-Alexander Igorevich, please tell us how you came to Orthodoxy?

I think that a person’s coming to faith is largely a mystery to himself. I grew up in an ordinary Soviet family, where everyone was an unbeliever, although my grandmother belonged to the clergy. All her ancestors from time immemorial were priests, and she herself graduated from the Saratov Diocesan School. I don’t know if she was a convinced atheist, but she was very far from the Church - a fairly typical result of the pre-revolutionary system of religious education.

But in my case, apparently, the genes of my priestly ancestors “speaked.” In my youth, I could not pass by an Orthodox church without looking there for at least a minute, I read prayers, although I read the Gospel only before baptism, in my fifties.- How has your life changed since coming to faith?

Outwardly, nothing has changed, except that I began to regularly attend church and try to follow basic church rules - prayers, fasting, and so on. But all this, given my work and the lifestyle associated with it, comes with great difficulty, and often it simply does not work out. Probably for new Christian this is useful - you begin to look at yourself and your weakness differently. But the main thing is that a new attitude to life has appeared - some other spiritual dimension, which widely expands ideas about the world, man, ethical standards and about oneself.

- To whom do you consider yourself indebted, who were and are your mentors in the faith?

I owe a lot to reading spiritual literature, primarily to such authors as Metropolitan Anthony of Sourozh, priests Alexander Schmemann and John Meyendorff. I remember how I once read an interview with Bishop Anthony for some secular magazine and was so captivated by the beauty of Christian thought that I began to read in a row all the religious works that I could get my hands on.

It so happened that he blessed me to be baptized His Holiness Patriarch Alexy. And the first mentor was the rector of the Church of the Prophet Elijah in the village of Selikhovo, Tver Region, Archpriest Boris Nichiporov, who, unfortunately, passed away very early. He was one of those about whom the Gospel says: “The harvest is plentiful, but the laborers are few.” So he was such a church “doer”: after the end of the persecution of the Church, he was one of the first to engage in social work, created a large children's Orthodox center at his parish and attracted many of his friends, including me, to this work. And after his death, for several years I served as an altar boy in the parishes of his spiritual father, the wonderful Moscow pastor Archpriest Georgy Breev, whom I now consider my mentor.

You spent a lot of time abroad. How does Orthodox life in the diaspora essentially differ from Russian life? What are the main tasks and problems of the Church in Russia and beyond its borders?

I am familiar with Orthodox life abroad mainly through the example of France, but this is a special case associated with such a unique historical phenomenon as the Russian emigration of the “first wave”. She had a huge spiritual charge, since the catastrophe she experienced - the collapse of a thousand-year-old empire - forced her to look deep into herself and led to Christianity many representatives of the upper classes of Russia who had been zhuzhing until then. This charge lasted for almost a whole century, because its representatives considered themselves refugees and lived their whole lives with the dream of returning to Russia. I remember meetings with Andrei Dmitrievich Shmeman, brother of the famous father Alexander. He for all his long life never took French citizenship, lived on a “Nansen” refugee passport, and only recently received a passport as a Russian citizen from the hands of President Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin.

Now there are almost no such people left; there are their descendants who remain faithful to varying degrees Orthodox tradition. The remarkable thing is that now our connection with many of them has been restored thanks to reunification with the Russian Orthodox Church abroad. At the same time, quite a large labor emigration appeared in the 90s. This part of our compatriots is very divided and devoid of Orthodox cultural roots. But people, nevertheless, go to the Church and unite around it. Here is a large field for interaction between the Church and Russian diplomacy.

The current time is usually called church revival: churches, seminaries are opening, domes are being gilded, and so on. On the other hand, new problems arise: abuse of clergy practice, hysteria, apocalyptic hysteria, fear of any new documents, fashion for reprimands, etc. In the context of these problems, can the time in which we live be considered an era of revival of the Church?

Undoubtedly, this is a revival, and it looks like a true miracle. It's not just about restoring churches and monasteries. The main thing is that more and more people accept Christian values ​​as the only possible basis for the “independence of man” that Pushkin wrote about. At the same time, it should be clear that there are no easy times in the earthly life of the Church. In the era of the Roman Emperor Constantine, when Christians stopped being subjected to physical persecution, many people poured into the Church, and the Christianization of public life began. But it was then that schisms and heresies began in the Church, the fight against which took several centuries.

Maybe something similar is happening now. However, I have never closely encountered the phenomena that you are talking about, and in general I have not seen anything but love and goodness in the Church. I think that I, like many others who came to the Church in the 90s, should not forget that we came there, as in the Constantine era, when “it became possible”, when “it was allowed.” We must remember that Russian Orthodox Church- This is the Church of Martyrs. Let us put ourselves for a moment in the face of those who were shot for their faith and rest in a ditch at the Butovo training ground in Moscow - and then many problems and neophyte complexes will seem simply insignificant.

Among educated people, who can be called the intellectual elite, is the credibility of the Church growing or decreasing?

Much has been said and written about the complex relationship between the intelligentsia and Orthodoxy. A thinking person by nature is inclined to look for independent answers to everything; he needs rational evidence for everything. But God is above human reason. Therefore, in Christianity there is no evidence, but there is evidence and living experience of faith. This is very well shown in the famous “triads” of St. Gregory Palamas. I myself was convinced of this when I studied Christian “antinomies” at the Sergius Institute in Paris - theological contradictions that cannot be resolved by reason, but can only be understood spiritually. And an educated person walking the spiritual path begins to understand at some stage that simple faith is more reliable than sophisticated theological constructs. No wonder the great Louis Pasteur said: “I thought and studied, and therefore became a believer, like a Breton peasant. And if I thought even more and studied science, I would become such a believer as the Breton peasant woman.”

Do you ever have a conflict between your inner beliefs and the tasks set by the public service?

I think that such a conflict simply should not exist. Our Church has always sanctified and blessed public service, including military and diplomatic. And the service itself only benefits if the employees are guided by the norms of Christian morality. In the 19th century, when a novice diplomat joined the Foreign Ministry, he had to take an oath of allegiance to the emperor, which was then given a deep religious meaning. This took place in the ministerial church, in front of the icon of the heavenly patron Russian Empire the holy noble prince Alexander Nevsky, who was at the same time a Christian ascetic, a statesman, and a diplomat. And although today the Church is separated from the state, the tradition of close cooperation for the benefit of Russia is being revived between it and Russian diplomacy.

Of course, every person must constantly make a choice between good and evil, between serving God and mammon. But this choice is determined by himself, and not by the profession to which he devoted his life.

You mentioned the role of Orthodoxy in the life of pre-revolutionary diplomacy and wrote about it in detail in your PhD thesis on the topic of training and education of a diplomat in the Russian Empire. Why are you interested in this topic?

The Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs has been preparing for its 200th anniversary for a long time; a huge amount of work has been done to restore forgotten pages of the history of Russian diplomacy and its continuity best traditions. And so I had a question - how much do we imagine the appearance of our predecessors, what kind of people they were in professional and moral terms. I started delving into the archives and discovered that it was very difficult to answer this question; the gap with “that” Russia turned out to be too deep. Pre-revolutionary diplomacy is difficult to understand without taking into account the religious factor in the upbringing of the then Foreign Ministry official. In old Russia, the bureaucracy was churched to the same extent that the Orthodox Church was nationalized. Among the diplomats there were many agnostics and even atheists, but an open break with Orthodoxy was unthinkable at that time. The country's foreign policy interests were closely intertwined with church ones. It was important to understand all this in order to understand in what ways the experience of old Russian diplomacy is not applicable to today, and in what, on the contrary, it is relevant and in demand.

You are the only diplomat of this level with a spiritual education: you graduated from the St. Sergius Theological Institute in Paris. How did you come to this decision?

Outwardly, everything looked like a matter of chance. A Moscow priest I know, to whom I am eternally grateful, came to Paris and invited me to visit this institute with him. There I met inspector Father Nikolai Ozolin, who received me very warmly and at the next meeting offered me to study in the correspondence department. I immediately agreed, and by the time the business trip to France ended (I was then working in our representative office at UNESCO), I managed to receive a diploma.

- Alexander Igorevich, what do you remember about your period of study?

The St. Sergius Institute is a unique creation of the Russian emigration of the “first wave”; the best theological minds of old Russia were gathered there. Of course, none of them are alive now, and even teaching there is conducted in French. But their books, their traditions and the huge layer of Russian Orthodox culture they saved remained. My teachers were also imbued with it - Russians, Serbs, French and others, for example, the rector of the institute, Father Boris Bobrinsky, Father Nikolai Chernokrak, Father Placid Desei and many others. All this could not help but captivate me, especially since I was greeted there very cordially and with love.

In a word, I remember this time with gratitude. It would seem that there are so many interesting things around Paris, and you sit locked up on weekends, writing term papers on the theology of the Apostle Paul or the anthropology of St. Gregory of Nyssa. But I don’t regret a single minute spent; on the contrary, it’s a pity that my official duties did not allow me to read much of what was included in the educational literature lists.

On the question of the influence of emigre thinkers: what are your impressions of the diaries of Father Alexander Schmemann, recently published in Russia?

I really love Father Alexander’s books, especially “The Historical Path of Orthodoxy.” And his diary is a vivid example of the Orthodox culture that was formed in the West under the influence of Russian emigration, having, of course, absorbed some part of Western culture. Father Alexander had never been to Russia, but all his life he lived in Russia and for Russia, as he understood it. Some of his judgments may probably seem controversial. But the main idea that runs through the entire book, in my opinion, fully corresponds to Church Tradition and the teaching of the Holy Fathers: the goal of Christian life is communication with God. And therefore, a bare branch trembling in the winter wind, if the presence of God is felt in it, was dearer to him than church congresses and meetings, which, according to the diary, Father Alexander was so burdened with. They simply lose meaning if they lead away from the main thing. This, in my opinion, is the edifying meaning of the book, which, however, was written for myself, and not for an outside reader.

As far as is known, on Spanish medieval maps of Europe Russia was designated as “terra incognita”. Isn’t Russia still “terra incognita” for the Spaniards?

