Pluralities and majorities

...are necessary for parliaments and parties but not for God's Church, which is the pillar and foundation of faith, independently of the above categories and even in contradiction of them...
St. Hilarion (Troitsky)

The "Christianization" of atheism

Now it is not what is pleasing to God or the Church that is good, but what is 'progressive,' 'liberal,' revolutionary; that which is 'right-leaning' is the concatenation of all evils. 'It is in agreement with Marx!' - this is the highest praise for any teaching, for any opinion. Even holy Christian doctrine is assessed on the basis of this new standard. Thus, all of Christianity's fundamental teaching concerning the personal struggle of repentance and humility is cast aside, while only some sort of 'social teaching' is taken up and given consideration, and in it only that which one can reinterpret in a liberal-revolutionary way is approved.

...they wish to 'correct' the Church's understanding of Christianity, replacing it with their own, in which the teaching of Christ is shown to bear a remarkable resemblance to all the most recent teachings and actions of the godless, up to and including revolutions, expropriations, and bombings. On the basis of such interpretations of Christianity, in renunciation of the authority of Church, there have appeared a 'Christian Brotherhood [?!] of Struggle' and a 'Christian Socialism,' and who knows whether there will appear at some point 'Christian' brigandage, etc., etc.

If socialism looks upon itself as a world-view, what, then, is this world-view? It is, first of all, a consistent materialism. A materialistic understanding of history, as acknowledged by the socialists themselves, comprises the essence of the entire theory of their teaching, its cornerstone, according to the expression of Bernstein. "One must seek the basic reasons of all social changes and revolutions not in the heads of men and not in their views on eternal righteousness and justice, but in changes in the means of production and distribution" (Engels). If socialism is so closely bound up with materialism, how can it bear any relationship to religion? Crudely distorting the moral and educational significance of religion, the materialistic criticism of Marx and Engels sees religion as the mere 'handiwork of man,' the product of ignorant imagination or profit motives; and God Himself as a reflection of economic relations. Even in the Christian God they dare to see an 'anthropological idealization of a capitalism which thirsts for power and satisfaction.' Religion is called forth, in the words of Engels, 'by the dark, primordial ideas of man concerning his personal nature and that which surrounds him,' and is defined in its permutations "by class, and consequently economic, relations". Religion seemed to Marx to be a superstition which has outlived its time, 'a dead question for the intelligentsia, but an opium for the people.' According to this, Marx considered 'freedom of conscience from the charms of religion' to be 'the assistance of the people toward real happiness.'

Socialism is the 'mystery of iniquity' which the holy Apostle Paul prophesied (II Thess. 2:7). Is there any need to refute socialism? No, it is sufficient merely to say what socialism is, and those who have still kept their faith in Christ to any degree will reject this ungodly scandal with horror. The believing man is absolutely unable speak of any agreement between socialism and Christianity whatever. Socialism is not only not ours, it is our declared and dangerous adversary. It is guilty of enmity toward Christianity and deserves no condescension. It is our enemy. Every member of the Church must be aware of this, and it is essential that the Church explain this for all the world to hear. If passing into heresy entails separation from the Church, passing into socialism is an error more grievous than any heresy, and is even more deserving of punishment. 'If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be anathema' (I Cor. 16:22). We have already seen how socialism 'loves' Jesus Christ. It is necessary to commit all inveterate socialism to anathema. Ravening wolves must be driven from the flock, else the whole flock will perish. How can one speak of the 'Christianization of socialism'? These are empty words. Can one Christianize atheism? 'Christian socialism' is a contradiction in terms. What is Christian cannot be socialist. If we do not loudly and openly declare that socialism is the enemy of Christianity, nothing will result except harm and scandal. All compromises are inappropriate here. One must look one's enemy in the eye. To underestimate danger is always deleterious.
St. Hilarion (Troitsky)

The principle of Christianity

People who deny the Church constantly speak about 'evangelical principles,' about evangelical teaching; but Christianity as life is completely alien to them . . .
St. Hilarion (Troitsky)

Included in the concept of the Church is this:

...the Church is that point at which dogma becomes moral teaching and Christian dogmatics become Christian life. The Church thus comprehended gives life to and provides for the implementation of Christian teaching. Without the Church there is no Christianity; there is only the Christian teaching which, by itself, cannot 'renew the fallen Adam.'
St. Hilarion (Troitsky)

The justification of desire

As today is one of the feasts of the New-Martyr St. Hilarion receive a word from him:

