The Catholic Bible contains the books of Tabitha, Eudit, the Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiastes, Baruch, the First and Second Maccabees, plus some additions to the books of Esther and Daniel. These additional scriptures are commonly referred to as the Apocrypha. They are scattered among the 39 books of the Old Testament.

+ Apocrypha means "hidden or spurious" (Webster's Collegiate Dictionary)... This term refers to scriptures in the authenticity of which there are doubts or their source is generally unknown. There are many similar works that have been rejected by both Catholics and Protestants. Those accepted in the Catholic Bibles are commonly referred to as "Old Testament Apocrypha."

These books were written between 200 BC. and 100 A.D. Some, such as the First and Second Maccabees and Ecclesiastes, are of some interest in terms of their historical or ethical content; while the rest are pure fiction and therefore have no value. Their absence in the Protestant Bible is not due to their degree of suitability, but due to doubts about their God-spirituality.

These apocryphal books are rejected by the Protestant Bible for the following reasons:

There is no evidence that they were ever accepted by the Jews into the Old Testament canon. This is especially important from the point of view that the Jews “were entrusted with the revelations of God” (Rom. 3: 2).
Philius and Yosef, both former 1st century CE Jews and those who left many works do not quote a single Apocrypha. The latter indicates that the canon of sacred books includes 22 books (I group some as one whole), which corresponds to our 39 books. It is also accepted by many authorities in this area that the Jewish council in Jamnia (AD 90 and 118) confirmed the Jewish canon as we know it today.
Jesus and his apostles quoted freely from almost every book of the Old Testament, but not once did they mention any of the apocryphal books. They referred to the Old Testament books as "Scripture" (John 10:35; 19:36; 2 Pet. 1:20), "Scriptures" (Mat. 22:29; Acts 18:24), "Holy Scriptures" (Rom 1: 2), “Sacred Records” (2 Tim. 3:15) “Law” (John 10:34; 12:34; 15:25; 1 Cor. 14:21) and “Law and Prophets” ( Mat 5:17; 7:12; 22:40; Luke 16:16; 24:44; Acts 13:15; 28:23). They never called the Apocrypha with such terms.
For the first four centuries, these books were widely rejected by churches as non-canonical. Famous authors of that period - Justin the Martyr, Origen, Tertullian, Hilary, Jerome - did not recognize these Apocrypha. Jerome, whose writings are the basis for the Roman Catholic Church, was particularly vehement against them. They began to infiltrate the faithful from the fifth century A.D. until they were officially established as authoritative writings at Trent Cathedral in 1546.
Perhaps the strongest argument against these books will be the books themselves. They themselves do not proclaim that they are the Word of God or belong to the pen of the prophets. They are full of inaccuracies, contradictions and all kinds of legends. They can in no way be considered God-inspired. Therefore, they cannot be considered as coming from God and therefore they have no place among the books of the Bible.

One of the fundamental principles of Protestantism, Sola Scriptura, implies the rejection of the Tradition of the Church as the source of doctrine. At the same time, the growing number of disagreements in the understanding of Scripture, including between Luther and Zwingli, casts doubt on the exegetical optimism of the first third of the 16th century. The author shows that over time, in different denominations, their own "tradition" appears, reflected in symbolic books, confessions, as well as doctrinal authorities, as well as necessary to prove the truth of their views.

Anyone more or less familiar with the theology of the Reformation knows very well that Protestants denied the Tradition of the Church as a source of doctrine and affirmed the principle of Sola Scriptura - only Scripture. The Bible is self-sufficient, it interprets itself, it has answers to all questions - we hear today from Baptists and Pentecostals. In this sense, the Orthodox, who defend the necessity of Tradition, seem to be some kind of "not quite Christians" who need some books other than the Word of God. True, the Orthodox have a simple objection - the Bible is infallible, there is no dispute, but God Himself is still needed for salvation. Is it possible to communicate with God just by reading the Bible, or are there other ways of communicating with God? This is the question of the Orthodox, to which the Protestants have to answer. One answer from Protestants is always ready: there is still prayer, but you can only pray with literal quotations from the Bible, or words that retell the Bible - and nothing else! It is easy to be convinced that this thesis is not fulfilled by any Protestant confession - each of them has its own "hymnbooks", and they are by no means limited to quoting or retelling the Bible. Prayer - is that all? - ask the Orthodox. This is where disagreements begin among the Protestants. For example, even in the era of the Reformation, Luther was convinced, like the entire Church before him, that, in addition to prayer, the Sacraments are an important and irreplaceable way of communion with God, but his colleague, the Swiss reformer Zwingli, was convinced that it was not. And as a result ...

However, let's not get ahead of ourselves. Of course, the scholar of Luther's theology will quickly prove that the Wittenberg leader did indeed initially believe that every believer can clearly understand the meaning of the Bible if he (of course, individually) is enlightened by the Holy Spirit.

But this position of Luther is understandable, proceeding from the strong rejection of the Catholic reliance on certain documents, which, in particular, substantiated the secular power of the Pope and other innovations in Catholic tradition, which made it possible to explain either communion under one guise for the laity, now purgatory, now indulgences. The pendulum simply had to swing sharply in the other direction - and it swung: no Tradition - such is the "tradition of Luther"; only Scripture! Everything is clear and logical: God enlightens each believer individually, and he truly interprets the Bible. But disagreements constantly arise between believers, often on fundamental issues - and what about then - who will decide where is the true enlightenment of the Spirit, and where is false revelation?

In Christianity, church councils have always existed for this, for Christians were convinced that only the Church as the Body of Christ is infallible, and some people, alas, sin. In Protestantism, difficulties immediately arose with this - the Protestant theory of salvation said that everyone is saved instantly, by faith, God instantly forgives him all sins - and, at least in a legal sense, every believer can be considered a saint, and not only in a legal sense. Here infallibility is manifested at least in the fact that all sins are forgiven you in advance. In addition, the opposition of the poor believers, who suffered under the yoke of the papacy, which distorted the truth of the Catholic Church, worked. If Catholicism, as Luther believed, was mistaken for almost 15 centuries, then against this background the ordinary believer seemed more likely a victim: they were mistaken - the Pope, the bishops, the monks - and we simply endured their distortions, suffered from the diseases with which they infected us. Well, now we'll fix everything! Such a program, it seemed, not only raised the status of the individual believer, but also gave his actions to reform the Church a certain infallibility.

All this is wonderful, but disagreements accumulated between believers. Luther could turn a blind eye to this, pretending that all these are trifles, because the main thing - the purification of Catholicism from filth - is in full swing. So the Swiss Zwingli is successfully reforming the Church in his homeland. But when Luther got acquainted with the teachings of Zwingli in more detail, it became clear that "the devil hides in the details" - the doctrine of Zwingli in details at times quite significantly diverged from the views of Luther. How so: both recognized leaders of the Reformation seemed enlightened by the Holy Spirit, both taught salvation by faith and criticized Catholicism, but they could not come to an agreement.

Does this mean that reading the Bible by itself, not only by ordinary believers, but even by the leader of the Reformation, does not guarantee the truth? This fact alone was capable of strongly shaking the thesis "only Scripture". Here is how the famous English Protestant theologian Alistair McGrath comments on this situation: "Luther seems to argue that the average pious Christian believer is quite capable of reading Scripture with a perfect understanding of what it has read. A similar position is advocated by Zwingli in his important treatise On the Clarity and Certainty of the Word of God." written in 1522. Zwingli writes: “The word of God, as soon as it affects the understanding of a person, sanctifies him in such a way that he understands it.” Yet by the end of 1520 this exegetical optimism was largely undermined, mainly due to serious disagreements between Luther and Zwingli over the interpretation of one biblical text: "Hoc eat Corpus Veum" - "... this is my body" (Matthew 26:26).