This was partly the case until recently, because in the 20th century our countries were deprived of the opportunity for close communication for many years. But now the situation is changing. Globalization reduces distances and brings people closer together. Interest in Russia is growing. Almost all educated Spaniards I have met have either been to Russia or know and love Russian culture. Our countries today have many common interests, and the traditional mutual sympathies of both peoples remain, which neither decades of mutual alienation nor ideological differences could undermine.

- How do you assess the situation of Christianity in Spain and modern Europe?

I will express a purely personal opinion. Outwardly, Spain, unlike many other European countries, remains a Catholic country. There are many more people coming to churches, especially in the provinces. I have witnessed many times how the Spaniards cherish Christian traditions, for example, the magnificent processions that are held in many cities during Holy Week and are distinguished by manifestations of mass popular piety.

But in recent years, Western Europe has seen a widespread onslaught of ultra-liberal ideology. This is no longer that good-natured liberalism that coexisted well with Christianity in the soul of a Russian landowner or an English gentleman of the Victorian era. This is a kind of liberal fundamentalism, which sometimes surprises with its intolerance and arrogance towards any other worldview and imposes a kind of censorship in the form of “political correctness”. He affirms a new system of values ​​in which human life is conceived only in earthly terms. A person is completely freed from the sense of eternity, from the consciousness of sin and from all moral restrictions, except those that the state establishes by law. In such a value system, Christianity simply has no place. Therefore, there is a gradual displacement of the Catholic Church from the public into the purely private sphere of life. As you know, the draft European Constitution did not even mention the Christian roots of European culture.

Why do you think this is a new value system? After all, even in the Old Testament it was said about people living according to the principle: “eat, drink, be merry, for tomorrow we will die.”

That's how it is, but half a century ago in the Western public consciousness there were moral taboos, the violation of which even secular society formally condemned. Today there are almost no taboos left. The mentioned Old Testament “formula” turns from a model of sinful human behavior condemned by society into almost a social norm.

But regardless of how a person perceives Christian values, they were the ones that formed the basis of European culture, morality, and the very concept of human rights. And if we abandon this foundation, then the erosion of culture, morality, and human rights inevitably occurs. For example, I simply could not believe my ears when one European diplomat, speaking from the UNESCO rostrum, said that no moral rights and obligations exist in nature, there are only human rights that can be protected in court. It is interesting that Spanish sociologists started talking about the phenomenon of a “de-heroized” society, in which, in principle, there are no goals or ideals for the sake of which a person can sacrifice his life. And in fact, if earthly life is an absolute value, then why sacrifice it? Why then such concepts as moral duty or the need to defend the Motherland, “not sparing your belly,” and much more?

As a result, some kind of deep shift occurs. Huge amounts of money are spent on education, universities amaze with their material equipment, and the quality of education, as university professors themselves admit, is falling due to low demands and permissiveness towards students. The cultural heritage of past centuries is maintained in exemplary condition - cathedrals, monasteries and art galleries - but more and more people come there who no longer understand either the spiritual beauty or the meaning of religious stories. All this leads to the impoverishment of culture. But when I once dared to say this at a scientific seminar at UNESCO, one nice European professor took me aside and said: you are, of course, right, but it’s not customary for us to talk about this publicly, it’s not politically correct.

- Does what you are talking about have anything to do with Russia?

We constantly hear from our Western colleagues that Russia's relations with the European Union should be based on common values. But the question arises: what are these European values ​​today, and where is the moral basis on which we must act together in search of answers to common threats and challenges? Humanity has created the most complex information and technical systems, including weapons of mass destruction. The world is suffocating unresolved problems and conflicts. Finally, the threat of intercivilizational clashes appeared. All this is reminiscent of the situation that the Spanish thinker José Ortega y Gasset foresaw at the beginning of the twentieth century: the development of civilization is ahead of man’s moral ability to manage it. To close this gap, a very high level of human personality is needed, and the rejection of Christian values ​​leads to its decline. Christianity directs a person to heaven, and ultra-liberal ideology attracts him to earth.

- What are your impressions of Orthodox life in Spain?

Orthodoxy came to Spain thanks to Russian diplomacy - at every imperial embassy or mission there was a temple, and priests were part of the embassy staff. But until recently there were almost no compatriots in Spain. Now the Russian diaspora numbers several tens of thousands of people. Exist Orthodox parishes in Madrid, Barcelona and some other cities in the south of the country. For example, our compatriots built a wonderfully beautiful wooden temple in the town of Altea in the province of Alicante. But church life is quite difficult; our priests sometimes serve in difficult conditions. For example, in Madrid the service takes place in a room that is completely unsuited for this purpose. Therefore, now our joint task is to build a Russian Orthodox church in Madrid. The mayor's office of the Spanish capital has already given its consent in principle to this project, but the main work is still ahead. n

Photo by priest Andrey Kordochkin

Despite the brutal persecution of Christians, the number of Christian sects grew inexorably, nothing could stop this process. The wealthy and educated layers of society gradually began to get used to the dispossessed and slaves. What was it about Christian teaching that attracted people so much? Apparently, there are a number of its features.

Firstly, the idea of ​​​​the equality of all people before God, the idea that for God there is neither a Greek nor a Jew, contrasted with the ancient idea of ​​​​the naturalness of inequality, the opposition of Hellenes and barbarians, and later Romans and barbarians. At one time, Aristotle created a classic rationale for the naturalness of slavery, which was shared by most of his contemporaries, as well as their descendants.

Secondly, humanity as absolute goodness, the preaching of love and compassion, the complete selflessness of this love, the abolition of bloody sacrifices and other inhumane rituals. If the culture of classical antiquity was dominated by the Platonic understanding of justice as proportional reciprocity, then the Christian unselfishness of love for one's neighbor was manifested in the amazing call to love our enemies, to do good to those who hate us, to bless those who curse us.

Finally, apparently an important role in the spread of Christianity was played by its appeal to the irrational sphere of the universe and the inner world of man himself, that is, faith as a special emotional-volitional state of exaggeration, feelings, experiences, mystical intuition, divine revelation. This is precisely the area that attracted little attention from the ancient classical genius with his rationalism, boundless confidence in the power of the human mind and love for everything clear, distinct, logically consistent and justified. Thus, Aristotle and his followers, studying the unconscious in man, ultimately turned away from this “abyss”, incomprehensible to the Greek genius. All this led to the natural defeat of the ancient logos-reason in a clash with the Christian irrational-religious faith.

Already by the 2nd century, the early Christian Episcopal Church was organized. Temples and monasteries arose in which the craft, literary and artistic life of adherents of the new religion was concentrated. The Church grew stronger economically and politically, and, taking this into account, the Roman Emperor Constantine I (the Great) in 312 issued the so-called Edict of Milan, which gave Christianity equal rights with other religions.

In the middle of the 4th century. Christianity received the status of the state religion of the Roman Empire and was soon divided into two main directions with their own characteristics in dogmas and rituals - Eastern and Western (Orthodox and Roman Catholic). The final division of the churches was completed in 1054. And in August 410, the Visigothic king Alaric captured Rome with the help of slaves who opened the gates to the barbarians at night. The Visigoths sacked the Eternal City. Following them, the Vandals visited Rome in 455. What these Christian converts accomplished there during their fourteen-day stay forever made the name of this Germanic tribe a household name. Libraries burned - luxurious collections of philosophical, scientific, artistic works; temples, palaces, Roman roads and bridges were destroyed. And although it is conventionally believed that the Western Roman Empire ended its existence in 476, the year of the abdication of the last Western Roman emperor Romulus Augustulus, in reality it had already died by that time. Slavery turned out to be a kind of time bomb that blew up ancient civilization and culture from within.

The most important task of the church was to educate the masses in the spirit of Christianity. It was a long and difficult process. Missionaries were sent to all corners of Europe, and the new religion gradually took over the barbarian world. But conversion to Christianity in itself did not mean that yesterday’s pagans would accept new ideas about the world and God, learn new moral standards - in a word, become Christians in practice, and not formally. Moreover, baptism often took place forcibly and the attitude towards pagans was completely inconsistent with Christian humanism.

It was necessary to change people's consciousness, and parish priests played a big role in this. In the parish, at the lower level of the church organization, the priest explained to his parishioners the meaning of the teachings of Christ, instilled the concept of sin and virtue. The sacrament of confession had enormous civilizing significance: it forced a person to evaluate his own actions and thoughts, taught him to self-discipline and self-restraint.

At the same time, the church, as a rule, made compromises with mass consciousness, trying to attract people to itself and realizing that complex theological problems were not accessible to everyone. For the “simple people”, special literature was created in which the dogma of Christianity was simplified and even modified, adapting to popular beliefs. “Popular” theology was adapted to the popular consciousness.

At the same time, under the influence of the Christian value system, people's consciousness changed significantly. Ideals that were different from the pagan ones and new ideas about man and the world were gradually consolidated in it.

The most important dogma of Christianity is the belief in one omnipotent and all-good God. Moreover, the concept of God that is decisive for Christianity is that he is God the Father, God the Love, and people are the children of God. The next cardinal idea is the incarnation of God, the incarnation of God. Its essence is that God the Father, in his infinite love for people, accepted a human body, lived in it according to the laws of the material world, suffered and died as a man, being innocent. With this sacrifice he atoned for the sins of people and saved them for eternal life. God incarnate is the Son of God, the Savior (Christ). And therefore, you can come to God the Father only through faith in Christ. Finally, another very important idea of ​​Christianity is faith in the Kingdom of God (Heaven). The Kingdom of Heaven is the divine world where people must ultimately come to unite with God for eternal blissful life. But already on earth, every person can accept him into his soul by a feat of faith and love (“The Kingdom of God is within you.”)

If we accept the significance of these ideas for culture as a way of cultivating and disseminating values, then it is obvious that Christianity considers earthly, visible, natural existence to be imperfect and subject to overcoming. But this does not mean that it rejects all earthly values. On the contrary, it affirms the human soul as the highest earthly value. It is above all earthly blessings and more important than the world as a whole (“what’s the point if you gain the whole world and lose your soul”). Of course, every soul deserves love on its own, and not in connection with certain human merits. Secondly, in this way, the love of man for man is affirmed as a value. Thirdly, if the soul is more important than all earthly goods and the world as a whole, and if you should love another person not for something, but in a brotherly way, then another value introduced by Christianity for cultivation is freedom. Freedom, as the highest human heritage, shines through all the ideas of Christianity. But most intensely it can be expressed in the feat of faith. Faith in Christ, in his coming, resurrection, in the fact that he saved people and the whole world, is so inconsistent with everyday life, does not agree with senseless suffering, the death of a huge number of people, illnesses, wars, insignificance, baseness, etc. that accepting it looks like madness.

