Суд над Бхагавад-гитой / Attempt to ban Bhagavad-gita

Arriving so, I follow the lead of fathers (look at "Panary" of prelate Epifanija Cyprian and “About Grade Bozhiem” blissful Avgustina). Speaking about marriage life, “Avgustin does not avoid the details alien to customs of modern church chair and the press, but, obviously, not seeming strange at that time and to that population for which Avgustin” wrote. In pre-revolutionary editions of sacred fathers quite often transfer interrupted, and any part of the text was reproduced in a source language — in a Greek way or in Latin — without any transfer. So from a casual sight hid details of ancient mentions of human physiology. Today “customs of the press” have again changed. Therefore I consider that it is quite possible to return to language of fathers.

And I will do it and henceforth — for to avert people from paganism to me it is represented to more important, rather than to observe pious virginity of hearing. If my critics transfer disgust for paganism on the one who convicts these pagan foulness, — means, something is abnormal with logic at critics. Also it is not necessary to me to show words of apostle Pavel that fornication and everyone нечистота and любостяжание should not even be called at you (Efes. 5, 3). The apostle writes about rules of Intrachristian life and speech (“at you”), and I should address to what by no means yet are not "ours". However, if “Russia Orthodox” really wishes, that ears of listeners “were not profaned by any muck” let will oppose distributions to church benches absolutely pathological брошюрок like “the Medicine for a sin”.

And with time of church people confuses that in your books and lectures are plentifully quoted not only sacred fathers, but also absolutely secular authors...

The fact that secular sources are quoted by me. The fact that it confuses someone. But fault here on those who is confused. They have too adjusted themselves on total suspiciousness and total condemnation. Spiritually sensible person would estimate it differently. For example, how martyr Ilarion (Troitsk): “In the composition of the author literally nearby there is Saint John Lestvichnik from V.V.Rozanovym, Saint Simeon a New Seminary student and blissful Avgustin with Merezhkovsky. It equally uses both lives sacred, and verses of poets, and fictional products, and even drawings of comic magazines. Before us strongly pronounced type of the spiritual person, always and everywhere unseparable with theological questions and interests. It is type — alas! — rare even at spiritual school and the more so, of course, valuable”.

Father Andrey, the reputation of the missionary of new time was fixed to you — unusual style, boldness of thought, contacts with рокерами. This novelty irritates some part, so to say, conservative clergy. Sometimes you name “a pop-music of Russian Orthodoxy”, sometimes "rationalist", "revisionist" and "heretic" …

"Heretic" I name newspapers like “the Russian bulletin” which editor worked in days of old in ideological department of the Central Committee, and now has for some reason decided to speak on behalf of Orthodox Church. Seriously it is not necessary to concern it. It is Enough to come into a book little shop at edition “Russian bulletin” to be convinced that cleanliness of Orthodoxy to these people: it is unknown, them does not worry. At them it is rubbed and the nationalist callosity itches. Between “Russian paganism” and “Russian Orthodoxy” for them there is no distinction. Advertising-pagan editions are presented at them in rather plentiful assortment. Are more plentiful in this shop unless newspapers and брошюрки with abuse to Russian Orthodox Church (on behalf of every possible independent “катакомбников”).

Level of their acquaintance to Orthodoxy which they ostensibly protect from my "heresies", is well visible from article in “the Russian bulletin”, left in March, 2004: “Further the father диакон long speaks about disagreements orthodox and Catholics who, ostensibly, at all and are not present. And deification of its lecture the phrase has sounded:“ As a matter of fact, all of us with you we are orthodox Catholics ”(!!!). This phrase-slogan has sounded right at the end — means, both students, and listeners of" Radonezha ”will remember it very firmly. I leave this without the comment and the analysis”.

And in vain pseudo-seminary students from “РВ” have refused the analysis. I have only reminded the official name of our Church in a XIX-th century: “the Russian Greek-Kafolichesky Orthodox Church”. The catechism of prelate Philaret Moskovsky which study at any tserkovno-parish school, is called “Vast Christian катихизис as Pravoslavnyja Kafolicheskija Vostochnyja Tserkve”. And there we read: “the Question. What important advantage the Kafolichesky Church has? The answer: to It actually belong high обетования that a gate адовы will not overcome it”.

That means a word “кафолический” (in other transcription: "Catholic")? — Universal, universal, cathedral. Yes, we are Catholics. We — Universal Church, instead of Latin dissenters. Any of those attributes of Church that are listed in the Creed, we cannot concede to someone. Orthodox Church and uniform, both Sacred, and Kafolichesky, and Apostolic. And if any харизматы the circle name “apostolic church”, it yet an occasion to ourselves to shun this our nice name. So the analysis is useful, useful.

The rationalist and the critic I only at the analysis of our modern church life. Everything that bears with itself the church orthodox Legend, — I accept both mind, and heart. Simply here to this voice of the Legend I trust more than to fashionable leaflets and visions. To compare certificates of the Legend to the new phenomena trying проторгнуться in church life, is already work rational. At first, however, all the same this matter of taste: at acquaintance to the next novelty the flavouring sensation — “not that”, well before is born, and then this sensation to the seminary student simply should be invested with arguments.

"Revisionist" I in relation to the atheistic past. I have really reconsidered those sights. Yes, my experience of Orthodoxy differs from experience of traditionally church people. For me the belief is a finding, instead of a heritage. One business: the person from священнической families, hereditary, at it somewhere even eyes замылились, something has become boring to it, поскушнело. I the revisionist in the sense that am able to rejoice and open till now for myself depth of church tradition. Till now I find something new, unexpected and I rejoice.

As to "pop-music" — in it too there is a truth. A pop-music — that is popular. And what — Orthodoxy should be elite, эзотерично?

And unless the sermon of the parish father, something in the 100-th time chewing for grandmothers, — not "pop-music", not simplification? Why приспособлять to level of grandmothers it is considered the orthodox sermon normal, and attempt to conduct the same, as a matter of fact, in language of students is considered conversation reprehensible?


It is necessary you to face any biases of orthodox believers?

