One of the most important decisions in a person’s life, which largely determines his destiny, is the choice of profession: who to be, what and how to study. For an Orthodox Christian, this decision is determined, in addition, by the desire to please God, so that future professional activity, at a minimum, does not run counter to the commandments of God, and, at a maximum, is directly related to serving God and the Church. Thus, the choice of profession can be considered as an intermediate goal on the path to the main goal of a Christian’s life—the acquisition of the Kingdom of Heaven. It is in this context that we will talk about this.
In modern conditions, making this choice is much more difficult than one hundred and fifty or more years ago. It’s not just the lack of class, accessibility to education and the widest range of opportunities. The point is the changed structure of social life. If earlier Orthodox customs were part of everyday life, most people were believers, and therefore, while doing almost any business, a person could freely combine it with his religious beliefs, but now the world lives according to completely different principles. They continue to change for the worse and often alienate us from the Orthodox faith.
Two extremes
In this regard, in the church environment there are often two misconceptions, two extremes, which, being seemingly opposite, very strongly contribute to one another. One extreme is the desire to keep up with the times, to lead a secular lifestyle, and the desire for a successful career in a secular society. Remaining a formal believer, a person does not correlate his actions with the requirements of Orthodox dogma, but pays attention to them when there is time for that. Accordingly, such a person chooses an educational institution and occupation based on criteria not related to Christianity. For this reason, a person can choose either a completely sinful profession, or build a career without thinking about how and in what way he could serve the Church.
Tomsk Report lesson in Sunday school
The opposite extreme is what can be called false spirituality, when the need to study, get an education and master a particular profession is denied, and instead only pray, fast and attend church services. Of course, there are ascetics who leave everything for the salvation of their souls and go to monasteries. But this should be a conscious and integral choice of the person himself, and not an attempt to “sit on two chairs”, combining work in the world, family life and monastic rules. It looks even sadder when parents try to realize their unfulfilled dreams of asceticism in their own children, forcing them to refuse to study and master a good profession. Neophytes—those who have recently come to faith in God—are subject to a similar temptation. There are cases when such people, having come to church, leave a good job, a sought-after specialty, and get a job as church watchmen, thereby quickly and deliberately destroying the life basis that they had, breaking social ties with the people who made up their circle of contacts. But in the end, they bury their God-given talent (Matt. 25:24) in one area or another, not realizing that in their place and in the rank in which they are called (1 Cor. 7:24), a person could bring more benefits both the Church and people.
Conversations with the priest. Church education
Audio |
In the Ekaterinburg studio of the TV channel, Archpriest Pyotr Mangilev, vice-rector of the Ekaterinburg Theological Seminary for educational work, rector of the Church of Saints Cyril and Methodius, Equal-to-the-Apostles, answers questions from viewers.
– Before the start of the program, I watched replays of our conversations and realized that we met last year on July 1, that is, a year ago. The website of the Ekaterinburg diocese reports that you took part in a webinar of the Educational Committee dedicated to church-state relations in the field of theological education in modern Russia. Did you take part in it remotely?
– Yes, it was a working meeting. Now the Educational Committee is actively working, due to the fact that theological education reform is underway. The form of webinars, when theological schools gather for such working meetings, justifies itself. There are quite a lot of webinars. This academic year we have met with representatives of the Academic Committee several times. Various reports are presented, we are enlightened on how we should continue to live and work. It was a working meeting of a similar nature. Representatives of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation and Rosobrnadzor, who are responsible for licensing and accreditation of educational institutions, came to the Educational Committee. The questions concerned issues of licensing and accreditation, since religious schools are now going through these processes.
Our school has been licensed as a church educational institution for over ten years. All religious educational institutions receive a license from the Ministry of Education, because educational activities cannot be conducted without a license; they are prohibited. The license we have does not imply accreditation or access to a state diploma. We issue only church diplomas, which are recognized within the Russian Orthodox Church. We are controlled by the Education Committee and the Ministry of Education. The Ministry, within the framework of this license, controls not so much the content of education as the creation of normal conditions for this education, so that there is no extremism or any other issues.
But now, in the new situation, it is important that a priest, a graduate of a seminary or church educational institution, receive a state diploma. Why is this necessary? Because a priest can come, for example, to a school as a teacher. He may be involved in teaching at a university and so on. He needs a state diploma in expert activities and in some other areas. A state diploma is a certain kind of right, but a person receives a good liberal education and does not have a diploma recognized by the state. For a long time, the hierarchy negotiated with government agencies on this topic. Laws have now been adopted that allow church educational institutions to license the specialty “Theology” and accredit this specialty. Accordingly, licensing and accreditation of this specialty allows a church educational institution to issue a state diploma.
Now our seminary is just preparing documents for licensing in the field of “Theology,” and the Missionary Institute of our diocese just recently passed an attestation test in this field. Nowadays, educational institutions are very busy with these issues, so the last working meeting dealt with these moments, questions, and some difficult places related to these processes.
Now there is such an innovation. Until this year, there was training in theology at the bachelor's and master's levels. For a very long time, the question of training in this area in graduate school and the possibility of defending dissertations that would be approved by the Higher Attestation Commission, and degrees would be recognized by the state, were raised and discussed. Since there are levels of higher education, the logical continuation should be the possibility of scientific activity in this area. Last year, the theology major was approved as a graduate major. Now there is an opportunity to study theology in graduate school. True, dissertation defenses can so far take place either in philology, or in history, or in philosophy. There are no such academic degrees yet, but, probably, over time this issue will be resolved.
Now the first academic council has been created in which dissertations of this kind can be defended. It was created on the basis of the All-Church Postgraduate and Doctoral Studies named after Saints Methodius and Cyril and the Academy of Public Service, that is, this council is interuniversity. It may be difficult to create such a council on the basis of one educational institution. This work will also begin; we were told about some points and requirements that are presented in this regard. But this is important for educational institutions, because we have a need, firstly, to teach our graduates further, and secondly, to improve the qualifications of our teachers, that is, they must receive the appropriate degrees (graduation is one of the requirements of the Ministry of Education for the quality of education ).
Science should and should have an outlet in the form of dissertations, this is natural. We were informed about this, they talked about the requirements for science that apply to a religious educational institution. In principle, it was useful and interesting work. There was talk about theological scientific journals, and so on. This was the subject of today's webinar, working meeting.
– So, today we will talk in principle about church education.
– The conversation about education is probably relevant during this period, because graduates have graduated from school...
- Search period...
– Yes, and universities have now opened their doors to accept applicants. We also opened the doors.
– We’ll talk about this later, but now a question from a TV viewer: “The Evangelist Luke has such words that in the Garden of Gethsemane Christ prayed until he sweated blood. Other evangelists make no such mention at all. How could Luke know such details, since Christ personally addressed God the Father, especially since the disciples were sleeping? Who could know this?
– It’s difficult for me to answer this question, because there are no details on which one could speak definitively. But the property of sweat is probably such that it remains on a person’s forehead for some time. When the Lord prayed, the disciples were sleeping, but then He went out to the disciples and returned to them three times. They could see Him and see those beads of sweat. The holy apostle and evangelist Luke could have known the tradition from his disciples. It seems to me that it could very well have been transferred. Even in Russian literature, Leskov describes a situation (in my opinion, in “Trifles of Bishop’s Life”) from the 19th century, when he says how such bloody sweat was visible. Therefore, although the disciples were sleeping, they woke up, the Lord spoke to them three times, they could see Him. The property of sweat is such that it remains on the forehead.
– Another question from a TV viewer: “I am 50 years old, I have a higher pedagogical education. Can I enter a religious educational institution, a seminary?”
- Good question. Fifty years is an age when it is quite possible to study, especially since you have the first higher education, and accordingly, you have the experience and skill of studying, the ability to learn. Moreover, this is pedagogical education. The seminary is a pastoral educational institution, admission there is limited. Males are accepted, and the seminary trains future priests. But in the Russian Orthodox Church there are several educational institutions that train graduates in the field of Theology. There are such departments in secular universities, and you can find out about this in the universities closest to you.
On the other hand, even if teaching is conducted in a secular university, it is always conducted in close cooperation with the diocesan administration, because according to the conditions, the teaching of doctrinal disciplines is controlled by the Church. There are also a number of purely church educational institutions. For example, in Moscow there is the Orthodox St. Tikhon Humanitarian University. There are several faculties there (in particular, missionary), where you can get education by correspondence. There is a Missionary Institute in Yekaterinburg, which offers evening and correspondence courses.
- And face-to-face too.
- Yes. For the TV viewer, since she does not live in Yekaterinburg, the correspondence form will be relevant. I would advise you to go to the websites of educational institutions (even those that I named) and look at the conditions for admission. Realistically, you can enroll and study. Yes, information about church educational institutions is published in the official Orthodox church calendars, which are published by the Publishing Council. There are addresses at the end of the applications. The addresses of educational institutions of the Russian Orthodox Church are also on the Patriarchate website. So you can find all this and get an education, even if you are 50 years old and there is no such educational institution in your city. It is quite possible to get an education through correspondence. St. Tikhon's University also has a distance learning form. More information about this can be found on the PSTGU website. If you have a good desire to learn, you don’t need to put it off.
– There will always be an opportunity.
– Yes, and this desire should only be welcomed, so make an effort to find a form that is possible for you and get an education. This will be useful and, as an internal resource for your spiritual development, you will be able to benefit your parish activities by participating in some educational activities in the parish. This will be good for both the family and the wider community.
– I am glad that modern technical means allow us, located thousands of kilometers from an educational institution, to participate in educational activities, receive an education, study using a computer and the Internet.
– This is such an opportunity! I remember how I started studying. Libraries here in Yekaterinburg are limited, although there are good libraries here. It is necessary to order books through interlibrary loan, wait for months for them to arrive, use them for a limited time... Now we have the opportunity to very quickly access information, the widest possibilities are open. This is very good. Being, it would seem, somewhere far from the centers of civilization, we can receive an excellent education, if only we had diligence and desire.
