Alexandermen (![[info]](http://p-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} alexandermen) wrote,@ 2007-11-24 08:18:00 |
|
II-25 From Conversations Wtth Fr Alexander Men
The following selections are taken from interviews and
Question & Answer sessions with Fr Men during the last
2 or 3 years of his life. Selected and translated by
Steve Griffin from "Kultura i dukhovnoe voskhozhdenie
(Moscow 1992)" I am copying these in and this notice
will remain up until it is complete.
THE HUMAN QUEST
What is the meaning of life?
The question is simple,brief and clear. Made in the image and likeness
of the Creator, man finds meaning in life as he draws near to his
Prototype. This is both the meaning and the goal. You see when
we open up the Kingdom within us, Eternity begins to speak in us.
And then we raise ourselves above vain pursuits, we cease to be
slaves of circumstance, and we bravely stand against misfortunes
which bring us down. This is not because we're indifferent or
cold. The Christian isn't a stoic; he can suffer, but endures his
sufferings through God's strength and not his own.
In this way the meaning and goal of life is a forward and
upward progression. It is not complacency,as some might
think. We think of complacency as a rose-colored attitude towards
our surroundings,when we close our eyes to evil and think that
everything is wonderful. That's not how it is. Man must understand
the tragic nature of life; he must look upon this tragic nature
with his eyes open and at the same time remain standing--indeed
not only remain standing, but move ever onwards and upwards. Our
life becomes meaningful only as we move upwards,despite the
fact that physically and mentally we descend as we grow older
and weaker.
Do you find the notion of self-perfection attractive?
Christianity takes a rather skeptical attitude towards the idea
of self-perfection. We believe that man's growth comes about
not only through his own efforts, but by Grace, which is the power
given to us from above. You can read about this in St Paul's letters
to the Galatians and Romans.
What is 'faith without religion'?
The faith of a non-religious person is unconscious,almost instinctive.
While denying Ultimate Meaning to existence,that person still tries
to live as though that Meaning did exist. Religious faith is the soul's
openness to ultimate or cosmic Reason,universal love, and to God,while
atheistic faith puts something limited and lower in God's place,such
as the blind forces of nature,social utopias, political leaders etc.
Such faith has been called idolatry since olden times, and has
invariably led to ruin because idols cannot,in fact, take the place
of the Creator.
CHRISTIANITY AND THE MODERN WORLD
In your view how should Christianity relate to the contemporary world?
I don't sympathize with those efforts attempted in the West to create
a 'secular Christianity.' The way of compromise associated with
Bishop [John A.T.] Robinson and other "modernists" has nothing
modern about it. It's all very naive and superficial. People become
charmed and deafened by the spirit of the age, quite simply. This is
hardly new, and will pass like any other fad. On the other hand, I
cannot regard the Church as some relic of the past. As Christians
we're in the modern world--this governs the entire program. Sp
we should be contemporary people, in the good sense of the word,
and not suffer from nostalgia for the past, but remain real
Christians in spirit,thought and life. This is difficult. But it's the
honorable task given by God to this generation.
Do you think that technological civilization is a
threat to Christianity?
It's not a threat to Christianity, but to people in general. The
Gospel,as in all ages, remains Christ's eternal call to us. The
Church was not founded by people. The One who founded it said that
difficult times of struggle would come. But he is Victor over this
world, and in this we find the guarantee of hope. The stone on which
the Church is founded cannot be moved. The task which Christ gave to
the world cannot be accomplished by any one civilization or group of
civilizations, for the Gospel ideal is only partially brought about
as one civilization yields to another. That's why I think that the
history of the Church has only just begun. We are still children,
despite the ages that have gone by since Pentecost. After all, these
two thousand years to God and to history?
Are you optimistic about the future?
I always quote Albert Schweitzer here, because his words are very
appropriate for today: my knowledge is pessimistic(I don't think
this requires elaboration in our day),but my faith is optimistic. I
don't derive this optimism from facts, but simply from the conviction
that the origin of goodness is creative and divine. Evil is a caricature
of God's creation:everything that torments or has ever tormented
humanity--totalitarianism,fanaticism,cha
stagnation,sloth,self-conceit,the lack of desire to create(but instead
cleverly to redistribute)--all of this will in the end burst like a soap-
bubble. Even though these illnesses have always been around and
continue to be reborn, they are still dead. Today, when social tension
has reached a nearly critical point, I wouldn't want to give people any
reason to suspect that I'm under some illusion--I'm one without
illusions. But I believe that Divine Providence will not allow us to
perish, and call on all who have God's spark in their hearts not to
yield to terror and panic. I am convinced that we shall, in the end,
make it through these times. We've seen wars and catastrophes
before; we'll make it through these trials too.