This text is central to the Eucharist and therefore has tremendous liturgical significance for both the reformer and the Catholic. For Luther, this text meant: "This is My Body", in other words, the bread of the Eucharist is the Body of Christ. For Zwingli, however, the interpretation of this passage was somewhat different: "it signifies my body", in other words, the bread of the Eucharist represents the body of Christ. … The seriousness of the disagreement among the reformers regarding the Sacraments not only divided the Master's Reformation into two streams. She showed how difficult it was to reach agreement on the interpretation of even those passages of Scripture that Luther believed to be the most understandable. The exegetical optimism of the late 1510s and early 1520s manifested itself in the assumption that the average Christian could understand Scripture. However, by the 1530s. it was increasingly argued that it was necessary to have a good knowledge of Hebrew, Greek and Latin and to be familiar with complex linguistic theories in order to understand Scripture reliably. "

Alas, Luther's attempt to find a way out in the knowledge of languages and the rules of exegesis very quickly ran into insurmountable obstacles. First, this contradicts his own theory of individual enlightenment by the Spirit of every believer - it turns out that now, without outstanding knowledge in philology, "enlightenment of the Spirit" does not mean anything? Or maybe the Spirit gives all believers the gift of knowing tongues? It looks like Pentecostal now, but Luther didn't teach it; how Pentecostals know languages - we know too well today. Second, among Luther's colleagues in the Swiss Reformation there were people who knew the biblical languages and Latin, but their interpretation of the Bible was still different. Since then, nothing has changed - there are people among Lutherans, Anglicans, and Reformed who know all these languages and are well acquainted with "complex linguistic theories", but interpretations of the Bible remain far from the same, to put it mildly. And this is not the only problem. It also lies in the fact that already in the time of Luther, ordinary believers, to whom, as it was assumed, the Spirit Himself imparts infallible interpretations of Scripture, behaved somehow not very holy. And the anarchy in the interpretations of the Bible was outstanding - what can be done?

Turning to McGrath again: “Initially, the Master's Reformation agreed that everyone had the right to interpret Scripture, but later its ideologues began to worry about the social and political implications of this idea. The peasant uprising of 1525 seems to have convinced some (such as Luther), the fact that individual believers (especially Germanic peasants) were simply unable to interpret Scripture.Ironically, the movement that attached such importance to Scripture subsequently began to deny its less educated members access to this Scripture for fear that they might misinterpret it. interpret (in other words, interpret it differently from the master's reformers).

For example, the school rules of the Duchy of Württemberg stated that only the most capable students received the right to study the New Testament in the final grade, provided that teaching was conducted in Greek and Latin. The rest of the mass was to read Luther's Little Catechism instead. Thus, direct interpretation of Scripture became the domain of a privileged small group of people. In other words, it was a question of whether you adhered to the point of view of Pope, Luther or Calvin in the question of the interpretation of Scripture. The principle of "Scripture clarity" seems to have been marginalized in light of the use of the Bible by more radical circles in the Reformation. Likewise, the idea that everyone had the right to interpret Scripture correctly has become the exclusive domain of radicals. "

But this is, in fact, practically a return to the traditional principle of Tradition. Only instead of the church tradition, the "tradition of Luther" is proposed. And such a return was inevitable - it was necessary to somehow separate the Lutheran "truth" not only from the Catholic "lies", but also from the "lies" of the revolutionary Protestants - the same Munzer, for example. After all, the latter, like his associates, quite rightly reproached Dr. Martin for inconsistent implementation of the ideas of the Reformation: Luther left too much of the legacy of the hated papacy; the same Sacraments (baptism, communion) - well, why are they when we are saved once and for all by faith?

***

But for Luther, the sacrament is unshakable, otherwise there is no Church, which means that he is forced to turn to the Tradition of the Church, since from the principle of "only Scripture" the traditional interpretation of the sacrament does not follow with iron necessity. The "spirit" enlightened radical Protestants in this matter differently from Luther. And here we can state: “The only wing of the Reformation that consistently applied the principle of“ sola Scriptura ”was the radical Reformation or“ Anabaptism. ”For such radicals (or“ fanatics ”as Luther called them), like Thomas Münzer or Kaspar Schwenkfeld, each a person, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, had the right to interpret Scripture as he wanted. For the radical Sebastian Frank, the Bible is "a Book with seven seals, which cannot be opened without the key of David, which is the enlightenment of the Spirit."

Thus, the way was opened to individualism, and the personal judgment of the individual was placed above the collective judgment of the Church. For example, the radicals denied infant baptism (which the Master's Reforms continued to adhere to) as an unbiblical practice. ... Similarly, doctrines such as the doctrines of the Trinity and the divinity of Christ were denied as lacking sufficient biblical foundation. ... Such a view opened the way for anarchy and, as the history of the radical Reformation showed, anarchy was not slow to manifest itself. "

Let us note that the consistent application of the principle of sola Scriptura was precisely among the radical Protestants who denied the Sacraments, turning them into simple rituals - if communion with God in communion or baptism is denied, and in the Church in general, then the only way to communicate with God is to read the Bible. There is a clear rationalism of the position "only the Bible", the denial of the mysticism of the Sacraments and the mysticism of asceticism. But the Protestants had a ready answer to this: the Sacraments and asceticism were "spoiled" by the papacy towards the "magic of salvation" - indulgences, the automatic efficacy of the Sacraments (ex opere operato), etc.

Scripture here, as the last anchor of salvation, is the last undistorted source of communion with God (note that if the Church opposed her formula to the sola Scriptura formula, then it could be the formula "only Tradition", for it includes both Scripture and the Sacraments, and the fullness of the communion of the Church with the Lord - this is what we sing about in the Creed: "I believe in one Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church"). The revolutionaries of Christianity, in contrast to its reformers, just advocated reliance on Scripture, cleansed of all sorts of "legends" of fifteen centuries. In this sense, Baptists and Pentecostals, who are now called neo-Protestants, are clearly the heirs of the Reformation radicals.

And here we will allow ourselves to disagree with McGrath - even radical Protestants were still unable to consistently carry out the thesis of sola Scriptura, since it simply cannot be consistently carried out. All the same, these groups had something similar to the symbolic books of the confessions of the "moderate" Reformation, and then - their own dogmatists, their doctrinal authoritarianism, and so on. You had to somehow explain how your understanding of Christianity differs from others, and resist the complete anarchy of interpretations of the Bible. Those. inevitably, a tradition of its own arose - among Adventists this principle is expressed especially clearly in connection with the giving of a special status to the writings of Ellen White. And the "master's" reformers (Luther, Calvin, etc.) in their struggle against Catholicism and radical Protestantism were forced not only to construct the tradition of their own confessions, based both on their personal heritage and on the "consent of the fathers" of their church (for example ., The Book of Concord among the Lutherans), but also partially rely on the Tradition of the Church - who will believe only Luther and Calvin and their interpretations of the Bible?

Bishops and priests of the Swedish Lutheran Church

It was necessary to stock up on a more solid foundation and try to show that the leaders of the Reformation borrowed their doctrines from the undistorted Church of the past, i.e. they are not sectarians, but only continue the faith of the fathers. McGrath argues: “It is not surprising that the reformers looked to the Church Fathers as reliable interpreters of Scripture. This issue is especially important, but, unfortunately, it has not received the attention it deserves. Augustine, was that they considered them to be the spokesmen of biblical theology. In other words, the reformers believed that the Fathers sought to develop a theology based on only one Scripture - exactly what the reformers themselves aspired to in the sixteenth century. "

In the latter case, the reformers were closest to the truth, referring directly to the Tradition of the Church. However, they were wrong here too, firstly, because they often reduced Tradition to Augustine alone, from which, however, they drew only what suited their own doctrines and at the same time rejected the opinion of other fathers, especially the Eastern ones; secondly, because they understood Tradition only as a collection of the texts of the fathers and the fathers themselves were looking in vain for teachings about relying on the text of the Bible alone, not realizing that Tradition is a living communion of the Church with God - in the Sacraments, in the very life of the saints. But the leaders of the Reformation rejected the experience of the holiness of the Church, providing all believers with a guaranteed "nominal holiness", and rejected the fullness of the Sacraments, leaving the Church and distorting the Sacraments themselves. As a result, the principle of "only Scripture" destroyed not only Scripture, but also the entire shining edifice of divine Christian truth. And the heirs of the Reformation had only to eat the fruits of the tree, from which most of the roots and branches were cut off.

As for the Church, Metropolitan Anthony of Sourozh, formulating the patristic perception of Scripture and Tradition, says: “The people of God ... are a people who are so rooted in God, so they know Him by personal experience that they could write and proclaim the Bible, and not just retelling and repeating it. And until we learn to do this in our evangelism ... by carrying the Bible's message to people, whether the Bible physically exists or not, we are still not God's people. We are just people repeating what is said by others is like a postman who delivers other people's letters. This is not enough. If we were the people of God in the true sense, we would not annoy people with endless quotes that become boring and nauseous. We ourselves would be a revelation of what should be revealed. ".

