understandable and emotionally effective.

      According to the teaching of the Eastern Church, the light of Tabor is not some purely psychological thing that affects only emotionally. It is not an inner illumination, but an ontological event that affects the whole of being, embracing the whole of nature. The divine power manifested in the humanity of Christ transformed not only His humanity, but also the entire world connected with man. "For the sun, clarifying the earth, sets, but Christ, having shone with glory on the mountain, enlightened the world,"[69] – prays the Eastern Church at Little Vespers on the feast of the Transfiguration. The rays of the Divinity of Christ spread to the cosmos, so it is also renewed. At Great Vespers, during the exit to the litiya, the Eastern Church sings that Christ sanctified the entire universe with His light (cf. the litiya). [70] It was the creative Light of the Father and the Light of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit, "Who instructs all creation with Light" (Matins, Luminary)[71]. In the presence of the transfigured Christ, not only man rejoices – "All joy is fulfilled today: Christ is transfigured before the disciples" (According to the 50th Psalm). [72]

      Thus, Christ's connection with the world is not only anthropological, but also cosmological. The Logos, by assuming human nature, thereby also accepted the content of the cosmos, which is hidden in the structure of man and is united with the Personality of the Logos. The divine power that shone on Tabor changes not only man, but also the natural world. Characteristically, in folk spiritual poems, Mount Tabor is called the mother of all mountains, for it is here that the birth of the new world begins, the new land of which the New Testament speaks (cf. 2 Pet. 3:13; Rev. 21:1). On Tabor, the overcoming of the dark "crust of things" begins, which hides from us the Light of existence – God; here begins the appearance of the Logos as the radiant basis of being. Christ, by announcing His connection with the earth, showed that He holds the fate not only of mankind, but also of the entire cosmos and leads them to the fullness of being.

4. THE PRIMACY OF DIVINITY IN CHRIST

Christ is the incarnate Word of the Father, He was sent into humanity for the redemption of the world. He lives not only as a man, but through human nature is united with the entire created world, which He frees "from slavery to corruption" and leads "into the freedom of the glory of the children of God" (Romans 8:21). Christ's sojourn in the Holy Spirit. The Trinity, His relationship to humanity and the cosmos, are all familiar to the West, although perhaps not all of these aspects are equally emphasized. Thus, in the dogmatic sense, the liturgy of the feast of the Transfiguration does not reveal to us any special truths that are not known to us.

      However, if we talk about religious experience, then the images of the liturgy of the Transfiguration feast do contain something new. In creating these images and symbols, the Eastern Church introduced into them not only her dogmatic concepts, her teaching, but also her experience of Christ, which is significantly different from the experience of Him by the Western Church. In the Byzantine liturgy of the feast of the Transfiguration we see Christ illuminated by Divine light, enveloped in Divine glory, changing everything by His Divine power. This is Kyrios[73] – the Lord in His majesty and glory. True, He is the True Man and is therefore connected with the ontological depths of our nature. But first of all, He is the True God, the Second Person of the Holy Spirit. The infinite and beginningless Light of the three-solar All-Godhead. In the experience of the Eastern Church, the Divinity of Christ, as the basis of His Person, is manifested so strongly that even before His resurrection His divinity illuminates, transforms, adores human nature and thereby frees it from the laws of human life, making it a likeness of the Godhead. The shining Kyrios – this image – is the main one in the liturgy of the Transfiguration and it is he who first of all attracts attention when studying this liturgy.

