Is this theology or boltology?

A few weeks ago, the public was excited by the first defense of the theology dissertation under the auspices of the highest certification commission [ 1 ]. In a number of media, the phrase flickered that in Russia for the first time the defense of the theology dissertation took place. This is not entirely correct: the dissertations on theology in large quantities were defended at the Moscow Theological Academy, the Orthodox St. Tikhonov University and the new structure called general church graduate school and doctoral studies (a kind of advanced training for priests). Thus, nothing extraordinary happened.

Nevertheless, the defense was scandalous: several biologists composed negative reviews on the dissertation of Father Pavel Khodzinsky “The solution to the problems of the Russian theology of the XVIII century in the synthesis of St. Filaret, Metropolitan of Moscow” (the text of the dissertation and reviews can be read here: [ 2 ]). In my opinion, reproaches were superficial. The priest was reproached for being guided by “personal religious experience” and violated the laws of pure mind; Allegedly, relying on faith, you can bring anything anything. I think this is not so: Christian faith and confidence in the existence of mermaids, vampires or Santa Claus are still different things.

Theology in its classical understanding is a tense intellectual activity; A frantic fanatic with banners is unlikely to be able to delve into the argument of Thomas Aquinas or William Okkam. Theological text is built according to certain rules; The power of authority here is stronger than in the natural sciences, where a smart and lively student can put professors on both shoulder blades. Theology does not engage in the “study of God”, it implies reflection on the texts about God, mostly ancients, primarily over the dilapidated and new covenant. In the ideal case, the theologian should know the ancient Hebrew, ancient Greek and Latin. When it comes to the analysis of the text, the soil underfoot becomes stronger. In the same way, the philologist discusses poetry and prose.

Of course, the orthodox theologist proceeds from unprovable premises: God is one in three faces; The two nature in Christ, the divine and human, are unconscious and inseparable; The end of the story will be crowned by the Last Judgment. However, the geometry of Euclid also proceeds from unnecessary statements by axime. Thinking about the axiom about parallel lines, Lobachevsky created an alternative geometry, where more than one straight line parallel to it passes through a point on this line.

The Christian heresiarchs (Marcion, Vasilid or Arya) also understood the dogmas in their own way and built complex alternative theological systems. Of course, the Orthodox priest, who dared to express his own point of view on the symbol of faith, will be ostracked and deprived of career prospects, but here we turn into the field of personal choice. Now there are examples of original and freedom -loving Christian theologists (including Russia) who do not think about career prospects. So it was before: you can recall Dietrich Bonhaffer, Simon Weil, mother Maria (Elizaveta Yuryevna Skobtsova). The theologian, who has lost intellectual freedom, turns into a propagandist, this is true; However, we are not talking about theology as such, but exclusively about certain adherents of the Russian Orthodox Church.

Theology implies disputes, as the apostle Paul also said: “ For it should be the diversity between you, so that the skillful is opened between you ” (1 Cor 11:19). Grigory Nazianzin the Elder painted the Constantinople of the 4th century in a somewhat grotesque way: “ This city is full of artisans and slaves and all of them are thoughtful theologians, pronouncing sermons in their workshops and on the streets. If you want to exchange a silver coin from someone, he teaches you, how the father differs from his son; If you ask about the price of large round bread, they answer you that your son is below your father; And if you ask if bread is ready, then they answer you that the son is created from nothing ”[3]. In my opinion, it is more interesting to discuss all this (as well as the issue of expanding the universe) than the number of billions withdrawn by the head of Rosneft.

Science does not come down to operating formulas and is largely built on intuition. There is a rather stamped phrase of Einstein that Dostoevsky gave him more to create a common theory of relativity than Gauss. I think that the reasoned disputes between savvy theologians and militant atheists can be fruitful for both sides. You can recall the dialogues of the Marganites of affection, journalists and writers who took part in the compilation of the Oxford dictionary of the English language, with Metropolitan Anthony of Surazh [ 4 ] or prose writer and publicist Frederick Bezelbeder with the Catholic bishop Jean-Michel Dee Faloko [ 5 ].

If we do not share someone's point of view, it depends on us at what level the discussion is to conduct. I got the impression that the discussion around the dissertation of Father Paul was in the character of squabbles. It was not conducted at the proper philosophical level. All this looked quite unethical in relation to an elderly person, a pianist by education, moreover, a defending third dissertation (the previous two in PSTU).

Of course, I met a sensational dissertation and did not see any crime. In my opinion, this is a fairly interesting humanitarian work; It is a pity that I have no time to read it for real. Of course, the prejudice of the reader will be confused by numerous phrases about the “secrets” of the other world or “insights” and “personal piety” of St. Filaret. But, mercy, these are the conditions of the game. In what else language to speak to the Orthodox priest? And if there is a desire to argue, it is necessary to do certain work and delve into the argument of the author; His judgments are not taken from the ceiling.

Among scientists, there are concerns that the universities of the country will fill the department of theology, and in schools they will necessarily introduce the discipline “Law of God”. Cut me, saw, but I will vote for this plan with two hands; True, with hard conditions: linguists with the courses of Hebrew, Latin and ancient Greek will teach these departments, and physicists, biologists and chemists will talk about the history of science and concepts of current natural science. Why artificially build partitions?

I think ancient texts about God require us to read careful reading. Therefore, theology at secular universities deserves the right to exist. But this should be the theology of a high intellectual flight, at least at the level of Father Pavel Florensky, the author of “imagination in geometry”, or father of Sergius Bulgakov, the author of the “philosophy of economy”. There is nothing impossible in this even in the twilight years of the reign of Vladimir the Magnificent.

Alexey Fire

1. Sergeev A. Disser on theology and its world-historical meaning // Trv-hunger. No. 230 dated June 6, 2017. Http://trv-science.ru/disser-po-tologii-i-ego-vsemirno-istoricheskoe-znachenie/
2. www.doCtorantura.ru/ru/ Materials-dissovet/Applicants/2379Dissertatsiya-protoeiereya-pavla
3. Cit. by: Hegel G.F. Lectures on the philosophy of history. SPb.: Science, 1993. S. 356.
4. www.pravmir.ru/dialog-xristianinas-ateropolit-antonijsurozkij-i-marganita-laski/
5. www.atheism.ru/library/beg1_1. Phtml