Christianity is a religion of salvation. For him, the essence of the history of the world is the falling away of humanity (in the person of Adam and Eve) from God, which subjugated man to the power of sin, evil, death, and the subsequent return to the Creator of the prodigal son who realized his behavior. This return is led by the descendants of Abraham, with whom God makes a “covenant” (agreement) and gives them a “law” (rules of behavior). The goal of the Old Testament righteous men and prophets turns into a ladder ascending to God. But even guided from above, even a holy person cannot be completely cleansed, and then the incredible happens: God incarnates, he himself becomes a man, or rather a God-man, by virtue of his miraculous birth “from the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary”, free from sin. God the word, the Savior, the Son of God appears as the Son of Man, a preacher from Galilee and voluntarily accepts a shameful death on the cross. He descends into hell, frees the souls of those who do good, resurrects on the third day, appears to the disciples, and soon ascends to heaven. A few more days later, the Holy Spirit descends on the apostles and gives them the strength to fulfill Jesus’ commandment - to preach the Gospel to all nations. Christian piety combines ethics based on love for one's neighbor with the feat of faith, which leads through the “narrow gates” to the Kingdom of Heaven. Its goal is the deification of the believer, i.e. the transition to eternal life with God is achieved through the cooperation (synergy) of human efforts and God's grace.

Aurelius Augustine (354-430) puts at the center of his attention the problem of evil in man and the fight against evil, the cause of which he initially considered matter, the flesh. Augustine believes that God created man righteous, but with a will capable of good and evil. Adam and Eve abused their freedom, sinned, stained their soul with pride and selfishness, and the fallen soul infected the body, which became its master from the servant of the soul. The lot of the descendants of Adam is to be in the power of the devil who seduced them, to carry original sin within themselves, from early childhood adding to it the sins of their fellow tribesmen and their own. The human will became capable only of evil that was not created by God. It is not something that really exists, but the action of the free will of people who wished to move away from the Creator. And so, evil is only the absence of good, removal from it.

God's mercy opened the way for people to salvation through the redeeming power of the incarnation, suffering and death of Christ. Augustine had his own vision of the dogma of the trinity of God: Lover (Father), Beloved (Son) and Love (Holy Spirit), which, after the ascension of Christ, the Father and the Son together send to the church. Salvation does not depend on the will and merits of man, but is conditioned by grace, the action of God. But justification by grace does not apply to everyone. God, in his omniscience, knew that few would take advantage of his gifts, and predestined a minority destined for bliss, while leaving the sinful majority to perish.

How can a Christian be sure of his salvation? How to maintain the right faith? This is where the role of the church comes to the fore. The Church is the bearer of religious and moral tradition, passed from Christ to the apostles, and then to their disciples; it is also the sphere of the real presence of Christ, who gives the infallibility of faith. The creation of a doctrine about the church and its organization became the most important tasks for Christianity.

Introduction

Christia ́ nstvo (from Greek. Χριστός - "poma" ́ Zannik", "Messi ́ I") is an Abrahamic world religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus Christ as described in the New Testament. Christianity is the world's largest religion in terms of the number of adherents, about 2.1 billion, and in terms of geographical distribution - almost every country in the world has at least one Christian community. Christians believe that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah, the Son of God who became man, and the Savior of mankind.

Christianity arose in the 1st century in Palestine, which was at that time under the rule of the Roman Empire, initially among Jews, but already in the first decades of its existence it became widespread in other provinces and among other ethnic groups.

The purpose of this work is to study the foundations and values ​​of Christian doctrine.

To achieve this goal, I set the following tasks:

Consider the life and personality of the founder of the Christian tradition, Jesus Christ;

Study the history of the emergence and development of Christian teaching in the world;

Determine the foundations and values ​​of Christian doctrine.

When writing this work, the following literary sources were used: Ambrogio D. At the Origins of Christianity, Sergius O. (Lepin). Christianity, also Sventsitskaya I. S. The first Christians and the Roman Empire and others.

Jesus Christ

Cultists say that the Gospels were written by two apostles of Jesus Christ (Matthew and John) and two disciples of the other two apostles: Peter - Mark and Paul - Luke. The Gospels tell us that during the time when King Herod ruled Judea. A woman named Mary in the city of Bethlehem gave birth to a boy whom she and her husband named Jesus. When Jesus grew up, he began to preach a new religious teaching, the main ideas of which were the following. First, you must believe that Jesus is the Christ (the Greek word Christ means the same as the Hebrew word Messiah). And secondly, you must believe that he is Jesus - the son of God. Along with these two, the most frequently repeated ideas in his sermons, he propagated many others: about his future second coming, about the resurrection of dead bodies at the end of the world, about the existence of angels, demons, etc. Moral ideas occupied a significant place in his sermons: about the need to love your neighbors, help those in trouble, etc. He accompanied his teachings with miracles that proved his divine origin. In particular, he performed the following miracles: he healed a great many sick people with a word or touch, raised the dead three times, turned water into wine once, walked on water as if on a dry place, fed five thousand people with five loaves of bread and two small fish, etc. Particularly important A role in the Gospels is played by the story of the last days of the life of Jesus Christ. This story begins with the episode of his entry into Jerusalem. He was met by many people, for Jesus became famous for his many miracles. People spread their clothes and palm branches on the road along which Jesus Christ was traveling and shouted to him Hosanna! . Word Hosanna literally translated from Hebrew means the rescue (a wish for salvation to Jesus), but in meaning this is a greeting like Glory ).

One of the important events in the life of Jesus Christ after his entry into Jerusalem was the expulsion of merchants from the Jerusalem Temple. The situation of expelling traders from the temple became a symbol of the removal of dishonest people from all holy and noble affairs. Jesus entered Jerusalem on the first day of the week (as Sunday is called in the Gospels), and on the fifth day of the week (i.e. Thursday) the farewell Easter dinner (the Jewish Passover) of Jesus Christ with the apostles took place. Subsequently, Christian clergymen called this dinner last supper . During the Last Supper, Christ's disciples ate the bread and drank the wine that he served them.

After the Easter dinner, Jesus Christ and his disciples (with the exception of one of them, Judas Iscariot, who left the dinner earlier) came first to the Mount of Olives and then to the Garden of Gethsemane. There, in the garden on the night from Thursday to Friday, Roman soldiers, with the help of Judas Iscariot, arrested Jesus Christ. The arrested man was taken to the house of the high priest. The church court accused him of blasphemy, and of encroaching on the royal throne (this encroachment was seen in the fact that he called himself king of the Jews ). Jesus Christ was sentenced to death. On Friday, Roman soldiers, who, according to the laws of that time, carried out death sentences from the ecclesiastical court, crucified him on the cross, and he died. Early in the morning on the first day of the week, Jesus Christ was resurrected, and after some time ascended to heaven. Book located in the Bible after the Gospels Acts of the Apostles clarifies that the ascension to heaven occurred on the 40th day after his resurrection. This is the main content of the gospel stories about Jesus Christ.

History of Christianity

In the 1st century AD There were many national religions on the territory of the Roman Empire. By the end of the 5th century. these religions either receded into the background (such as Judaism) or disappeared from the historical scene (ancient Greek religion). Christianity, on the contrary, is from a small religious movement turned into the main, most numerous religion in the empire. According to historians, the victory of Christianity over other religions is explained by its following features.

Firstly, its monotheism. All other religions in the empire, except Christianity and Judaism, were polytheistic. Under the empire, monotheism looked more attractive.

Secondly, its humanistic moral content. Of course, there were certain humane moral ideas in other religions of that time. But in Christianity they were expressed more fully and more vividly, since the main authors of this religion (according to historians) were workers; and for workers, work and life without mutual respect and mutual assistance were simply impossible.

Thirdly, the picture of the afterlife in Christianity looked more attractive to the lower classes than in any other religion. Christianity promised a heavenly reward first and foremost to all those suffering in this life, to all those humiliated and insulted.

Fourthly, only Christianity abandoned national barriers, promising salvation to everyone, regardless of nationality.

Fifthly, the rituals in the religions that existed at that time were complex and expensive, and Christianity simplified and made the rituals cheaper.

The Christian religion has gone through two major stages and is now in the third stage of its history. Historians call Christianity of the first stage (I-V centuries) ancient Christianity, the second stage (VI-XV centuries) - medieval Christianity, the third stage (XVI century - to the present) - bourgeois Christianity. In bourgeois Christianity, a special part of the stage stands out, which is called modern Christianity (second half of the twentieth century).

The creed of official ancient Christianity took shape towards the end of the 5th century. It was based on the Bible and the decisions of the Ecumenical Councils and was set forth in the works of prominent theologians of the 4th and 5th centuries (they, like the famous theologians of subsequent times, are called church fathers ). The creed of official ancient Christianity was adopted in whole or in part by all Christian denominations that emerged subsequently, but each of the denominations supplemented the creed of ancient Christians with some of its own specific religious teachings. These specific additions mainly distinguish one denomination from another.

The main author of the Bible is God. People helped him: about 40 people. God created the Bible through people: he inspired them with what exactly should be written. The Bible is a divinely inspired book. It is also called Holy Scripture and the Word of God. All books of the Bible are divided into two parts. The books of the first part, taken together, are called the Old Testament, the second part - the New Testament. IN New Testament ancient Christians included 27 books. Some confessions in modern Christianity include 39 books in the Old Testament (for example, Lutheranism), others - 47 (for example, Catholicism), others -50 (for example, Orthodoxy) Therefore, the total number of books in the Bible is different confessions miscellaneous: 66, 74 and 77.

The persecutions experienced by Christianity in the first centuries of its existence left a deep imprint on its worldview and spirit. Persons who suffered imprisonment and torture for their faith (confessors) or were executed (martyrs) began to be revered in Christianity as saints. In general, the ideal of the martyr becomes central in Christian ethics.