– This is probably a separate topic for conversation - if there was a desire, because at one time we really shoveled through mountains of catalogs to find what we needed, we ordered from other libraries... Today we have access to everything, but the desire is lost.
– Yes, we don’t always use this access. Therefore, any desire to get an education should certainly be welcomed.
– Question from a TV viewer: “In the Gospel of Matthew there is a verse: “Whoever does not take up his cross and follow Me is not worthy of Me.” Explain these words."
– In this case, it is both simple and complex... We live, come to God, try to somehow build our life, measuring it with what the Lord commanded us. Trying to build this life, we encounter certain stumbling blocks and difficulties. We want to bypass these difficulties, make life easier, and we deviate from what the Gospel commanded us, we do not take up the cross that is given to us. Taking up your cross means, probably, first of all, trying to build your life in accordance with what the Lord commanded in the Holy Gospel, that is, trying to live according to the Gospel commandments. At least start fulfilling them in small ways. It is always work, but refusal of this work is refusal of the cross. I could explain it this way, if it's simple and short.
– Question from a TV viewer: “Can a person immediately receive an answer during prayer? If you have personal experience, please tell us.”
– A very good personal question. Ask, and it will be given to you, says the Lord, so during prayer, of course, a person can receive answers to some of his questions. Sometimes they come, and it becomes easy, clear and understandable what to do in a given situation. As for personal experience, I don’t even know what could be cited here. We must understand and know that the Lord hears the prayer of everyone and answers the prayer of each of us according to the strength with which we pray. Of course, we need to resort to God and try to listen to what He tells us.
– How to distinguish what is divine and what is devilish?
– It’s clear that we need to differentiate. But the divine does not contradict what is commanded to us in the Holy Scriptures, with what is contained in the teaching of the Church. What the Lord reveals to us about us, in a personal sense, must always coincide with what the Holy Church teaches. If it conflicts with church teaching, then it should be avoided. The Apostle Paul said that even if an angel from heaven says something different from what the apostle himself says, then there is no need to listen to the angel.
In theology there is a doctrine of supernatural Revelation. It can be general, which is given to the entire Church, and personal, private, individual. The property of individual revelation, which every person can have (every person can have a personal meeting with God), should never conflict with general Revelation, with what we know about God and salvation. It deepens and applies church teaching specifically to this person, helping him on the path of salvation, and does not conflict. This is the main criterion.
And you need to consult with a clergyman during confession, see how much this corresponds to church teaching. Again, education is needed to know what the Church teaches on a particular issue.
– The next question is from a TV viewer: “You said that we have many church educational institutions. There are probably a lot of graduates in different fields. Why are children's Sunday schools taught mostly not by graduates - young, energetic, knowledgeable - but by older women? Where do young people go with knowledge and energy?”
– There are many educational institutions, but this does not mean that there are so many graduates to cover all the personnel needs of the Russian Orthodox Church.
– I don’t think we said that there are a lot of them. They exist, but compared to the number of secular educational institutions, they are just a drop in the bucket.
– The Russian Orthodox Church now has 38 seminaries in Russia, as far as I remember. This year our seminary graduated six young graduates (full-time). There are also graduates in the correspondence department, but they are clergy. Young graduates, until they are ordained (someone has not yet arranged their family life, have not decided), will be busy in one or another church obedience, in particular in teaching. As for the educational institutions that we talked about today (Missionary Institute, PSTGU), people of different ages study in their correspondence courses. Teachers in parochial schools may or may not be graduates of one or another church educational institution. There are not enough graduates.
In our diocese there is also a teachers’ seminary that trains teachers for parochial schools. Here you need to keep in mind that there are many parishes in the Russian Orthodox Church, and new ones are opening. There are many more parishes than graduates from all educational institutions of the Russian Orthodox Church. The parish solves certain educational problems on its own. Often, if a Sunday school is formed in a parish, the parish rector and parents determine who will teach and how. The church education system is designed to help organize this education - in particular, by accepting one or another teacher for training, perhaps for distance learning. There are different forms of short training, advanced training, and so on. But the situation is such that there are people who exist... They work, try, teach. There are young people, but not as many as we would like.
It must be borne in mind that the number of parishes of the Russian Orthodox Church has increased significantly over the past two and a half decades. In Yekaterinburg in 1988 there was one church - here, in the courtyard (St. John the Baptist Cathedral). Now there are several dozen temples. On the territory of the Sverdlovsk region there were less than two dozen open churches - now there are several hundred. Much parish work is carried out mainly in parishes. No matter how many educational institutions we open, in the near future we will not satisfy the shortage of personnel and will not cover all personnel needs.
Another important point. Educational institutions cannot open just like that, right away, from scratch. It is clear that the personnel needs of the Russian Orthodox Church became clear in the early nineties. The clergy had a constant concern about solving personnel issues and engaging in educational activities. But there are also natural forces, a natural resource, including in the Church, in relation to those people who can teach in these educational institutions, where and how these educational institutions can be formed, what book we will give into our hands and how we will teach, for what kind of desk will we seat? All of these are important and big problems that cannot be solved at once. I have been observing this process for more than twenty years and I see how difficult many things are and what efforts are made. There is a result, but the need for personnel is greater than the result. It will be like this for quite some time.
– Thank God that now educational institutions are appearing that train not clergy, but church workers, specialists who can be Sunday school teachers, heads of youth departments, employees of Orthodox media, video studios, and so on. This kind of work is actually being done.
– Yes, the needs are great. But there is, for example, the problem of Orthodox libraries. Requires special training. There is a problem with Orthodox television. You need to find a competent employee somewhere, someone has to work for two or three, because sometimes there is simply no one to hire for a particular position. In this regard, the formation of the educational system is important, because there are personnel needs, which means the educational system must develop. But all this, unfortunately, does not happen right away.
– Can we say that the church educational system exists as a system?
– Yes, it exists as a system. There are seminaries offering bachelor's degrees, and a number of seminaries have master's degrees. There is an internal church system for training highly qualified personnel. Now a number of church higher educational institutions have emerged that train graduates in various fields. Women's education arose, the education of those who do not intend to become clergy, but want to participate in educational activities. In Moscow, in addition to St. Tikhon's University, there are several such universities. That is, the system as such has developed.
– Question from a TV viewer: “The child graduated from 11th grade, passed the Unified State Exam, more or less passing grade. What documents are required to apply to the seminary? What exams?
– Thanks for the question. In general, to decide on the documents, I would immediately advise you to go to the seminary’s website, there is a list of documents there. Or call. Traditionally, we take the same documents that are required for admission to higher education institutions. In addition to these documents, you may need: a certificate from a psychiatrist, a narcologist, a character reference, a recommendation from the parish. We take into account the Unified State Examination, and additional exams include the Law of God, an interview on knowledge of prayers, the ability to read and sing. Here we decide for ourselves whether a person has any abilities.
– To better define specialization?
– No, in order to understand for ourselves what level we should aim for next in teaching.
– The question of documents is a technical question, where to come, what to bring...
– Rosa Luxemburg Street, 57, Holy Trinity Cathedral (building in the courtyard).
– All these questions can be found out over the phone and on the Internet.
– Yes, on the seminary website.
– But there are also questions of a moral nature. Who even goes to seminary? What aspiration should a person have for him to go there, what qualities should he have?
“I said that in addition to the documents required for admission to any university, we require a recommendation from a clergyman, because a seminary applicant must somehow prove himself in the parish. A seminary is a special educational institution whose main task is to train pastors of the Church - clergy. Naturally, certain requirements are already imposed at the entrance. For example, there is a condition: single or first married, because second marriage is an obstacle to the priesthood. A recommendation from the parish is also needed so that we can see that the person who comes to us is a church person, that he confesses, partakes of the Holy Mysteries of Christ, lives a church life and understands where he is going and why. This main point is there. And so – we are waiting for applicants.
– There are students who can come to the seminary having already received some kind of secular education (both in colleges and universities); after school they are also accepted. In your personal opinion, should a person first receive a secular education, a general knowledge of the humanities or mathematics, and then move on to a more serious spiritual education?
– I would say it depends in each specific case on the individual person. It is good for someone to receive such an education. This year (and other years too) seminarians graduated who received secular higher education and completed a master's degree. It was a conscious choice for them, and it’s good that they received this education. We see both students who come straight after school and those who come straight after the army. I can say that among all of them there are good, serious students who are focused on learning. When the Lord calls, everyone comes at their own time, at their own age. Some people need it this way, and some need it differently. If a person hears a call and comes to the seminary, his formation takes place here, he somehow grows in a theological educational institution - this is good. If an adult with life experience comes, that’s also good. Both seventeen- and thirty-year-olds come to study, they study together, they help each other.
– At the beginning of our conversation, we talked about the general education standard “Theology”. Do I understand correctly that church specialists who graduate from higher educational institutions with state accreditation, regardless of the spectrum in which they studied, all emerge as theologians?
– Yes, their diploma says “theologian, teacher of theology” (as specialists used to have) or “bachelor of theology” and “master of theology” (since now there is no longer a specialty). “Theologians” – translated into Russian as “theologians”. A very pretentious name for a specialty, but so...
– Is it necessary to introduce any additional general education standards, what could they be? Perhaps work is underway to introduce them?
– There are theological standards, the specialty was included in the register of specialties in 1992. Now standard 3+ is already being implemented, that is, fundamental and specific changes have been made to it. In principle, the last standard by which we work is very close to the church standard by which teaching is conducted in religious educational institutions, even if they are not licensed in the field of “Theology”, but conduct educational activities purely according to the church standard. Any additional standards are hardly needed.