I would add this: I feel that the torments of our day are not the
birth pangs of some new world--that is a fiction--but simply
the birth of normal human life,which has been denied us.
As an Orthodox believer what is your attitude towards other
confessions?
My attitude was not formed immediately. After considerable thought,
interaction and research I've come to be convinced that the Church
is in essence one and that divisions have come about through the sin
and narrow-mindedness of Christians. This sad fact is one of the
greatest reasons for crises in Christianity. Only through brotherly unity
and respect for diverse forms of church life can we hope to find
strength, peace and God's blessing once again.
Can divisions in the Christian Church be overcome?
Over the centuries of division many differences have accumulated
in the areas of doctrine, canon and worship. But I'm convinced that the
schism between East and West is bound up with political, cultural and
national conflicts. Today only a miracle could bring about real unity.
Bur it is still possible to overcome misunderstanding and aggressive
attitudes towards one another. If the members of different communities
got to know one another better, in time this will bear good fruit.
CHRISTIANITY IN RUSSIA
In your view does Russia have a specific vocation?
The Bible teaches that nations which play an important role in history
have a vocation given to them from above. I think that this applies ot
Russia. Chaadaev thought that Russia's vocation was to synthesize
the depth and contemplative way of the East with the dynamism of
the West. This thought is very close to my heart.
What role do you think religion will play in the life of the Russian
people in the years to come? Do you have any particular speculations?
Here we don't even need to speculate. Everything is so obvious.
Even the cave man connected his life and culture with his sense of
the Eternal and his orientation towards a Higher existence. The first
attempts to depict the Universe, in fact were connected with
religious cults. After all one didn't sit there in the caves and just mess
along with art: these were ritual drawings. In one form or another
religion has always been inseparable from humanity; it has been
the soul of humanity. One need not think that something unprecedented
has now taken place, that anew form of humanity has been born.
Nothing has changed! Rather ,the old humanity needs a chance to
develop normally. We don't need to invent some new form!
Human culture has its own natural course of development,
with advances and retrogressions. But when men have tried
to snatch God from human minds, whether in Nazi Germany,here,
in China or wherever, an idol has come quickly to fill the void.
This shows that man,culture and spirit cannot be severed from the
Eternal. Otherwise everything becomes worthless,and we begin
to create and idolatrous system which eventually collapses. In our
country,thank God, idolatry is on a decrease.
I think that we live in a time when the hope of an earthly
paradise without Heave is dying. In fact it is probably dead.
What has changed in the Russian Orthodox Church since Gorbachev
came to power?
Gorbachev brought about a revolution in the realm of Church-State
relations. The Bolshevik system was conceived as one with absolute
authoritative power. But absolute authority is possible only when there
is no other authority. That;'s why institutions which represented other,
specifically spiritual, authorities needed to be destroyed from the start.
For this reason the regime,right at the beginning,was anti-religious--
indeed militantly anti-religious--and did not change in its relationship,
essentially,throughout the entire seventy years. But Gorbachev
resolutely changed the course of things. Its an historical fact. Not only
details were changed, but the history of the Church in our country.
How do you react to the notion of 'Patriotism'?
I disagree with Tolstoy when he says that patriotism is evil. To love
one's home,street,city, and country is natural and wonderful. But to do
this we don't have to belittle other countries,cultures or peoples.
In a multi-national state it's particularly important that we learn to
respect one another. I find any form of chauvinism repulsive, very
unpleasant. In any case, it's antithetical to the heart of Christianity
and the precepts of Christ and his apostles. I pray that patriots
of all the nations in our country will flee from chauvinism and
internally overcome it.
What currents are there to be found now in the Orthodox Church?