This is the main difference: the experience of communication with God makes us a Church, and not just a retelling of how someone once communicated with God. Without, along with the biblical words, to convey God Himself, union with Him, the preaching of the Gospel turns into a kind of agitation and propaganda. The choice is this - either to carry the Living Word of God, or - a dead Bible; dead, for without the Word of Life the Bible does not give life. The Orthodox Liturgy, the very experience of acquiring grace by the saints, makes preaching the true Gospel, because otherwise, only the irritation of people with endless quotes that cause nausea really remains. For proof, look at modern American evangelism - endless repetition of quotations from Scripture, but without communion with God.

One of the spiritual daughters of Metropolitan Anthony once wrote to him: "Pray to God to give me the courage never to try to build His imaginary presence in order to fill the terrifying emptiness of His absence" [cit. in: 2, S.873].

"Sermon" in the elk muzzle of a Lutheran "priest" in one of the Swedish parishes

Of course, we are all somehow guilty of this sin - but these are our sins, but not the sin of the Church, in which there is always true Liturgy and true holiness. But look at today's Baptists and especially Pentecostals - isn't their primitive poetry, pop music, and other ways of “stirring up the public” a clear attempt to fill the terrifying emptiness of God's absence with His imaginary presence and make it almost a rule of prayer?

Konstantin Matakov

References

1. McGrath A. Theological thought of the Reformation. - Odessa: Bogomyslie, 1994.

2. Metropolitan Anthony of Sourozh. Proceedings. - M .: Practice, 2002.

The Church of Christ commands its children to lead a temperate lifestyle, highlighting the days and periods of compulsory abstinence - fasting. The Old Testament righteous fasted, and Christ Himself also fasted (Matthew 4).

The weekly fast days (excluding "solid" weeks) are Wednesday and Friday. On Wednesday, fasting is established in remembrance of the betrayal of Christ by Judas, and on Friday - for the sake of the sufferings of the Cross and the death of the Savior. On these days it is forbidden to eat meat and dairy food, eggs, fish (according to the Charter from Fomin, Resurrection until the Feast of the Holy Trinity, you can eat fish and vegetable oil), and in the period from All Saints' Week (the first Sunday after the Feast of the Trinity) to on Wednesdays and Fridays, you should refrain from fish and vegetable oil.

There are four multi-day fasts a year. The longest and most severe is Lent, which lasts seven weeks before Easter. The strictest of them are the First and the last, Passionate. This fast was established in memory of the forty-day fast of the Savior in the wilderness.

Close in severity to the Great Dormition Fast, but it is shorter - from 14 to 27 August. With this fast, the Holy Church venerates the Most Holy Theotokos, who, standing before God, invariably prays for us. On these strict fasts, fish can be eaten only three times - on the feasts of the Annunciation of the Most Holy Theotokos (April 7), the Entry of the Lord into Jerusalem (a week before Easter) and the Transfiguration of the Lord (August 19).

Nativity Fast lasts 40 days, from November 28 to January 6. On this fast, fish is allowed to eat, except Monday, Wednesday and Friday. After the feast of St. Nicholas (December 19), fish can be eaten only on Saturdays and Sundays, and the period from January 2 to January 6 must be carried out in full severity.

The fourth fast is for the Holy Apostles (Peter and Paul). It begins with All Saints' Week and ends on the Day of Remembrance of the Holy Chief Apostles Peter and Paul - July 12. The dietary charter for this fast is the same as for the first period of Christmas.

The days of strict fasting are Epiphany Eve (January 18), the feasts of the Beheading of John the Baptist (September 11) and the Exaltation of the Holy Cross (September 27).

Some relaxation in the severity of fasting is allowed for the sick, as well as those who are busy with hard work, pregnant and lactating women. This is done so that fasting does not lead to a sharp decline in strength, and the Christian has the strength for the prayer rule and the necessary work.

But fasting should be not only bodily, but also spiritual. "The one who believes that fasting is only in abstaining from food is mistaken. True fasting," teaches St. John Chrysostom, "is removal from evil, curbing the tongue, setting aside anger, taming lusts, stopping slander, lies and perjury."

The body of the fasting person, without being burdened with food, becomes light, strengthens to receive grace-filled gifts. Fasting tames the desire for the flesh, softens the temper, suppresses anger, restrains the impulses of the heart, invigorates the mind, brings peace of mind, eliminates intemperance.

By fasting, as Saint Basil the Great says, a favorable fast, moving away from every sin committed by all the senses, we are fulfilling the pious duty of an Orthodox Christian.

Repentance

What to do to someone who is tormented by conscience? What to do when the soul languishes?

The Orthodox Church answers: to bring repentance. Repentance is the conviction of your sin, it is the determination not to repeat it in the future.

We sin against God, against our neighbor, and against ourselves. We sin by deeds, words and even thoughts. We sin at the instigation of the devil, under the influence of the world around us and according to our own evil will. "There is no person who lives on earth and does not sin," says the funeral prayer. But there is no such sin that is not forgiven by God in our repentance. For the salvation of sinners, God became a man, was crucified and rose from the dead. The Holy Fathers compare the mercy of God with the sea, extinguishing the most powerful flame of human iniquity.

Confession is performed daily in Orthodox churches. Obviously, the priest accepts it, but invisibly - the Lord Himself, who gave the pastors of the Church to forgive sins. “Our Lord and God Jesus Christ, by the grace and compassion of His love for mankind, may forgive you all your sins, and I, an unworthy priest, by His power given to me, forgive and release you from all your sins,” the priest testifies.

At confession, one does not need to make excuses, complain about the circumstances of life, disguise sins with vague phrases like "I have sinned against the sixth commandment", and talk about extraneous topics. One should not be ashamed (ashamed to sin, not repent!) To tell everything in which the conscience and the Gospel expose. In no case should anything be hidden: sin can be hidden from the priest, but not from the Omniscient God.

The Church refers to the grave, "mortal" sins: murder; abortion; beatings; adultery; fornication and fleshly perversion; theft; blasphemy; blasphemy; hatred towards one's neighbor, reaching the point of damnation against him; witchcraft and fortune-telling; seeking help from psychics, "healers" and astrologers; drunkenness; smoking; drug addiction.

But even less serious sins harm a person, serve as an obstacle on the way to the Kingdom of Heaven. "Harmless" lies or foul language can send you to hell!

If, while confessing something, we are determined to repeat this sin, then repentance is meaningless. You cannot start the sacrament in a state of quarrel or protracted rebellion with your neighbor, according to the word of Christ: "If you bring your gift to the altar and there you remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar, and go first be reconciled to your brother "(Matthew 5:24). If this person has already died, one must fervently pray for the repose of his soul.

In some cases, the priest will prescribe penance to the penitent - a kind of spiritual medicine aimed at eradicating vice. This can be bowing, reading the canons or akathists, increased fasting, a pilgrimage to a holy place - depending on the strength and capabilities of the penitent. The penance must be performed strictly, and only the priest who imposed it can cancel it.

The so-called "common confession" has become a reality of our days. It consists in the fact that the priest himself names the most common sins, and then reads a prayer of absolution over the repentant. It is permissible to resort to this form of confession only by those who do not have mortal sins on their consciences. But good Christians also need to check their souls from time to time for a detailed (individual) confession - at least, at least once a month.

A person bears responsibility for his sins from the age of seven. One who is baptized as an adult has no need for repentance during the pre-Baptismal period.

Prayer Rule

The basis of the life of an Orthodox Christian is fasting and prayer. Prayer, said St. Philaret of Moscow, "is a conversation between the soul and God." And just as in a conversation it is impossible to listen to one side all the time, so in prayer it is useful sometimes to stop and listen to the Lord's answer to our prayer.

The church, praying daily "for everyone and everything," has established for each individual, individual prayer rule. The composition of this rule depends on the spiritual age, living conditions, and human capabilities. The Prayer Book offers us morning and evening prayers available to everyone. They are addressed to the Lord, the Mother of God, the Guardian Angel. With the blessing of the confessor, prayers to selected saints can be included in the cell rule. If it is not possible to read morning prayers in front of the icons in a calm atmosphere, then it is better to read them on the way than to omit them altogether. In any case, you should not have breakfast before the prayer "Our Father" is read.