A master's degree also requires a narrower specialization, but here you write and agree on the curriculum you write and teach. There may be a specialization, say, in the field of history of the Russian Church or the formation of the military clergy, where there will be the specifics of certain disciplines. Or a master’s degree program with a focus on “Orthodox journalism” is possible, where relevant courses are taught aimed at training a specialized specialist. A bachelor's degree presupposes general, basic training. Groups of master's students are initially expected to be small; this is a one-off training of specialists, where private courses are taught. If we need a group of specialists who could do, for example, social work and care for prisons, we probably need to take psychology courses in this master’s program related to the peculiarities of pastoral counseling. If we set the task of training specialists in the field of patrolology who will engage in scientific activities, they will have their own special courses, there must be a lot of language... This is how it works in the secular system, and in the church too.
– In general, the Church from ancient times was the place where people received their first education, studied writing and grammar. Schools were formed at churches and monasteries, including Sunday schools, where people could learn something. Gradually, this role in our world passes to the state, and special educational institutions appear. What can we learn useful for ourselves, for example, from the standards that existed before the revolution?
– There is a lot to talk about here. You are right, the Church, especially in the medieval period, was the center of education. All literacy was contained in the Church. As a matter of fact, the first formally organized higher educational institution was the church educational institution of the Slavic-Greek-Latin Academy, the successor of which is the Moscow Theological Academy. The first educational institution that opened in Russia in 1685 was a church educational institution. Educational activities began with him.
It must be said that church schools at the end of the 17th - beginning of the 18th century, in the 18th century had the task of training clergy, but the state, especially at the beginning of the 18th century, drew heavily from church schools, since the school itself did not yet have the necessary organization, and in the Church this production of education was. Educated people were needed. And even since the medieval period, the children of clergy, who did not follow in the footsteps of their fathers (not everyone became priests, but the family was a unit where they received an education), often found themselves in some kind of official positions, because they knew how to read and write. In this regard, in both ways, the Church promoted education.
Of course, we have seen the correct structure of the system of spiritual education since the 18th century. The spiritual regulations, written by Feofan Prokopovich, put into effect in the Russian Orthodox Church, describe a harmonious system of seminaries of eight classes, sequentially from lower to higher, studying theological sciences. The eighteenth century saw seminaries built according to Western models.
The beginning of the 19th century gives a slightly different system. There is a reform of both the spiritual and secular schools. As a matter of fact, the existing education system was founded at the beginning of the 19th century - it is a stepwise education from lower to higher levels. We can say that at the beginning of the 19th century, the theological school received the following structure: six years of theological school, six years of seminary. These twelve years are complete secondary education. The seminary was not only a vocational school, but also a general education one, therefore, in the pre-revolutionary seminary, both special disciplines that provided professional training and general education (mathematics, physics, botany) were taught. Twelve years is a cycle of complete education. Four years later it is a theological academy, a higher educational institution.
There were seminaries in every diocese, a school in every district; the schools were subordinate to the seminary, the seminaries were united into educational districts and were subordinate to the academies. There were four academies: Moscow, Kiev (the eldest, arose in the first half of the 17th century), St. Petersburg, Kazan (the last to open). This personnel training system solved its problems. The seminaries were very large. In the diocesan city they numbered more than a thousand students. That is, the seminary was a secondary school, and secondary school education in the 19th century was a very good education, in addition, it was also secondary vocational education.
Problems with educational activities and the lack of educated personnel are beginning to be recognized, and already at the beginning of the twentieth century the question is raised about the need to open theological faculties in universities so that this would be a separate system. It must be said that even with the opening of the first university in Moscow in 1755, the question of opening a theological faculty was raised; then he rose repeatedly. But the faculty was not open. The cautious position of the Synod was reflected here, because the Synod believed that in this case sufficient control over educational activities could not be ensured. But at the beginning of the twentieth century, the issue was raised acutely, because there was a need for women's education. There is an understanding that there should be spiritual, church education for women; diocesan women's schools are opened, where both general and special church training are given. That is, this problem has matured, at the beginning of the twentieth century there were attempts to solve it, there were also in the post-revolutionary period, because not everything was closed immediately, for some time these institutions existed in difficult conditions, there were interesting initiatives. True, they were quickly strangled.
In Yekaterinburg there was an interesting initiative to open the Yekaterinburg Theological Institute on the basis of the seminary. In the year of Kolchak's administration, the Orthodox People's University was opened here. I must say that the scant information we have is very interesting. 300–400 people attended lectures at this popular theological university. Yekaterinburg was not such a big city then.
– That is, these were very popular courses.
– Yes, now we are not always able to gather such a number of people for one or another church event. We cannot compare, because now there is television, the Orthodox TV channel “Soyuz”, there is an Orthodox newspaper, an Orthodox Internet. That is, there are many places where a person can study and self-educate. I made an incorrect comparison here. It’s not that people are more passive now – they have much more opportunities for their church education.
– Yes, and one of the main questions is how to make this church education applicable to people. After all, church education, in essence, is the acceptance of the image of God, knowledge of His essence, of being. You can know all this while being a completely unbelieving person. Previously, they taught atheism and perfectly analyzed our entire faith. This is a separate topic...
– This is a separate topic, but you are correct. Briefly we can say this: when a person studies, receives spiritual education, then first of all he receives it for himself. This is a kind of internal resource for the spiritual development of the individual. To the extent that he has received for himself and has internalized it, a person can somehow give it away further. This is the specificity of education.
There is one more point. This education is difficult because we learn some things formally, but do not grow into them spiritually. This growth sometimes occurs throughout life, sometimes it does not occur at all. Church education is a shirt for growth; one is supposed to reach a state where one has mastered it with the mind, but has not lived it inside. A person must try to live it. The main thing is to have the desire to live. To have a vector.
Host Dmitry Brodovikov Recorded by Margarita Popova
The Royal Way
In Christian life, the virtue of prudence is very important, the ability to find in any matter the middle ground between excess and deficiency, what in the Holy Scriptures and among the Holy Fathers is called the middle, or royal, path. “Plant the path for your feet, and let all your ways be established. Do not turn aside to the right or to the left; remove your foot from evil” (Proverbs 4:26-27).
MSDU graduates
To avoid both extremes in relation to education, it is necessary, first of all, to realize that life around us, no matter how abnormal it may be, is where we begin our own Christian life. We should never forget that the title of Christian is not a profession. Remembering the words of the Savior: “Behold, I send you out as sheep among wolves: therefore be wise as serpents, and innocent as doves” (Matthew 10:16), in our battle against the spirit of this world we must use the best, what the world has to offer, and to go beyond this best, to put it to the benefit of the Church and the cause of Christian witness in the world. Those who are called, already having an education and profession, should remember the words of the Gospel about a certain scribe who, having been taught the Kingdom of Heaven, is like a master who brings out from his treasury new and old (Matthew 13:52). When a person has a certain cultural, intellectual base, this often helps him to avoid many mistakes in his Christian life, as well as to benefit the Holy Church in her earthly existence.
This is exactly what the great saints did. If we look at the history of the Church, we will see that many saints received an excellent education, the best in their time. These are the ecumenical teachers Basil the Great and his brother Gregory of Nyssa, Gregory the Theologian, John Chrysostom, Ambrose of Milan, Augustine of Hippo, Gregory Palamas and many others. It is interesting to quote the words of St. Gregory the Theologian: “My cheeks had not yet become pubescent when some kind of fiery love for the sciences took possession of me. And I tried to give teachings that were not entirely pure (meaning the works of pagan philosophers - Fr. I.K.) to help the true teachings, so that those who had not learned anything would not become arrogant.” From this quote it is clear that already in the time of St. Gregory (IV century) there was an opinion among Christians that since Christ chose the apostles from among simple fishermen and sent these “unlearned” people to preach, then there is no need to study, no special skills are needed. acquire knowledge.
St. Augustine in his book “Christian Science, or the Foundations of Sacred Hermeneutics and Ecclesiastical Eloquence” brilliantly refutes the opinion that “if the Holy Spirit produces teachers, then people should not prescribe a rule for what and how to teach.” “In this sense,” says the saint, “we should not pray, for the Lord says: For your Father knows what you require before you ask (Matthew 6:8).” Blazh. Augustine cites many quotations from the pastoral letters of the Holy Apostle Paul, showing that the supreme apostle prescribed rules for his disciples, what and how they should teach. For example, the Apostle Paul wrote to Timothy: “Try to set yourself skillfully before God, a worker who is not ashamed, rightly ruling the word of truth” (2 Tim. 2:15). “Like physical medicines,” Augustine concludes, “that are given to people from people, they are used only by those who are given health by God, who can heal without medicines, and, although medicines are ineffective without the help of God, nevertheless people use them, and diligent delivery of them in any case, is considered a matter of mercy and beneficence, and the teachings of science, taught by the hand of man, only benefit the soul when God Himself makes them useful, Who, not from man or through man, could, if He wanted, give man the Gospel itself.”
The path of the clergyman
If in pre-revolutionary Russia the clergy was almost entirely class-based, the type of occupation predetermined by birth, today the choice of clergy occurs according to the free will of the person, the blessing of the spiritual father and election by the community. Unfortunately, there is currently a decline in the interest of young people in religion. Even in the seminaries of the Russian Orthodox Church there is a shortage of students, although twenty years ago there was considerable competition among applicants.
Nevertheless, among religious youth there are those who show deep religiosity at an early age. There are always few such guys and girls, and we can say with confidence that their zeal for prayer, interest in reading Scripture and Orthodox literature, singing and worship is evidence of spiritual giftedness. A priest is a calling. As an example, we can recall Archpriest Markel Kuznetsov (12/22/1893 - 02/01/1988), who served in the priesthood in Kaluga for more than sixty years. From early childhood he diligently attended services, and his fellow villagers saw a future priest in a six-year-old boy. He was ordained as a deacon at age nineteen and served until a very old age.
This special spiritual potential of the younger generation, spiritual gift and talent must be used to the fullest. Spiritual fathers should identify these talents, guide them, so as not to lose them under any circumstances, but to direct them in time to the path of priestly service while observing the canonical requirements, the foundations of which are laid in the pastoral letters of the Holy Apostle Paul (1 Tim. 3, 1-7 and Titus 1, 6–9). Among these instructions, we highlight the following: “The bishop must be ... holding to the true word, consistent with the teaching, so that he will be able to instruct in sound doctrine and reprove those who resist” (Titus 1: 7-9). These words speak of the need for serious training of future clergy, which includes not only the bishop, priest, deacon, but also the charterer, sexton, regent, church warden, etc.