Today the main directions of Christianity are Catholicism, Protestantism and Orthodoxy.

Foundations and values ​​of Christianity

According to the creed of official ancient Christianity, there are three groups of supernatural beings in the world: the Trinity, angels and demons. The main idea of ​​the doctrine of the Trinity is the assertion that one God exists simultaneously in three persons (hypostases) as God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. All persons of the Trinity can appear to people in physical, material bodies. Thus, on Catholic and Orthodox icons (and Catholics and Orthodox Christians inherited the doctrine of the Trinity from ancient Christians), the Trinity is depicted as follows: the first person in the image of a man, the second person also in the image of a man, and the third person in the image of a dove. All persons of the Trinity possess all perfect qualities: eternity, omnipotence, omnipresence, omniscience, omnibenevolence and others. God the Father created the world with the participation of the other two persons of the Trinity, and the forms of this participation are a mystery to the human mind. Christian theology considers the doctrine of the Trinity one of the most incomprehensible to the human mind.

In ancient Christianity, believers were required to honor prophets. Prophets were people whom God gave the task and opportunity to proclaim the truth to people. And the truth that they proclaimed had two main parts: the truth about right religion and the truth about right life. In the truth about right religion especially important element there was a story about what awaits people in the future. Christians, like Jews, revered all the prophets mentioned in the Tanakh (Old Testament), but in addition to them they revered the prophets of the New Testament: John the Baptist and John the Evangelist. Their veneration of the prophets, as in Judaism, was expressed in the form of respectful conversation about the prophets in sermons and in everyday life. But the ancient Christians, unlike the Jews, did not have any special ritual veneration of Elijah and Moses. Ancient Christians supplemented the veneration of the prophets with the veneration of the apostles and evangelists (authors of the Gospels). Moreover, two evangelists (Matthew and John) were also apostles. John, moreover, according to the views of ancient Christians, was considered at the same time a prophet.

The main idea of ​​the doctrine of the afterlife in Christianity is the idea of ​​​​the existence of heaven and hell. Heaven is a place of bliss, hell is a place of torment. Word paradise taken from Persian. In the first, literal meaning, it meant wealth , happiness . Word hell taken from the Greek language (in Greek it sounds like ades ) and in the first, literal meaning meant invisible . The ancient Greeks used this word to describe the kingdom of the dead. Since, according to their ideas, this kingdom was located underground, to that extent the word ades in the second meaning it began to mean underground kingdom . Ancient Christians believed that heaven was in heaven (hence the expression Kingdom of heaven ), and hell is in the bowels of the earth. Modern Christian clergy add to this that both heaven and hell are located in a special supernatural space: they are inaccessible to people during earthly life.

It is usually written in the literature that, according to Christian teaching, God sends the righteous to heaven and sinners to hell. Strictly speaking, according to Christian teaching, because of the original sin of Adam and Eve, all people are sinners (with the exception of Mary, the mother of Jesus Christ). Therefore, according to Christians, the righteous are not the opposite of sinners, but a special part of them. Since the righteous differ from each other in the degree of righteousness, and inveterate sinners differ from each other in the depth of sinfulness, then the fate of all the righteous (in the degree and forms of bliss) and all sinners (in the degree and forms of torment) is not the same.

According to the canons of Christianity, the afterlife has two stages. First: from the death of the body until the second coming of Jesus Christ. The second stage will begin with the second coming of Jesus Christ, but it has no end. At the first stage, only the souls of people are in heaven and hell; at the second, souls will unite with resurrected bodies. Hell in both stages is in the same place, and heaven in the second stage will move from heaven to earth.

Man, according to Christian teaching, was created as a bearer of the “image and likeness” of God. However, the Fall committed by the first people destroyed man's godlikeness, placing on him the stain of original sin. Christ, having suffered on the cross and death, “redeemed” people, suffering for the entire human race. Therefore, Christianity emphasizes the purifying role of suffering, any limitation by a person of his desires and passions: By accepting his cross,” a person can overcome evil in himself and in the world around him. In this way, a person not only fulfills God’s commandments, but also transforms himself and ascends to God, becomes closer to him. This is the purpose of a Christian, his justification sacrificial death of Christ.

Connected with this view of man is the concept of sacrament, characteristic only of Christianity - a special cult action designed to really introduce the divine into human life. This is, first of all, baptism, communion, confession (repentance), marriage, unction.

Basic ideas and values ​​of Christianity:

) Spiritualistic monotheism, deepened by the doctrine of the trinity of Persons in the single being of the Divine. This teaching has given and continues to give rise to the deepest philosophical and religious speculations, revealing the depth of its content over the centuries from new and new sides;

) the concept of God as an absolutely perfect Spirit, not only absolute Reason and Omnipotence, but also absolute Goodness and Love (God is love);

) the doctrine of the absolute value of the human person as an immortal, spiritual being created by God in His image and likeness, and the doctrine of the equality of all people in their relationship to God: they are still loved by Him, like children of the Heavenly Father, all are destined for eternal blissful existence in union with God, everyone is given the means to achieve this destiny - free will and divine grace;

) the doctrine of the ideal purpose of man, which consists in endless, comprehensive, spiritual improvement (“..be perfect, as your Heavenly Father is perfect”);

) the doctrine of the complete dominance of the spiritual principle over matter: God is the unconditional Lord of matter, as its Creator: He has given man dominion over the material world in order to realize his ideal purpose through the material body and in the material world; Thus, Christianity, dualistic in metaphysics (since it accepts two foreign substances - spirit and matter), is monistic as a religion, for it places matter in unconditional dependence on the spirit, as a creation and medium for the activity of the spirit. Therefore it

) is equally far from both metaphysical and moral materialism and from hatred towards matter and the material world as such. Evil is not in matter and not from matter, but from the perverted free will of spiritual beings (angels and humans), from whom it passed onto matter (“cursed is the earth because of your deeds,” God says to Adam; during creation, everything was “good and evil” "). This sober and at the same time highly ideal view of Christianity on matter received its best expression in the doctrine of the resurrection of the flesh and the bliss of the resurrected flesh of the righteous together with their souls in the enlightened, eternal, material world and in the second cardinal dogma of Christianity - in the doctrine of the God-man, truly incarnate and the Eternal Son of God, who became human to save people from sin, curse and death, identified by the Christian church with its Founder, Jesus Christ. Thus, Christianity, with all its impeccable idealism, is a religion of harmony of matter and spirit; it does not curse or deny any of the spheres of human activity, but ennobles them all, inspiring us to remember that they are all only means for man to achieve spiritual, god-like perfection.

) essential metaphysical nature of its content, making it invulnerable to scientific and philosophical criticism and

) for the Catholic churches of the East and West - the doctrine of the infallibility of the church in matters of dogma due to the Holy Spirit acting in it at all times - a doctrine that, in the correct understanding, protects it, in particular, from historical and historical-philosophical criticism.

These features, carried by Christianity through two millennia, despite the abyss of misunderstandings, hobbies, attacks, and sometimes unsuccessful defenses, despite all the abyss of evil that was and is being done supposedly in the name of Christianity, lead to the fact that if Christian teaching could always be accepted and not accept, believe in it or not believe, then it is impossible and will never be possible to refute it. To the specified attractiveness traits Christian religion it is necessary to add one more and by no means the last: the incomparable Personality of its Founder. To renounce Christ is perhaps even much more difficult than to renounce Christianity.

Ancient Christianity was the cradle of the main world religion of our time. In its further development, Christianity was divided into many denominations, but each of them is based on the inheritance received from ancient Christianity.

Conclusion

Subsequent events showed that the content of the new spirituality (and it was realized not only in the sermon, but also in the very life of Jesus and his closest disciples) has a significance that goes far beyond the borders of little Judea. At this time, the Roman Empire was gripped by a gradually growing spiritual (semantic) crisis: in the gigantic expanses, people feel spiritually lost, they become just cogs in a huge bureaucratic machine, without which it is impossible to manage the empire. Traditional pagan gods expressed a sense of spiritual involvement in the life of the cosmos, the continuation of which was perceived to be the life of the ancient city-state (polis). But Rome actually ceased to be a polis, grew to the size of an empire, and this feeling disappeared along with the previous way of political and economic life. The old gods have lost their meaning for humans. The man was left alone with himself and longed for a new semantic support, connected with him personally, looking for God addressed to everyone, and not to everyone together.

Christianity was able to provide this semantic support. Moreover, it made possible the spiritual community of people belonging to the most different races and nationalities, for God stands above the external differences and strife of this world, and for him there is no difference, Christ is all and in all. Spiritual universalism allowed Christianity to become a world religion, laying the foundations for understanding the very value of a person without regard to his race, nationality, class, or class.

The Christian faith changed the very structure of the soul of European man. People's deep perception of the world has changed: having discovered personality and freedom in themselves, they faced such questions of existence that neither ancient thought nor ancient feeling had reached. First of all, this spiritual revolution was associated with morality.

List of used literature

christian creed spiritual

1.Ambrogio D. At the origins of Christianity (from its origins to Justinian): Trans. from Italian / Under the general edited by prof. I.S. Sventsitskaya. - M., 1979.

2.Bolotov V.V. Lectures on the history of the ancient Church. - St. Petersburg, 1907 1918. T. 1-4; The same (reprint). M., 1994.

.Posnov M.E. History of the Christian Church (before the division of the Churches - 1054)

.Sventsitskaya I.S. Early Christianity: pages of history. - M., 1987; M., 1988; M., 1989

.Sventsitskaya I.S. The first Christians and the Roman Empire. - M., 2003.

.Sergius O. (Lepin). Christianity // Religion: Encyclopedia / Comp. and general ed. A.A. Gritsanov, G. V. Sinilo. - Mn.: Book House, 2007

.Frazer James George. Folklore in the Old Testament.

Hegumen Veniamin Novik
Candidate of Theology, Theological Evangelical Academy in St. Petersburg

Christianity and universal values.