At everyone the biases. Someone, for example, considers that it is impossible to smile, when conversation goes on spiritual themes. You look at such person during lecture — and you see that in it there is a heavy struggle with itself because the part of its consciousness forbids to laugh and smile, but at the same time when he hears any interesting argument or a joke, the humanity rests try to escape outside through a pseudo-piety scab. If also it does not occur — well, with bitterness it is necessary to make the unfavourable diagnosis: “it is irreversible воцерковленный the person” … the Most unfortunate being: and it has not touched joyful depth of Orthodoxy, and pleasure of human dialogue has lost. Having accepted God (is more exact — “idea of God”), it then could not to return with this again found gift to the world of people.

About "irreversibility". Vladimir Soloveva has a poem "Recognition":

I was the adherent правоверия,

Also the pig would eat me,

But on hypocrisy border

Поворотил shafts I.

Sincere experience and history,

Kohl you will not close eyes,

You will teach that the theory

Not so it is important, as life of people,

That правоверие with unbelief

Вспоило the same milk

Also that with cold hypocrisy

To broadcast an anathema easily.

And still happens, you come somewhere and you feel: deafness, is not present at people of desire to listen, think and react. It seems that here someone from fathers has so unsuccessfully started to conduct Orthodoxy sermon that people had an impression, as if Orthodoxy — a synonym of the big boredom. It is necessary сламывать and this bias.

It is said that earlier you were more independent in the judgements, and became now closer to the power.

In such reproach immemorial conviction of Russian intelligency appears - the power always is not right. But the last century us has taught that there can be a wrongfulness big, than a power wrongfulness: a revolt lie.

Where you have more than ill-wishers: among atheists, representatives of other belief or among orthodox churchmen?

Most painfully to endure reproaches from the. Somehow in Tyumen the bearded man has approached to me in boots and speaks: “What for you to us have arrived? In the Gospel it is told: be not afraid, small herd. See, us, orthodox should be a little. What for you here preach?!”.

So happens, my trips on dioceses come to an end with denunciations. From the church environment.

In 1998 the newspaper “Russian bulletin” already suggested me to shoot. In number 46–47 they have reprinted a certain Nikolay Alekseeva's article "Deserters" (before left in the seventh release of the almanac “Antihrist in Moscow”; it is published by Committee “For moral revival of Fatherland”, окормляемый archpriest Alexander Shargunovym).

Once (in the book “School divinity”) I have written that we are too frightened by alarms of the "adult" world and behind these alarms we do not see children. In Moscow there was already a little сборничков under the name “Antihrist in Moscow”. But with them after all to a school class you will not go. There it is necessary to go with a message that “the Christ in Moscow”, — for “the Christ in the middle of us!”. We will present that I have come to school and within three weeks talked to children. As a result one listener has wanted to be christened. Have gone. Christened. Next day, when I will come to a class, for me two variants of behaviour are possible. In the first case I will tell: “Zhidomasony you damned! I speak three weeks to you about Orthodoxy but only one of you has escaped from under influence of mean fate and a pornography!”, and in the second case: “Look, what physiognomy at this Vanki happy. It — because it was christened yesterday. By the way, this pleasure can be and yours”. I prefer the second way.

Publishers “Antihrista in Moscow” — the first. “We are heroes of the Brest fortress, — they speak. — we were surrounded from different directions with hostile forces, from windows with gases poison, under us undermining conduct, from above bombs throw... In general to be orthodox it it is healthy, айда all to our casemate!”. And it must be said, what even in such sermon would be больший dynamism and there would be more truths, than in that what is conducted now from pages of orthodox editions and in teleplots. Nevertheless the military symbolics is that language that is close to heart of the boy. In this language he can understand that it is a question about something live and waiting from it a choice and participation. But also such sermon is seldom audible. Generally language of our sermon still анемичнее. “Store belief of ancestors” and “have destruction warm” — in these appeals so itself the young man a little can learn.

Publishers of the almanac “in Moscow” sense of all трехсотстраничной books “School divinity” have reduced Antihrist to this one-page fragment and have declared that “deacon Andrey Kuraev has written the whole book“ School divinity ”ostensibly about Christian education of children — with that only to disavow a position of Committee and with sense of superiority (as at that security officer) carelessly to scarify attempts to protect children from corruption surrounding them”.

At “комитетчика” too high opinion on the activity. Thus that to me "spiritually-sincere" atmosphere шаргуновского "Committee", its apocalyptic monomoral substance and a gloomy monoemotionality is remote, I and would not think to write the whole book “with that only, to disavow the Committee position”.

I will disappoint "Committee". These lines have been written by me even before creation of its structure. "Committee" has been created in September, 1994, whether and my text has been published in the first collection of my articles “All equally how to trust?” (A wedge, 1994. With. 26–27) which has been sent for the press in March, 1994, and left in May. For the first time these lines were born in general in the middle of 1993. And only having seen that new created "Committee" is amazingly similar on for a long time me the drawn cartoon, I have inserted a mention of it into “School divinity”.

But itself I have written “School divinity” at all for the sake of polemic with "Committee", and for the sake of elimination of those средостений that stand between children and Church. If rights there was N.Alekseev who has written that “the killed souls of children do not excite the deserter of deacon Andrey Kuraev” I would not began to undertake a writing of such book about children.

But now I am convinced that from шаргуновского "Committee" of children really it is necessary to protect.

First, because children should be protected from any hysterics and нетрезвости. Unless the perception of the world the person who in banal publicity boards (let even advertising a sin) sees magic and anything, except magic is normal: “These advertising have purely mystical value is a pure Satanism, occult magical reception … Here it is a question already of indulgence of black magic”. Well it is fine, has slipped out at performance on radio. But what for then these quick-tempered exaggerations to reprint? Really each sin is already “a pure Satanism” and “black magic”? Really everything coming on a confession for the story about the sins, should repent of “a pure Satanism” and “black magic”?

If to the faithless teenagers who have been brought up on materialism-Darvinism-konsjumerizme, to teenagers who on переменках palm off each other pornomagazines to come and tell that they “pure Satanists” and “black magicians” it will be the best means for a long time to block it any way to truth...

Secondly, children should be protected from "Committee" because it bears in itself(himself) such charge of hatred to which the most terrible Hollywood thrillers will not be compared.