      The Eastern Church calls itself the Church of the Resurrection (others also call it that – A.M.). This is a beautiful, deeply meaningful name! However, we often forget that the Eastern Church considers the Transfiguration on Tabor to be the beginning of the resurrection and thereby extends the state of resurrection to the entire life of Christ. The state of resurrection has always been inherent in Him, it has always been His own. It did not arise only after His victory over death on Easter morning. It's just that this state was imperceptible before. The Transfiguration is a reflection of the resurrection, it is the proclamation of the "salvific resurrection," as the Byzantine liturgy calls it. This suggests that both of these events – the Transfiguration and the Resurrection – are essentially one and the same, namely, they are a breakthrough of the Divine power in human nature. In Christ, as in the Divine Logos, this power has always been contained. Christ always lived in the state of the resurrected. However, the darkness of earthly existence hid this state from people. But on Tabor the darkness of nature dissipated and Christ shone in the same way as on the morning of His resurrection. Thus, the resurrection, as the first principle of the Eastern Church, lies in the very foundations of this Church. The Eastern Church is the Church of the risen Christ, and not because it clearly singles out and solemnly celebrates the very event of the resurrection, but precisely because it sees the state of Christ's resurrection not only in His heavenly glory, but also in His earthly history. It is not the feast of Pascha itself, as the main feast of the Eastern Church, that makes it the Church of the risen Christ, but it is precisely the extension of the transfigured state of Jesus to His entire life and the position of this state as the basis of religious experience. In the light of this experience, Christ is always the Great Lord, clothed with power and glory. Therefore, it does not matter whether we perceive Him to be sitting at the right hand of the Father or walking along the shore of the Lake of Gennesaret.

      Here we must sincerely admit that it is precisely this image of Christ, if approached from a dogmatic point of view, that has a very deep meaning, and if it is approached from a psychological point of view, then this image is extraordinarily attractive. Every historical image of Jesus of Nazareth pales before the face of the transfigured Kyrios. Therefore, it is not surprising that theologians of the Eastern Church and students of the Holy Scriptures do not pay special attention to the historical Christ and do not feel special interest in him. In our time, especially in Protestant theology, a distinction is made between the historical Jesus and the kerygmatic Jesus, that is, between the Christ in history and Christ as the Word and "finisher of the faith." Such a distinction is unknown to the Eastern Church: it considers it a misunderstanding and even an absurdity. Even the very expression "historical Christ" more than once caused angry irritation. The Russian religious philosopher V. Ern (1881-1917) indignantly asks: "Why not just Christ? Is there another Christ besides the Christ of history?" And then he answers: "Yes, there is, but not for believers." [75] Developing this idea, W. Ern emphasizes that "for people who recognize Christ as a simple man, there are undoubtedly two Christs. The only real one, whose image is revealed by the results of historical criticism, is the Jewish rabbi, devoid of any halo of miraculousness and supernaturalism; the other is the Christ of believers, legendary, not real, decorated with fiction. And for these people – the historical Christ really has a certain meaning – as the opposite of another Christ, not historical, i.e. not real. In the mouth of a believer, the word "historical Christ" is absurdity or blasphemy." [76] But the historical Jesus, active in Palestine in the time of Herod and crucified in Jerusalem by the decision of Pontius Pilate, is the same Christ of faith. The historical Jesus became the Christ of faith, for He was resurrected. The resurrection made the historical Christ eternal. On the other hand, the historicity of Jesus made the resurrection itself a reality. If the resurrection had not taken place, then Jesus of Nazareth would have long been forgotten, as would many of his contemporaries. But if Jesus had not been a historical figure, then the resurrection would have remained only a myth, like those found among many peoples whose gods die and are resurrected. Thus, whoever distinguishes between the historical Jesus and the kerygmatic Jesus does not take into account the intrinsic connection between historicity and resurrection. For the Eastern Church, however, this connection, which she has always emphasized, has always been both understandable and indisputable, and therefore Christ has always remained whole for her, not divided.

      The Eastern Church avoided the temptation to consider the historicity of Christ as insignificant for faith, which is very characteristic of the Protestant so-called mythological theory today. Nor was it carried away by the scientific-historical method of studying the Gospel narratives in order to gain a deeper knowledge of the Person of Christ and His work. The Eastern Church has always known that Christ is a historical personage—He was born Mary in Bethlehem, grew up in Nazareth, taught in Palestine, and died on the cross in Jerusalem. However, the Eastern Church has always considered the historical figure of Jesus in the light of the resurrection. She sees in him the Transfigured Lord, in whom the Divine Logos has become visible, but who, however, has drawn the whole earthly life of Jesus into the realm of mystery. That is why this life was hidden from the uninitiated eyes of science. In the life of Jesus, science sees only a series of bare facts, but it does not and cannot see their ultimate meaning, without which even the most accurate and objective description of these facts will not help to understand and reveal Christ. After all, it is important for us not only what Christ did, but also why He did it, for only this "why" can tell us who Christ is. And no secular science can penetrate into this "why," for the deep basis of all the deeds of Christ is hidden in His divine mission, which is inaccessible to science.