If a person is sick or very tired, then the evening rule can be performed not before going to bed, but shortly before that. And before going to bed, one should read only the prayer of the Monk John Damascene, "Vladyka Beloved of mankind, can it be that this coffin's bed will be for me ..." and those who follow it.

A very important part of morning prayers is remembrance reading. You should definitely pray for the peace and health of His Holiness the Patriarch, the ruling bishop, spiritual father, parents, relatives, godparents and godchildren, and all people who are connected with us in one way or another. If someone cannot make peace with others, even if not through his own fault, he is obliged to remember the "hating" and sincerely wish him well.

The personal ("cell") rule of many Orthodox includes the reading of the Gospel and the Psalter. Thus, the Optina monks blessed many to read during the day one chapter from the Gospel, in order, and two chapters from the Apostolic Epistles. Moreover, the last seven chapters of the Apocalypse were read one a day. Then the reading of the Gospel and the Apostle ended at the same time, and a new circle of readings began.

The prayer rule for a person is established by his spiritual father, in his own jurisdiction to change it - to decrease or increase. Once a rule has been established, it should become the law of life, and each violation should be considered as an exceptional case, tell the confessor about it and receive admonition from him.

How to pray when you are pressed for time

What words to pray? What about someone who either has no memory, or who due to illiteracy has not studied many prayers, to whom, finally - and there is such a life situation - there is no time to stand in front of the images and read morning and evening prayers in a row? This issue was resolved by the instructions of the great elder Seraphim of Sarov.

Many of the elder's visitors blamed him for praying little, not reading even the prescribed morning and evening prayers.

St. Seraphim established the following easily observable rule for such people:

"Rising from sleep, every Christian, standing before the holy icons, let him read the prayer" Our Father "three times, in honor of the Most Holy Trinity. Then the song to the Mother of God" Virgin Mary, Rejoice "also three times. At the end of the Symbol of Faith," I believe in one God. " - once. Having fulfilled such a rule, every Orthodox person goes about his business, to which he is assigned or called. While working at home or on the way somewhere he quietly reads "Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on me a sinner (or a sinner)", and if they surround his others, then, minding his own business, let his mind say only "Lord, have mercy" - and so on until dinner. Before lunch, let him again perform the morning rule.

After dinner, while doing his job, let every Christian read as quietly: "Most Holy Theotokos, save me a sinner."

Going to sleep, let every Christian again read the morning rule, that is, three times "Our Father", three times "Theotokos" and once "The Symbol of Faith."

St. Seraphim explained that by adhering to that small "rule" one can achieve a measure of Christian perfection, for these three prayers are the foundation of Christianity. The first, like a prayer given by the Lord Himself, is the pattern of all prayers. The second was brought from heaven by the Archangel in the greeting of the Mother of God. The Symbol of Faith contains all the saving dogmas of the Christian faith.

The elder also advised reading the Jesus Prayer during classes, while walking, even in bed, and at the same time quoted the words from the Epistle to the Romans: "everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."

What a Christian Should Remember

There are words of Scripture and prayer that it is desirable to know by heart.
The Lord's Prayer "Our Father" (Matt. 6, 9-13; Luke 11, 2-4).
The main commandments of the Old Testament (Deut. 6, 5; Lev. 19.18).
Basic gospel commandments (Matt. 5, 3-12; Matt. 5, 21-48; Matt. 6, 1; Matt. 6, 3; Matt. 6, 6; Matt. 6, 14-21; Matt. 6, 24-25; Matt. 7: 1-5; Matt. 23: 8-12; John 13:34).

Symbol of faith. Morning and evening prayers for a short prayer book. The number and meaning of the sacraments. Sacraments should not be confused with rituals. A ceremony is any outward sign of reverence that expresses our faith. A sacrament is a sacrament during which the Church invokes the Holy Spirit, and His grace descends on the believers. There are seven such sacraments: Baptism, Confirmation, Communion (Eucharist), Repentance (Confession), Marriage (Wedding), Blessing of Oil (Unction), Priesthood (Ordination).

"Do not be afraid of the fear of the night ..."

Human life costs less and less ... It has become scary to live - there is danger from all sides. Any of us can be robbed, humiliated, killed. Realizing this, people try to defend themselves; someone gets a dog, someone buys a weapon, someone turns a dwelling into a fortress.

The fear of our time has not escaped the Orthodox either. How to protect yourself and your loved ones? - believers often ask. Our main protection is the Lord Himself, without His Holy Will, as the Scriptures say, and a hair will not fall from our head (Luke 21, 18). This does not mean that in our reckless trust in God, we can behave defiantly towards the underworld. The words "do not tempt the Lord thy God" (Matthew 4: 7) we need to remember firmly.

God has given us the greatest shrines to defend against visible enemies. This is, first of all, a Christian shield - a pectoral cross that should not be removed under any circumstances. Secondly, holy water and artos, eaten every morning.

We also preserve the Christian by prayer. In many churches, belts are sold on which the text of the 90th psalm "Alive in the help of the Most High ..." and the prayer to the Honest Cross "May God rise again" are written. It is worn on the body, under clothing.

The ninety psalm is very powerful. Spiritually experienced people recommend reading it before every time we go outside, no matter how many times we leave the house. Saint Ignatius Brianchaninov gives advice when leaving the house to sign the sign of the cross and read the prayer: "I deny to you, Satan, your pride and service to you, and I am combined with You, Christ, in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. Amen." Orthodox parents must by all means re-baptize their child if he goes out on the street alone.

When you find yourself in a dangerous situation, you need to pray: "May God rise again", or "Victory to the chosen Voevoda" (the first kontakion from the akathist to the Mother of God), or simply "Lord, have mercy", many times. It is also necessary to resort to prayer when, before our very eyes, another person is being threatened, and we lack the strength and courage to rush to his aid.

Prayer is very strong to the saints of God, who became famous for their martial art during their lifetime: saints George the Victorious, Theodore Stratilates, Demetrius Donskoy. Let's not forget about the Archangel Michael, our Guardian Angel. All of them have a special power with God to give the weak the strength to overcome their enemies.

"If the Lord does not guard the city, the watchman is in vain" (Psalm 126: 1). A Christian's house must be consecrated without fail. Grace will keep the dwelling from all evil. If it is not possible to invite a priest to the house, you yourself need to sprinkle all the walls, windows and doors with holy water, reading "May God rise" or "Save, Lord, Thy people" (troparion to the Cross). From the danger of arson, fire, it is customary to pray to the Mother of God in front of Her icon "Burning Bush".

Of course, no means will help if we lead a sinful life and do not repentance for a long time. The Lord often allows extraordinary circumstances to bring unrepentant sinners to their senses.

"Protestant" Bible

One often hears the question: "Is it possible to read the Bible that I took from a Protestant? They say that it lacks some books?"

For several years, generous overseas preachers have provided the Holy Scriptures for almost all willing Russians. Large numbers of people came to Protestant meetings solely because of the Bible as a gift. It must be admitted that in this respect the Lord turned evil for good - it would be extremely difficult for the Moscow Patriarchate to publish so many Bibles on its own.

But is it possible to read them to an Orthodox person without harm to the soul? The point here is not who he took the Bible from, but what is printed in it. The overwhelming majority of "Protestant" Bibles in Russian are printed from the Synodal edition of the 19th century, as indicated by the inscription on the back of the title page. If there is such an inscription, you can read it without embarrassment, insofar as the texts of the holy books do not contain anything non-Orthodox.

Another thing is "free" translations of the Bible or individual biblical books (for example, "The Word of Life"), as well as the Bible with commentaries. Naturally, Protestants comment on the Word of God from their heretical positions.

Another feature of the foreign editions of the Bible is the absence of eleven Old Testament books there: Tobit, Judith, the Wisdom of Solomon, the Wisdom of Jesus, son of Sirach, the prophet Baruch, the Epistle of Jeremiah, the second and third books of Ezra and three books of Maccabees. They are not included in the modern Hebrew translation of Holy Scripture and are called non-canonical, that is, not included in the canon (Greek "sample", "rule"). A more authentic Greek translation of the Bible contains these books.