MSDU graduates
Unfortunately, in our Church today there is no system of fundamental church education. The existing theological school of the Russian Orthodox Old Believer Church trains mid-level specialists. This level is clearly not enough to prepare a future shepherd capable of giving proper answers to the challenges of our time. Such widely discussed topics in society as genetic engineering, artificial intelligence, in vitro fertilization, cloning and the like require theological understanding and a timely response from the Church. But how can it be given without professional training? It seems that one of the main reasons for the shortage of priests that our Church is experiencing is the lack of full-fledged education.
It is necessary to work on strengthening the school and expanding its teaching staff. The next task is the creation of a higher educational institution of the Russian Orthodox Church. Several years ago, the building of the Old Believer Institute was transferred to our Church, and work began on its restoration. There is a discussion of the status and concept of the new institute, the curriculum, work on its registration and licensing of activities. Here it is important to analyze the pre-revolutionary experience, a comprehensive study of which was done in Fr. Ioanna Sevastyanov “Educational activities of the Old Believers in the period 1905–1918.” This scientific work comprehensively examines the issues of Old Believer education of the so-called golden age of the Old Believers, reconstructs in detail the process of creation and functioning of the Moscow Old Believer Institute, identifies the problems that arose during its opening and the reasons that led to the closure of this educational institution. Only by relying on this experience can we avoid the mistakes of the past and make significant progress in the creation and development of our Church’s own educational institutions, the formation of the Old Believer system of education, adaptation and creative transfer of organizational, didactic, methodological initiatives of the past into modern practice.
Church educational institutions are given equal rights with state ones
Yesterday, the State Duma adopted in the first reading a bill granting religious universities the right to issue state-issued diplomas. This was achieved by clergy who fought for more than two years for the equality of religious and secular educational institutions. However, lobbyists for the bill had to make a radical concession: religious universities will be able to accredit their educational programs as state ones, but they will not be able to obtain the status of a state institution.
Amendments to the laws “On Freedom of Conscience and Religious Associations” and “On Education” boil down to the fact that religious universities will be able to apply for state accreditation of their educational programs if they meet the state standard, and issue state diplomas for these programs. “Unfortunately, graduates of Muslim, Orthodox, Jewish and other religious universities cannot, unless they connect their lives with the spiritual sphere, get a job in their specialty in the world. They don’t have a state diploma,” explained one of the document’s developers, head of the Duma Committee on Public Associations and Religious Organizations Sergei Popov, presenting the document to parliamentarians. “Of all non-profit organizations, only religious ones do not have the right to accreditation of their educational programs,” clarifies committee adviser Stepan Medvedko. According to the head of the Duma Committee on Education, Valery Grebennikov, the bill is intended to unify programs of spiritual and secular education, and therefore to include religious universities in the all-Russian education system.
A bill to equalize the status of diplomas from religious and secular universities was developed two years ago. It received approval from the Ministry of Education and Science and the Commission on Religious Associations under the Government of the Russian Federation, but its submission to the State Duma was postponed. Despite the fact that it was supported by religious leaders, opponents of the initiative were found in each of the faiths. Thus, some Orthodox seminaries feared the loss of independence, and Muslims feared reprisals against Islamic educational institutions, which might not be allowed to receive state accreditation and then be closed. In addition, the promotion of the bill took place against the backdrop of controversy about the “clericalization of education.”
Meanwhile, supporters of the project apparently managed to convince opponents that the costs of its adoption were not so great. On the eve of its presentation to the State Duma, Russian President Vladimir Putin spoke out in defense of the law, saying that the ability to issue state-issued diplomas “will improve the quality of education, as well as the authority of higher religious educational institutions.”
Representatives of confessions this time were unanimous in their assessment of the bill. Thus, the press secretary of the Moscow Patriarchate, priest Vladimir Vigilyansky, is confident that “the decision is long overdue, because the non-recognition of church education by the authorities is a remnant of the Soviet system”: “To this day, people who graduated from a church university are considered by the state to be people without higher education, that is, without rights " Rector of the Moscow Islamic University Marat Murtazin points to the financial opportunities opening up for religious universities: “Religious universities will have the opportunity to receive financial assistance from the local or state budget for the training of specialists.” And the chairman of the Congress of Jewish Religious Organizations and Associations of Russia, Rabbi Zinovy Kogan, is convinced that “graduates will gain greater independence, that is, they will be able to find secular work”: “Religious institutions will be able to open new faculties, for example, law, economics. Then graduates, if they do not want to serve in the church, will be able to get a job in a law office or as accountants.”
President of the all-Russian organization of small and medium-sized businesses “Support of Russia” Sergei Borisov shared the optimistic forecasts of representatives of confessions: “Graduates of church universities have deep moral values that are worth a lot. I think that once they receive a state-issued diploma, they will have no problems finding employment.”
It is worth noting that, having received the right to issue state diplomas, religious universities will still not be able to claim the status of a state institution. Moreover, according to the bill, a diploma from a religious institution cannot contain an image of the state emblem of the Russian Federation. “It took us almost two years to discuss,” says Stepan Medvedko. “A reasonable compromise was found: a uniform diploma, but without state symbols. Thus, we removed the contradiction and brought the norm into compliance with the law.”
Pavel Kommersant, Yulia Kommersant-Taratuta
Where to study to become a clergyman
The Old Believer Institute is still being created. But where should young Old Believers who dream of dedicating their lives to the Church and God go to study? There are two options here.
Gratitude from MSDU graduates
The first, most common, is receiving a secular education in one specialty or another and at the same time self-education in the field of Orthodox theology, biblical studies, patristics, liturgics, canon law and other disciplines. All the famous Old Believer teachers of the 19th and early 19th centuries followed the path of self-education. 20th century: Hilarion Kabanov (Xenos), Semyon Semyonovich, saints Arseny Uralsky and Inokenty Usov, Vasily Zelenkov, Fyodor Melnikov, Archpriest Dimitry Varakin and others. They obtained the necessary knowledge exclusively on their own. And they sometimes knew their subject better and more deeply than other professionals, teachers of theological academies and anti-Old Believer missionaries, with whom they conducted constant public debates. Suffice it to recall Bishop Arseny Uralsky’s visit to the St. Petersburg Theological Academy on March 23, 1886, where he delivered his famous “Apology,” which was later published as a separate brochure. The phenomenon of teaching is significant and diverse; it represents a whole layer of national culture. In general, the readers served the Church of Christ very fruitfully, compiling a huge number of works in defense of the old faith, giving detailed theological answers to the challenges of the time, leading many souls to salvation.
In Soviet and post-Soviet times, those who engaged in spiritual self-education on the basis of secular education became Old Believer clergy. But even then, despite the cruelty of the atheistic authorities, the traditions of Old Believer teaching were preserved. Evidence of this is the answer of an unidentified author to the articles of Archpriest Dmitry Bogolyubov in the magazine of the Moscow Patriarchate Nos. 3 and 7 for 1946. The answer is stored in the archives of the Metropolis of the Russian Orthodox Church and published in the appendix to the magazine “Church” (“In Time It”, issue No. 4 , 2007).
Another way is to receive spiritual education in religious educational institutions of other faiths, primarily the Russian Orthodox Church. Previously, these were theological seminaries and academies. In recent years, several universities have opened, established by the Russian Orthodox Church, but training specialists in various, including secular, specialties related to the church sphere. Such experience also exists, although these cases are isolated and cause controversial attitudes among fellow believers. There is room for discussion here. On the one hand, there is the opportunity to receive a systematic theological education, have access to libraries and communication with professors in the relevant fields of knowledge. On the other hand, there is a risk of apostasy from the faith, transition to another denomination, as well as the subsequent spread of any heretical views in one’s Church.
St. Maxim Grek. Miniature from a handwritten volume of his collected works. End of the 16th century
Without going into polemics, we nevertheless consider it appropriate, as food for thought, to cite the example of St. Maxim the Greek, highly revered in the Old Believers. He came from an aristocratic family, received an excellent education, but strived for greater knowledge. In order to study the language and philosophy of the ancient Greeks, he went to Italy. In Florence he worked in the Medici Library. There he was deeply impressed by the sermons of the Dominican monk and abbot of the monastery of San Marco, Girolamo Savonarola, who was later brutally executed by Catholic inquisitors. However, he later returned to his homeland and took monastic vows at the Vatopedi monastery on Mount Athos. In 1515, at the request of the Russian sovereign, Grand Duke Vasily III, he arrived in Moscow. Here he learned Russian and took part in the translation of the Explanatory Psalter and other books. The life of the saint in Rus' was filled with difficult trials, he was deprived of Holy Communion, but God glorified His saint, his memory is on January 21 (February 3). From this example it follows that communication and study in non-Orthodox educational institutions did not harm the soul of Saint Maximus, but gave him the opportunity to develop his talents and bring fruit to God a hundredfold (Matthew 13:23).
Spiritual education and theological science
To contents
Beginning of the 18th century marked a new stage in the history of spiritual education and theological science in Russia. The Ukrainian bishops who emerged at that time set up schools for training the clergy on the model of the Kiev-Mohyla Academy, of which they were students. Thus, the Locum Tenens of the Moscow Patriarchal Throne, Metropolitan Stefan (Yavorsky), transformed the Moscow Slavic-Greek-Latin Academy, which under him was in a state of decline, and invited Kyiv teachers to it.
Saint Demetrius, Metropolitan of Rostov, opened a theological school in Rostov, and Metropolitan Philotheus (Leshchinsky) of Tobolsk opened a theological school in Tobolsk. Similar schools were also opened in Chernigov and Smolensk. In these schools, Latin dominated, teaching was scholastic in nature, because teachers followed Catholic models in teaching.