The spirit breathes where it wants... John 3:8

Let's start with a definition, at least briefly. Christianity is “a creed centered on the figure of Jesus Christ (Christocentrism - V.N.) and uniting the content of both the Old and New Testaments into a single semantic complex, ensuring the unity of the Bible as a common source for all Christians” (Newest Philosophical Dictionary, Minsk, 1999, p. 796). Christian ethics is closely related to Christian doctrine. Christian ethics, as presented in the New Testament, is characterized by universalism. The main Christian maxim: this is a benevolent attitude, love (agape) towards all people, regardless of their social, national and religious status. But this is also fully described by the well-known “golden rule”. In terms of ethical instructions, Jesus Christ communicates almost nothing new at the verbal level. But He Himself is the main news and given, He offers Himself to people and sends down to people a new power - grace. The Apostle Paul continues to affirm Christian ethical universalism: “There is neither Jew nor Gentile; There is neither slave nor free" (Gal. 3:28). The Apostle Peter opens the doors of the Church to the Gentiles (Acts 10). /Subsequently, as orthodoxy developed, the religious factor began to be considered as particularly important, and the attitude towards heretics and schismatics began to differ from the attitude towards ordinary sinners/.

Universal human values ​​(HC) are “a system of axiomatic maxims, the content of which is not directly related to a specific historical period in the development of society or a specific ethnic tradition, but, being filled with its own specific meaning in each sociocultural tradition, is nevertheless reproduced in any type of culture as a value. Universal human values ​​include: human life (its preservation and development in natural and cultural forms). There are values ​​(in connection with the structure of being) natural (ecological) and cultural (freedom, law, education, creativity, communication). According to the forms of spiritual culture, values ​​are classified into moral (goodness, the meaning of life, conscience, dignity, responsibility), aesthetic (beautiful, sublime), religious (faith), scientific (truth), political (peace, justice), legal (human rights, law and order). Each historical era and specific ethnic group express themselves in a hierarchy of values ​​that determine what is socially acceptable. In the modern world, the moral and aesthetic values ​​of antiquity, the humanistic ideals of Christianity, the rationalism of the New Age, and the paradigm of non-violence of the 20th century are significant. (M. Gandhi, M. L. King). In the modern era of global changes, the absolute values ​​of goodness, beauty, truth and faith acquire special importance as the fundamental foundations of the corresponding forms of spiritual culture, presupposing harmony, measure, balance of the holistic world of man and his constructive life affirmation in culture.” /Further, however, it is said that goodness, beauty, truth and faith mean not so much adherence to absolute values ​​as their search and acquisition - V.N./. Further, the dictionary entry states: “The Biblical moral commandments are of enduring importance: the 10 Commandments of Moses and the Sermon on the Mount of Jesus Christ” (NFS, p. 484).

On the one hand, in the dictionary entry religious values ​​are listed on an equal basis with others (which is typical for a secular type of thinking). On the other hand, the article speaks, albeit with some reservations, about the absolute timeless significance of universal human values. Thus, judging by the dictionary entry, the era of the Bolshevik struggle against “abstract humanism” is beginning to end.

Let me remind you that during the communist period the very concept of an OC was either denied or identified with the interests of the progressive class. In any case, the OCs were declared exclusively historically, culturally and class-based. In order to avoid the relativization of OCs, they tried to fit them into objective historical necessity (istmatism), which methodologically played the role of God in Marxism. God was called "objective law."

Today, almost no one denies OC, but the question of the origin of OC remains open for discussion. The main question: are they given from above, from God, or are they of earthly origin? In philosophical language, the question sounds like this: are OCs rooted in the transcendental sphere (in the absolute) or in the relative immanent sphere of current reality? The transcendental sphere has one characteristic: it is invisible. This seems to be bad, because... you can't touch it. But if we take into account that the “transcendental thirst” of man (according to Christian anthropology) cannot be satisfied by anything finite (visible), then the absolute should not be visible (a visible absolute would be finite, and therefore not an absolute). Only if there is a common point of reference, a common criterion (one absolute) can we talk about the universality (universality) of moral requirements. In addition, only in the presence of a transcendental sphere can one comprehend, not in terms of defeat, the earthly (immanent) catastrophe of a person physically dying as a result of his highly moral act. The immanent sphere is visible and even too visible. In the kaleidoscope of events, it is very difficult to understand what is happening, but it is even more difficult to understand what should be happening. It is very easy to show that moral norms are conditioned by the historical sociocultural situation. But it is equally difficult to determine the proper direction of development of the situation. What is considered natural and what is not? It is very easy to show that any kind of decency leads to earthly failure, and bad qualities lead to material well-being (you just need to “not get caught” - i.e. this is a technical question). Ethical relativists like to cite as an example some exotic island where everything is the other way around. Where people are not only “terrible on the outside, but kind inside,” but also inside they are not at all kind, cannibals, for example. Theoretically, it is almost impossible to prove the category of what should be. Here, no statistics will help: in fact, what is more in the world: good or evil? And what do we mean by good and evil? It is too easy to “show” the relativity of these concepts. True, the experience of building the world’s first atheistic state, an “earthly paradise,” is in itself very indicative. Instead of paradise, we got a “zone”.

As history shows, the most difficult idea for humanity to assimilate is the idea of ​​universalism. Moreover, oddly enough, not a totalitarian, not a camp type, but a humanistic-liberal type. This is the idea of ​​the unity of the human race, solidarity, a unified system of ethical and OC, respect for the human person, without which no globalization, which is talked about so much today (mainly in the West), will not take place. These values ​​form a common part of the ethical precepts (commandments) of world religions: do not kill, do not steal, do not lie, do not take revenge, treat people well. These values ​​are clearly expressed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (1950), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966), the recently adopted Ecumenical Charter for Europe and other international documents recognized by many countries, including ours. This general ethical minimum necessary for the very existence of human society is well known. This is the so-called natural morality, the maxim of which is expressed in the well-known “golden rule of morality”, in the virtues known since antiquity: courage, moderation, wisdom, justice. Ancient morality, like any natural morality, was normative in nature.

In the Old Testament there is a harsh experience of creating a moral standard through God's chosen people in a pagan environment. In the Old Testament history there is nothing reminiscent of modern human rights (tolerance); there was a merciless war against idolatry. But still, in the Old Testament there were the beginnings of universal human ethics. The words “truth” and “justice” are often found there, and these concepts began to extend to strangers: “do not oppress the alien and do not oppress him; for you yourselves were strangers in the land of Egypt” (Ex. 22:21). “The Lord is a God of righteousness” (Is. 30:18).

Christian ethics includes the highest achievements of ancient and Old Testament ethics. The righteousness of the apostles was supposed to surpass the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees (Matt. 5:20). The idea of ​​natural morality is reflected in the statement of the apostle: “When the pagans, who do not have the law, by nature do what is lawful, then, not having the law, they are a law unto themselves. They show that the work of the law is written in their hearts, as their conscience and their thoughts bear witness to” (Rom. 2:14-15).

It is important to note that it is in the Biblical-Christian tradition that the unity of the human race is affirmed, originating from one source, the same ancestors (no matter how they are understood: literally or generally allegorically). Jesus Christ Himself gives the commandment: “As you want people to do to you, do so to them” (Luke 6:31), which includes the long-known “ Golden Rule“morality: “don’t do to others as you would not want them to do to you.” The neighbor in Christ’s parable turns out to be not his true believer, but a “foreigner and a heretic” - the Merciful Samaritan (Luke 10:29-37), and precisely because he was merciful to to a stranger. In the scene Last Judgment the criterion will not even be a religious sign, but again - good deeds, that is, ethics (see: Matt. 25, 31-46).

But Christian ethics is not only normative, as natural ethics, it is paradoxical, which is clearly expressed in the “Sermon on the Mount”. You should love your enemies, give away your property, and not worry about tomorrow. This paradox is explained:

1 . New eschatological perspective eternal life. Not everything happens within the visible limits of earthly life. Physical death ceases to be an absolute factor. 2. By introducing a new factor - grace. On the ethical plane, grace produces love, forgiveness, and self-sacrifice. 3. A new understanding of eternity as the Kingdom of God, which begins here and now.

It would seem that these two ethical systems (natural and Christian) do not contradict each other. Christian ethics should, it seems, include the best achievements of universal human ethics and complement them with the boundless heights of Christian maximalism. It is possible to combine these two ethics in a hierarchical paradigm of subordination of ethical values, as was done, for example, by the Christian apologist Justin the Philosopher (2nd century. Good belongs to Christians. That is, he called for appreciating goodness in all its manifestations.

But here every now and then a problem arises, identified by Tertullian in the dilemma: “Athens or Jerusalem?” Augustine also said: “the virtues of the pagans are Christian vices.” /Example - honor, chivalry, duels, attitude towards suicide/. The question arises: is not Christian ethics self-sufficient? This approach assumes an exclusive paradigm: either-or. If the gospel pearl is found, then everything else seems unnecessary. It is known that people who profess Christianity often deny culture, the OC, opposing them to the heights of the Christian ideal. They tend to create a subculture and do not feel responsible for the state and development of civil society. At the same time, politics is often simply despised by them as a “dirty business.” The concept of social sin, together with social life, is, as a rule, denied by them. This causes a corresponding reaction from society to the church, which is perceived as something marginal and asocial.

This situation is explained by several reasons: Religious reason: all natural sciences and secular culture are oriented towards this (earthly) life. Christianity is more focused not on this life, but on the hereafter. With too strict a dualism between the earthly and the heavenly in the eschatological perspective of salvation, earthly culture loses its meaning. All that remains is asceticism and strict morality.

Social reason: secular society in our era of narrow specializations has assigned the church a certain function that does not involve interference in culture, because other specialists deal with culture.

Psychological reason: it is easier for a person to perceive what is happening next to him than to see the picture as a whole. He tends to perceive his surroundings as a self-sufficient club with its own interests. In paganism, God is perceived only as the guardian of the hearth.

Philosophical reason: the absolutism of religious values ​​is opposed to all other values, as obviously “weaker” (too strict dualism of the earthly and the heavenly). The same result is possible at the other extreme: a flat, single-level perception of existence. Nothing can stand comparison with the absolute on the same plane. V.V. Rozanov vividly wrote about this in his report: “About the Sweetest Jesus and the bitter fruits of the world” (1907). But with a hierarchically structured perception of existence, everything finds its place. Absolute value (eternal life) does not destroy the relative values ​​of earthly existence (well-being, for example). It is important to remember that matter (God’s creation) is not perceived as something obviously negative.