And what I can tell about people who, as a matter of fact, have called for my execution? Such conclusion article of Alekseeva comes to an end: “That it is possible to tell? Severely, but with deserters general Turkul” fairly arrived. And it arrived so: “the Security officer have shot without mercy”.

I will remind — article "Deserters" is devoted me.

By the way, in the same release “in Moscow” archpriest Alexander Shargunov shares Antihrista the intellectual experience: it at last has reached that understanding why it is necessary “to punish the death penalty for godlessness propagation” …

Then fighters against an INN had a fashion at meetings to share with me the dream — as though they wanted to fry me in a cage (so was in corridor МДА during session of the Synod theological commission on an INN problem in February, 2001, and also at picketing иннэнистами diocesan meeting at a temple of the Christ of the Savior in December of the same year).

And in 2004 on the Internet (and that is more important — on a holiday of Sretenija) the Magadan "orthodox" fascists have returned to day of my birth to a theme of my execution: “Kuraev in the role. Now this figure has told to all крещеному to the world about advantage“ day sacred Valentine ”. It appears, time tradition already is, so it is time and молебны to serve on February, 14th about health“ all enamoured ”. And that is not known by" the clever man ”that in a normal church calendar on February, 14th any“ Valentines ”отродясь did not happen. Fie! However, this … удак for a long time already in расстрельный the list has thrust”. Well, see, here again a bad word has quoted …

Attempts to ponder, understand about what I speak, at my "superchurch" opponents are not present. The naked superraised irritation impregnates their texts. For an example — a response of "the Russian bulletin” on my lecture about "Matrix".

“After acquaintance with lecture it became clear that further to delay the conversation beginning it is impossible: that Kuraev speaks диакон, is the uttermost, scandalous, extreme... Nonsense. I underline, nonsense is that the author of lecture, instead of about what he speaks speaks. And this nonsense, like Zhirinovsky's nonsense, is rather talented and flowed round. Sated with conformable data from area of history, divinity, culture, it rivets on herself attention, intrigues, starts to seem the world outlook concept, wins"supporters". I long could not understand, it is possible to be the supporter of what exactly, being the supporter of that Kuraev speaks диакон. After all if to take in hands a pencil and the paragraph behind the paragraph, a line behind a line, a word behind a word to analyse that Kuraev in the articles and lectures it will be found out speaks диакон that told as a whole has no the slightest sense. And such cumulative pointlessness develops of separate parts and the parts, which in itself can be both substantial, and actual, and testify to any separate aspects of true. But shovelled through a meat grinder of the inflamed consciousness диакона Kuraev, having been a part of it проповеднического "forcemeat", they cease to serve former ideals and start to serve populism of the concrete person. Also that is surprising, similar creativity finds the admirers! And their big part are so-called “new Russian” from among businessmen, bank clerks, figures of "show business". All is people far not silly, capable to independent getting, judgement and information use. And here, поди you, have got, as flies on липучку ”.


And what of your books more all is criticised by your church opponents?

With books to argue hard — theses are clearly registered in them. The argument is resulted. And to check up easily — whether truth I has written that nonsense which to me have attributed. Therefore the editions specialising on accusation “кураевщины”, prefer to build the a PR campaign on перевирании my lectures.

It is easier to carp at lectures for quite objective reason. Lectures for the writing person is always draught copies. Here some themes, plots, arguments are run in, slandered". Then, on a measure начитки certain themes, they are made out at first in articles, and then and in books. Oral speech has other features, rather than speech written. Here it is more сиюминутности, it is less than reasonableness. Here there is more pedagogics (it is necessary“ to hold audience ”) and less logic and a source study correctness. But to people of certain abilities half made work do not show.

At once I will explain: cartridges with my lectures extend against my will and without my permission. Fees, even author's copies to me do not transfer. Especially do not do necessary editing at duplicating of lectures. And editing is necessary — for in oral speech happen both inexact citations, and mess in dates. Happens also that that it was necessary to tell in that audience, absolutely to what on the cartridge or in the book.

In my audiences (and I read the most part of the lectures “on departure” — out of Moscow) people or indifferent, or even hostile in relation to Orthodoxy prevail. About me they, as a rule, have heard for the first time in day of lecture. Besides, these lectures pass usually after the termination of the basic employment in university. Students have already enough exhausted for a day. To manage to keep even two hours their attention — business completely not simple. So to pull out audience it is necessary from "minus". (For them I the anonymous representative of "this melancholy Orthodoxy”) and to about what I speak, it is necessary to change the prejudiced relation to me within the first hour on at first sderzhanno-interested, and eventually and on the concordant.

Absolutely other business — the cartridge. It is bought by the person who is already in advance interested in conversation on this theme. It, as a rule, not the student. Besides, as a rule, it is the person already orthodox. It is capable already to perception of firmer spiritual food. "Discharges" and “digressions aside” are not necessary to it. Therefore, if distribution of cartridges though was somehow co-ordinated with me, I would insist on their most serious editing. Alas, no coordination is present.

And how much the person who has come on your lecture, can be assured what you state really the point of view of Orthodox Church?

You understand that if I will consider that my sights are not sights of Orthodox Church, and I will pretend thus that I speak on behalf of Church I will be the rascal. To me it is very expensive that I in Church: I aspired to it, painfully went to enter into Church, therefore not in the least I do not wish itself Church to oppose. And, naturally, I accept all church dogma. Another matter that it is necessary to distinguish dogmatic вероопределения from private theological judgements, opinions. In the latter case there is a space for studying, acquaintance, understanding and — disputes. Here can be разноречия even between orthodox seminary students. They always were in the history, moreover, even between sacred fathers there were misunderstanding and discussions. So, beginning lecture, I always try to explain: so far as concerns a church position, and when about a question on which is not present общецерковного judgement. Then I speak:“ My position here such, but is my position, at other priests it can be on this question another ”.

And consequently both journalists, and seminarists I ask: “Brothers, forgive, I understand that you have already got appeals to аскетике, to abstention and so on, but I attach the voice to a voice of your priests and I ask you: be воздержанны on language. Though I understand that it sounds partly ridiculously — диакон Kuraev calls to воздержанности, and at a loose tongue, — but nevertheless I piously ask you: братие, filter a market! And as seldom as possible in the speech dare to begin a phrase with a parenthetic clause“ as learns Church "," according to Church ””.