The Slavic translation of the Holy Scriptures was carried out from the Greek text, therefore non-canonical books were included in it and are traditionally present in Russian editions of the Bible. According to the Orthodox catechism of St. Philaret of Moscow, the Church offers its children non-canonical books as pious reading, but does not extend to them the concept of "inspiration" inherent in canonical ones.

For worship, non-canonical books are not used, except for a few readings from the Book of Wisdom of Solomon.

Why does the Lord allow sickness?

The Lord allows us sickness, first of all, for sins - for their atonement, for changing the vicious way of life, for realizing this depravity and understanding that earthly life is a short moment, behind which there is eternity, and what it will be for everyone depends from his life on earth.

Children often root for the sins of their parents, so that grief overwhelms their thoughtless life, makes them think and change, cleanse themselves of passions and vices.

We are also sick for our humility and non-admission to evil and destructive deeds. One day Jesus Christ was walking with his disciples, and the apostles saw a man without legs from birth. He sat by the road and begged for alms. The disciples asked, "Why does he have no legs?" Christ replied: "If he had legs, he would have passed the whole earth with fire and sword."

Often the Lord pulls us out of the ordinary course of life with sickness, saving us from a serious trouble, and with a little trouble saves us from a bigger one.

Many diseases arise from the action of unclean spirits. Moreover, the symptoms of demonic attacks are very similar to natural illness. It is clear from the Gospel that the crumpled woman healed by the Lord (Lk. 13: 11-26) was not possessed, but the cause of her illness was the action of an unclean spirit. In such cases, the art of medicine is powerless, and healing is provided only by the power of God, casting out the spirit of evil.

The Christian attitude to illness consists in the humble acceptance of the will of God, in the awareness of one's sinfulness and those sins for which illness is tolerated; in repentance and life change.

Prayer, fasting, alms and other virtues propitiate the Lord, and He sends us healing. If we go to doctors, then we ask for God's blessing for treatment and we trust them with the body, but not the soul.

Pectoral cross

Crosses are in vogue these days. The unshakable stamina of atheists in their hatred of crucifixion (remember Bagritsky's Death of a Pioneer: “Don't resist, Valenka, he won't eat you ...”?) Has been replaced by a new fashion. Crosses of various shapes and sizes, expensive and not very expensive, are sold in cooperative stalls next to vodka, in underground passages and jewelry stores. The cross is becoming a symbol of our time, but not as a sign of faith, but as an image of mockery of Orthodoxy.

The cross is the greatest Christian shrine, the visible evidence of our redemption. In the service on the Feast of the Exaltation, the Church glorifies the tree of the Cross of the Lord with many praises: "The Cross is the keeper of the whole universe, the beauty of the Church, the kings of the empire, the faithful affirmation, the glory of angels and the demons of the plague." From the first centuries of Christianity, every believer wears a cross on his chest, fulfilling the words of the Savior: "If anyone wants to follow Me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and come after Me" (Mark 8:34). A pectoral cross is worn on each newly baptized as a shield of faith and a weapon for demons.

Nothing is so afraid of evil spirits as the cross. And nothing pleases demons more than the impious, careless handling of the cross, as well as displaying it. Until the 18th century, only bishops had the right to wear a cross over clothing, and later - priests. Anyone who dares to become like them commits the sin of self-sacrifice. Crucifixion has appeared on modern atheists, but this is hardly a good thing.

Those crosses that are sold in the temple are consecrated with a special rite. There are canonical forms of crosses of four-, six-, eight-pointed, with a semicircle at the bottom and others, each line in which has a deep symbolic meaning. Traditionally, on the back of Russian crosses, the inscription "Save and Preserve" is made.

Modern "casket" crosses often do not even look like those of Golgotha. In some dioceses (for example, the Crimean), bishops forbid to accept for consecration crucifixes prepared outside church workshops. This makes sense, because sometimes a cross is given to the priest, and instead of Christ there is a woman surrounded by radiance! "Where did you get this?" "Yes, the guys were selling on the street, in blue overalls ..."

But even a consecrated cross cannot be worn without reverence. A shrine, used without due honor, is defiled and, instead of help from above, brings God's wrath on the defiler. The cross is not a medallion, not a precious trinket. "God is not mocked" (Gal. 6: 7).

There are no rules about the material for the crosses. Obviously, precious metals are also acceptable here, for for a Christian there can be nothing more valuable than a cross - hence the desire to decorate it. But, of course, simple wooden or metal crosses are closer in spirit to the Cross of the Lord. There is also no fundamental difference between a chain and a braid: it is important that the cross stays firmly.

Beads

The life of a Christian ascetic is work and prayer. "Pray incessantly" (1 Thess. 5:17) - these are the apostolic words of the podvig of the holy men to the creation of many prayers. But the most famous of them is the so-called Jesus Prayer: "Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner."

If you put together all the works written by the holy fathers about the practice of the Jesus Prayer, you get an extensive library. Brevity and simplicity allows any Christian to include it in their daily rule (of course, with the blessing of the confessor), pronouncing a certain number of times - 50, 100, 200 ... per day. But how do you simultaneously pray and keep track of the count? Beads help with this.

Modern rosary is a closed thread, consisting of small "grains", separated by dozens of "grains" of larger sizes. The most common number of "seeds" is 50 or 100. Monk's cell prayer beads sometimes contain 1000.

The rosary helps to count (hence the name) the number of prayers or prostrations. The person praying with the fingers of his left hand is sorting through the "seeds" simultaneously with the beginning of the recitation of a new prayer. Having reached a large "grain", they usually stop and read "Our Father" or "Virgin Mary, rejoice", then again the Jesus Prayer. At the end of the due date, it is customary to read "It is worthy to eat." Any other prayer can be performed on the rosary.

In antiquity in Russia, the rosary had a different form of a closed ladder, consisting of wooden blocks, sheathed with leather or fabric. They were called "ladder" or "ladder" (ladder) and spiritually designated the ladder of salvation, ascent to heaven. The closeness of the rosary and the beads means unceasing, eternal prayer.

Rosary beads are part of the vestments of monks, laymen can pray for them, having received a blessing from the confessor. Rosary beads help to pray at work, in public places - just put your hand in your pocket and sort out the "seeds".

An obscure fashion to wear rosary beads around the neck, wrap it around the wrists, twist it on the finger - clearly not of pious origin. As with any sacred object (and rosary beads are necessarily sanctified), they must be treated piously and not show off.

Birthday

For the entire Universe, the greatest holiday is the Easter of Christ. And for every Christian there is his own little Easter. This is the day of commemoration of the saint of the same name. In the church way, Little Easter is called the name day, and the people call it name day.

Previously, a person received a name from the Church, at Baptism. It was not chosen arbitrarily, but according to one of several rules. Most often, the child was named in honor of the saint, whose memory fell on the birthday or the day of giving a name, as well as the day of baptism. For girls, a shift of several days was allowed if there was no memory of the holy wives. With this choice, the birthday and name day most often coincided and in the minds merged together. Until now, those who celebrate their birthday are called birthday people, but Christians celebrate the name day in honor of the saint.

In another case, the child was named according to a vow, in honor of a certain saint, who was chosen in advance and prayed to him even before the appearance of the child. Then the name day was celebrated on the day of remembrance of this saint of God, and if the memory was celebrated several times a year, then on the day closest to the birthday.

Today many people are baptized as adults. How do these people know their name day? It is necessary, according to the church calendar, to find the next day of remembrance of the saint with the same name following the birthday. For example, a person born in early July and named Peter will celebrate his name day on July 12, and Peter born in late December will celebrate on January 3. If for some reason it is difficult for you to deal with this issue, ask any priest for advice.

It is necessary to celebrate name days like twelve holidays. Even the most careless Christians at all times tried to confess and receive communion on this day (it should be remembered that if the name day falls on a fast day, then the festive meal should be fast).

How to help a neighbor on his deathbed

God works in mysterious ways. It so happens that a person who has lived all his life without God, at the threshold of death gains faith, wants to receive Baptism - the very Sacrament about which the Savior said: "Whoever is not born of water and spirit cannot enter the Kingdom of God" (John 3:16). 3, 5). But there is no priest nearby ...