The degree of Christianization of society can be judged not only by the attendance of churches, but also in relation to the weak: the elderly, children, disabled people, religious minorities and the smallest minority - an individual who may find himself defenseless against the state leviathan or any collective. This is precisely the area where OCs coincide with Christian ones. In paganism, along with the “Golden Rule,” there were other rules: “you can do whatever you want with the enemy, you don’t need to feel sorry for him,” “finish off the weak, there’s no need to mess with him”! But it is about Christ that it is prophetically said: “A bruised reed he will not break, and smoking flax he will not quench” (Isa. 42:3, Matt. 12:20). The Son of God Himself came in a beggarly form, bringing into this life a completely different criterion for evaluation. Now it is not force that must triumph, but truth and truth. “God is not in power, but in truth,” said (according to legend) Alexander Nevsky. What is truth in our time? Yes, the same as many years ago. Truth is closely connected with the relationships between people, with justice, which is always social. And justice, as V.S. Solovyov so well said, is a social expression of love, that very universal love for all people to which Christ has called us and continues to call us. This means that justice is both a universal concept and a Christian one. And the tool for implementing the OC is a legally formalized concept of human rights, focused primarily on protecting the weak (the strong will protect themselves anyway). “The right of the strong” is not right in the human sense. Such right is widespread in the animal world and in the sick imagination of Marx, who defined law as the will of the ruling class elevated to law. But for some reason it is believed that the legal approach leaves no place for Christianity. Where is Christ here? - they may ask. But He has not gone away, Christians simply receive additional help (grace) in fulfilling generally accepted commandments. But no, our new Orthodox (neophytes) often don’t like this. Where have they seen this, they say that some rights should be respected somewhere!? From here the cynical conclusion is drawn that the very concept of human rights is false. So... everything is allowed again? Others believe that one must continue to “sit quietly,” thinking only about one’s internal balance, “doing one’s own thing,” not defending the very principle of law and “not interfering” in anything. But we do not abandon the principle of goodness, which is also violated everywhere! “The bitter feeling of human baseness should not obscure the heights to which a person is destined” (N. A. Berdyaev). So why abandon the same principle, only expressed in a different, more specific (instrumental) terminology, to the actualization of which the concept of OC, which includes both humanitarian assistance and the protection of human rights, encourages us? Anyone who says that he believes in God, but does not recognize the OC, may not be lying. This is possible. Christianity does offer a higher ethical standard than mere humanism. But any humanism is not simple at all, just like goodness is not simple, just like doing good is not simple. The denial of humanism should have nothing to do with Christianity. Moreover, Russian religious philosophers of the beginning of the century created, in essence, the concept of Christian humanism. A. Men continued this line in his works.

Appendix to the report

RELIGIOUS AND PHILOSOPHICAL BACKGROUND OF THE CONCEPT OF HUMAN RIGHTS (thesis)

“Woe to those who make unjust laws to steal the rights of the weak” Isaiah (10:1)

“While we are burning with freedom...” Pushkin

In legal theory, the question of the source of law is very important. If law is a tool for realizing state interests, merits or privileges determined by the state, then the state can arbitrarily change such a legal system at any time. With such a utilitarian understanding of law, it is understood, first of all, as a set of rules (laws). But there is another way of looking at law. The right must, in fact, be INALienable, and it can be such ONLY if the main source of law is recognized not as “common law” (custom), not as experience developed as a result of joint labor activity, not as a practice of social existence, etc., but as something transcendental (beyond), rooted in the Absolute, in the One Who is called GOD in the Western tradition. /The term “nature”, which is used by atheists and agnostics, is much weaker, because too vague, does not carry an ethical dimension/. God created man in His image and likeness, endowed man with FREEDOM, which is the basis of law. Hence - human dignity as an absolute category. As V.S. Solovyov said, law is human freedom limited by the equality of people (the freedom of one person is limited by the freedom of another). The law is a boundary between individuals that is forbidden to cross. A person has no rights before God, but before people he has very definite rights. Everyone has the right to demand that others comply with generally accepted standards of behavior, for example.

In the Western theological tradition, God is not only a transcendental being, but also an important PRINCIPLE of existence, giving objective significance to the concepts of goodness and justice. “God is not only in power, but also in truth,” said Alexander Nevsky. The truth is social concept related to justice. Justice is objectified in legal law, which is, figuratively speaking, a secular god for all citizens. And “human rights” are, figuratively speaking, a secular religion. In the USA there is the concept of “civil religion,” which represents the general ethical basis of all world religions: do not kill, do not steal, honor the laws that protect a person from another person, from groups, from the state. Be in solidarity with all that is good. This is universal human ethics. When God is denied, the concepts of goodness and justice inevitably become psychologized, subjectivized and relativized (“everything depends on man,” who is supposedly “the measure of all things”). Therefore, there is a very close (albeit not so obvious) connection between law (as a principle) and religion. Both of these universals are transcendental. Therefore, atheistic countries (Russia for example) have and will continue to have big problems with “abstract and formal” law for a long time. If we have accepted the Western concept of human rights (see the 1993 Constitution of the Russian Federation), then we must understand its pathos and the way it is legally formalized in Western society, and finally understand what “natural law” is. In the West, belief in God was and continues to be considered natural. In our country, it is considered more natural NOT to believe in God (at the same time, you can observe some rituals “just in case” in the hope of receiving something “from above”). The West remains a big mystery for us, but the paradox is that we don’t feel this, believing that in the West there is “simply” more order. Most human rights activists are far from religion, naively believing that the truth of goodness and justice is self-evident for normal people. “That, they say, is all philosophy.” We, therefore, simply do NOT have the religious and philosophical resources to develop a similar concept of human rights. The main work in Russian philosophy on ethics, “The Justification of Good” (especially the 17th chapter) by V.S. Solovyov, remained unread. We did not notice how we had absorbed the Bolshevik-disdainful attitude towards V.S. Solovyov as an “idealist”. But the Bolshevik-nihilistic attitude towards law as “abstract humanism” is also well known. “Istmat” at one time abolished the law, replacing it with class interest, the “law of force,” obedience not to the law, but to the ruling class. Within the framework of materialism, it is impossible to understand what the force of law is. For materialism, law itself is an abstraction. Materialism understands law only as an instrument in the class struggle, i.e. in fact denies right as such. Today we want to skim the cream off “human rights” without bothering to think through the philosophical foundations of this concept. Therefore, the concept of human rights is not perceived by the public consciousness. It is abstract, without color, figuratively speaking, without smell, it inspires almost no one. Even the chaos in various types of Russian prisons does not awaken legal consciousness. After all, the essence of human rights activity is not in protecting oneself, but in protecting others, in the taste for justice as such. There is, therefore, a very close connection between law and religious absolutism, in which the inalienable dignity of man, created in the image and likeness of God, is rooted.

ABOUT SOCIETY, STATE, LAW

In the theory of law, the question of values, or more precisely, the hierarchy of values, is also very important. What exists for what: the state for the person or the person for the state? In the first case, enshrined, by the way, in the Constitution of the Russian Federation (Article 2), the state is considered as a technical or official means for the convenience of citizens. Citizens pay taxes, hire officials and control their work. Decisions are made by polling public opinion. All citizens (including officials) are equal before the law. In the second case, the state is viewed as the highest uncontrollable authority, and citizens as interchangeable cogs. Uncontrolled officials, having taken a supra-legal position, feel not like employees, but commanders. In this case, bureaucracy and corruption flourish. This regime is called statism or totalitarianism. The only good thing is the state (state apparatus) that is under the constant control of civil society, i.e. the first type of political structure of society.

RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS

The question of the relationship between rights and responsibilities is not very simple. The whole point is WHO will determine the balance of rights and responsibilities. If this is one social subject, then it will always skew in its favor (alas, these are the rules of the game in our sinful world). This is how the state will ALWAYS affirm the responsibilities of citizens. The state must be opposed by society, citizens who will emphasize their rights. It is only the society that opposes it that makes a state legal. The state (leviathan) always gravitates towards totalitarianism. Therefore, he alone cannot be entrusted with observing the rights of citizens. A rule-of-law state is a state where, with the competing interests of society and the state, a socio-political balance is formed in which state law, in addition to performing a general regulatory function, protects the inalienable freedoms of citizens. The state has the right only to suppress the actions of citizens and organizations that violate the rights of other citizens and organizations and violate the general interest of society (the common good). The state is obliged to demand compensation for damage caused, including that which concerns the general state treasury intended for everyone. It is important to understand that this is basically ALL that the state can claim. In a state governed by law, there cannot be, for example, a “duty to work,” just as there cannot be a duty to “live” or breathe. The law is the rules of the game that are binding on everyone and nothing more. And of course, the state should not take on the role of God and educate citizens. Let me remind you that in rule-of-law states there are no state media. Strict observance of laws is already good education. Human rights should not depend on a person’s social status, on whether he works or not, for example. Only his salary should depend on this. The right to a good salary is conditional on appropriate work. Thus, there are conditional rights (contractual), and there are absolute rights (inalienable). Human rights: freedom of speech, religion, movement, assembly, press - should not be determined by a person’s social status. These are unconditional rights. So the norm of the relationship between rights and duties (to comply with the laws) is established the same for everyone, regardless of a person’s merits. Compliance with this norm should be kept under control by human rights organizations. Otherwise, “benefits”, all kinds of “feeding troughs”, special distributors and supra-legal structures created by officials are inevitable. A paternalistic state maintains control over all kinds of benefits that have nothing to do with law in the legal sense. A simple example: by the number of different types of beneficiaries one can judge the degree of legal development of the state. A paternalistic state forces citizens to pay for benefits that government officials and, quite often, their family members enjoy. A legal state can only be built if there is a society that develops into a civil society.