I have the right to begin so a phrase only in the event that the citation from the Creed further will follow. Here then I have the right to tell: “Under the Church doctrine, there is Uniform God the Father, the Creator of the sky and the earth, all visible and invisible world”. In other cases it is better поосторожничать and not to give out the opinion for opinion of all Church. We will tell, when me ask: “That the Church thinks of Harry Potter?”, I can answer it only: “Yes it is a lot of honour for Harry Potter that the Church something thought of it”. On behalf of Church the Cathedral can tell only. But I somehow cannot imagine the Cathedral in which agenda under point 15 would appear: “Development of the relation to Harry Potter”.

And still I do not think that the Church does not approve my work. It is possible to judge the relation of Church to me on destiny of my books. For 10 years the circulation of my books has already passed for 700 thousand. In this connection I have a feeling of some fault before my classmates on university among which there are people very bright, talented. But I look, how to them is and as is to me. To me, of course, is much better. I have that possibility of which any intellectual dreams. It is possibility to speak with people. That I write, will be claimed, published, extends. And those books that write at Institute of philosophy of Academy of Sciences and at philosophical faculty of the Moscow State University, either are not published, or published by scanty circulation in 500 copies so, as a matter of fact, the author and buys them, and then gives away. My advantage that behind my back there is a powerful system of dioceses, arrivals, monasteries with the network of book-trade. As a matter of fact, today only the religious organisations have the all-Russian network of distribution of the literature. Even the scientific literature on the country does not extend almost. And so, if the relation to me of Orthodox Church was bad, my books would not be published and did not extend.

Here in general there are two extreme measures. One my critics consider that I any dissident in Church and my books do not represent a church position. Other my critics, on the contrary, believe, as if my work has "custom-made" character. They write that “books диакона Kuraev щедрейше are financed MT Russian Orthodox Church”. In practice both that and another is incorrect: I not the official journalist, but also not the dissident. Many publishing houses — both secular, and church — are ready to publish my books but first of all it makes for them profit. Books are interesting and necessary to people; they do not contain оппонирования the Patriarchy — therefore church structures and do not avoid from partnership in their edition and distribution.

The second. Almost half of my life passes in trips. And generally invite arrivals and dioceses. For me just it is a source of joyful sensation — I in Church, I together with it and for the sake of it.

And the third: I feel that from many and many troubles I am am stored by prayers of those people that across all Russia remember me. I live, not on my sins, it is good — and it on their prayers. I will not hide: not always all clergy approves my judgements. Happens both disagreement, and polemic. Moreover — sometimes (not on questions вероучительным, it it is natural) my position appears a distinct from position of the majority.

It not too confuses me. I feel myself as the executor in the big symphonic orchestra. At me not the loudest and not the most important tool. But also it is necessary. Moreover — if my tool music would leave intolerable sounded only and the symphony would be ruined. And if my tool has become silent — the symphony would leave a little more poorly, deprived of a certain smack. And so — I know that there are editions and preachers who speak differently. Otherwise — not always means "incorrectly". Simply and there and there there is a vicarial, missionary truth or need.

In general, I consider that our Church is strong enough and stable to dare to suffer on the periphery of such outcasts, as priest John Okhlobystin or диакон Andrey Kuraev. As an alarm signal occurrence “sects кураевцев” will serve. While I did not hear about occurrence кураевской sect, and it pleases me. Means, people through my lectures, my books come not to me, and to God.


Why in the Svjatogorsky monastery of Donetsk area do not allow to sell your books?

The Svjatogorsky monastery has opposed the position of a position of the Patriarch, the Synod of new passports, tax numbers and so on. As to books to forbid easily, and here to give reason — more difficultly. Somehow I had a possibility to see in business of the deputy of this monastery. This father who obviously has been not burdened by the academic formation, has suddenly risen and has declared: “Yes I have read all sacred fathers — there there is no that, you don't say so!”. I assure you, any professor of divinity has not read all sacred fathers. Further away from this purpose deputies of monasteries will defend. At least for the reason that the huge part of texts of sacred fathers is not translated into Russian... In general, the remark of this young erudite (he for five years is younger than me) has been met by an amicable laughter священнической audiences (it was at diocesan meeting of the Donetsk diocese).

You pray before the beginning of your conversations?

Yes, before an input in audience. Thus I say traditional prayers on молитвослову not so much, how many simply I speak: “My God, You know, what for You here have resulted me, help me”. And, really, I feel that the Lord helps me. Also helps not because I such good, and am simple because it is necessary for other people. And any priest will confirm that very often the Lord gives forces and words through the priest for the sake of the person who to it addresses. And even despite of sins of the preacher.

Tell, by your personal experience to whom similar meetings it is more important: to Church or people?

They are necessary for all. Churches — that in this dialogue to hear the interlocutor and most during conversation to specify the understanding of those or other problems. To believing people they help to realise and protect the belief. To faithless people such meetings help to resist to activity of sects.

You often speak about beauty of Orthodoxy, love to which at you very deep and for which you so courageously stand. If nevertheless to open, for what you love it?

I in Church not because have read clever books, that is why that have met people in whom Orthodoxy is live and from which light Christ's streams. I orthodox because am aged men. All book arguments in favour of Orthodoxy are absolutely insufficient to enter into Orthodoxy, to accept it, to live it. I would not remain of any day in Orthodoxy if I was kept in it only by any knowledge: theological, philosophical, istoriko-religious. But, favour of Bozhiej, I met Orthodoxy in life, met people (can be, no more than ten for all these twenty years of life in Church) with which it was possible not to speak about what.

The aged man is a person with whom it is possible to be silent. Very often, it seems to me, people of it do not understand, accepting aged men for any oracles. Also go to the aged man that that has confirmed opinion which and so is at the person, — has confirmed my correctness. Or about any household questions it ask. And after all in the aged man important not that, чт! About it will tell about the future and even about me. In it that it is is important. Quality of its life is important.

