Against the rules of 325

The Church Court abdicated two young priests from service and San - for blasphemy

The church scandal erupted at the end of the past year in Krasnoyarsk. The diocesan church court forbade two local priests - priest to Peter Boev and Dyakon Ivan Loginov to conduct services and wear priestly clothes for ten years. Young Krasnoyarsk clergy were famous for the reformers and modernists among their supporters and almost heretics from the conservative part of the Orthodox community of the city.

Both disgraced priests are famous people in the city. Peter Boev, for example, leads blogs in several Krasnoyarsk media, actively communicates with journalists on a variety of topics, he has many friends and subscribers on social networks. Any serious claims on the part of the leadership of the Krasnoyarsk diocese to the activities of both Boev and Loginov themselves, and the Holy Delo created by them back in 2011 , the Holy Delo of the Orthodox Community has never arisen.

And suddenly - a detachment from the commission and from a priestly dignity. As Radio Liberty explained by the head of the protocol of the Krasnoyarsk diocese Andrei Skvortsov, such a decision was made in connection with "serious violations of personal life by the clergy, an outdoor change in the basis of worship and blasphemous attitude to the sacraments and posts established by the Church." Otherwise, Skvortsov advised studying the message published on the Diocese’s website, referring to the fact that the church court was held closed.

The news of the decision of the diocesan church court against Boev and Loginov caused acute discussions on the Internet.

Priest Peter Boev and Deacon Ivan Loginov talk about the fact that they have long been ready for such a turn of events, commented on the decisions of the diocesan church court quite restrained and at the same time emphasize that they intend to continue their missionary activities, albeit in other forms

- The diocese reported that the reason for the trial was a complaint against you of certain dissatisfied Krasnoyarsk residents. Is it really so?

We live in the 21st century, and a certain rule, for example, was written in 325 and is still valid

Peter fights . There are always people who complain. Especially if the priest is open - then there are a lot of complaints. They complain about anything-from the availability of a car from the minister of the church to the not quite definite: "We liked the previous priest, now they put another one, and he was not like that." And the area of church law is very wide, there is no, as in state legislation, clarifications and explanations, each church canon allows an extensive interpretation. There is such a difficulty: we live in the 21st century, and a certain rule, for example, was written in 325 and is still valid. And in Orthodoxy, the commitment to canons and traditions is very strong, especially when it comes to something new.

- If we talk about your case, what exactly was the complaint?

If it comes to the fact that a person must be entered in a certain framework - this is not to us. This causes complaints.

Ivan Loginov . There were no complaints about our behavior within the church fence, to the fulfillment of our duties within the temple - from this side there was no misunderstanding. The questions were to what we are doing in secular space. Our audience is looking for people, most often non -church, with whom we learn a conscious look at ourselves and on life as a whole. Priests turn to those who have already come to the temple and are ready to listen to them, and their approaches to communicating with these people are relevant. And with those with whom we communicate, we need to form a new language and areas of understanding. I want people to learn to think and find the answers themselves to their own internal questions. We, in turn, have no task of accustoming the listener to strictly defined views. And for this they condemn us the most ("You lead people to yourself"). Our approach is this: a person will come to Christianity - I will not attribute it to myself as a achieved goal. It will not come-the value is that we probably enriched each other with something, while there was a possibility of communication and dialogue. We do not immediately enter people into one or another religious concept. If it comes to the fact that a person must be entered in a certain framework - this is not to us. This causes complaints. Here is an example: Father Peter, along with a Protestant pastor, leads a video project and there are immediately complaints about him - why don’t you denounce it, do not condemn it publicly, do not convince, etc.? (Peter Boev in 2016 was a speaker at the Protestant Forum "YUS16", a video of his performance at the forum is posted to the network. - RS). I would emphasize that the point is not that we violated something, but only unlike approaches. We work as it is easier and more organic.