In such a situation, it is the duty of every Orthodox Christian to perform Baptism "for the sake of death". To do this, you need to wash (sprinkle) the sick person with consecrated or even ordinary water three times, saying: "The servant of God (full Orthodox name) is baptized in the name of the Father. Amen. And the Son. Amen. And the Holy Spirit. Amen." This Baptism is considered valid, and if the patient recovers, it is replenished already in the church with the sacrament of Confirmation.

It is by no means possible to baptize a person who is in an unconscious state against his will, taking advantage of his bodily weakness. The end does not justify the means.

It also happens that a baptized person who is far from the Church on the verge of death wants to repent of his sins. And here every Orthodox Christian, of course, if it is completely impossible to call a priest, is obliged to accept the confession of a dying person. Ask about grave sins - murder, abortion, adultery, debauchery in all forms, theft, drunkenness, participation in sects, communication with satanic forces through astrologers, psychics and healers. After confession, the secret of which must be kept until the grave, offer up a fervent prayer to God that He would have mercy on the penitent.

And if there is the slightest opportunity to call a priest to the deathbed, it is necessary, regardless of any difficulties, to do this good deed.

How the secessions happened

The Orthodox Church has kept intact the truth that the Lord Jesus Christ revealed to the apostles. But the Lord Himself warned His disciples that from among those who would be with them, people would appear who would want to distort the truth and muddy it with their inventions: Beware of false prophets who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves(Matthew 7, 15).

And the apostles also warned about this. For example, the apostle Peter wrote: you will have false teachers who will introduce harmful heresies and, rejecting the Lord who redeemed them, will bring on themselves swift destruction. And many will follow their debauchery, and through them the path of truth will be reproached ... Leaving the straight path, they lost their way ... the darkness of eternal darkness is prepared for them(2 Pet. 2, 1-2, 15, 17).

Heresy is understood as a lie that a person follows deliberately. The path that Jesus Christ opened requires from a person selflessness and efforts in order to show whether he really entered this path with a firm intention and out of love for the truth. It is not enough just to call yourself a Christian; you have to prove by your deeds, words and thoughts, with your whole life that you are a Christian. The one who loves the truth, for its sake, is ready to abandon all lies in his thoughts and his life, so that the truth will enter into him, purify and sanctify.

But not everyone embarks on this path with pure intentions. And so the subsequent life in the Church reveals their unfit mood. And those who love themselves more than God fall away from the Church.

There is a sin of deed - when a person by deed violates the commandments of God, and there is a sin of the mind - when a person prefers his lie to Divine truth. The second is called heresy. And among those who called themselves Christians at different times, there were both people devoted to the sin of an act, and people devoted to the sin of the mind. He and the other person opposes God. That and the other person, if he made a firm choice in favor of sin, cannot remain in the Church, and falls away from it. Thus, throughout history, all who chose to sin left the Orthodox Church.

The Apostle John spoke of them: They went out from us, but they were not ours: for if they were ours, they would have remained with us; but they went out, and through that it was revealed that not all of our(1In. 2 , 19).

Their fate is unenviable, for the Scriptures say that the betrayers heresies ... the kingdom of God will not inherit(Gal. 5 , 20-21).

Precisely because a person is free, he can always make a choice and use freedom either for good, choosing the path to God, or for evil, choosing sin. This is the reason why false teachers arose and those who believed them more than Christ and His Church.

When heretics appeared, bringing lies, the holy fathers of the Orthodox Church began to explain to them their errors and called for them to abandon fiction and turn to the truth. Some, convinced by their words, corrected themselves, but not all. And about those who persisted in lies, the Church pronounced its judgment, testifying that they are not true followers of Christ and members of the community of the faithful founded by Him. This is how the apostolic council was fulfilled: After the first and second admonition of the heretic, turn away, knowing that he is corrupted and sins, being self-condemned(Tit. 3 , 10-11).

There have been many such people in history. The most widespread and numerous of the communities founded by them that have survived to this day are the Monophysite Eastern Churches (they arose in the 5th century), the Roman Catholic Church (which fell away from the Ecumenical Orthodox Church in the 11th century) and Churches calling themselves Protestant. Today we will consider what is the difference between the path of Protestantism and the path of the Orthodox Church.

Protestantism

If some branch breaks off from the tree, then, having lost contact with the life juices, it will inevitably begin to dry out, lose its leaves, become fragile and easily break at the first onslaught.

The same can be seen in the life of all communities that have separated from the Orthodox Church. Just as a broken-off branch cannot keep the leaves on itself, so those who separate from genuine church unity can no longer preserve their inner unity. This is because, having left God's family, they lose touch with the life-giving and saving power of the Holy Spirit, and that sinful desire to resist the truth and put themselves above others, which led them to fall away from the Church, continues to act among the fallen ones themselves, turning already against them and leading to ever new internal divisions.

So, in the 11th century, the Local Roman Church separated from the Orthodox Church, and at the beginning of the 16th century, a significant part of the people separated from it, following the ideas of the former Catholic priest Luther and his associates. They formed their communities, which began to be considered the "Church". This movement is collectively called Protestants, and their very secession is called the Reformation.

In turn, the Protestants also did not retain their inner unity, but they began to divide even more into different trends and directions, each of which claimed that it was precisely this Church of Jesus Christ. They continue to share to this day, and now there are more than twenty thousand of them in the world.

Each of their directions has its own peculiarities of doctrine, which would take a long time to describe, and here we will confine ourselves to analyzing only the main features that are characteristic of all Protestant nominations and which distinguish them from the Orthodox Church.

The main reason for the emergence of Protestantism was the protest against the teachings and religious practices of the Roman Catholic Church.

As St. Ignatius (Brianchaninov) notes, indeed, “many delusions have crept into the Church of Rome. Luther would have done well if, rejecting the errors of the Latins, he replaced these errors with the true teaching of the Holy Church of Christ; but he replaced them with his own delusions; some of the errors of Rome, very important, he fully followed, and some strengthened. " “The Protestants rebelled against the ugly power and divinity of the popes; but since they acted on the prompting of passions, drowning in debauchery, and not with the direct aim of striving for the holy Truth, they did not prove worthy to see it. "

They abandoned the mistaken idea that the Pope is the head of the Church, but retained the Catholic fallacy that the Holy Spirit comes from the Father and the Son.

Scripture

The Protestants formulated the principle: "only Scripture", it means that they only recognize the authority of the Bible, and they reject the Holy Tradition of the Church.

And in this they contradict themselves, because the Holy Scripture itself indicates the need to honor the Holy Tradition coming from the apostles: stand up and keep the traditions that you have been taught either by our word or message(2 Thess. 2 , 15), - writes the Apostle Paul.

If a person writes a text and distributes it to different people, and then asks to explain how they understood it, then it will probably be discovered that someone understood the text correctly, and someone incorrectly, having put their meaning in these words. It is known that any text can have different versions of understanding. They can be correct or they can be wrong. The same is with the text of Holy Scripture, if you tear it away from Holy Tradition. Indeed, Protestants think that you need to understand Scripture the way you want to. But this approach cannot help to find the truth.

Here is how Saint Nicholas of Japan wrote about this: “Sometimes Japanese Protestants come to me, asking me to explain a passage of the Holy Scriptures. “But you have your own missionary teachers - ask them,” I say to them. “What do they answer?” - "We asked them, they say: understand as you know; but I need to know the true thought of God, and not my personal opinion" ... It's not so with us, everything is bright and reliable, clear and solid - because we are apart from the Sacred We also accept Holy Tradition, and Holy Tradition is a living, unbroken voice ... of our Church from the time of Christ and His Apostles to this day, which will remain until the end of the world. It is on him that the whole of Holy Scripture is affirmed. "

The apostle Peter himself testifies that no prophecy in Scripture can be resolved by oneself, for the prophecy was never uttered by the will of man, but the holy men of God spoke it, being moved by the Holy Spirit(2 Pet. 1 , 20-21). Accordingly, only the holy fathers, moved by the same Holy Spirit, can reveal to a person the true understanding of the Word of God.

Holy Scripture and Holy Tradition form one inseparable whole, and this was the case from the very beginning.

Not in writing, but orally, the Lord Jesus Christ revealed to the apostles how to understand the Holy Scriptures of the Old Testament (Luke 24, 27), and they orally taught this to the first Orthodox Christians. Protestants want to imitate the early apostolic communities in their organization, but in the early years the early Christians did not have a New Testament scripture at all, and everything was passed from mouth to mouth, like tradition.