WHAT IS LIBERAL DEMOCRACY? Democracy, as is known, etymologically means “power of the people.” But the power of the collective, the people, may turn out to be no better than the power of one (the monarch). “Depend on the king, depend on the people - does it really matter?” (A.S. Pushkin). The human person must be protected from any evil power. The concept of human rights allows us to establish legal mechanisms to protect people from any government that exceeds its powers. The salt of modern democracy is the protection of minorities (the smallest minority is a person) from any majorities. Law should not be associated with statistics. This can only be understood on the basis of Christian personalism (one sheep is worth more to the shepherd than ninety-nine sheep; see Matt. 18:12). Here the connection between law and the religious worldview is clearly visible. The political regime in such a state is called liberal democracy. The paradox here is that the government must pass laws that limit this power itself. Due to the presence of insightful, intelligent people in power, this is sometimes possible. There is no ideal state of law anywhere in the world, but differences in the degrees of approximation to it already have a very significant impact on the standard of living of citizens.

There should not be a “dictatorship of the law”, but a dictatorship of the legal, i.e. fair law. Or better yet: there must be the rule of law.

REASONS FOR THE INDIFFERENCE OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC TO LEGAL ISSUES

It would seem that with such a low standard of living (we live on average 15-20 years less than a Western person), embezzlement and bribery of officials, all kinds of “lawlessness”, the people should have an increased interest in human rights (i.e. in their own rights ), as well as in general to the observance of justice. But this doesn't happen. By the way, people view the environmental problem with the same indifference. I see the following reasons here: 1. Lack of a culture of rationally consistent thinking through issues. Let's not forget that the concept of “human rights” is a product of the New Age, a kind of legal modernism, the key concept and instrument of which is rationalism. It was from the combination of deism and rationalism that the mentioned socio-legal concept was formed. In Russia, the era of enlightenment, if it existed, affected a thin layer of society and did not produce almost any shift in public consciousness. Those. Russia faces the same problem of modernization. 2. The lack of will of the people as a result of the 70-year dictatorship of the communist bureaucracy, which paralyzed the country and destroyed public life. 3. The psychological type of Russian religiosity (for all its multi-confessional nature), which has nothing to do with the formation of respect for the individual, for personalism, which is associated in the popular consciousness with simple egoism and individualism. 4. Perhaps indifference to human rights issues is also due to the weakness of the conceptual thinking of many people. The concept, unlike a fur coat, for example, cannot be felt with your hands. But those who do not want to deal with concepts end up without fur coats.

CONCLUSION

As is known, the basis of any theory and any worldview are certain axioms, the acceptance and negation of which takes place in the sphere of the non-rational. But on this basis, completely rational theories are further built. The “image and likeness of God” in every person is an object of non-rational faith. “Human rights” are the result of the work of reason on the specified religious thesis in application to the social sphere. A way out of the current situation is as easy to propose (“develop”, “strengthen”, “enlighten”, etc.) as it is difficult to implement. Therefore, at the risk of being accused of unconstructiveness and the same lack of will, I will not do this here (i.e., propose something specifically). The solution to the problem lies not so much on a theoretical plane, but on an existential one.

Introduction........................................................ ........................................3

1. The concept of morality.................................................... ...........................4

2. Morality and religion................................................... ...........................6

3. Commandments - the triumph of eternal, enduring values

moral standards......................................................... ......................9

4. Eternal moral values ​​in Christianity.......................... 11

Conclusion................................................. ....................................16

List of sources used............................................... 18

Introduction

"Morality, of course, can only be based on God."

V. Chesnokova

Relevance: The topic of this essay is very relevant, since we will talk about the timeless, eternal truths of morality from the point of view of religion, and in particular Christianity. Nowadays, unfortunately, people's understanding of morality and worthy behavior is being erased. Young people do not respect adults, children are disobedient to their parents, homosexuals are already legalizing their relationships in many countries, and crime is growing every year. Various kinds of teachings are spreading in society, defending the cult of strength, the anti-values ​​of the “superman,” mysticism and amoralism. Therefore, it is very important to have a fundamental scientific knowledge of the moral values ​​​​contained in the Holy Scriptures. And this is especially important for young people who do not have the proper life experience and the necessary knowledge to correctly evaluate the incoming information.

Target of this work is to reveal the concept of morality through timeless Christian truths.

Tasks:

1. Define morality from a scientific point of view.

2. Show what positive impact faith in God has on a person’s moral life.

3. Reveal the spiritual and moral truths of the Old and New Testaments.

Item research: morality (morality) in general.

An object research: eternal moral values ​​from the point of view of Christianity.

Structure work: the abstract consists of an introduction, four chapters, a conclusion and a list of sources used.

1. The concept of morality

We can highlight the following, the most generally significant definitions of morality:

1) morality (morality) is “the internal, spiritual qualities that guide a person; ethical norms, rules of behavior, determined by these qualities.” IN this definition morality comes down to certain spiritual qualities of a person, as well as certain norms and principles of behavior, i.e. To a certain form consciousness. However, the moral dimension of society, as well as practical moral activity, is not adequately taken into account here. Therefore, in Russian-language Soviet ethics in the 70s of the 20th century, a different, broader concept of morality was proposed.

2) morality is a special, imperative-evaluative way of mastering reality through the dichotomy (opposition) of good and evil. Moral norms, also reflected in the categories of duty, conscience, honor, dignity, responsibility, have a specific historical content, determined by the level of development of society. The connection between this concept of morality and a person who can only evaluate and command is obvious. Morality is thus understood as a subjective form of existence, although universal for humans.

Moral consciousness reflects social phenomena and people's actions from the point of view of their value. Value is understood as the moral significance of an individual or a group, certain actions and value concepts (norms, principles, concepts of good and evil, justice).

The natural principles of morality are innate moral feelings and, above all, feelings of conscience, compassion, love, duty, and reverence. There is a lot of truth in the teachings of V.S. Solovyov, who took three feelings as the subjective foundations of morality - shame, compassion and reverence.

There are also social foundations in morality. The social foundations of morality include actually existing moral relations, mores, customs, traditions, norms and principles of behavior. Each culture, nation, estate, social group, class, even profession develops its own specific moral values, attitudes, and norms. Morality appears as a product of the historical creativity of all mankind. The development and existence of morality is greatly influenced by social institutions such as family, law, state, and church.

Morality also has its own spiritual foundations. And this, first of all, is the spiritual activity of the person himself. A person is sometimes required to have enormous courage and fortitude in order to resist evil and develop moral qualities.

2. Morality and religion.

Throughout its history, morality has always been closely connected with religion. Faith contains a powerful moral charge, since, firstly, a person subordinates his behavior to the will of God, i.e. accustoms himself to obedience; secondly, through his own actions, external appearance and internal abilities, he strives to become like God and, to some extent, is transformed.

According to one version, the Latin word “religio” comes from the verb “religare” (“to bind”, “to attach”). That is, in religion we are talking about the connection between man and God. She reveals for him the highest virtues - holiness, love, humility and justice, thereby showing the path of goodness and love for one's neighbor, how one can go this way without obstacles life path, where he becomes more perfect with the knowledge of these truths.

Faith in God has a multifaceted positive impact on a person’s moral life:

First, it creates a picture of the world in which, based on the interaction between the natural (man) and the supernatural (God), there is certain reward that will correspond, as it is written:

- “...God will reward everyone according to his deeds: to those who, by constancy in good deeds, seek glory, honor and immortality - eternal life; and to those who persist and do not submit to the truth, but indulge in unrighteousness - rage and anger; sorrow and distress to every soul of a person who does evil, first to the Jew, then to the Greek; on the contrary, glory and honor and peace to everyone who does good, first to the Jew, then to the Greek! For there is no partiality with God” (Book of the New Testament, Romans 2: 7-11);

- “...for the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus” (Romans 6:23);

- “Blessed are those who keep His commandments, so that they may have the right to the tree of life and to enter into the city of heaven through the gates, and without are dogs and sorcerers, and fornicators and murderers, and idolaters, and everyone who loves and works iniquity” (Apocalypse 22: 14) etc.

Thus, the advantage of a moral lifestyle over an immoral one in this short-term earthly life is substantiated: the belief is affirmed that moral goodness is ultimately rewarded, and evil and sin will be subject to deserved punishment.

In the image of the eternal God, the concept of an ideal is formed, as the highest moral standard, the approach to which should determine the life of all people on earth:

- “...learn from Me, for I am meek and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls,” “...be perfect, as your Father in heaven is perfect,” “...have peace with everyone and holiness, without which no one will not see the Lord” (Gospel of Matthew 11:9);

The most important moral requirements for a person are formulated;

A list of the main positive and negative qualities personality: virtues and vices, the ascetic practice of acquiring the former and eradicating the latter is being developed.

So, for example, in the Bible in the Epistle to the Galatians, the Apostle Paul speaks about the eternal, enduring values ​​of Christian morality: “... the fruit of the spirit The Holy One is: love, joy, peace, long-suffering, kindness, mercy, faith, meekness, self-control; against such there is no law,” he also condemns the immoral behavior of man, his sins: “... works of the flesh the essence is known - they are: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, quarrels, envy, anger, strife, disagreements, (temptations), heresies, hatred, murder, drunkenness, disorderly conduct and the like; I'll preface you, as before preceded that those who do this will not inherit the Kingdom of God...”

These various lines of influence of religion on morality can be reduced to one most important one: religion forms spirituality as the desire for perfection, the meaning of which is the knowledge of the Holy God, through Jesus Christ revealed to people.

Let us conclude: the religious interpretation of the origin of morality has a number of advantages; first of all, it emphasizes the universal, universal nature of morality. Divine instructions apply to all people without exception. Before morality, as before God, everyone is equal: rich and poor, king and servant, old and young.

True Christian teaching, to a certain extent, protects people from a simplified utilitarian approach to morality and elevates moral quests to high “meaningful” questions.

Within certain limits, religion is capable of limiting the scope of subjectivism and arbitrariness in moral assessments and judgments.

3. The commandments are the triumph of eternal, enduring values ​​of moral norms.

In the Old Testament, morality is understood as righteousness, which is unconditional obedience to the Divine law. Thanks to the power of God, righteous actions will lead to everyday well-being and happiness, and unrighteous actions (sins) will lead to internal decay of a person (degradation) and premature death.

