The reader should draw their own conclusions. We have sometimes assisted, given hints, but each person must live their own life, taste and see how good the Lord is on their own. To make it easier for them, we will try to accompany them until they can go on their own, until they say, ‘We no longer believe merely by your words, but have seen and recognized the Lord ourselves…’ Therefore, in subsequent parts, we will try to discuss the fundamental laws of correct spiritual life, about prayer as the essence and core of hypostatic life, about the parish as a necessary condition for spiritual Eucharistic life, about battling lusts and passions, about the sacrament of marriage and family life, about raising children. Along the way, as we organize and select quotes from the father on these topics, we will respond to your questions, suggestions, clarify misunderstandings that may have arisen during discussions, talks with this book, and, of course, we will gratefully consider your criticism and remarks…
P.S. You reproach me for referring to myself, for testifying to the truth of the teachings I presented! But I must correct the reproach—the teaching is not mine, but my spiritual father’s; and, since both the father and I testify about the same, by law, the testimony of two already holds weight! And also, that this reproach is unfounded, is evidenced by the recommended literature—my friends, my fellow thinkers in the main!
You reproach me that there are no quotes from the holy fathers in this booklet!? When I communicate with someone, I am not interested in what John Chrysostom, Basil the Great, or Apostle Paul said about this or that issue! I am primarily interested in what you know, what you will say, what you think about the given issue. I can ask John Chrysostom myself! But now I am talking to you, and I am interested in your opinion! This was the principle on which this booklet was arranged, with a minor exception, where the compiler, unable to rely on trust alone (knowing that they would not believe the father, nor would they check if it is as he says), called upon the elders (for your benefit and advantage)!
You reproach me for saying that Orthodoxy speaks about personality, hypostasis, but I almost never spoke about hypostatic life in all sections, except, perhaps, ‘Worthy Communion…’ And this is not true—if you carefully read the definition of hypostasis again and review all the sections, you will find indications of hypostasis, hypostatic life. And if you wish to describe reality in such terms—then I think we are not yet ready to communicate at such a height (that is, to call things by their names—everything untimely and without discernment is harmful: e.g., to offer solid food to someone who can barely digest milk diluted with water; everything in its time—with children one language, with the wise another), but I hope that by the third part we will have grown a bit, and we will be able to speak more deeply. I have selected the simplest quotes from the father on the topics we discussed, as if treating guests with milk at a called logos dinner. And you are offended at me, for inviting you to a feast and serving diluted milk for dinner, considering you infants. Forgive me, but indeed this modest dinner was prepared for infants (babies). But so that no one leaves the feast hungry, we will still serve one dish—milk undiluted with water (though I very much doubt that there is a need, and whether even a part of what we have served has been digested).
Solid food—not sooner than the third part; because while we are still fleshly, do not battle with passions, believe in sin and willingly try to commit it—then not only solid food but even milk will be harmful to the fleshly mind! So if you are still fleshly—do not read further, but immediately proceed to getting to know friends! And for those who consider themselves older infants and think they can drink milk undiluted with water, we will say something. We will serve some thoughts for reflection, not building a logical system (we will systematically describe the reality we will talk about below—not sooner than part III), and at the same time, we will answer another question posed by your fellow diners.
You ask to explain what it means that we are saved when history (the reality of earthly existence), which existed before the birth of Christ, remains the same after the Resurrection of Christ: wars (in the 20th century, probably more blood was shed than in all previous years), disasters, cataclysms, epidemics—in a word, sorrow, pain, suffering, tears, despair… That is, evil has not disappeared after the Incarnation but, on the contrary, the closer to the end, the more it increases, and in the end —it will prevail (‘In the last days, love will grow cold…’, ‘When the Son of Man comes, will He find faith on the earth?’)!
Let us note in advance that evil does not exist; God did not create it, hence, it has no essence, it is non-being, that is, it does not exist, it is not real (because reality is what exists)—illusion, mirage. It is said that not the world is evil (all creation—from very good to very good), but that the world lies in evil, that is, in what does not exist—in illusion; the world exists in the non-existent…