      Therefore, history, being one of the secular sciences, can say little about Christ, as well as psychology. Just as the psychology of Christ is impossible, since in the depths of His Person lies the mystery of the Son of God, which makes all psychology absurd, so the earthly history of the life of Jesus is impossible. N. Berdyaev (1874-1948) drew our attention to this impossibility, preceding R. Guardini by as much as ten years. "The absolute reality of the God-Man Jesus Christ is given in the sacred tradition of the Church, in the spiritual experience of the Church. It is only within the Church that the whole face of Jesus Christ can be seen, in which Jesus and Christ, man and God, cannot be separated. The absolute reality, the integral face of Jesus Christ, is not visible in external empirical reality, in historical empiricism. That is why the problem of Jesus Christ cannot be solved by means of historical science... The earthly biography of the Son of God and the Son of Man cannot be written on the basis of objective scientific historical data alone," for "the absolute reality of Jesus Christ and His integral face is revealed in a different order of being, not a natural historical, but a supernatural historical, spiritual order... Christ appeared in history, but the magnitude of His appearance was not visible in history, in its external process. The dimensions of His appearance are visible only in the Church, which is the mysterious presence of a different order of being in our order of being." [78] In other words, Christ rises above history; history does not exhaust Him. Historical science is not able to convey His life and work in such a way that the whole and true Christ appears before us. The divinity of Christ escapes the gaze of the historian, and without this the image of Christ becomes not only incomplete, but distorted and therefore incorrect. Therefore, he who supposes that he can embrace Christ and explain Him with the help of historical science distorts Him, for he transfers His Person to the earthly level and thus deprives Him of His divinity.

      That is why the Eastern Church does not trust purely secular studies of the life and person of Jesus. After all, it is very characteristic that Vl. Solovyov, in his "Short Story of the Antichrist" (1900), allows the Antichrist to establish a World Institute for the free study of the Holy Scriptures. It may at once seem that the establishment of such an institution should be an important religious event, but in essence this is the idea of the Antichrist, for in it there is a hidden intention to exclude Christ God from the Holy Scriptures and to engage in the study of Jesus, but Jesus only as a historical man, which for the Antichrist is not only desirable, but even necessary. [79] It is precisely this distrust of secular studies that can explain why in the Eastern Church the branch of theology dealing with the interpretation and interpretation of the meaning of Holy Scripture or exegesis has not been developed as widely as it was in Catholicism and Protestantism. The Russian religious philosopher G. Fedotov (1886-1951) asserted that "until now, Orthodoxy has not had its own serious and strictly armed exegetical tradition." [80] The transfigured Kyrios sends his light also to the Holy Scriptures, and in this light the Holy Scriptures appear inexhaustibly deep, like "a window into another world, from which the rays and sounds of the Kingdom of God break through." [81] The Orthodox prefer to read or listen to this Holy Book during the service, rather than to study it in their offices, for the Eastern Church does not expect anything new from these studies that would help her to know Christ better and to love Him even more.

      The radiant face of the transfigured Kyrios raises a question of extraordinary importance: how does the Eastern Church experience the suffering humanity of Christ? After all, Christ is not only the transfigured and resurrected Kyrios, but also the crucified Martyr. So how does the Eastern Church show precisely this side of Christ's existence? It is often heard that in the Eastern Church Christ pays almost no attention to the suffering, that it is concentrated only on the risen Christ, Who by His Divine power overcame suffering and death. This general attitude is also confirmed by prominent representatives of Orthodoxy. "The cult of the humanity of Christ is alien to the tradition of the Eastern Church," says Vl. Lossky, or, rather, this deified humanity is clothed here in the same glorious image as the disciples saw Christ on Mount Tabor." [82] This means that the Eastern Church experiences and comprehends the humanity of Christ in the light of the Transfiguration. There is no doubt that the Eastern Church has every reason for this, for the humanity of Christ is truly transformed. But even this does not give an answer to the question of what significance the suffering and death of Christ has in this transfigured situation. Are these extremely important events really insignificant and insignificant for the Eastern Church?