In aged men there is a sacred evidence, at their presence questions die. Therefore to dialogue with the original aged man cannot prevent and a language barrier. So, in Romania when I yet did not know the Romanian language, I have got acquainted with father Kleopoj, the person similar, probably, to father Cyril (Павлову), and outwardly, maybe, even more similar to father John (Крестьянкина). Near to it it was simple to fit well. Silence and the world inside. He professed and from time to time left to the people, talked, answered questions. Me has surprised that then, in 80th years, he spoke against sects. And then he even has written the special book against sects.

The first my meeting with the aged man was surprising. It were very much unlucky days in my life when I studied in postgraduate study at philosophy Institute, some years dreaming of receipt in seminary. I have dared to tell about it to the confessor, and that began to explain me difficulty of church service from what I have understood that he does not bless me on it. Life for me has lost meaning …

But once after a liturgy in Monastery one my friend-seminarist shows on the elderly person in a secular jacket and speaks: “Look, at this old man of an eye perspicacious”. I look: red as though bloodshot eyes, anything perspicacious I in them have not made out, and what I could then in it to understand? But then, hour through two, coming back to Moscow, I have seen the same old man in the electric train car. With us the tipsy children went, which steels to stick to the old man-pilgrim. And he began to laugh the matter off:

— Oh, children, yes what, you young, seem to know better to you, and I somehow will live. You me do not touch.

They ask:

— And how call you, the grandfather?

— Yes the Ear ring my name is, — answers. — children, you have a sleep, anything, I here will reach …

And it is valid, minutes through ten they fall asleep. And here suddenly the old man turns to me, and instantly there is a change of the person, and asks:

— And you as call?

I speak:

— Me Andrey call.

He speaks:

— And you, Andrjush, do not worry, in seminary you will arrive.

In conversation it was found out that this old man — иеросхимонах Sergy, подвизавшийся in the Pochaevsky monastery disper-sed still many years ago. I have asked the father, whether for a long time it странничает.

He speaks: “There are no, recently, 17 years”. And I then was only 22 years old.

So it and странничал, from a temple to a temple, from монастырька to монастырьку. And at parting he has told to me: “do not worry. I for you will pray. Our monastic prayer strong, reaches God”. After that I as on wings treat to myself. Has addressed to the father with the story about all it. And my confessor has told: “Yes that you, I simply did not understand, how much it for you is serious, and so, certainly, arrive in seminary, good luck …”.

One of criteria on which it is possible to define, true it is the aged man or it only thinks itself(himself) that (or people consider it as that), — one of such criteria is that the original confessor does not have in advance prepared answers, there are no schemes for all cases of life. I know on myself and on the friends, what even on the same questions — both theoretical, and absolutely concrete — (Pavel's) father Cyril tells to different people a miscellaneous. And it at all приспособленчество, not any policy when in each audience say that here wish to hear. It and not psychology, not всматривание in the person. The aged man peers at itself, in the prayer, and already therefrom scoops that it is necessary to tell to this person on its question. Answers to different people therefore happen different that a different plan at God about different people. If you see that a certain priest of all sends, say, to a monastery successively or, on the contrary, all persuades successively to marry, means, this person has a certain scheme which it imposes on people.


Father Andrey, you simultaneously are the professional philosopher and the professional seminary student. Than your way the philosophy differs from theology, and what the general between them?

Unlike the philosopher, the seminary student knows, Whom to ask. There, where the philosopher in private with the thoughts and riddles, to the seminary student is to Whom to pray and to question Whom.

So there are questions on which and you do not know the answer?

Certainly. Here only their small list:

Where the boy whom I was, once has got to?

Tell, a long old age — an award or payment?

Where birds die?

How many years to September?

Whether understands the sea, what I speak?

About what the young foliage sings to a spring breeze?

Whence the death — from above or from below is?

How many leaves to survive, trees pay to winter?

And there are questions which are not pleasant to you?

I do not love questions on me. It is better to talk about orthodox belief, than how I have come to it. By the way, I specially give this interview in order that the interested me personally to send to this book and by that to save time at lectures for conversation on more important subjects. I and further kept silent on this theme if round my biography the strangest myths and slander have not started to arise. So it is better, than each time to waste time on stories and the explanations, most nevertheless to tell about itself.

I ask to consider misters of journalists that they will not wait from me answers to two is traditional-wild questions: “Tell about the purposes of your arrival to our city” (as though I come that local beer to drink!) and “that you will wish in the end our readers”.

Still I do not like type questions “Tell about your impressions about our city”. First, this question is indecent, because it does not leave to the interlocutor of space for a choice; standards of politeness demand to give out the answer in style: “As here all is healthy!”. Secondly, this question gives out hopeless nonprofessionalism of the interviewer (for means that it any more does not know about what to ask, that is has come for work, being “not in a theme”). Thirdly, it bares also its so hopeless complex of the provincial considering with that — a pier, the person from Moscow (Paris, London …), and our Uryupinsk was pleasant to it!

And the main thing — at me simply is not present forces and time to systematise the impressions. At my volume of work on departure I can work only “on an exit”; the entering information is not acquired almost. And that I see in other cities, except the same halls and “palaces of culture!”. Does not remain to time even to bow to local relics more often.

But even more I do not love questions in style: “And what do you think of …”. Too often them set to write down only me in any party. It not a question, and interrogation. It some kind of “examination on loyalty” that party with which identified by the questioning.

For an example: a certain newspaper receives the letter from the reader. The reader says that, wishing to enter Black one hundred, it “has followed blessing in a local temple and has heard from the confessor that at first-de it is necessary воцерковиться, to start to conduct a just way of life, and then already to rescue Russia and others to it to call”. Very much right words: before to bring up in yourself hatred to the one whom you will consider as "the foe of Russia”, it is necessary to impart yourself to love Christ's. But even if the confessor would tell to the spiritual son something not so obvious — has not put the newspaper to deny council of the confessor. One of principles of church ethics consists that it is impossible to criticise the confessor and its councils in the presence of its spiritual fumes. Absolutely “the Black one hundred” differently thinks. Questioning receives the answer:“ Our time vague, and among clergy meet from time to time обновленцы, экуменисты and other heretics. To distinguish the heretic from orthodox not always happens simply, but there is original "test" on which it is possible to distinguish with the big share of probability one from another.