...there is nothing easier than to re-interpret Christ's teaching according to one's personal taste and to invent 'Christianity,' passing off, under this name, the dreams of one's heart and the images of one's own idle fantasy. The sacred books of the New Testament were written by practical, unscholarly apostles. Throughout the centuries there have been 'correctors of the Apostles,' as Saint Irenaeus of Lyons calls them, ones who considered themselves higher than the Apostles, those 'Galilean fishermen.' Does it become a highly educated European [or American] of the twentieth century [or 21st] to accept on faith all that is said by some 'fishermen'? So many free themselves from the authority of the Apostles and desire to interpret Christ's teaching while being guided only by their personal whims. Leo Tolstoy, for example, bluntly declared that the Apostle Paul did not properly understand Christ's teaching; it follows that Tolstoy considered himself to be higher than the Apostle Paul. One can marvel greatly at how far people go in their 'interpretation' of Christianity. Whatever they might desire, they immediately find in the Gospel. It would appear that it is possible to cover one's every idle dream and even ill-intentioned thought by means of the Gospel's authority.
St. Hilarion (Troitsky)

The question of faith

…a great many people enter into the questions of faith and the Church solely as bold and decisive reformers who want to remake everything according to their own personal desires.
St. Hilarion (Troitsky)

Denying the Church

If anyone denies the Church with its religious ideals, then Christ becomes for him only a teacher-philosopher in the category of Buddha, Confucius, Socrates, Lao-Tse and others.
St. Hilarion (Troitsky)

Seeker sensitivity

… there is, in our days, such an abundance of those who are "ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth" (2 Tim. 3:7). A new sport has been created, if we may call it that, a sport of "god-seeking." "God-seeking" has become the goal in itself and if their efforts were ever crowned with success, they would feel themselves highly unfortunate and immediately turn, with their former zeal, from "god-seeking" to "god-fighting" (i.e., theomachism).
St. Hilarion (Troitsky)

The Church and "Christian morals"

Christianity is not concerned with the interests of reason; but only with those of the salvation of man. In Christianity, therefore, there are no purely theoretical tenets. Dogmatic truths have moral significance, and Christian morals are founded on dogma. Included in the concept of the Church is this: the Church is that point at which dogma becomes moral teaching and Christian dogmatics become Christian life. The Church thus comprehended gives life to and provides for the implementation of Christian teaching. Without the Church there is no Christianity; there is only the Christian teaching which, by itself, cannot "renew the fallen Adam."
St. Hilarion (Troitsky)

The 'relevancy' of the Church

No, it is not the insufficiency of life in the Church which must be spoken of, but of the insufficiency of Church consciousness in us. … Unfortunately, we ourselves do not value our Church and the great blessing of Church life enough. We do not confess our faith in the Church bravely, clearly, and definitely. While believing in the Church, we constantly seem to pardon ourselves for the fact that we still believe in it.
St. Hilarion (Troitsky)

In full bloom...

...the cult of individualism blossoms luxuriantly [in the West], finding prophets in fashionable philosophy and singers in the belles-lettres, Christ's ideal of the Church can, of course have no place; for it negates self-love and self-will in people and demands love from them all.

St. Hilarion (Troitsky)

No dams here...

Those who speak about the insufficiency of life in the Church usually refer to the insufficiencies of church administration, the thousands of consistory papers and so on. For all those who genuinely understand Church life, however, it is as clear as God's day that all these consistories with their ukases do not affect the depth of Church life at all. The deep river of abundant, Grace-filled life flows increasingly and gives drink to everyone who wishes to quench his spiritual thirst. This river cannot be dammed up with "paper."

St. Hilarion (Troitsky)

нельзя!

Since this is my first incredible quote post from Russia I thought it apropos that I post a Russian source. (As a side note: I went yesterday to Novo-Devichy monastery and in the Church they have an icon of St. Hilarion; while I was venerating I was yelled at by a wrinkly babushka [as if kissing the glass does any harm to the icon behind it]. I guess she takes the position that harm(?) done to the glass passes to the prototype; anyway...)

Tolstoy clearly demonstrated for us what results to expect from the absurd separation of Christianity from the Church and the negation of the Church in the name of imaginary Christianity. If one is to separate Christianity from the Church, then there is no need for the divinity of the Savior and the Holy Spirit is unnecessary.

St. Hilarion (Troitsky)

boundaries...

For, according to the Apostle James (2:19), the devils also believe; as attested by the Gospel, they confessed their faith like the Apostle Peter did (Matt. 16:16;8:26; Mark 1:24; Luke 8:28). But do they belong to the one Church of Christ?

St. Hilarion (Troitsky)

If you're out there Al, this ones for you.

Our forebears, Adam and Eve, sought to become "like gods" without God, relying on the magical power of the beautiful "apple." This is how many of our contemporaries dream of being saved: with the Gospel, but without the Church and without the God-man. They hope on the book of the Gospel exactly as Adam and Eve hope on the paradise apple. The book, however, does not have the power to give them a new life.

St. Hilarion (Troitsky)