A zealot for spiritual education among the Great Russian hierarchs, Metropolitan Job of Novgorod (1716) organized a Slavic-Hellenic school in Novgorod, where the founders of the Moscow Academy, hieromonks Ioannikis and Sophronius (Likhuds), first labored. Already at first about a hundred people studied at this school, and in 1707 Peter I ordered the printing house of monk Simeon of Polotsk to be transferred from Moscow for its needs.
The “Spiritual Regulations” of Peter I prescribed the establishment of “school houses” at bishops’ houses, which were called seminaries. The course of study in them was designed for 8 years, and Latin also dominated in teaching. Particular attention was paid to discipline. The school was ordered to be organized “in the manner of a monastery,” rare visits from students to their families were allowed, the class schedule was strict, and the supervision of the rector and prefect was vigilant. Seminary education became mandatory for children of all clergy. Moreover, appointment to the clergy now also depended on receiving an education in a theological school. Thus, this system soon led to class isolation of the Russian clergy.
True, the opening of seminaries did not occur very quickly and by the 60s of the 18th century. only 26 of them were opened. Moreover, the highest, theological class was only in eight of them. The main difficulties that Russian theological schools faced in the 18th century were the lack of material resources allocated for their maintenance and the shortage of teachers.
At the end of the century, 8 more seminaries were opened, St. Petersburg and Kazan Seminaries were transformed into Theological Academies.
A major role in the development of spiritual education in Russia at that time was played by two outstanding hierarchs - Metropolitans Gabriel (Petrov) of St. Petersburg and Platon (Levshin) of Moscow.
The first paid special attention to the training of teachers for diocesan theological schools, for which he transformed the Seminary located in the Alexander Nevsky Lavra in St. Petersburg into the Main Seminary with an expanded course of sciences.
The second cared about the internal transformation of the theological school - overcoming the formal scholastic nature of teaching, while he paid special attention to teaching the Greek language and imparting a more humane character to seminary education. He saw the task of the theological school in the preparation of enlightened shepherds who enjoy authority in an educated society and are capable of being true teachers of the people. The subject of his constant concern was the Trinity Seminary in the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, from which at the turn of the 18th-19th centuries. A whole galaxy of figures of Russian theological science came out.
A new page in the history of religious education in Russia is associated with the school reform of 1808. Being one of the reforms in the spirit of the initial period of the reign of Emperor Alexander I, it pursued the goal of “rooting education” among the Russian clergy. In theological education, a structure was now formed that, with minor changes, was preserved in the Russian Church until 1918. The theological school received a clear division into primary, or lower (theological schools), secondary (seminaries) and higher (academies). Moreover, each type of school received its own charter and a specific curriculum. During the 19th century. In almost every diocese of the Russian Church, except for a small number of missionary ones with a relatively small number of parishes, a Theological Seminary was opened. At the same time, the number of theological schools in general reached several hundred (an average of 10 per diocese).
The Theological Academies now acquired particular importance, of which four were opened in a transformed form - St. Petersburg (1809), Moscow (in the Trinity-Sergius Lavra, 1814), Kiev (1819) and Kazan (1842). The first Charter of Theological Academies was introduced in 1814. In total, four such charters were adopted before 1918: in 1814, 1869, 1884 and 1910.
The most important role in the development of the Russian higher theological school was played by the Charter, which was in force from 1869 to 1884. In accordance with it, the rights of professorial corporations were significantly expanded, elected officials were introduced (except for rectors, who were still appointed by the Holy Synod), and the requirements for the level of dissertations for master's and doctoral degrees, student specialization was introduced, for which departments similar to university faculties were established in academies.
The main task of the Theological Academies was to train teaching staff for Seminaries, clergy for city churches, candidates for higher church administrative positions, missionaries, as well as officials in the synodal department, but the Academies at the same time were the true centers of Russian church science.
Among the learned men of the Russian Church in the 18th century. The first to be named is Saint Demetrius, Metropolitan of Rostov (1654-1709). The son of a Cossack centurion, he was educated at the Kyiv Academy. At the age of eighteen he took monastic vows and later gained fame as an excellent preacher. He devoted more than 20 years to the main work of his life - the compilation of the Chetyih-Menya - the lives of the saints, which he completed in 1705, already occupying the metropolitan see in Rostov (from 1701).
This monumental multi-volume work, which included data from Eastern and Western hagiography, gave the Russian pious reader a truly inexhaustible source of saving reading, making its author the most popular teacher of the Russian Church. Saint Demetrius wrote a number of works of a catechistic, moral, church-historical, polemical (in connection with disputes with the Old Believers) and spiritual and poetic nature.
The formation of Russian theological science in the first decades of the 18th century. passed under the banner of the struggle between two directions: the old, Latin-scholastic Kyiv school, which was based on the works of St. Thomas Aquinas (1274) and Cardinal Robert Bellarmine (1621), and the new one, which drew inspiration from the works of Protestant authors.
The main representative of the first direction was Metropolitan Stefan (Yavorsky) (1658-1722), and the second was Hegumen Feofan (Prokopovich; 1681-1736), who became Bishop of Pskov in 1716, and Archbishop of Novgorod in 1726.
The controversy revolved around the work of Metropolitan Stephen, “The Stone of Faith,” which was directed against the enthusiasm for the ideas of Protestantism that permeated at the beginning of the 18th century. into Russian society, and also defended the traditional view of the relationship between the Church and the state. This work displeased Peter I, and its author was accused of adhering to the “papage spirit.”
Only after the death of Peter, when the influence of Metropolitan Theophan weakened somewhat, the former rector of the Moscow Academy, Archbishop of Tver Theophylact (Lopatinsky) managed to publish “The Stone of Faith” in 1728. However, with the accession of Anna Ioannovna in 1730 and the beginning of the Bironovschina, the position of Metropolitan Feofan again strengthened significantly, which sadly affected his ideological opponents. The Stone of Faith was again banned, and its publisher was defrocked and imprisoned in 1735.
Once again, “The Stone of Faith” was published under Elizaveta Petrovna by Metropolitan Arseny (Matsevich) of Rostov.
In the middle of the 18th century. The severity of theological polemics has significantly dulled, but since the 60s, the Theophanian direction has already firmly occupied a dominant position in the Russian theological school.
Meanwhile, since the 40s of the 18th century. There has been a noticeable revival in the publication of Russian spiritual literature. In 1751, a new edition of the Slavic Bible was published, on the preparation of which the learned monks Jacob (Blonitsky), Varlaam (Lyashchevsky) and Gideon (Slonimsky) worked for a number of years.
Among Russian church writers of the second half of the 18th century. Especially notable are Saint Tikhon of Zadonsk, Bishop of Voronezh (1724-1783), and Metropolitan Platon of Moscow (1731-1812).
Saint Tikhon of Zadonsk was the brightest representative of the moral and religious trend in Russian theology. Knowledge of the works of Western Christian mystics and moralists is combined in his writings with a creative understanding of the Orthodox ascetic tradition. His two extensive works - “On True Christianity” and “Spiritual Treasure Collected from the World”, as well as numerous sermons, letters, exhortations to the flock, clergy and monks forever entered the treasury of Orthodox spirituality.
Metropolitan Platon left a memory of himself as a bright and zealous preacher (more than 600 words and speeches remained after him) and a teacher of the faith. His “catechisms” - a short one for children, a catechism in conversations for the people and a catechism for clergy, written in living Russian, not only served the cause of spiritual enlightenment of different layers of Russian society, but also served the further development of Russian theological thought.
In the second half of the 18th - early 19th centuries. Interest in Russian church history noticeably increased, which was reflected in the works of the monk Nicodemus (Sellius), Archpriest Peter Alekseev, Metropolitan Platon, Metropolitan of Kyiv Eugene (Bolkhovitinov), Bishop of Penza Ambrose (Ornatsky) and a number of other church figures.
A new page in the history of Russian theological thought and church science is connected with the life and works of Metropolitan of Moscow Philaret (Drozdov; 1782-1867). The son of deacon (later archpriest) Mikhail Feodorovich Drozdov from Kolomna, he was educated at Trinity Seminary, where he showed brilliant abilities. He was left at the end of the course as a poetry teacher. He enjoyed the special patronage of Metropolitan Platon, who saw Trinity Seminary as his favorite brainchild. However, in 1809, the Commission of Theological Schools at the Holy Synod summoned Hierodeacon Philaret to St. Petersburg, where he was appointed professor of theology at the transformed Theological Academy. In 1812 he became its rector (already in the rank of archimandrite, from 1817 - in the rank of bishop) and remained in this position until 1819.
The ten years in St. Petersburg turned out to be the most creatively intense period in his life. He developed academic courses on dogmatic theology, biblical history and church antiquities (a subject that included elements of patrolology, liturgics and canon law), and wrote a number of manuals.
Under his leadership at the Academy in 1815-1822. a translation was carried out into modern Russian of the New Testament and Psalms, published by the Russian Bible Society. A clear expression of the theological views of His Grace Philaret were his sermons delivered during that period. His great service to Orthodox theological thought was its liberation from the extremes of scholasticism, its return to the Holy Scriptures and the patristic tradition.
In 1821, His Eminence Philaret was appointed to the Moscow See. He paid a lot of attention to the transformed Moscow Theological Academy, where during the period of his priestly ministry a galaxy of remarkable Russian theologians and church scientists grew up. Among them is the Church historian, dogmatist and first Russian patrolologist, Archbishop Filaret (Gumilevsky; 1866); outstanding Slavic philologist and church historian Archpriest Alexander Vasilyevich Gorsky (in 1862-1875 - rector of the MDA; 1875), prominent representatives of Russian Christian philosophy Archpriest Theodore Aleksandrovich Golubinsky (1851) and Viktor Dimitrievich Kudryavtsev-Platonov (1891), historian of the Russian Church Evgeny Evsignievich Golubinsky (1912).