The conservative,current which sharply opposes the West, relates to
all manner of reform with hostility,idealizes the past,and takes from
history the most rigid(in my view Medieval)patterns, is quite
powerful,and very popular among certain circles(in Western language
we could refer to this current as 'the right' because of its right
wing inclination) You might ask,why is this so in the Church? One of
the reasons is artificial selection. All the living,experimental
movements within the Church were mercilessly destroyed over the course
of several generations. If a bishop manifested a spirit of freedom,
independence or experimentation, he was immediately re-assigned to the
provinces or simply retired.
So what was true of society was true of the Church?
That's right. That's why the most conservative remained, survived, and
multiplied. The KGB liked them,as did the bureaucrats. It's no secret
that the authorities liked the Church. It was a fragment of hoary
antiquity, a museum.
In the 60s there were free progressive members of the clergy, but they
were pushed aside. Bishops were conservative. Today some bishops are more
open,but the common clergy is more conservative. In any case the
conservative tendency reigns throughout, and liberals are afraid of it.
Do you believe in the future of Orthodoxy in Russia?
Absolutely. But it seems to me that we should not swim with the current,
but rather work seriously and frankly on all problems which time places
before us. Present conditions are complcated, of course, but at the
same time it's hard to deny that we need to have another look at some
things in our church practice, canons and theology for the sake of
greater depth. I'm not alone here:quite a
number of bishops,priests and lay people share this view.
Do you see signs of renewal in Russian theology at present?
It seems to me that renewal began about a hundred years ago ,when
the old methodology (the so-called "scholastic theology") ceased to
be satisfactory. At that time Vladimir Soloviev pioneered a movement
which in our century came to be led by prominent and diverse individuals
such as Florensky and Tareev, Berdyaev, Bulgakov,Nesmelov, and
Fedotov. But at that time their fresh and probing thought did not find
a place in the Church,specifically in its academic tradition. That tradition
was unable to re-structure itself,and the theological schools were
subsequently closed and the tradition was interrupted. In my view what
we most need now is to return to the works of that remarkable Pleiad
which make up what has come to be called the "Russian Religious
Renaissance of the Early 20th Century." This will stimulate not so much
renewal,but development and greater depth in theology. We possess a
vast spiritual inheritance whose complete extent we can yet scarcely
imagine. This is true even for professional scholars writing about
Florensky or Bulgakov ,whose legacy is made up of literally dozens
of volumes.
How likely is reforem for the Russian Orthodox Church and its
parishioners?
First I'll say a word about language, because for many parishioners it is
unintelligible. This makes the situation quite a serious one. As it
happens, at the beginning of this century Patriarch Sergei indicated
a way in which this problem could be resolved by editing the Church
Slavonic liturgical texts in such a way as to make the language more
like contemporary Russian. One can,after all, make Church Slavonic
approximate the Russian language,and such editing and careful
'modernization' is quite admissible. When it comes to Church reforms,
certain changes that represent more of a return to ancient church practice
might be possible. I don't consider it my place to make any pronouncements
on church reforms, but my personal opinion on one thing is that the
Royal Doors should always remain open during the liturgy--opening them is
no violation of dogma. Liturgy is corporate prayer,a corporate sacrament.
If the Royal Doors are closed,then the altar and laypeople are divided,
and the very essence of worship is violated. But such questions should
be dealt with by the Council and the Patriarch of course.
But,I repeat, the dramatic history of the Russian Orthodox Church over
the last decades has not been suited to reforms. They were completely
inappropriate. Here we recall the reform efforts of those who sought
renewal in the 20's and the tragic consequences those efforts had for
the Russian Church: namely schism and discord. These reforms were
hasty and insufficiently considered. Their translations of liturgical
texts(I've had a look at them)are extremely unsuccessful and their
personal tactics and position justifiably evoked much unfavorable
criticism. They compromised the idea of Church renewal, so that the word
'renewal' itself became offensive. For this reason they carry great
historical blame.
However,I'm not inclined to absolutize the 'conservative' Russian Church
tendency. Part of the Russian Orthodox Church is truly devoted to certain
forms and will never agree to changing them. But this by no means
includes all believers. If that were the case there wouldn't be a
million Baptists in Russia today. This means that there is a specific
psychological type within our believing population that is ready to
adopt the most radical changes in ritual and outward forms,with a view to
returning to earlier Christian practice.
HIS WORK AS PASTOR AND PRIEST
Could you say something about yourself and the difficulties and joy
of your work as a pastor?