The Bible was given by God for the Orthodox Church, it was in accordance with Holy Tradition that the Orthodox Church at its Councils approved the composition of the Bible, it was the Orthodox Church that, long before the appearance of Protestants, lovingly preserved Holy Scripture in its communities.

Protestants, using the Bible, not written by them, not collected by them, not preserved by them, reject the Holy Tradition, and thereby close for themselves the true understanding of the Word of God. Therefore, they often argue about the Bible and often come up with their own, human traditions that have no connection either with the apostles or with the Holy Spirit, and fall, according to the word of the apostle, into empty deception, according to human tradition .., and not according to Christ(Col. 2, 8).

Sacraments

The Protestants rejected the priesthood and sacred rites, not believing that God could act through them, and even if they left something similar, only the name, believing that these are only symbols and reminders of historical events left in the past, and not a holy reality in itself. Instead of bishops and priests, they got themselves pastors who had no connection with the apostles, no succession of grace, as in the Orthodox Church, where on every bishop and priest is the blessing of God, which can be traced from our days to Jesus Christ Himself. The Protestant pastor is only an orator and administrator of the life of the community.

As Saint Ignatius (Brianchaninov) says, “Luther ... with fervor rejecting the unlawful authority of the popes, he rejected the legitimate one; Holy Scripture testifies that it is impossible to receive remission of sins without confessing them. " Rejected by Protestants and other sacred rites.

Veneration of the Virgin and the saints

The Most Holy Virgin Mary, who gave birth to the Lord Jesus Christ through humanity, prophetically said: from now on all generations will please me(OK. 1 , 48). This was said about the true followers of Christ - Orthodox Christians. And indeed, since then and to this day, from generation to generation, all Orthodox Christians venerate the Most Holy Theotokos the Virgin Mary. And Protestants do not want to honor and humor her, contrary to the Scriptures.

The Virgin Mary, like all saints, that is, people who have followed the path of salvation revealed by Christ to the end, have united with God and are always in harmony with Him.

The Mother of God and all the saints became the closest and most beloved friends of God. Even a person, if his beloved friend asks him for something, he will try to fulfill it, and God willingly listens and soon fulfills the requests of the saints. It is known that even during His earthly life, when they asked, He certainly responded. So, for example, at the request of the Mother, He helped the poor newlyweds and performed a miracle at the feast in order to save them from shame (John 2: 1-11).

Scripture says that God is not the God of the dead, but of the living, for with Him all are alive(Luke 20:38). Therefore, after death, people do not disappear without a trace, but their living souls are contained by God, and those who are holy retain the ability to communicate with Him. And the Scripture directly says that the departed saints turn with requests to God and He hears them (see: Rev. 6, 9-10). Therefore, Orthodox Christians venerate the Blessed Virgin Mary and other saints and turn to them with requests that they intercede before God for us. Experience shows that many healings, deliverances from death and other help are received by those who resort to their prayerful intercession.

For example, in 1395 the great Mongolian commander Tamerlane with a huge army went to Russia to capture and destroy its cities, including the capital - Moscow. The Russians did not have enough strength to withstand such an army. The Orthodox inhabitants of Moscow began to earnestly ask the Most Holy Theotokos to pray to God for their salvation from the impending disaster. And so, one morning, Tamerlane unexpectedly announced to his commanders that it was necessary to turn the army and go back. And to questions about the reason, he answered that at night in a dream he saw a great mountain, on top of which a beautiful shining woman stood, who ordered him to leave the Russian lands. And, although Tamerlane was not an Orthodox Christian, he obeyed Her out of fear and respect for the holiness and spiritual strength of the Virgin Mary who appeared.

Prayers for the dead

Those Orthodox Christians who, during their lifetime, could not overcome sin and become saints, after death also do not disappear, but they themselves need our prayers. Therefore, the Orthodox Church prays for the dead, believing that through these prayers the Lord sends relief for the posthumous fate of our deceased loved ones. But Protestants do not want to admit this either, and refuse to pray for the dead.

Posts

The Lord Jesus Christ, speaking about his followers, said: the days will come when the Bridegroom will be taken away from them, and then they will fast in those days(Mark 2, 20).

The Lord Jesus Christ was taken away from his disciples for the first time on Wednesday, when Judas betrayed Him and the villains seized him to lead him to judgment, and the second time - on Friday, when the villains crucified Him on the Cross. Therefore, in fulfillment of the Savior's words, Orthodox Christians from ancient times have been fasting every Wednesday and Friday, refraining for the Lord's sake from eating animal products, as well as from all kinds of entertainment.

The Lord Jesus Christ fasted for forty days and nights (see: Matthew 4: 2), setting an example for His disciples (see: John 13, 15). And the apostles, as the Bible says, with puddled the Lord and fasted(Acts 13, 2). Therefore, Orthodox Christians, in addition to one-day fasts, also have many-day fasts, of which the main one is Lent.

Protestants deny fasting and fasting days.

Sacred images

Anyone who wants to worship the true God should not worship false gods, which are either invented by people or by those spirits that fell away from God and became evil. These evil spirits often appeared to people in order to mislead them and distract them from worshiping the true God to worship themselves.

However, having ordered to build a temple, the Lord even in these ancient times commanded to make in it images of cherubim (see: Ex. 25, 18-22) - spirits who remained faithful to God and became holy angels. Therefore, from the very first times, Orthodox Christians also made sacred images of saints who were united with the Lord. In the ancient underground catacombs, where in the II-III centuries Christians, persecuted by the pagans, gathered for prayer and rites, they depicted the Virgin Mary, the apostles, stories from the Gospel. These ancient sacred images have survived to this day. In the same way, in modern churches of the Orthodox Church there are the same sacred images, icons. When looking at them, it is easier for a person to ascend his soul to prototype, concentrate your energies on a prayer appeal to him. After such prayers in front of holy icons, God often sends people help, often miraculous healings occur. In particular, Orthodox Christians prayed for deliverance from the army of Tamerlane in 1395 at one of the icons of the Mother of God - Vladimirskaya.

However, Protestants, by their delusion, reject the veneration of sacred images, not understanding the difference between them and between idols. This stems from their erroneous understanding of the Bible, as well as from the corresponding spiritual mood - after all, only those who do not understand the difference between a holy and an evil spirit can fail to notice the fundamental difference between the image of a saint and the image of an evil spirit.

Other differences

Protestants believe that if a person recognizes Jesus Christ as God and Savior, then he already becomes saved and holy, and no special deeds are needed for this. And Orthodox Christians, following the apostle James, believe that faith, if it has no works, is dead by itself(James 2 , 17). And the Savior Himself said: Not everyone who says to Me: "Lord, Lord!" Will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father in heaven(Matthew 7, 21). This means, according to Orthodox Christians, that it is necessary to fulfill the commandments that express the will of the Father, and thus by deeds to prove their faith.

Also, Protestants do not have monasticism and monasteries, while the Orthodox have them. Monks earnestly work to fulfill all the commandments of Christ. And besides, they take three additional vows for the sake of God: the vow of celibacy, the vow of non-covetousness (lack of property) and the vow of obedience to the spiritual leader. In this, they imitate the apostle Paul, who was celibate, not covetous and completely obedient to the Lord. The monastic path is considered higher and more glorious than the path of a layman - a family man, but a layman can also be saved, become a saint. Among the apostles of Christ were married people, namely, the apostles Peter and Philip.

When Saint Nicholas of Japan was asked at the end of the 19th century why, although the Orthodox in Japan have only two missionaries, and the Protestants have six hundred, nevertheless, more Japanese converted to Orthodoxy than to Protestantism, he replied: “It's not about people, but in teaching. If a Japanese, before adopting Christianity, thoroughly studies it and compares it: in the Catholic mission he recognizes Catholicism, in the Protestant mission - Protestantism, we have our teaching, then, as far as I know, he always accepts Orthodoxy.<...>What is this? Yes, that in Orthodoxy Christ's teaching is kept pure and whole; we added nothing to it, as Catholics, did not subtract anything, as Protestants. "

Indeed, Orthodox Christians are convinced, as Saint Theophan the Recluse says, of this immutable truth: “What God has revealed and what He has commanded, nothing should be added or subtracted from that. This applies to Catholics and Protestants. Those add everything, and these subtract ... The Catholics have muddied the apostolic tradition. The Protestants undertook to fix the matter - and they did it even worse. Catholics have one Pope, and Protestants, whatever Protestant, is a Pope. "

Therefore, everyone who is really interested in the truth, and not in their own thoughts, both in past centuries and in our time, will certainly find their way to the Orthodox Church, and often, even without any efforts of Orthodox Christians, God Himself leads such people to the truth. For example, we will give two stories that happened recently, the participants and witnesses of which are still alive.

