- "What do you believe?"
Let us leave discussions about over canons and dogmas aside for a moment: the majority of contemporary believers are not particularly versed in them. However, this serves neither to their honour nor to their justification, since believers must know their faith; but it often happens with us that some believers know the finest subtleties of the earthly sciences, but do not wish to know the heavenly science, saying that "the most important thing is what is in the soul", or, even worse than this, that the study of Orthodoxy and the Church canons is a matter "for those specially appointed to it", the bishops or priests, "but it is not our business". Let us look at the matter in a simpler manner, so to speak, from an "everyday" point of view. What do contemporary "Orthodox" believers believe in?
If you ask: "Do you believe in God?" they reply in the affirmative. But what beyond that? Very often they display a consumerist psychology, which, moreover, is greatly facilitated by contemporary market relationships, which have penetrated deeply into church life. For example, a "believer" comes into the church and asks, not about how he should repent, cleanse himself, change his life, live according to the commandments, but about which icon he should put a candle in front of, "so that things may go well". He comes when a complicated situation in daily life confronts him, in the hope that "God will sort it out". Or when someone has fallen ill or fallen into some misfortune, he will ask for deliverance. And often he receives help, but then it almost always turns out as the Lord described in the parable of the ten healed lepers? And it happens that the person does not receive what he asks for, in which case he may then decide in himself that God does not exist, without thinking that what he asked for was perhaps to his profit? But one rarely finds the recognition that much in a person's life does not turn out well because he is simply living incorrectly, in an unchristian manner, and that he has to change something in his manner of life radically change it, moreover.
Of course it is difficult to expect great awareness in these questions in people who have come to the church for the first time. And it is at this point that pastors should explain to the people that the Church exists not only for the placing of candles and to get consolation in the beauty of the icons and chandeliers.
If we examine the views of the contemporary bishops of "official Orthodoxy", in general they roughly come down to the same "everyday" interests: the mission of the Church consists in facilitating "the friendship of the peoples" and peace on earth, so that there should be no war or international tension, so that everyone should love each other and care for "universal human values"; it consists in the regeneration, for example, of "Great Russia", in the recreation of "trampled on holy things", etc., etc. "so that everything should go well for everybody".
But why should the Church worry about this, and not about Orthodoxy? Why care for "universal human values" And what are these values, what do they consist of, where is their source? Why regenerate Russia without regenerating True Orthodoxy? What is the need for such a "false" Russia? After all, she collapsed precisely because Orthodoxy was not preserved! Why do people often link the regeneration of Orthodoxy with the regeneration of Russia, and not the other way round? For example, one meets believers who are ready to support even the communists not because they have suddenly become Orthodox, but because they supposedly stand "for a strong Russia".
Many people go to church for "consolation": life now is hard and joyless, all routine things are boring, people want something "spiritual" sweet singing, golden iconostases, imposing batyushkas in elegant vestments? But faith and the Church do not exist in order that there should be more consolations in this world , or in order that one should find some good company in the church that delivers one from the feeling of loneliness and not being needed, but in order that one should prepare oneself for another life and to this end it is not much to visit the church once a week, hand in notes and have pious conversations with acquaintances about the corruption of the world and the necessity of going to the Church. One has to fight with oneself, renounce the world and that which is valued in it (and this renunciation is an absolute condition of salvation not only for monks, but also for laymen, for every Christian; for the Gospel is the same for everybody: "love not the world, nor the things that are in the world" (I John 2.15)), abandon whatever sinful habits you may have or your sinful mode of life as a whole, renounce worldly "consolations" and that, not for the sake of immediately receiving spiritual consolations, but simply out of love for God and a striving to live in accordance with His commandments. But when you begin to talk about this, you immediately come up against incomprehension, even offence. Many people want to legalise their lawlessness in life not only in a secular way, but also in an ecclesiastical manner, for which they are ready to pay even large sums of money. And then we find patriarchal batyushkas "blessing", for money, whatever you like, only so long as people can live "more comfortably" with the consciousness that "God's goodwill" for their way of life is already guaranteed with the help of the batyushkas who are in charge of it. Other pastors, however, put on a "strict" face, saying: "Dont do this, do this!" but all this is normal within the bounds either of the worldly interests of the flock, or of the ambitious strivings of the pastors; but real salvation of the soul interests neither the former nor the latter.
But what do contemporary "believers" believe in? How do they square up this ecclesiastical reality with the life of the saints and ascetics, with the patristic teaching on salvation, with the words of the Lord on the narrow way, on the bearing of one's cross, on "hating one's soul" for the sake of the Gospel? Where has the Apostle's commandment on unceasing prayer been lost, and on the necessity for those who use this world not to use it, as it were? Where is heed paid to the apostle's words on false teachings and heresies? And in general: what relationship does the whole Gospel have to contemporary "faith"
And yet contemporary believers still go to services, pray, feel compunction, even weep! ? But what is the value of "spiritual feelings" when standing at prayer in church, when after them the person calmly returns to his everyday life ("I've been to church, now I must get down to business") Why read the lives of the saints if the position is wittingly taken that "such heights are not for us, sinful and weak ones, so there's nothing to strive for" How can one regenerate "spirituality" in the people if the pastors say that Church canons, rules and asceticism are one thing, but "simple life" something else? And can one expect a person to understand the canons, heresies, etc., if he at times even considers it unnecessary to keep the fasts? Finally, even Catholics and other heretics or Muslims also have sometimes even more "spiritual" feelings on a religious basis. So in general why go into an Orthodox church if you are seeking such spirituality? Perhaps it's more worth your while to go to a Catholic church or a mosque the more so in that Muslims are often much more zealous in relation to everything that concerns their faith than the Christians?
At this point, incidentally, I remember one more argument that is often used by us in trying to draw unbelievers into the Church. For example, a person is looking for faith, he is striving for something spiritual and by chance is attracted by Buddhism or some other false teaching. An Orthodox says to him in horror: "What, how is it possible?! A Russian person can only be Orthodox!" A wonderful argument! So a Tibetan or Buryat, for example, can only be a Buddhist? After all, this is their historical religion? And an Italian can only be a Catholic? That's a good method of argument one has to be Orthodox, not because the truth is in Orthodoxy, but because Orthodoxy is the historical religion in Russia! And what if a person then goes to live in the East can he then become a Muslim??
It's still worse when a person keeps the fasts, fulfils his prayer rule, goes to church once a week and is content with that? as if he were already a completely respectable Christian. But such "piety" was reproached by St. John Chrysostom?