I received a Christian upbringing in the home. But if that were the
extent of it, faith would be for me just a way into traditions,something
like recollections of my childhood. Every person with a religious
upbringing at one moment or another encounters God for himself
and makes a choice. This happened to me in my early school years.
In school I did not experience any oppression,although many of my
classmates and teachers knew that I was a believer. That's why
they didn't require me to joint the Young Pioneers or the Komsomol.
It was the same in university, where everyone knew that I was
Christian. But in the fifth year the administration decided to get rid
of me, and they asked the military studies department to 'fail' me on
the state examinations. When the military studies department
refused, I was simply dismissed for 'failure to attend lectures.' But I
was hoping to enter seminary in any case, once I had fulfilled my
service requirement after graduation. My dismissal simply sped up
the process,so that within a month Archbishop Makani ordained me
as a priest. Until that time I had sung and read in church,and studied
theology and Church regulations on my own.
I have experienced no shortage of difficulties and troubles
but I don't want to talk about them. When I'm asked, I say that my
spiritual mentors spent dozens of years in prisons and labor camps.
Compared to what they went through, threatening letters,searches,
interrogations, and attacks in the media re not such a heavy ordeal.
In those days there was a lot to endure in any case, and I was no
exception , and nothing more. I didn't have to make a compromise,
for which I can only be thankful to God.
Among my parishioners there were many profound and interesting
people ,such as the famous psychiatrist D.E. Melekhov, who directed
a clinic;M.V.Yudina the pianist; N.Y. Mandelshtam not only came
to church regularly, but lived in my home during the summer months;
A.Galich was baptized in our church. But I would rather not say any
more about them than what I've already mentioned. That belongs to the
realm of the spiritual life, and, just as there are clinical secrets, so
there are pastoral ones.
I've experienced a great many joys in my life:liturgy,prayer,people
whom I love,pastoral work,books,fellowship,research,art,natur
the list is endless. I always thank God for his endless gifts to us.
These gifts are magnificent and ,perhaps, unmerited.
I understand that your ethnic background is Jewish. Don't you think
that in becoming a Christian you have cut yourself off from your people?
Not at all. I consider my membership in God's chosen race an unmerited gift,
a sign of additional responsibility before God. He called Israel to serve Him,
and Israel's history is sacred history, and it continues today. If the majority of
my fellow Jews have not accepted Christianity, that is just the next chapter in
the drama which is unfolding between God and the world. It began in Bible times,
and it is taking place among other peoples too, many of whom have partially
left Christianity. I am happy that with my weak efforts I can serve the God of
Israel and his Church. For me the Old and New Testaments are inseparable. In
any case ,that's an indisputable argument in Christian theology.
As a Christian and simply by nature, I find myself extremely alienated by any
form of chauvinism. I value and love the culture in which I was raised and which
has given me so much, but I will not forget for a moment the responsibility and
vocation laid upon me as a member of the Jewish race.
What is the value of confessing our sins before a priest?
We're quite cunning with ourselves, and always find an excuse for
everything. When there's a witness(and a priest is only a witness)
we have to carry out our first redemptive,as it were,spiritual feat:
we have to name our sin. This can be so excruciating and repulsive that
we would sooner repent of a thousand sins to ourselves than to tell a
priest (or especially a friend) the truth about ourselves. And then
we don't tell it straight, we speak in interjections or empty words,
and what's important is obscured. The natural desire to appear better
than you are is often at work as well as the natural fear that the
priest will think less of you once he knows of your sin.
But it's not true, my friends. I have hundreds of friends who make
their confessions before me,and their sins have not in the least kept
me from loving them. I simply forget their sins; they completely slip
straight out of my consciousness.
But then,believe me,satan hasn't managed to come up with anything
ingenious; all sins are extremely monotonous and can be counted on
the fingers of one hand. It seems to us that our sin is a particular
one but alas sin is a synonym for banality, they're all commonplace.
What is more important for you: your work as a priest or your
writing?
I cannot make that distinction. Everything I write about is intimately
related to my work as a priest. I try especially to help the new
Christians in my books, as I attempt to disclose the fundamentals of
Christian doctrine and the Christian world view in contemporary
language. Our pre-revolutionary literature,unfortunately, is not
always understood by today's reader, and foreign books are directed
to people with a different psychology and experience from our own.