Give we will list questions from this "test". Ask the priest — as it concerns: to экуменизму, to Catholicism, протестантизму; to events of August, 1991 and October, 1993; to democratic mass media; to democratic elections; to Yeltsin and its mode; to the autocratic form of government; to обновленчеству and A.Menju; to transition to “new style”; to church service in Russian, instead of Church Slavonic language; to a Judaism and Jews; to patriotic movement in general and to Black one hundred in particular. Answers to these key ideological questions practically with absolute accuracy will give you the answer: the heretic before you or the orthodox priest ”.

And the spiritual son incite asking similar questions to the confessor! Rudeness it, instead of struggle for Orthodoxy. The dissident modernism, and in any way традиционализм stands up for this "test".

And though the author of this test — Alexander Shtilmark — the parishioner of a temple where I serve (both very good and light parishioner; the person with kind, instead of malicious or prickly, sad eyes), nevertheless at all my kind human relation to it I cannot consider its this "council" clever or even simply church.

In the ancient time all was somehow clearer. “Orthodoxy limit — is purely to know two articles of belief — the Trinity and Dvoitsu: the Trinity неслиянную and unseparable to behold and know; Двоицу — two natures in the Christ in the uniform Person исповедать” (compare: Saint Grigory Sinait. Heads about precepts and doctrines, 26). Today criteria on which people are ready to distinguish Orthodoxy and heresy, were rather displaced.

Question 707: If who tells, that I have damned Nestorija and heretics similar to it, whether to damn to me them or not?

The answer. That Nestory and the heretics who were after it are under анафемою it it is obvious, but you do not dare to damn at all someone because considering the sinner should mourn over the sins and — more anything. But it is not necessary to condemn and damn someone …

Question 708: And who from here will conclude, as I philosophise the same as heretics what to tell to that?

The answer. Tell to it: though and it is obvious that heretics are worthy damnations, but I грешнее and am afraid of any person, as though, condemning other person, not to condemn myself …

Question 709: If I do not know, whether is valid that heretic whom he asks me to curse how to arrive to me?

The answer. Tell to it: “the Brother! I do not know, how about whom you speak philosophises; to damn the one whom I do not know, apparently, will serve me in condemnation. I say to you that other belief, except betrayed from 318 sacred отцев [the First Universal Cathedral], I do not know, and who philosophises differently, rather than it научает, that has anathematized itself(himself)”.

Today if the missionary speaks only about the main thing — about the Christ "party" orthodox it is perceived as malicious evasion from party "alignment", as position masking “молчальника”. And this position for certain is absolutely not orthodox, "not our", time he does not speak about it, — after all this missionary, speaking about the Gospel, does not express on that theme that interests all is true-orthodox adherents. Present — when “sharply there is on the agenda a problem …”, he at all does not speak about it, and polemizes with any “witnesses of Iegovy” and proves them Divinity of the Christ instead of essentially demanding from the Patriarchy of canonization N!.

The Internet server of publishers “Russia Orthodox” frankly warns: “We do not offer visitors of our server of materials on the Scriptus, lives sacred, to a catechism, Church history”. That it for “orthodox Russia”, forgotten about the Gospel and reducing Orthodoxy to infinite skirmishes! As with charming frankness and naivety the writer close to spirit “Russia Orthodox” was expressed, “mission of our Fatherland — to keep юлианский a calendar”. Whether “Russian idea” is small? Really it also is that unique contribution of Russia to world culture, history and religious life of which Slavophiles and Dostoevsky dreamt?

But околоцерковные newsdealers consider the focus of interest standard for Orthodoxy. And those who is not limited to this circle, try вытолкать from Church.


I could be present at your lectures. And both times at me such impression that at lectures I have learnt more than from your books. How many from the conceived books you have already published, and how many still wait for the hour?

If to consider formally left at me 35 books and brochures. But as them to consider, I and itself do not know. Here in 1997 I had a book under the name “About our defeat”. In it there were 40 pages. In 1999 there was a book with the same name. That was for two years before whole брошюркой, here became only chapter 1. In total in the book there were 540 pages. In 2003 there was a new processing of the same book with the same name — “About our defeat. Christianity on a history limit”. Now in the book already 840 pages. And thus pages from the edition of 1999 have not entered into the edition of 2003 …

How it to consider — three different books or one?

Or a return example: in 1997 I had a book “If God is love”. In it there were 120 pages. It completely was a part of my book “Gifts and an anathema” (in last edition it is 540 pages). So two it is books or one?

I therefore carefully say that I had 20 books.

When you have time to write so many books and articles?

And I also am not in time. Therefore also it is necessary to come back and alter all time to them.

So it has turned out that I have started to write and be published earlier, than it assumed, and earlier, than was ready to it. Too sharp turn has occurred in religious life of Russia in the early nineties, and church editions and church writers too slowly reacted to occurring changes. On myself I was convinced of the validity of the supervision asserting that everyone writes that book which would like to read simply. Absence of modern apologetic publications on the one hand, and improbable quantity of lie about Orthodoxy, with another, have forced me to take up the pen.

To usual, for a long time habitual and then yet стихнувшей to atheistic antiorthodox polemic those years new voices have increased: and supporters of "universal values”, believing as if orthodox monks prevent to become them bankers, and quickly gaining in strength occult propagandists, and the new Russian Protestants who suddenly have been brought up by foreign missionaries.

From church publicists and seminary students of the senior generation it was not audible public answers to these attacks to Orthodoxy. And then I have remembered Anton Chekhov's words: “There are big dogs, and there are small dogs, but small should not be confused existence of the big: all are obliged to bark - and to bark that voice, what Lord has given”.

My articles have started to appear in newspapers, then in magazines, at last they began to gather in books. Those responses which to me could be heard, showed that despite all imperfection of these books, all of them have benefited many people. Their circulations and допечатки have quickly disper-sed. But when offers on their reprinting again began to arrive, it has appeared that is simple so it is simply impossible to make it. They need to be changed too seriously. I refuse to recognise these books the, that is expressing my today's relation to problems discussed in them.