Among the outstanding mentors of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy who worked in it in the first fifty years of its existence is His Eminence Macarius (Bulgakov), later Metropolitan of Moscow (1882). For ten years he was a professor at the Academy, and then rector (1844-1853). This period was for him a time of intense scientific work, its most significant results being his research on ancient Russian literature and the first three volumes of his fundamental “History of the Russian Church.”
In 1860-1877 professors of four Theological Academies carried out a complete translation of the Bible into Russian. Initially, this work was carried out under the supervision of Metropolitan Philaret of Moscow.
Last quarter of the 19th century. and the first fifteen years of the 20th century. were a period of genuine prosperity for the Russian higher theological school. During this period, a number of theologians and church scientists were formed, whose outstanding works received worldwide recognition.
Among the professors of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy, these are primarily historians of the Ancient Church Vasily Vasilyevich Bolotov (1900) and Alexander Ivanovich Brilliantov (1933), church historian and exeget Nikolai Nikandrovich Glubokovsky (1937), historian of the Russian Church and ancient Russian literature Nikolai Konstantinovich Nikolsky (1936) . Among the professors of the Moscow Theological Academy, they noted the prominent exeget Mitrofan Dimitrievich Muretov (1917), the outstanding philologist-Slavist Grigory Aleksandrovich Voskresensky (1918), the remarkable church historian and internationally recognized authority in the field of ancient chronology, priest Dimitry Alexandrovich Lebedev (1938), the brilliant Orthodox theologian Archimandrite ( subsequently - Archbishop of Vereisky) Hilarion (Troitsky; 1929) and the great Russian religious philosopher priest Pavel Alexandrovich Florensky (1943).
Of the professors of the Kyiv Theological Academy, Archpriest Pavel Yakovlevich Svetlov (1942) became the most famous for his dogmatic and philosophical-apologetic works, and of the professors of the Kazan Theological Academy, for his developments of the Orthodox teaching about man - Viktor Ivanovich Nesmelov (1920).
Worldly professions and service to the Church
One should not think that one can serve the Church only by becoming a clergyman. According to the words of the Apostle Paul, the Lord “has appointed some apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some shepherds and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, until we all come into the unity of the faith and the knowledge of the Son of God, into a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of Christ” (Eph. 4:11–13). The Body of Christ is the Church. In its earthly existence, it needs qualified assistance from various specialists, both at the level of a centralized organization (metropolis or diocese), and at the level of each individual community. Let's name just a few of them: lawyers, architects, builders, restorers, icon painters, singers, philosophers, accountants, historians, doctors, psychologists, journalists, philologists, programmers. The list goes on and on, because we face many tasks, and they are different. This includes the restoration of churches, their maintenance, the creation and maintenance of websites, the representation of the interests of the Church in government agencies and courts. You don't have to work for a church organization. Only the very largest of them have such personnel on their staff. Most often you have to bring in outside professionals. It is good if the specialist involved is a member of the Church. But we must honestly admit that today there are very few of our own personnel.
Separately, it should be said about engaging in entrepreneurial activities. The history of the Old Believers clearly shows that it is possible to combine deep faith and piety with an entrepreneurial spirit and put all this at the service of one’s native Church and the Fatherland. Before the revolution, Old Believers made up over sixty percent of the representatives of the commercial and industrial class, in whose hands up to 64% of all Russian capital was concentrated. Diligence in running a business was seen as the fulfillment of a Christian duty to God and to people; skillful management contributed to the strengthening and growth of faith and the strengthening of the true Church. At the beginning of the twentieth century. merchants and industrialists contributed to the rapid development of church institutions and institutions that satisfied the urgent needs of that period. The church life of the Old Believers received an impetus, Old Believer temple building, periodical printing, and the construction of schools developed throughout Rus', and an Old Believer institute was created. God knows, maybe new Morozovs, Ryabushinskys, Kuznetsovs will be revealed to the world, who will revive their glorious traditions and deeds.
It seems that this situation should motivate spiritual fathers to guide the younger generation towards mastering those professions where they could reveal their potential and at the same time have the opportunity to help Orthodox communities and individuals from among the brethren of the same faith. And if not by direct participation in the affairs of the Church, then at least in the offering of tithes from one’s righteous labors. As it is said in the Book of Wisdom of Jesus, son of Sirach: “The offering of the righteous makes the altar fat, and its fragrance is before the Most High; the sacrifice of a righteous man is favorable, and the memory of it will be unforgettable. With a cheerful eye glorify the Lord and do not diminish the firstfruits of your labors; With every gift, have a cheerful face and dedicate the tithe with joy” (Sir. 35: 5-8).
This essay was given as the 2021 "Orthodoxy in America" lecture at the Center for Orthodox Christian Studies at Fordham University. I thank President Joseph McShane, Professors George Demacopoulos and Aristotle Papanikolaou and all those involved in the Center for Orthodox Christian Studies at Fordham University for the invitation, and Anne Glynn-Makul for her very kind and moving introductory speech. Working on this text gave me an opportunity to summarize everything that I have been doing for the last quarter of a century.
Theological education truly lies at the core of the Christian faith, and is spoken of in the commandment of Christ Himself: “Go therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 28:19). When we hear this great commission, our attention is usually captured by the words go and baptize, although in Greek they are participles - going/baptizing. It is the word “teach” here that is imperative: this is what we must do, and walking and baptizing are accompanying activities. Moreover, the phrase “teach” (μαθητεύσατε) is not simply a matter of creating new followers, it is a matter of teaching, making disciples (μαθηταί), disciples of the Word. This action, among other things, implies not just the transfer of information, but also the increase in the number of educated Christians. The woman fleeing into the wilderness described in the book of Revelation (12) is, according to Hippolytus, the Church, and her child is Christ, “whom,” he says, “the Church constantly bears, since she teaches all nations” (AntiChrist 61: ὃν ἀεὶ τίκουσα ἡ ἐκκλησία διδάσκει πάντα τὰ ἔθνη). The Church gives birth to Christ in the act of teaching! Theological education truly calls for high goals!
Unfortunately, we are forced to admit that training is necessary for all Christians[1]. We pray in the liturgy for growth in life, faith and spiritual understanding - and yet we choose to spend time studying something else - politics, sports, economics, etc., and then wonder why our faith too often remains in childhood. But that's not what I plan to talk about today. My topic is specific: how to achieve a higher level of theological education and prepare new teachers. For, as the apostle said, for the equipping of the saints, for the work of ministry, for the building up of the Body, God appointed some apostles, others prophets, others evangelists, others pastors and teachers (Eph. 4:11-12): “shepherds” and “ teachers" come together as a single administration rather than separate roles or even separate activities (I'll come back to this later). What then does theological education include and what should be the preparation of those called to be teachers/pastors? I would like to make two main points.
I: THE TASK OF THEOLOGY/THOLOGY AS A TASK
Over the past decades, I have become increasingly aware that the task of education is not to enable students to answer the questions that arise today, but to enable them to answer the questions that will arise in the coming decades as they mature in their own vocation. If the issues we face today were complex and unimaginable just a few years ago, they will undoubtedly become even more complex as the world changes at an ever faster pace. Thus, there is a prophetic element to theological education. But to do this, we must clearly understand what the task of theological education is. Simply put, it is not about transmitting information, but about forming theologians who can speak in new and unexpected contexts.
Theological education, of course, includes long-term study and mastery of all types of disciplines. Some are more academic: for example, the study of Scripture, patristics, history, systematic theology, liturgics, canon law, iconology, and the languages needed to study these disciplines. Other disciplines are more pastoral, dealing with issues of pastoral care, counseling on various issues related to illness, old age, death and loss of all kinds, drug addiction, etc., which often requires extensive field work. There are other, even more practical areas, such as rules of worship, music, public speaking and preaching. However, this is not yet theology in the full sense of the word: every discipline can and is taught, but not as theology. In fact, each of these disciplines - interpretation of the Holy Scriptures, patristics, liturgy, systematics, or dogmatics, and others - have now become independent disciplines, which leads to the fragmentation of the single discipline of theology. To quote Edward Farley, it can be said in broad strokes to express what is generally accepted that during the first millennium and beyond, theological work was carried out through the contemplative reading of Scripture in the context of the school of liturgy and patristic tradition[2]. But during the second millennium this pedagogy collapsed in both East and West: the practice of sacra pagina [3] became sacra doctrina [4] , in which passages of Scripture were accumulated in support of dogmatic points of view, which then took on a life of their own as building blocks for dogmatic theology, resulting in handbooks of dogmatic or systematic theology to aid in the study of church history and the fathers. Thus, students began to study the Scriptures in a completely different way, primarily, not to say exclusively, through the lens of history. Likewise, liturgy is now studied primarily as a history of liturgical practice, rarely addressing, for example, the use of Scripture in hymnography.
Because of this fragmentation of the theological discipline into numerous areas, those responsible for theological education have focused on the curriculum as mastery of these disciplines, each with its own requirements that are combined into a manageable set. At the same time, almost no one is trying to organize a coherent process of theological education. This, however, results in the reduction of theology teaching to the dissemination of certain information materials or, as is increasingly the case, certain skills (leadership, finance, people management, etc.). Information and skills are of course important, and the curriculum always needs revision as well. But to understand theological education, we must look deeper and clearly understand the nature of theology itself. Theology is not simply a matter of conveying information, a selective set of sentences, as if theology teachers were simply SDEK couriers delivering a package. This understanding of the nature of theology is false and incorrect.