That's why there is always a need ot produce our own works,
particularly for those who have just begun the life of faith.
The following selections are taken from interviews and
Question & Answer sessions with Fr Men during the last
2 or 3 years of his life. Selected and translated by
Steve Griffin from "Kultura i dukhovnoe voskhozhdenie
(Moscow 1992)" I am copying these in and this notice
will remain up until it is complete.
THE HUMAN QUEST
What is the meaning of life?
The question is simple,brief and clear. Made in the image and likeness
of the Creator, man finds meaning in life as he draws near to his
Prototype. This is both the meaning and the goal. You see when
we open up the Kingdom within us, Eternity begins to speak in us.
And then we raise ourselves above vain pursuits, we cease to be
slaves of circumstance, and we bravely stand against misfortunes
which bring us down. This is not because we're indifferent or
cold. The Christian isn't a stoic; he can suffer, but endures his
sufferings through God's strength and not his own.
In this way the meaning and goal of life is a forward and
upward progression. It is not complacency,as some might
think. We think of complacency as a rose-colored attitude towards
our surroundings,when we close our eyes to evil and think that
everything is wonderful. That's not how it is. Man must understand
the tragic nature of life; he must look upon this tragic nature
with his eyes open and at the same time remain standing--indeed
not only remain standing, but move ever onwards and upwards. Our
life becomes meaningful only as we move upwards,despite the
fact that physically and mentally we descend as we grow older
and weaker.
Do you find the notion of self-perfection attractive?
Christianity takes a rather skeptical attitude towards the idea
of self-perfection. We believe that man's growth comes about
not only through his own efforts, but by Grace, which is the power
given to us from above. You can read about this in St Paul's letters
to the Galatians and Romans.
What is 'faith without religion'?
The faith of a non-religious person is unconscious,almost instinctive.
While denying Ultimate Meaning to existence,that person still tries
to live as though that Meaning did exist. Religious faith is the soul's
openness to ultimate or cosmic Reason,universal love, and to God,while
atheistic faith puts something limited and lower in God's place,such
as the blind forces of nature,social utopias, political leaders etc.
Such faith has been called idolatry since olden times, and has
invariably led to ruin because idols cannot,in fact, take the place
of the Creator.
CHRISTIANITY AND THE MODERN WORLD
In your view how should Christianity relate to the contemporary world?
I don't sympathize with those efforts attempted in the West to create
a 'secular Christianity.' The way of compromise associated with
Bishop [John A.T.] Robinson and other "modernists" has nothing
modern about it. It's all very naive and superficial. People become
charmed and deafened by the spirit of the age, quite simply. This is
hardly new, and will pass like any other fad. On the other hand, I
cannot regard the Church as some relic of the past. As Christians
we're in the modern world--this governs the entire program. Sp
we should be contemporary people, in the good sense of the word,
and not suffer from nostalgia for the past, but remain real
Christians in spirit,thought and life. This is difficult. But it's the
honorable task given by God to this generation.
Do you think that technological civilization is a
threat to Christianity?
It's not a threat to Christianity, but to people in general. The
Gospel,as in all ages, remains Christ's eternal call to us. The
Church was not founded by people. The One who founded it said that
difficult times of struggle would come. But he is Victor over this
world, and in this we find the guarantee of hope. The stone on which
the Church is founded cannot be moved. The task which Christ gave to
the world cannot be accomplished by any one civilization or group of
civilizations, for the Gospel ideal is only partially brought about
as one civilization yields to another. That's why I think that the
history of the Church has only just begun. We are still children,
despite the ages that have gone by since Pentecost. After all, these
two thousand years to God and to history?
Are you optimistic about the future?
I always quote Albert Schweitzer here, because his words are very
appropriate for today: my knowledge is pessimistic(I don't think
this requires elaboration in our day),but my faith is optimistic. I
don't derive this optimism from facts, but simply from the conviction
that the origin of goodness is creative and divine. Evil is a caricature
of God's creation:everything that torments or has ever tormented
humanity--totalitarianism,fanaticism,cha
stagnation,sloth,self-conceit,the lack of desire to create(but instead
cleverly to redistribute)--all of this will in the end burst like a soap-
bubble. Even though these illnesses have always been around and
continue to be reborn, they are still dead. Today, when social tension
has reached a nearly critical point, I wouldn't want to give people any
reason to suspect that I'm under some illusion--I'm one without
illusions. But I believe that Divine Providence will not allow us to
perish, and call on all who have God's spark in their hearts not to
yield to terror and panic. I am convinced that we shall, in the end,
make it through these times. We've seen wars and catastrophes
before; we'll make it through these trials too.