In the Moscow Spiritual Academy professor Alexey Ilich Osipov was my favourite teacher. The person deeply orthodox and consequently allocated with surprising internal freedom, it непрочь ironically to concern камому to itself and the professorial advantage. Not to apply on it too obliging word “юродство” I will tell differently: at times he wishes to arrive how norms of orthodox etiquette do not allow to arrive. And so, once on change I have approached to Alexey Ilichu with a question concerning one of theses of its textbook “Basic divinity”. My question, however, has been met absolutely unexpectedly: “And why you with this question have addressed to me?” - “well as, - I speak, - Alexey Ilich, the same your textbook!”. - ”Pardon, yes from what you it took?”. Dizzily I show it the title page: “Yes here it is written!”. - “Well, no, excuse, here, it is just written that the author absolutely other person”. - “As so?” - “Read attentively: see, how it is written -"senior lecturer A.I.Osipov ”. And I who? - Professor A. I.Osipov. So it is not my textbook”.

Here and I feel that my first books not quite mine. That is why from time to time I am engaged in destruction of the old draught copies, is more exact - processing before than the left books. In reprintings much is anew written on the same themes to which the first books have been devoted, but thus, naturally, those places of former books which in my opinion still looks as more or less comprehensible remain.

And, of course, the abundance of lecture trips disturbs to literary work. Last eight years I have enough forces only to overwork one and a half ten already left books. In general it would be desirable 6–7 more books to write. The material for them is.

You not so favour to a press, and meanwhile prefer to name yourself not the seminary student, not the professor and so on, and the church journalist.

Here really there is some divergence between an official title and internal feeling. Well, what I really “the professor of divinity”! In дореволюционую spiritual Academy me and the student would not accept, not that that the professor! I first of all in languages would be filled up … But if there are today theological higher educational institutions — someone should be in them and the professor. “What time for a court yard — such is the Messiah”.

However, here it is possible to note one uniqueness of our time: for the first time in history our Church missionary work is conducted by professors of divinity. Even in prerevolutionary years complaints of missionaries were audible that “professors of our spiritual academies absolutely ignore sacred business of our mission, the  destruction of souls of the orthodox people for them is indifferent, why professorial works on сектоведению at us never was, no, and I do not know, whether soon will. Only occasionally, as though by the way, they criticise our missionary literary works, but concerning mission they have not given till now independent serious scientific works and missionaries do not give also are in this respect absolutely lonely”.

Today the situation is really unique: there is a group of professors of divinity which are ready to come off the academic libraries and византологических studies and to go to people and the audiences rather far from is professional-theological traditions. Whether there is it on advantage or to the detriment of their actually scientific work? At least on myself I can скаазть that, of course, to the detriment. But to people the advantage is. Means, it is necessary to work so: knowing enough for teaching at spiritual school, nevertheless to go to school usual; having knowledge more than at the journalist to work nevertheless in journalism.

I am valid — the church journalist. And as from within I see, how the journalism becomes, I have a number already order of the taken roots claims to a modern secular press. There is such old Jewish joke. The Jew sits and cries on the ashes of the house. The neighbour approaches to it and asks:

— How affairs, Izja?

— Yes itself you see — the house has burnt down, the wife has burnt down, children have burnt down. All has burnt down!

— Yes, it is sad... And what brand new?

This joke at me it is strong ассоциирован with journalism …

This joke at me it is strong ассоциирован with journalism …

And still, of course, in the world журналюг and officials to me обидна the settled hostility, нелюбопытство to the world of Russian thought, to the world of philosophy, divinity. Why at us as Russian culture are considered only “ложечники” and “матрешечники”? Why event in cultural life Bori Moiseyev's concert, instead of lecture of the seminary student is considered? It is insulting that in the journalism world tremendous illiteracy, нелюбопытство, bias reigns. Whence this desire of modern paparazzi all to befoul, изъесть, about all to write with ехидцей? Have passed celebrations in Diveevo (the 100 anniversary of glorification of Saint Serafima) — and liberally-dissidentstvujushchy the Internet site begins the reporting with a phrase: “Pilgrims have parted, having left after itself garbage heaps”. And after all even children's rhymes derided such репортерский style:

- Where you were today, the cat?

- At the queen at the English.

- And what saw at court?

- Saw a mouse on a carpet.

Father Andrey, speak, you had a new book about a post?

Yes прильпни language wash throats to mine, аще I will sometime write something about a post! It is enough to look at my waist to understand that it is a theme which is out of limits of my competence.
At you the house an extensive record library, even records of modern music; on a book shelf at you Vysotsky's photo — as is all is combined with Christianity, belief in God?

Well, this music — that remains from former and that it is a pity to erase as memoirs on youth. As to Vysotsky for me it there was very expensive person whom in my choice … I will not tell that it has led me to Orthodoxy, — but he has created that internal psychological atmosphere in which it became possible. Because its songs spoke about a choice, about the protest — in the beginning 80 this motive should be present at life of the young man which has come to orthodox tradition. I am grateful to Vysotsky for it.

Its songs constantly sounded in our house. It still love and my father — they with Vysotsky coevals. For “red tags” — here it has made search of the way, a track, an exit for me psychologically possible to make the choice.

I store those cartridges, but for a long time already I do not listen to its record. Human life полосата: probably, there are such days when I again could listen and would began to listen to Vysotsky. Rationally speaking, I would wish, that such days was less. And, on the other hand, that such days happen, it helps to remain the person.

Well, this music — that remains from former and that it is a pity to erase as memoirs on youth. As to Vysotsky for me it there was very expensive person whom in my choice … I will not tell that it has led me to Orthodoxy, — but he has created that internal psychological atmosphere in which it became possible. Because its songs spoke about a choice, about the protest — in the beginning 80 this motive should be present at life of the young man which has come to orthodox tradition. I am grateful to Vysotsky for it.

Its songs constantly sounded in our house. It still love and my father — they with Vysotsky coevals. For “red tags” — here it has made search of the way, a track, an exit for me psychologically possible to make the choice.

I store those cartridges, but for a long time already I do not listen to its record. Human life полосата: probably, there are such days when I again could listen and would began to listen to Vysotsky. Rationally speaking, I would wish, that such days was less. And, on the other hand, that such days happen, it helps to remain the person.