The patriarchal model of domination and submission, on which Old Testament morality is built, presupposes filial piety and paternal care. The Jewish people, who entered into a covenant with God, considered themselves beloved children of God, to whom the Heavenly Father turns his mercy and love. A “covenant” is a kind of promise in which one party makes certain demands (“commandments”) to the other, promising some kind of reward for their fulfillment and punishment for non-fulfillment; the other party undertakes to fulfill these requirements. The commandments are given in the form of unconditional commands, since the legacy of original sin continues to live in the human heart.

The Ten Commandments of Moses, contained in the Old Testament books of Exodus and Deuteronomy, formulate requirements concerning man’s relationship to God and relationships between people:

1. Do not recognize other gods and do not worship them,

2. Do not make for yourself an idol or any image and do not worship them,

3. Do not take the name of the Lord in vain,

4. Dedicate the Sabbath day to God,

6. Don't kill

7. Do not commit adultery

8. Don't steal

9. Do not bear false testimony,

10. don't be jealous.

Conclusion: The appearance of the 10 commandments is a significant stage in the development of ethics. For the first time in world history, ritual prescriptions were replaced by moral requirements, and the latter were expressed in a generalized form. The commandments are a triumph of the eternal, enduring values ​​of the moral norm.

4. Eternal moral values ​​in Christianity .

The immeasurable wealth of Christian moral values ​​is also contained in the 27 books of the New Testament.

In its moral content, Christianity is radically different from all other religions in the universality of its universal human content. It addressed the Gospels (translated from Greek as “good news”) to those segments of the population that for many other religious moral systems acted as a model of socio-moral degradation.

Christianity teaches about the equality of all people before God, and therefore in relation to each other, teaches moral behavior, which rests on the same foundations for all people. Christianity appeals to the humiliated and insulted, the rejected and oppressed: to those who occupy the lowest places in the hierarchy - to strangers, slaves and outcasts.

The preaching of Christ promises the Kingdom of God, in which there are neither slaves nor masters, but all are brothers to each other, and all violence gives way to justice, mercy and love, and mutual understanding.

The Son of God - Jesus embodies the fullness of divine and human nature: he is omnipotent and wise, but he can experience human feelings, he can rejoice and suffer, grieve and compassion, punish and have mercy, on the other hand, he can heal and raise the dead, convict and forgive sins, radically change the lives and hearts of people. He can be for people not only an unattainable ideal, but also a role model. To be spiritual and moral means to imitate Christ, read and listen to His Word, and follow His instructions.

In the teaching of the Apostle Paul, the idea of ​​the future transformation of man acquires great importance. The human soul will be freed from sinfulness, and the law will lose its meaning for it, for where the law is, there is sin, as a deviation from it. Law is necessary for human nature, which cannot do good without coercion and punishment.

The sacrificial death of Jesus on the cross and His resurrection became the guarantee of our salvation and grace (undeserved mercy), which is above all law. Sin is overcome not only by fulfilling the law, but also by obedience and love, faith and hope, as in gratitude for what Christ has done for us.

On this basis, the emphasis in the moral attitude of man to man changes significantly. The main thing is not the literal compliance of the act with the law, but the intention, the motive for which the act is performed. Human transformation occurs outside of earthly life, but begins on earth with a feeling of love and reverence for God. Love marks the beginning of the Kingdom of God in the heart of every believer: “...God is love, and he who abides in love abides in God, and God in him” (1st John 4:16) - says one of the creeds of Christianity .

Subordinate to love are two other highest eternal Christian values: faith and hope, these three virtues together constitute an inseparable unity, for hope and love cannot be separated from faith in Christ, and love and faith are inseparable from hope. Love absorbs the entire content of morality, including that which was in the Mosaic commandments. All the virtues of Christianity, which occupy the main place in the moral system, are based on it.

This system is supported by the ideas of the New Testament - a covenant between Christ and a person personally, according to it - a moral attitude extends to all people without exception, Jesus said: “...you have heard what was said in the Old Testament: “You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.” “But I say to you: love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who despitefully use you and persecute you” (Gospel of Matthew 5: 43-44).

Moral ideals worthy of man were set forth in detail by Christ in the Sermon on the Mount. What he said was unexpected and surprising to the listeners. If previously it was considered quite fair to act according to the principle “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” or “love your neighbor and hate your enemy,” then Christ appealed to the higher motives of human behavior, to a higher degree of spirituality. In the Sermon on the Mount he speaks not so much of vengeful justice as of love.

Moral perfection requires solving an even more complex moral task: loving not only your neighbors, but also your enemies. Loving those who love you and greeting your brothers - what's so special about that? But “...to love your enemies, to pray for those who offend and persecute you, to forgive those who hate you...” - the fulfillment of this commandment requires a lot of work on oneself on the path of moral improvement. This is very difficult, but striving for this as the highest ideal is necessary, because in love for another, a person becomes more moral and purer.

As you can see, Christianity opens up new deep layers of morality. Jesus' Sermon on the Mount does not abolish the Decalogue of Moses, but includes it as a particular moment in a broader system of demands. The Old Testament “thou shalt not kill” expands to condemn hostility as such in all its manifestations: anger, insults, quarrels, etc. Not only the fact of adultery itself is condemned, but even internal indulgence in temptation. Christ reveals the exclusive “golden rule of morality”: “...in everything, whatever you want people to do to you, do so to them” (Gospel of Matthew 7:12).

From the point of view of true Christianity, the goal of life is not earthly well-being, nor carnal pleasure, but the salvation of the immortal human soul for eternal life. Salvation means deliverance from moral evil - sin, and physical evil - hellish suffering and eternal death. Earthly life is considered only as a preparatory step for the transition to eternity.

In connection with such a revaluation of moral and spiritual values, the attitude towards oneself and one’s neighbor takes on special importance. A righteous person, as Christian teaching believes, constantly works not so much with external as with internal enemies: temptations and his own lusts, including: “... the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes and the pride of life” (1st Epistle of John .2:16). In order to overcome sins and temptations, Jesus teaches: “...watch and pray, so that you do not enter into temptation” (Gospel of Mark 14:38).

The Bible says that two paths are open to every person: the narrow and the wide, the path of “eternal life” and the “path of destruction.” Many follow the last path - the path of temptations and satisfaction of the flesh, consumerism and worldly vanity. This kills a person, his soul, since material needs, selfishness and selfishness come to the fore. A person becomes self-centered, guided only by his own whims and desires and does evil not only to others, but above all to himself. As a result, the personality is destroyed. The narrow path, the “path of life” is the path of spiritual improvement, the path of spiritual purity, inner peace, the path of peace, righteousness and repentance. This is a difficult path, and few people find it.

As they say in legal circles, ignorance of the law does not exempt one from responsibility, and in spiritual and moral terms: people who do not know God’s law and have not read the Bible cannot be justified before God for their immoral behavior.

Thus, the Apostle Paul wrote in his Epistle to the Romans: “...when the Gentiles, who do not have the law, do what is lawful by nature, then, not having the law, they are a law unto themselves: they show that the work of the law is written in their hearts, what their conscience testifies and their thoughts, sometimes accusing, sometimes justifying one another" (Romans 2:12-15).

In confirmation of this, the ancient philosopher Tertullian (2nd century) stated: “So, before the Mosaic Law, written on stone tablets, I affirm, there was an unwritten law, which was usually understood naturally and observed by the ancestors.”

Conclusion:

From all of the above material we can draw the following conclusions:

1. Morality is a special, imperative-evaluative way of mastering reality through the dichotomy (opposition) of good and evil. The natural principles of morality are innate moral feelings and, above all, feelings of conscience, compassion, love, duty, and reverence.

2. From the point of view of religion, the origin of morality has a number of advantages. First of all, it emphasizes the universal, universal nature of morality. Divine instructions apply to all people without exception. Christian teaching to a certain extent protects against a simplistic utilitarian approach to morality and elevates moral quests to high questions of meaning in life. Within certain limits, religion is capable of limiting the scope of subjectivism and arbitrariness in moral assessments and judgments.

3. Christian ethics is an ethics that is based both on God’s revelation to man of moral truths and on natural, social facts of morality. It is argued that moral truths comprehended by people are supplemented in revelation by those that cannot be “discovered” by the mind, such as, for example, the commandment of love for one’s enemies or the truth about God’s grace sanctifying the soul, etc. Christian ethics recognizes the Grace of God as the spiritual foundation of morality, through which certain moral principles and laws are believed to be transmitted to man. Here reference is made to the religious experience of mankind, which reflects a similar divine origin of some moral precepts. Thus, the Jewish people first received their legislation on Mount Sinai through Moses from God, which is reflected in the Old Testament of the Holy Scriptures. The New Testament describes the moral teaching of Jesus Christ, in whom true Christians believe as the God-man.

Why do we need moral improvement and high spirituality? After all, life is a transitory thing, everything is perishable, everything will be erased by death. Maybe in this case you need to hurry and take everything you can from life and more, but no! As one character from N. Ostrovsky’s novel “How the Steel Was Tempered” said: “... life must be lived in such a way that there is no excruciating pain for the years spent aimlessly...”.

Wealth, fame, power and money - all this does not fill a person’s life: today - a beggar, tomorrow - a king, today - an enemy, tomorrow - a hero, and the craving for the eternal and the unknown persists no matter what social status a person lives. A consumerist and insatiable life or simply a feeling of emptiness sooner or later leads a person to think about higher values. A person always seeks the highest meaning of life, strives for something eternal, harmonious, beautiful. Therefore, the main thing in Christ’s preaching is that people can radically change their sinful, immoral nature, acquire spiritual and moral values ​​and follow them, so that their earthly existence would be in hope of a new type of immortal existence.

1. Books of the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments (canonical)

2. Fundamentals of Religious Studies: Textbook / Ed. N.I. Yablokov. - M.,

2004. - P. 347.

3. Garadzha V.I. Religious Studies. - M., 2005. - P. 306.

4. Garadzha V.I. Sociology of religion. - M., 2005. - P. 89.

5. Vasiliev L.S. History of the religions of the East. - M., 2003. - P. 72.

6. Tokarev O. Religion in the history of the peoples of the world. - M., 2004. - P. 55.

7. Nikolsky N.M. History of the Russian Church. - M., 2005.

8. Religion and religious organizations in modern Russia. - M.,

9. James W. Diversity of religious experience. - M., 2006.

10. Religious traditions of the world. - M., 2006.