I would add this: I feel that the torments of our day are not the
birth pangs of some new world--that is a fiction--but simply
the birth of normal human life,which has been denied us.
As an Orthodox believer what is your attitude towards other
confessions?
My attitude was not formed immediately. After considerable thought,
interaction and research I've come to be convinced that the Church
is in essence one and that divisions have come about through the sin
and narrow-mindedness of Christians. This sad fact is one of the
greatest reasons for crises in Christianity. Only through brotherly unity
and respect for diverse forms of church life can we hope to find
strength, peace and God's blessing once again.
Can divisions in the Christian Church be overcome?
Over the centuries of division many differences have accumulated
in the areas of doctrine, canon and worship. But I'm convinced that the
schism between East and West is bound up with political, cultural and
national conflicts. Today only a miracle could bring about real unity.
Bur it is still possible to overcome misunderstanding and aggressive
attitudes towards one another. If the members of different communities
got to know one another better, in time this will bear good fruit.
CHRISTIANITY IN RUSSIA
In your view does Russia have a specific vocation?
The Bible teaches that nations which play an important role in history
have a vocation given to them from above. I think that this applies ot
Russia. Chaadaev thought that Russia's vocation was to synthesize
the depth and contemplative way of the East with the dynamism of
the West. This thought is very close to my heart.
What role do you think religion will play in the life of the Russian
people in the years to come? Do you have any particular speculations?
Here we don't even need to speculate. Everything is so obvious.
Even the cave man connected his life and culture with his sense of
the Eternal and his orientation towards a Higher existence. The first
attempts to depict the Universe, in fact were connected with
religious cults. After all one didn't sit there in the caves and just mess
along with art: these were ritual drawings. In one form or another
religion has always been inseparable from humanity; it has been
the soul of humanity. One need not think that something unprecedented
has now taken place, that anew form of humanity has been born.
Nothing has changed! Rather ,the old humanity needs a chance to
develop normally. We don't need to invent some new form!
Human culture has its own natural course of development,
with advances and retrogressions. But when men have tried
to snatch God from human minds, whether in Nazi Germany,here,
in China or wherever, an idol has come quickly to fill the void.
This shows that man,culture and spirit cannot be severed from the
Eternal. Otherwise everything becomes worthless,and we begin
to create and idolatrous system which eventually collapses. In our
country,thank God, idolatry is on a decrease.
I think that we live in a time when the hope of an earthly
paradise without Heave is dying. In fact it is probably dead.
What has changed in the Russian Orthodox Church since Gorbachev
came to power?
Gorbachev brought about a revolution in the realm of Church-State
relations. The Bolshevik system was conceived as one with absolute
authoritative power. But absolute authority is possible only when there
is no other authority. That;'s why institutions which represented other,
specifically spiritual, authorities needed to be destroyed from the start.
For this reason the regime,right at the beginning,was anti-religious--
indeed militantly anti-religious--and did not change in its relationship,
essentially,throughout the entire seventy years. But Gorbachev
resolutely changed the course of things. Its an historical fact. Not only
details were changed, but the history of the Church in our country.
How do you react to the notion of 'Patriotism'?
I disagree with Tolstoy when he says that patriotism is evil. To love
one's home,street,city, and country is natural and wonderful. But to do
this we don't have to belittle other countries,cultures or peoples.
In a multi-national state it's particularly important that we learn to
respect one another. I find any form of chauvinism repulsive, very
unpleasant. In any case, it's antithetical to the heart of Christianity
and the precepts of Christ and his apostles. I pray that patriots
of all the nations in our country will flee from chauvinism and
internally overcome it.
What currents are there to be found now in the Orthodox Church?
The conservative,current which sharply opposes the West, relates to
all manner of reform with hostility,idealizes the past,and takes from
history the most rigid(in my view Medieval)patterns, is quite
powerful,and very popular among certain circles(in Western language
we could refer to this current as 'the right' because of its right
wing inclination) You might ask,why is this so in the Church? One of
the reasons is artificial selection. All the living,experimental
movements within the Church were mercilessly destroyed over the course
of several generations. If a bishop manifested a spirit of freedom,
independence or experimentation, he was immediately re-assigned to the
provinces or simply retired.