Peter fights. We see our audience of modern, multicultural people. There are such widespread. We consider ourselves, so to speak, people of the world. If you view my page on the social network, then what is not there. Other priests often reproach me: how can you read, for example, Hemingway, because he is a suicide? Yes, I read. And I consider myself a believer. And in general I read everything. In addition to spiritual education, I also have secular - philological. Therefore, I can read a scandalous novel, and the works of Maxim the Confessor, and a business publication, and a glossy magazine, and Solzhenitsyn, and Tolstoy. But there is always a temptation of a person somewhere to “enter”, give him a clear definition ... with all the time when you study the biographies of the Holy Fathers, you understand: these were people of the broadest views.

- How did the court itself go?

Peter fights . When this trial spun, Father Ivan and I were on vacation. And when they returned, out of six meetings, we were invited only to one. But is it worth talking about the procedure itself? In principle, I predicted such a turn of events 3-4 years ago, I just could not imagine exactly how this would happen. I would emphasize the main thing: in our case, we are not talking about a clash of faith - about the clash of civilizations. Today, missionaries cannot, in my opinion, use the approaches that exist in the Russian Orthodox Church. Yes, our activity is “non -format”, but there are always difficulties when people think arithmetic - they say, ten people cannot be right, but one is right. Yes, in communication with a person for me the main thing is the person himself. I can be friends and communicate with both Protestants and with Buddhists. Yes, and I can also with an atheist - and already in this for me there is God's presence. Whether he will come to faith - I don’t know if I will never provoke people on it.

I can be friends and communicate with both Protestants and with Buddhists. Yes, and I can also with an atheist - and already in this for me there is God's presence

We are asked - how you managed to collect so many parishioners around you, reveal your methodology. We never call anyone and do not drag anywhere, and it convinces the most - that’s the whole secret. But a different tradition has developed inside the church ... Of course, the audience with which we communicate is also important. If the Russian Orthodox Church is predominantly elderly people, then we have mainly those from 20 to 35 years old. And those still whose youth fell on perestroika and the first post -perestroika years. You can’t just say to them: “Go there, but you can’t do it here ...” In general, our approach could be called psychological. But the fact is that psychology over the last century developed violently, including its language-new terms appeared, for example. And the church stood still. That is, there is not even a language in which you could communicate with modern people.

Ivan Loginov. Now they say a lot in the church that the temples are empty, they need to attract young people in them. But in this case you can not go from the problem. It’s like a woman to give birth to a child “for myself”: it is not a child to be valuable, but a fear of being alone. So here: we say - you can’t make people objects, we must share with them what is in the most genuine and natural rhythm and format for you. And then what happens, it will turn out. It is impossible to design people. This was the most claims among the priests , the criticism of our address was to one degree or another constant . Well, how to explain to them that those people who need it themselves will figure it out over time. And they will come to the temples. The main thing is that no one needs to formate. After all, a person can come to church, rejecting himself, running away from himself. Moreover, this applies to parishioners and priests. But such a step, in fact, means self -hatred.

Peter fights . You see, two people who read the same book, especially related to Orthodoxy, will understand it differently. And if they read it, this still does not mean anything. And if a person has learned “our father” - this also does not mean anything, he may not understand the learned. Another thing is to feel the fullness of the presence of God in his life, to be human. Understand that there is a person in the church, but there is a church in a person. People come to this gradually ...

- And what should change in the Russian Orthodox Church now, so that what you are talking about, does not cause rejection and church courts?