You have personal spiritual crises, you are visited by sensation богооставленности?

In due time in seminary it is all it was well treated. There were also personal friction, there were boring lectures … But leave for territory of seminary and understand that all the rest — is worse. Since then my way of life on border of Church and the world helps to overcome internal crises more likely, rather than them generates.

You mean the periods неспокойствия, spiritual crisis?

Here we rest against other problem, a serious problem of internal church life. It consists here in what: people who come to a temple, address to the priest is frequently people with sick conscience, with sick soul. And the priest is, as a rule, the person, whose well-being above the average level (I speak about internal well-being). He/she is the person who has a meaning of the life — very realised, — the person who has an internal calling. He/she is the person who feels as all being нужность the service. He/she is the person at whom the main choice of life — already behind, is made. But private world situation has the double: here the world in the Christ, and here the double — a peace of mind. And it is very easy to accept one for another. Often so happens that people not church, — which frequently therefore and remain not church, — go to the priest with the pain, and meet the person who has not wished to be the interlocutor, has not wished to accept this pain. Has not wished to leave the habitual rhythm of life, to listen to the person, to understand it. The Lord, as it is known, treats for such illnesses: treats us the temptations, different everyday burdens. And consequently, on the one hand, maybe, also it would not be desirable, that these "heavy" days happened, but, on the other hand, absolutely it to leave is would mean loss. Sometimes there are such days when there is to relatives a sensation of pre-Christian youthful existentialism.

“I want to live to think and suffer...”. But we will return to Vysotsky. In what relations it with Christianity?

In the bad. I am, of course, strong христианизировал it in the perception and was very glad, when once have seen its photo with a dagger on a neck. I gave to this circumstance, likely, more values, rather than Vysotsky.

But its destiny, seemingly, all the same has passed by the Gospel. And in it drugs are in many respects guilty. Alas, very many of that pain which is in its late songs, — not because that platitude of the Soviet validity caused suffering in a shower of the poet, and — simply pain from a drug. But is at Vysotsky and the present poetry.

Very often in your lectures, in works you quote fragments from literary works and citations from Tsvetaeva or from Vysotsky illustrate many theological themes and arguments. What for you the poetry world means?



Simply I do not love the press and television world, the pop-music world. Tsvetaeva has lines: “... Readers of newspapers — глотатели emptiness!”.

And here the poetry becomes a refuge from this total “макдональдизации” the world of newspapers for me. Once it was the outlet from the world диамата. And I am very grateful to Tsvetaeva, Ahmatovoj, to Galich, Pasternak, Voloshin, Gumilev, Mayakovsky, Yesenin. I do not dare to judge them for those blasphemous attacks which meet in products of some of them. As the priest has no right to condemn the person who has come on a confession, and I do not judge the poet for its public confession on which it has taken out the sins, sufferings, doubts, passions.

Whether there is at you time for reading of the similar literature? Use of similar citations is how much proved? And in general, what you prefer to read, what circle of your reading during the given period?

I very much any more do not read for a long time fiction, something is simple since students in memory remains. I work with the istoriko-religious, theological literature. Almost I do not read even books on philosophy.

Why?

I said that for all life I regret that have arrived on philosophical faculty, instead of on the historical.
In your books, lectures, conversations considerably Lewis, Chesterton's influence. What your relation to them?

Lewis and Chesterton is a lot of for me meant. I read them in seminary, in a samizdat. I have understood that it is possible to speak with pleasure about Christianity, without tediousness. And that's it this intonation, a manner has laid down to me on heart, has helped to change style of the letter because to write I began on a monstrous "scientifically-postgraduate" slang. And for me there was joyful a thought that it is possible to write differently, not for an academic council, and for people.

Whether something from the modern art is pleasant to you personally?

In the most unexpected places where it is thought that on this bog can only поганки grow, suddenly there is something interesting. Who could think, what in the rock music world there can be something Christian, orthodox? For example, Yury Shevchyuk's songs — there a lot of evangelical light, there remind the person of his soul. The video film “Zone of Ljube” — there very human, Christian sight at the person was very kind.

However in modern creativity for certain a lot of not orthodox. How it can be "filtered"?

It is really difficult. But, understand, I have been brought up in the Soviet years and learnt to be grateful for small. I knew one seminarist who has gone to seminary such strange way: it could not get the Gospel anywhere and bought atheistic books and therefrom wrote out citations from it. And so has made full enough mosaic of evangelical citations. And in the Soviet years I learnt to be grateful at least for one kind word about Church. Therefore also has got used to that I can appreciate any author, thus without incurring the obligation to agree with everything that it has made, spoke. So it is necessary to tell only after Anna Ahmatovoj: “When you would know, from what rubbish flowers grow, without knowing shame”.

Listening to your lectures, you are surprised to your knowledge, and they, should be, all replenish and replenish. How you feel with them? After all it is told: from much wisdom a lot of grief.

Yes, so it is told by Solomonom (if it to consider as the author "Ekklesiasta"). But at wise Solomona it was a question of knowledge completely not scientific, philosophical, and about knowledge of the world of people. My book knowledge, more likely, strengthen my belief. Blow on belief is put usually by “news of church life”. But medicines for present pricks — in knowledge of history. When I узна! ю any pitiable things about us, modern orthodox I think: “My God, people have not learnt to sin in a new fashion for thousand years. And nevertheless the Lord suffers us”. And that the Lord suffers us, gives hope that our generation — not is generation limiting, last. Number of rascals in cassocks always stable, evangelical — everyone the twelfth. In general, here at me the same consolation, as at Ekklesiasta: There is something about what speak: “Look, here, it is new!” — but it was in the centuries which were before of us! (Compare: Еккл. 1, 10).


You somehow said that in a terrestrial history all of us are equally doomed to defeat. But unless optimism — not quality of the orthodox Christian?

There is a known formula: “My knowledge is pessimistic, my belief is optimistical”. Each of us will endure  destruction not only Russia, but also all our Galaxy. We are immortal. Unfortunately or to pleasure — to solve to everyone most.

And what you in church life pleases?

About, in Church I am am pleased, first of all, with that It suffers me.

And in the end, what you would want to tell?

I have one request growing from one my disappointment. To me it