So what was true of society was true of the Church?
That's right. That's why the most conservative remained, survived, and
multiplied. The KGB liked them,as did the bureaucrats. It's no secret
that the authorities liked the Church. It was a fragment of hoary
antiquity, a museum.
In the 60s there were free progressive members of the clergy, but they
were pushed aside. Bishops were conservative. Today some bishops are more
open,but the common clergy is more conservative. In any case the
conservative tendency reigns throughout, and liberals are afraid of it.
Do you believe in the future of Orthodoxy in Russia?
Absolutely. But it seems to me that we should not swim with the current,
but rather work seriously and frankly on all problems which time places
before us. Present conditions are complcated, of course, but at the
same time it's hard to deny that we need to have another look at some
things in our church practice, canons and theology for the sake of
greater depth. I'm not alone here:quite a
number of bishops,priests and lay people share this view.
Do you see signs of renewal in Russian theology at present?
It seems to me that renewal began about a hundred years ago ,when
the old methodology (the so-called "scholastic theology") ceased to
be satisfactory. At that time Vladimir Soloviev pioneered a movement
which in our century came to be led by prominent and diverse individuals
such as Florensky and Tareev, Berdyaev, Bulgakov,Nesmelov, and
Fedotov. But at that time their fresh and probing thought did not find
a place in the Church,specifically in its academic tradition. That tradition
was unable to re-structure itself,and the theological schools were
subsequently closed and the tradition was interrupted. In my view what
we most need now is to return to the works of that remarkable Pleiad
which make up what has come to be called the "Russian Religious
Renaissance of the Early 20th Century." This will stimulate not so much
renewal,but development and greater depth in theology. We possess a
vast spiritual inheritance whose complete extent we can yet scarcely
imagine. This is true even for professional scholars writing about
Florensky or Bulgakov ,whose legacy is made up of literally dozens
of volumes.
How likely is reforem for the Russian Orthodox Church and its
parishioners?
First I'll say a word about language, because for many parishioners it is
unintelligible. This makes the situation quite a serious one. As it
happens, at the beginning of this century Patriarch Sergei indicated
a way in which this problem could be resolved by editing the Church
Slavonic liturgical texts in such a way as to make the language more
like contemporary Russian. One can,after all, make Church Slavonic
approximate the Russian language,and such editing and careful
'modernization' is quite admissible. When it comes to Church reforms,
certain changes that represent more of a return to ancient church practice
might be possible. I don't consider it my place to make any pronouncements
on church reforms, but my personal opinion on one thing is that the
Royal Doors should always remain open during the liturgy--opening them is
no violation of dogma. Liturgy is corporate prayer,a corporate sacrament.
If the Royal Doors are closed,then the altar and laypeople are divided,
and the very essence of worship is violated. But such questions should
be dealt with by the Council and the Patriarch of course.
But,I repeat, the dramatic history of the Russian Orthodox Church over
the last decades has not been suited to reforms. They were completely
inappropriate. Here we recall the reform efforts of those who sought
renewal in the 20's and the tragic consequences those efforts had for
the Russian Church: namely schism and discord. These reforms were
hasty and insufficiently considered. Their translations of liturgical
texts(I've had a look at them)are extremely unsuccessful and their
personal tactics and position justifiably evoked much unfavorable
criticism. They compromised the idea of Church renewal, so that the word
'renewal' itself became offensive. For this reason they carry great
historical blame.
However,I'm not inclined to absolutize the 'conservative' Russian Church
tendency. Part of the Russian Orthodox Church is truly devoted to certain
forms and will never agree to changing them. But this by no means
includes all believers. If that were the case there wouldn't be a
million Baptists in Russia today. This means that there is a specific
psychological type within our believing population that is ready to
adopt the most radical changes in ritual and outward forms,with a view to
returning to earlier Christian practice.
HIS WORK AS PASTOR AND PRIEST
Could you say something about yourself and the difficulties and joy
of your work as a pastor?