The heritage of the Soviet era is that people can not say any things aloud, but behind their backs to bear, discuss something, and then tell who needs to

Peter fights . We do not pose a question like that, we have no goal of changing something radically. The Russian Orthodox Church is a separate organism with its huge history, and it flows as it flows. And besides, this is a huge institution with its internal rules, which are hardly capable of changes. But canons are one thing, but there are also specific people. You know, I never talked about this before ... Now, after the decision of the diocesan court, many priests began to publicly scold us with Father Ivan. But I would ask: if for them it was immediately unacceptable for what we were doing, why did they not declare this before? We are all heirs of certain eras. And the legacy of the Soviet era is that people can not say some things aloud, but behind them to bear, discuss something, and then inform who needs to. This experience has not gone anywhere. The gospel principle - "if you have something to say, come and say" - is erased here, does not work. Inertia is stronger than a conscious life. By the way, one of the advantages of what happened to us is that many people were simply forced to start thinking and trying to understand what was happening. I and I knew the priests and I warned about this: the news explosion on the Internet will lead to the result that was expected from the verdict of the diocesan court.

- Do church courts often make decisions similar to the one that was made by the Krasnoyarsk Diocesan Court in relation to you?

Ivan Loginov . Priests leave the church often. There are enough such cases. Ours became known because we ourselves are public people, otherwise he would have unnoticed.

- Is there an opportunity to challenge the decision of the diocesan court?

Peter fights. In the Civil Court, of course, to do this is unrealistic. And in church courts, such a decision is unlikely to be revised: the Russian Orthodox Church is still a single organization. Therefore, the question of the appeal for us today remains open.

- You have been removed from the service for ten years. We can assume that this is forever?

Peter fights. I remember last year - and I have enough memory for six months. We live so richly that we live somewhat in one year. Therefore, to say what will happen in 10 years is almost impossible. But now I understand that this rejection can bear large fruits, primarily in the personal plan.

Ivan Loginov . If we talk about the changes - now I have come here with a child. In general, it began to spend much more time with children, and I have two of them. And in general, there are more personal communication, trips, some movements. The changes for me are that there was a chance to become closer to life. Moreover, to close precisely with what already formed its basis, to identify and consider the main thing.

- And the community "holy business"? Will it continue to work?

Ivan Loginov. We are forbidden to conduct services in the temple and wear priestly clothes. But the meaning of the “holy cause” is primarily in communication, in that every person finds the way to himself and his neighbor, revealing his face to his own life. Brotherhood is, first of all, a friendly circle, naturally built on certain joint sympathies and interests. So our mission has developed, and there is no ban on it. As well as to be believers. The "Holy Delo" continues to work.

Peter fights. It so happened that our experience was extremely relevant and in demand. Plans - do what we did before the trial. Hold seminars, meetings, including in other cities. Such trips take away a lot of effort, and when I was in the schedule at the temple, it was difficult to combine them with parish service, now the time appeared on what had long been in the table. I see the current situation so that she is from God: if one had not gone, another would not have come to his place. If we talk about activities, then we study everything related to modern society. The experience gained now allowed us to start working in directions designed for different categories of people - musical, thinking, reading, and we often build formats from scratch. In this we are helped by people who once came to our meetings and adopted the principles and approaches, that is, our like-minded people.

Instead of the afterword. From the page on the social network Peter Boeva:

“Probably the most common phrase that you hear from believers is with us, God is so short and amazingly energetic. How powerful - God! How much - with us! This phrase is able to raise from the knees when you are at the very bottom. It can be said so that the sound will pile in the ears and flow throughout the body. But one day, you will ask with us, then with us, then with those who?

All -knowing people are in such a hurry with conclusions that they do not leave the opportunity to reflect less quickly. But it seems more important why some people so persistently want to refuse others in God. If you recall what real saints answered about people with other experience and life, then this may not like it. Each time they unfolded the person himself (like his question) to internal reflection on himself.

The complexity of the approach dictates the need for verdict. Simplicity gives maximum liberation. Obviously, God always acts everywhere. And always he is with everyone, it is impossible to understand this, but it hurts to realize. If I talk about someone that there is no God with Him, then this moment is just my way out. It is precisely when I undertake to determine the border and place for him, I become him, and destroy it. To know God means recognizing everyone and calling everyone, leaving the opportunity to refuse. "