Case in the USA

In the 1960s, in the American state of California, in the cities of Ben Lomon and Santa Barbara, a large group of young Protestants came to the conclusion that all Protestant Churches they knew could not be a real Church, since they assume that after the apostles the Church of Christ disappeared , and it seems that it was only in the 16th century that Luther and other leaders of Protestantism revived it. But such a thought contradicts the words of Christ that the gates of hell will not prevail against his Church. And then these young people began to study the historical books of Christians, from the earliest antiquity, from the first century to the second, then to the third, and so on, tracing the continuous history of the Church founded by Christ and His apostles. And so, thanks to their many years of research, these young Americans themselves became convinced that such a Church is the Orthodox Church, although none of the Orthodox Christians communicated with them and did not inspire them with such an idea, but the history of Christianity itself has borne witness to this truth for them. And then they came into contact with the Orthodox Church in 1974, all of more than two thousand people accepted Orthodoxy.

Case in Benin

Another story took place in West Africa, in Benin. In this country there were no completely Orthodox Christians, most of the inhabitants were pagans, a little more professed Islam, and some more were Catholics or Protestants.

One of them, a man named Optat Bekhanzin, had a misfortune in 1969: his five-year-old son Eric fell seriously ill and was paralyzed. Bekhanzin took his son to the hospital, but the doctors said that the boy could not be cured. Then the grief-stricken father turned to his Protestant "Church", began to attend prayer meetings in the hope that God would heal his son. But these prayers were fruitless. After that, Optat gathered some close people at his home, persuading them to pray together to Jesus Christ for the healing of Eric. And after their prayer a miracle happened: the boy was healed; this strengthened the small community. Subsequently, all new miraculous healings took place through their prayers to God. Therefore, more and more people moved to them - both Catholics and Protestants.

In 1975, the community decided to form itself as an independent church, and the believers decided to pray hard and fast in order to know the will of God. And at that moment Erik Bekhanzin, who was already eleven years old, received a revelation: when asked how he should call his church community, God answered: "My Church is called the Orthodox Church." This greatly surprised the Beninians, because none of them, including Eric himself, had ever heard of the existence of such a Church, and they did not even know the word "Orthodox". Nevertheless, they called their community “the Orthodox Church of Benin,” and it was only twelve years later that they were able to meet Orthodox Christians. And when they learned about the real Orthodox Church, which has been called that since ancient times and originates from the Apostles, they all joined together, with over 2,500 people, transferred to the Orthodox Church. This is how the Lord responds to the requests of all who really seek the path of holiness leading to the truth, and brings such a person into His Church.

Saint Ignatius (Brianchaninov). The concept of heresy and schism.

St. Hilarion. Christianity or Church.

Saint Ignatius (Brianchaninov). Lutheranism.

"Protestant" Bible

H One often hears the question: “Is it possible to read the Bible that I took from a Protestant? They say it lacks some books? "

Another thing is “free” translations of the Bible or individual biblical books (for example, “The Word of Life”), as well as the Bible with commentaries. Naturally, Protestants comment on the Word of God from their heretical positions.

Another feature of foreign editions of the Bible is the absence of eleven Old Testament books there: Tobit, Judith, the Wisdom of Solomon, the Wisdom of Jesus, the son of Sirach, the prophet Baruch, the Epistle of Jeremiah, the second and third books of Ezra and three books of Maccabees. They are not included in the modern Hebrew translation of the Holy Scriptures and are called non-canonical, that is, not included in the canon (Greek "sample", "rule"). A more authentic Greek translation of the Bible contains these books.

For worship, non-canonical books are not used, except for a few readings from the Book of Wisdom of Solomon.

From the book Introduction to the Old Testament. Book 1 the author Yungerov Pavel Alexandrovich

From the book Essay on Orthodox Dogmatic Theology. Part II the author Malinovsky Nikolay Platonovich

§ 165. Protestant teaching? the universal priesthood of Christians. Protestant ordination. The Protestant denominations - Lutheranism and Reformation - reject the priesthood as a sacrament. Church-wide teaching on hierarchy and priesthood as a sacrament,

From the book Christ is our High Priest author White Helena

The Bible and only the Bible William Miller possessed a great intellect, developed through his diligent study and meditation, and having merged with the Source of Wisdom, he was also endowed with heavenly wisdom. He was an impeccably honest man, fully deserving of respect and

From the book Theological Thought of the Reformation the author McGrath Alistair

Protestant Work Ethics To understand the significance of the work ethic that emerged during the Reformation, it is necessary to understand the persistent rejection with which the early Christian tradition, represented by monastic writers, viewed work. For Eusebius of Caesarea

From the book Handbook on Theology. SDA Bible Commentary Volume 12 the author Seventh-day Adventist Christian Church

A. The Bible and the Bible alone The fundamental principle that Scripture makes about itself is that only the Bible (sola scriptura) is the ultimate norm of truth. The classic text that reflects this basic premise is Isa. 8:20 am: “Contact

From the book The Jewish World the author Telushkin Joseph

From the book Bibliological Dictionary the author Men 'Alexander

BIBLE (term). The word B. comes from the Greek. t¦ bibl… a - books. The corresponding Heb. term as applied to Sacred. Scripture was first encountered in the Old Testament. time: “I, Daniel, figured out from the books (Hebrew sphar? m) the number of years about which the word of the Lord was to Jeremiah” (Dan 9: 2). In christ.

From the book History of the Greek-Eastern Church under the rule of the Turks the author Alexey Lebedev

LIBERAL-PROTESTANT SCHOOL OF EXEGESA direction in biblical studies from the 19th to the beginning of the 20th century. It is organically part of the liberal theology, which tried to minimize the dogmatic aspect of Christianity. The main principles of the school: 1) the highest Reality is impossible to cognize

From the book Religion of the Cross and Religion of the Crescent: Christianity and Islam the author Maksimov Yuri Valerievich

PROTESTANT EXEGETICS interpretation of the Bible and methods * of hermeneutics, prevailing in various Protestant denominations. P.E. developed predominantly. where these confessions occupied a dominant position (see articles about Anglo-American, German, Netherlands,

From the book Theological Encyclopedic Dictionary by Elwell Walter

Protestant Troubles in the Greek Church of the 17th century. I The increase in the travels of Greek clergy abroad, mainly to Protestant countries, at the end of the 16th and beginning of the 17th centuries, the purpose of these journeys; ? - information about this kind of travel at the end of the 16th century; Kirill's journey

From the book History of Secret Societies, Unions and Orders author Schuster Georg

The Protestant idea of universal equality and the Orthodox teaching on hierarchy It should be remembered that the now popular idea of universal equality flourished on Protestant soil. To Orthodoxy, this idea in the form in which it now exists is deeply alien. Jacob I have loved,

From the book History of Religions. Volume 1 the author Kryvelev Iosif Aronovich

Reformation, Protestant. The religious revival movement that swept Europe in the 16th century. and prepared by earlier Reformed ideas — the Waldensians in the Alps, Wycliffe and the Dollar in England, and the Hussites in Bohemia. This movement is inseparable from his

From the book Protestant Ethics and the Spirit of Capitalism by Weber Max

Scholasticism, Protestant (Scholasticism, Protestant). The method of thinking developed by early Protestantism, which gained influence in the 17th century. and became a widely accepted way of developing systematic Protestant theology. Although the main figures of the Protestant Reformation

These apocryphal books are rejected by the Protestant Bible for the following reasons:

***

***

Bishops and priests of the Swedish Lutheran Church

"Sermon" in the elk muzzle of a Lutheran "priest" in one of the Swedish parishes

References

Repentance

Prayer Rule

How to pray when you are pressed for time

What a Christian Should Remember

"Do not be afraid of the fear of the night ..."

"Protestant" Bible

Why does the Lord allow sickness?

Pectoral cross

Beads

Birthday

How to help a neighbor on his deathbed

Read also