It is false, as the example of the last century shows. During the twentieth century, Orthodoxy experienced a renaissance in many ways: liturgical (revival of participation in the Eucharist), spiritual (revival of interest in the Jesus Prayer), iconographic (rediscovery of older styles of iconography), and especially theology and its teaching. The roots of this renaissance lie in the earlier movement of the Kollivads on Mount Athos and Paisius Velichkovsky in Moldavia in the 18th century, as well as the Optina Elders in Russia in the 19th century, and the Moscow Council of 1917/18, and the space for this revival to flourish in the 20th century was mostly West. It was here, in the West, that emigrant theologians felt free and could get rid of the shackles of what Fr. George Florovsky famously described as the “Western captivity” of Orthodox theology, that is, a very scholastic form of theology and its teaching in previous centuries in the East. He said, quoting Spengler, that this was a pseudomorphosis of his true nature into an alien form. But then, in the West, liberated from Western captivity, Florovsky and others entered into an energetic and highly productive new era of rediscovery of the true roots of Orthodox theology, which was to be accomplished mainly through a return to the fathers (as did many others in the West) and realized in new institutional context, in particular at the Institute of St. Sergius in Paris, and then at St. Vladimir's Seminary in New York and the Seminary of St. Cross in Brooklyn (Massachusetts).
The style of Orthodox theology that emerged in this way became so ubiquitous in the second half of the twentieth century that it is now perceived as the authentic Orthodox tradition of theology. But given the gap between this renewed vision of theology and previous centuries—a disconnect inherent in the very proclamation of its revival—theologians knew that they could not claim to be merely dispensing untouched the inheritance handed down to them, so they insisted that which, as usual, was expressed extremely elegantly by Metropolitan Kallistos: tradition is not just repetition, but “creative fidelity” [5], words that were then often repeated and which have recently been transformed, as George Demakopoulas pointed out, into a strange, the non-traditional and even sectarian phrase “traditional Orthodoxy”[6].
In this case, to say that teachers only pass on, without any input, what they have received is simply not true. This is also, as I have said, fundamentally wrong about the nature of theological disciplines. By thinking a little more about the renewed form of Orthodox theology in the 20th century, we will try to understand this discipline more deeply. The fruit of the return to the fathers in the last century has most often been expressed in a "neopatristic synthesis", combining various elements of the teachings of the fathers into a synthesis representing Orthodox dogmatic or systematic theology. This was done primarily from the point of view of the highest point of patristic theology - the figure of St. Gregory Palamas. And so neopatristic synthesis regularly took the form of neo-Palamism, as detailed in Norman Russell's excellent new study, Gregory Palamas and the Making of Palamism in the Modern Age.[7] “Neo-” - because Palamas himself did not study at Orthodox church institutions in previous centuries; In many ways, this neo-Palamism stood alongside neo-Thomism, as a means of self-differentiation in the general task of returning to the fathers, carried out by both Eastern Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism. Perhaps one could also consider the desire for neopatristic synthesis as a historically oriented example of the modern desire for a “systematic” theology, since such systematization is not characteristic of the first millennium, it is a modern phenomenon.
To paraphrase the words of St. Irenea, I would suggest talking not about synthesis, but about symphony. A symphony, technically speaking, is synchronically and diachronically polyphonic, that is, it consists of different voices, each of which is built into the melody being played throughout the entire time with different timbres and keys, modulations and themes, and each of them creates a symphony. St. Basil and Gregory of Nyssa disagree in the fifth century, despite the fact that they are brothers and despite our tendency to speak of “Cappadocia” theology as a single monolithic whole. The words of Saint Irenaeus in the 2nd century are not identical. and Saint Maximus in the 7th century, although there are strikingly similar themes that are addressed using very different terminology and philosophical systems. Yet all these figures were part of the same symphony, with all the diachronic and synchronic diversity that it entails. The symphony does not reduce each voice to either monotony or consensus (as the lowest common denominator): each voice in its full specificity contributes to the polyphonic nature of the symphony. Moreover, in theological language, this symphony is not constructed by any one voice or all the voices together, but is governed by its own rhythm and rules, so that, in the words of Irenaeus, it is God who “harmonizes the human race with the symphony of salvation.”[8]
Thus, reading the Fathers “symphonically” tunes us to the melody that is theology. But rehearsing the symphony in the form in which it has been performed so far does not mean practicing theology. If one wants to take part in the symphony, one must read the score of the earlier movements, especially the earliest ones, where the symphony is first given form; but theology itself begins only when, having carefully read the account of the previous movements, we take part in the ongoing symphony. We read an earlier score not simply to accumulate quotations, but to reinforce what we think we already know; rather, we are rehearsing a symphony so that we ourselves may be harmonized into the symphony, and so playing our own unique role to sing in that symphony with new voices, with themes and movements that might well be different from what came before, but are part of the same symphony, for we must sing in the present moment, paying attention to the problems of the present and using modern language if we want to say something and hope to be heard.
Then another question arises (perhaps the answer to this will be the symphony of theology movement in the 21st century): how can we hear the distinct voices of the fathers as a symphony and not as a cacophony? This question will take us deeper into a topic I raised earlier: the question of the coherence of the discipline of theology as theology. To continue the theme of the symphony, I would suggest that it is possible (or only potentially?) if we return to the idea of the canon as it was expressed at the beginning of our era. In the words of Clement of Alexandria: “The canon of the Church is the harmony and symphony of the law and the prophets in the covenant established at the coming of the Lord.”[9] The canon, the guiding rule, for theology is the symphony and harmony of the law and the prophets (what we now call by the misleading words "Old Testament") handed down at the coming of Christ. An example of this is Christ himself. On the Road to Emmaus (Luke 24) He opens Scripture to show how Moses and all the prophets said that Christ must suffer to enter into His glory, and then He was revealed in the breaking of bread, only to disappear from sight (for we now His Body). These two points—the opening of Scripture, showing how it speaks of the crucified and risen Christ, and the breaking of bread—are, importantly, the only elements for which the apostle Paul uses the technical and permissive formula: “I have delivered (or “established”) unto you what I have received” (1 Cor. 11:23 and 15:3-5). This is what is “committed” by the heavenly Apostle, and it is given as a constant task. The interpretation of Holy Scripture and the liturgy form a single whole, regulated by the same canon. In the liturgy, there is a contemplative reading of Scripture, which is then articulated in different ways in different eras. The apostle, although he does not use the word canon, points to the same requirement when he calls on Timothy to “hold the pattern of sound doctrine” (2 Tim. 1:13). Too often today, however, theology becomes a mere image of sound doctrine!
In other words, if we want to understand the coherence of theology as a theological system, we do not start from the end (or from what we consider to be a high point, such as the teachings of Palamas, who began to be read and appreciated in the last century), rather we we must, as Polycarp said, “return to the Word handed down in the beginning”[10], and thus learn to speak the language of theology. For, as Rowan Williams reminds us, “Theology […] is constantly tempted by the prospect of sidestepping the question of how it learns its own language.”[11] It should also be noted that when the appeal to "canon" was first made in early Christianity, it was not a set of informational sentences that had to be simply maintained, repeated without reformulation in a modern context. The word canon rather means a guideline, a straight line. As Aristotle already noted, if we do not have a straight line, we cannot determine what is straight and what is crooked. The point of canon (and later faith) is to not limit thought, to note what untouchable dogma, heresy is, and perhaps leave a gray area for thought or speculation (called theologumen). No, the meaning of the canon is not to organize or delimit thinking, but to make thinking possible! Without a canon, a rule or a regulative principle, without a straight line, we would not be able to think at all. Every field of thought needs its own canon, a guide to regulate its discourse, and, as I have said, for Christian theology it is the discovery of the Holy Scriptures in the light of the Passion of Christ and the breaking of the bread through which we become His Body. The meaning of the canon, again, is not to obscure thought or reflection, but to make it possible, and not just as an acceptable feat that we could, if we wanted to, perform, but also that we must take upon ourselves This task - the task of theology, we must be ready to give a good answer about our hope to everyone who asks about it, as the Apostle Peter demands this of us (1 Pet. 3:15). It is for this freedom that we have been set free (Gal. 5:15), to be able to respond to the contemporary situation within the ongoing symphony of theology.
It is sometimes assumed that responding to, or even listening to, the questions raised today is dangerous and that dialogue leads to distortions of faith. However, this is not as dangerous as failing to understand what the canon is for, and not as dangerous as allowing our own psychological baggage to determine what we consider a symphony. There is a certain ascetic dimension to theology, as in any academic discipline, that allows our own assumptions to be illuminated and revealed. We must be harmonized into a symphony so that we can sing in the present, and not redefine that symphony according to our own psychological baggage, our own mistakes or fears (as is often the case).
If we begin with this idea of a canon guiding the formation of theological course, then we can see the modern fragmentation of theology into a number of areas, which I spoke about earlier, not as a cause for mourning, but in a positive way, for it has led to the emergence of a phenomenal number of sciences, touching every branch of human knowledge, to the publication of numerous volumes containing extensive information, and to the attainment of depth of knowledge. And thus - through disciplined, rigorous academic study, to the highest level of which we are capable - the spell of monotonous harmonization of history into a fixed "synthesis" constructed from our own place in history is broken, and we can once again hear everyone with fidelity a historical witness and thus integrate into the harmony of this symphony.
What we have before us, or rather behind us, is the story of specific Christians living at a specific historical moment who witnessed and lived out their faith in Christ until He comes again: a witness embodied in texts and accessible us in the form of texts understandable in the context of the liturgy. Thus, the theologian's vision is both historical/hermeneutic and inevitably exegetical: he stands between the final action of God in Christ and His return, patiently and dialogically learning to hear the Word of God, to encounter the risen Christ in the opening of the Holy Scriptures and in the breaking of bread with the witnesses of this encounter and thus harmonize with the symphony they sang, so as to be able to sing our own part today.