I received a Christian upbringing in the home. But if that were the
extent of it, faith would be for me just a way into traditions,something
like recollections of my childhood. Every person with a religious
upbringing at one moment or another encounters God for himself
and makes a choice. This happened to me in my early school years.
In school I did not experience any oppression,although many of my
classmates and teachers knew that I was a believer. That's why
they didn't require me to joint the Young Pioneers or the Komsomol.
It was the same in university, where everyone knew that I was
Christian. But in the fifth year the administration decided to get rid
of me, and they asked the military studies department to 'fail' me on
the state examinations. When the military studies department
refused, I was simply dismissed for 'failure to attend lectures.' But I
was hoping to enter seminary in any case, once I had fulfilled my
service requirement after graduation. My dismissal simply sped up
the process,so that within a month Archbishop Makani ordained me
as a priest. Until that time I had sung and read in church,and studied
theology and Church regulations on my own.
I have experienced no shortage of difficulties and troubles
but I don't want to talk about them. When I'm asked, I say that my
spiritual mentors spent dozens of years in prisons and labor camps.
Compared to what they went through, threatening letters,searches,
interrogations, and attacks in the media re not such a heavy ordeal.
In those days there was a lot to endure in any case, and I was no
exception , and nothing more. I didn't have to make a compromise,
for which I can only be thankful to God.
Among my parishioners there were many profound and interesting
people ,such as the famous psychiatrist D.E. Melekhov, who directed
a clinic;M.V.Yudina the pianist; N.Y. Mandelshtam not only came
to church regularly, but lived in my home during the summer months;
A.Galich was baptized in our church. But I would rather not say any
more about them than what I've already mentioned. That belongs to the
realm of the spiritual life, and, just as there are clinical secrets, so
there are pastoral ones.
I've experienced a great many joys in my life:liturgy,prayer,people
whom I love,pastoral work,books,fellowship,research,art,natur
the list is endless. I always thank God for his endless gifts to us.
These gifts are magnificent and ,perhaps, unmerited.
I understand that your ethnic background is Jewish. Don't you think
that in becoming a Christian you have cut yourself off from your people?
Not at all. I consider my membership in God's chosen race an unmerited gift,
a sign of additional responsibility before God. He called Israel to serve Him,
and Israel's history is sacred history, and it continues today. If the majority of
my fellow Jews have not accepted Christianity, that is just the next chapter in
the drama which is unfolding between God and the world. It began in Bible times,
and it is taking place among other peoples too, many of whom have partially
left Christianity. I am happy that with my weak efforts I can serve the God of
Israel and his Church. For me the Old and New Testaments are inseparable. In
any case ,that's an indisputable argument in Christian theology.
As a Christian and simply by nature, I find myself extremely alienated by any
form of chauvinism. I value and love the culture in which I was raised and which
has given me so much, but I will not forget for a moment the responsibility and
vocation laid upon me as a member of the Jewish race.
What is the value of confessing our sins before a priest?
We're quite cunning with ourselves, and always find an excuse for
everything. When there's a witness(and a priest is only a witness)
we have to carry out our first redemptive,as it were,spiritual feat:
we have to name our sin. This can be so excruciating and repulsive that
we would sooner repent of a thousand sins to ourselves than to tell a
priest (or especially a friend) the truth about ourselves. And then
we don't tell it straight, we speak in interjections or empty words,
and what's important is obscured. The natural desire to appear better
than you are is often at work as well as the natural fear that the
priest will think less of you once he knows of your sin.
But it's not true, my friends. I have hundreds of friends who make
their confessions before me,and their sins have not in the least kept
me from loving them. I simply forget their sins; they completely slip
straight out of my consciousness.
But then,believe me,satan hasn't managed to come up with anything
ingenious; all sins are extremely monotonous and can be counted on
the fingers of one hand. It seems to us that our sin is a particular
one but alas sin is a synonym for banality, they're all commonplace.
What is more important for you: your work as a priest or your
writing?
I cannot make that distinction. Everything I write about is intimately
related to my work as a priest. I try especially to help the new
Christians in my books, as I attempt to disclose the fundamentals of
Christian doctrine and the Christian world view in contemporary
language. Our pre-revolutionary literature,unfortunately, is not
always understood by today's reader, and foreign books are directed
to people with a different psychology and experience from our own.
That's why there is always a need ot produce our own works,
particularly for those who have just begun the life of faith.