II: Theology as Transformative Vision
The second main point I would like to make is that the task of theology is transformation—transforming our vision so that we ourselves can be transformed. Teaching theology is not simply a matter of distributing sentences containing information, but rather a task of transforming our vision to see everything in the light of Christ. Take, for example, the figure of the martyr Blandina, who was killed in the arena at the end of the second century. She was a young slave, the weakest of the weak in the ancient world, but therefore the greatest vessel of God's power, for His power, as Christ tells Paul, is made perfect in weakness (2 Cor. 12:9). Describing the ordeals she had to go through, Irenaeus reports that the guards, who tortured her for several days, admitted that they were exhausted, while she remained stoic. She was impaled and thrown to be eaten by wild animals. Saint Irenaeus continues:
“It was decided to hang Blandin from a pole to be devoured by animals. The sight of her, as if crucified on the cross, her fervent prayer inspired much zeal in the competitors: thanks to her sister, with their bodily eyes they saw Him Crucified for us; may those who believe in Him be convinced that everyone who suffered for Christ is in eternal communion with the living God.”[12]
Not only is she the supreme vessel of God's power, but now in her passing she embodies Christ himself. But notice that only those in the arena next to her can look at her and see the One who was crucified for them, and not those sitting in the seats of the amphitheater, who can only see the young girl torn to pieces for their entertainment. So we should be in the arena, and not spectators in the stands. Or rather, the author of the letter himself, Saint Irenaeus, with his theological vision based on the canon, is the discovery of Holy Scripture in the light of Christ. This helps to see Christ and understand the whole economy of God from beginning to end, from Adam to Christ. A person, from man and woman to a living person in the spiritual stature of Christ, who is able to look at this scene of cruelty and carnage and see the incarnation of Christ himself in Blandina, and thus allows us to see her today as the incarnation of Christ, is what we probably wouldn't have seen if we were there that day. Irenaeus gave us a verbal icon of the martyr, not just a photograph.
It is in this transformation of vision that the pastoral dimension and the power of theology lie. When we talk about pastoral theology, we cannot allow it to be reduced to what those who do, say, social work teach, we cannot allow the more abstract aspects of theology, such as taxonomy, to escape the pastoral dimension, which returns us to the problem of fragmentation. Rather, the pastoral dimension of theology as a unified discipline is to open our minds in the light of Christ to a full theological vision and thus be able to reproduce this transformed and transformative vision to others. What we see when we look with theological vision is best expressed by Paul in his letter to the Romans (8:19-24):
“For the creation waits with hope for the revelation of the sons of God, because the creation was subjected to vanity not voluntarily, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in the hope that the creation itself will be freed from the slavery of corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groans and suffers together until now; and not only she, but we ourselves, having the firstfruits of the Spirit, and we groan within ourselves, awaiting adoption, the redemption of our body. For we are saved in hope. But hope, when it sees, is not hope; for if anyone sees, what can he hope for?”
The chaos, suffering, pain, decay and death that fill the world in which we live, in fact, in the light of Christ, turn out to be the birth pangs of a creation that labors in hardships, giving birth to the children of God.
And this, in turn, offers a broader vision of the Church and the tasks of preaching. Irenaeus, continuing to talk about Blandina, describes how she and a young man named Attulus were finally killed. He says the following:
“For their patience, the immeasurable mercy of Christ was shown to them: the living revived the dead, the martyrs forgave those who renounced, and the Virgin Mother had great joy when she accepted the dead miscarriages alive. Thanks to the confessors, most of the apostates returned to the faith, conceived new fruits, became passionate and learned the confession. Revived and full of strength, they approached the pulpit for a new interrogation, and the Lord, who does not want the death of a sinner and is merciful to the repentant, rejoiced.”[13]
The Church is the Mother of martyrs, those who through their testimony become living people. This maternal aspect of the Church, while such a widespread feature of early Christian theology, is, however, strikingly absent from modern ecclesiology. Over the past century, ecclesiology has been viewed primarily from the perspective of the Eucharist: it was believed that where the Eucharist is, there is the Church. This is one of the fruits of the revival of 20th-century theology. But this eucharistic ecclesiology, I would say, was subtly transformed into an episcopal one. Proof of this is how often the words of St. Ignatius are misquoted: “Where there is a bishop, there is a catholic church.” In fact, he says: “Where there is a bishop, there must be a people, just as where Jesus Christ is, there will be the Catholic Church.”[14] In this transformation, our ecclesiological questions in turn become increasingly focused on territory and hierarchy, and preaching is also understood as a kind of religious or cultural imperialism, expanding the boundaries of our institutions and increasing the composition of our ranks.
Returning to the quotation with which I began: if our task is to fulfill Christ's command to "make disciples," then "going" and "baptizing" are related activities, and if teaching theology, as I have tried to show, is the task of transforming our vision to such an extent that we can see with Paul the whole creation, see how the groans in agony, the birth of the children of God, living people who in their knowledge/torment embody or make man Christ, so that the Church, as Hippolytus said, always gives birth to Christ , - then we will receive a much broader vision of the Church and a much higher understanding of the tasks of theology.
III: Context: Institutions
The third point I would like to briefly highlight is the institutional context. Earlier I mentioned that the revival of Orthodox theology in the 20th century. associated with the creation of new educational institutions about 70 years ago. These were the first institutes in which only Orthodox theologians worked and taught in the last century. In recent decades, however, there has been an increase in the number of Orthodox theologians (and Orthodox scholars in other related disciplines) working in universities and colleges, and in academia in general, Orthodox centers have been established, such as here at Fordham University.
Some people do not like this, they believe that Orthodox scholars working in the wider scientific community, working outside the Church, freely engage in what some call speculative theology, while seminaries, as church institutions, are more associated with church theology. But this is indeed a false opposition, which actually betrays the vision of the founders of Western theological schools. What may be called the founding charter of these schools is contained in a report on theological education in America, written in 1913 by Fr. Leonty Turkevich (then dean of the school in Tenafly, New Jersey, then Metropolitan of the North American Metropolis and dean of the Vladimir Seminary) for the Russian Church[15]. “Instead of dividing theological education, as was the case in Russia, into seminaries, which focused on training parish priests, and academies, where higher education was provided to those who were preparing to become leaders of church administration,” noted Fr. Leonty prophetically, “different should be the characteristics of theological education in the New World, a world in which the American Orthodox Church [would be] the vanguard of Orthodoxy as a whole and the theological school of the Local Church [would be] a serious outpost of Orthodoxy”[16]. To fulfill this high role, he insisted, it was necessary that there be a theological scholarship of the highest order in America, because, he said, a priest serving in this country “has no right to refuse a decent basic answer about the meaning, purposes and problems of the Church , as well as ideas about the true relationship of Orthodoxy to heterodoxy”[17]. Without this “serious theological foundation,” he continued, “our work will always amount to a sectarian game.”[18] And with even greater insight, he insisted that such education must go beyond the opposition between pastoral and academic, practical and scientific spheres, combining both of these necessary activities to create what he called an “apostolic type” of education.[19] .
By delving deeper into the nature and purpose of theology, we may perhaps gain a fuller understanding of the kind of education and ministry he was talking about. To reduce theological education to anything less is to betray one's high calling and fall into sectarianism. The fact that Orthodox theology is taught outside seminaries, in universities and colleges, sometimes with their own centers, should not cause concern or desire to engage in self-flagellation, but become a cause for joy, because this testifies to its vitality. The fact that Orthodox theologians are ready to solve modern problems and difficulties with the creative fidelity that Metropolitan Kallistos wrote about is not a repetition, but a new stage in the symphony of theology, which should be noted, using the words of the exclamation before the Lord's Prayer, “with boldness without condemnation” (although Unfortunately, too often condemnation still prevails!). What institutions will teach theology in the future? Institutions come and go, as history teaches us, especially when they betray their mission and identity, but we can definitely say that the tradition, the symphony of theology, will not disappear.
UNIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN
Behr J. (Archpriest), Theological Education in the Twenty-First Century. Journal of Orthodox Christian Studies 3.1: 1–11 © 2020 Johns Hopkins University Press
Translation by A. Makarov
[1] Probably Fr. John pronounces these words with irony - approx. lane
[2] E. Farley, Theology: Fragmentation and Unity of Theological Education (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1994).
[3] Holy Scripture. In this context, an in-depth study of it - approx. lane
[4] Sacred doctrine - approx. lane
[5] Timothy Ware, The Orthodox Church, new ed. (London: Penguin, 1993), 198 (this commentary was already in the first edition in 1963).
[6] George Demacopoulos, ““Traditional Orthodoxy” as a Postcolonial Movement,” Journal of Religion 97.4 (2017): 475-99.
[7] Norman Russell, Gregory Palamas and the Making of Palamism in the Modern Age (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019).
[8] Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies, 4.14.2.
[9] Clement of Alexandria, Stromata 6.15.125.3.
[10] Saint Polycarp of Smyrna, Letter to the Philippians, 7.
[11] Rowan Williams, On Christian Theology (Oxford: Blackwell, 2000), 131.
[12] "Letter of the Christians of Vienna and Lyon to those in Asia and Phrygia", probably the writings of St. Irenaeus, is preserved in Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History, 5.1, here 5.1.41.
[13] Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 5.1.46.
[14] Saint Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Smyrni, 8. It is not good to miss the people and Christ!
[15] Leonty Turkevich, “Theological Education in America,” SVTQ ns 9.2 (1965), 59-67.
[16] Ibid., 61.
[17] Ibid., 62.
15. Ibid.
[19] Ibid., 65.
Temptations and seductions in professional activities
Obviously, a Christian will have to face some difficulties in worldly work. We are not talking about obviously sinful activities associated with crime or usury. But the rules of piety do not always coincide with worldly requirements. Some companies, for example, may impose a ban on wearing a beard or organize mandatory “corporate parties” during fasting periods. Some enterprises have canteens for employees, but the menu there does not include Lenten dishes, and it is prohibited to bring food with you. All these are temptations that can be conditionally called external. But there are also more serious ones. These are corruption and bribery, dishonesty, deception, theft, serving political or class interests contrary to moral standards, and much more. Something similar can happen in church organizations; it should not be idealized.
In any case, wherever a person works and whatever he does, courage and wisdom are needed everywhere so that a career does not interfere with the salvation of the soul. For what does it profit a man if he gains the whole world and loses his own soul? (Mark 8:36). And the experience of the saints shows that among them there were simple peasants, officials, soldiers, military leaders, artisans, entrepreneurs, clergy, and ordinary workers.
