The version about every fifth accident, due to poor visibility of the road, has the right to live.

View of the track at night depends on the quality of the light

Definitely, the quality of light is the viewing range of the track. Behind all this is reflector and diffuser in the lighting unit.

The VAZ-2114 is equipped with a BOSCH instrument cluster, the directional light beam of which is incomparable with previous domestic counterparts.

Which modification is better?

H4 halogen lamps installed on the VAZ-2114 are divided into:

1. Standard.
2. Enhanced light beam.
3. Improved visual overview.
4. All weather.
5. Increased power.

They are two filaments of near and far lighting. 60 / 55W lamps are considered optimal among them..

Standard

Standard bulb H4

Such lamps are mounted on each car of this VAZ model.

High beam lamp

Lamp of enhanced light flux + 30%

Improved visual overview

Illuminate with the usual white light. Consuming the usual 55 watts, they illuminate brighter, despite the bluish tint of the bulb.

They give out an excellent light background on a snowy and dry road. On a wet track, it is better to use yellow fog lights. Do not dazzle oncoming vehicles. The duration of operation of those does not differ from the standard ones, despite the inflated price. Manufacturers prefer lamps with a yellow or bluish tint.

All weather

All-weather yellow lamp

Special coatings of a yellowish tint are made on the lamps, which allows the light to reach the contrast of the area in bad weather, especially cloudy (foggy). Yellow light is less reflective.

increased power

They are in demand among owners who do not really own the “subject of dispute”.

The manufacturer does not supply the VAZ-2114 with powerful lamps and does not recommend it, since this is due to the obligatory overheating and melting of wires, contacts, and headlight reflectors.

A lamp of increased power leads to the consequences of blinding an oncoming car and an accident.

Choosing a lamp on the VAZ-2114 by manufacturer and brand

Lamp type - H4. In one lamp, both high and low beam are combined.

Based on the two components of the design of the headlight, the lamp is selected at the discretion of the driver. The essence of the H4 lamp, consisting of two threads, has not changed. A halogen incandescent lamp is characterized in that the bulb is saturated with bromine or iodine vapor.

The flask is made of quartz glass. This increases the service life, the maximum temperature of the filament. At the same time, the brightness of the head lighting increases, which is the most attractive factor in the popularity of the product.

The H4 halogen range is focused on high-quality lighting, among which lamps of increased light output are distinguished.

In accordance with European safety requirements, products meet the best performance:

OSRAMCOOLblueINTENCE , during tests, no deviations in the consumption of electrical energy were noted. Dipped and main beam correspond to GOST. Does not blind drivers of oncoming, passing traffic.

Due to the use of 80 W power, the superiority remained with the company IPFSUPERDEAM, but for a long distance, the illumination was only 70 meters.

She left more confidence behind her NARVA H4 RANGE POWER with excellent results in both modes.

Lamp KOITO WHITE from a Japanese manufacturer, showing high-quality light output, does not affect the technical condition of the wiring, other elements of the headlight. Together with excellent contours of the luminous flux, it provides low, high beam illumination of the lighting zone. The functionality extends to the angle of coverage and the shadow boundary of the trace. The factor of protection against blinding of oncoming cars is also a significant advantage of the device.

This lamp comparison has revealed the best models of Japanese H4 lamp manufacturers.

Lamp types

Xenon

Discharge xenon lamps

Lamps equipped with xenon are three times brighter than conventional ones. They last ten times longer. Efficient in power consumption, almost twice, which allows the generator to work in a gentle mode, saving the engine resource. Serious disadvantage xenon is considered unsuitable for a circuit designed for halogen lamps.

Halogen

Advantages in increased light output, color choice, long service life, all-round visibility of the road with curb coverage.

disadvantages- high bulb heating temperature, poor quality of the lamp, not economical energy consumption, the need for additional service.

Video about choosing lamps

OUR PARTNERS:

Website about German cars

Lamps used in the car

Any modern car or truck can be serviced and repaired independently, in a regular garage. All that is required for this is a set of tools and a factory repair manual with a detailed (step-by-step) description of the operations. Such a manual should contain the types of operating fluids, oils and lubricants used, and most importantly, the tightening torques of all threaded connections of parts of vehicle components and assemblies. Italian cars - Fiat Alfa Romeo Lancia Ferrari Mazerati (Maserati) have their own design features. You can also join a special group select all french cars - Peugout (Peugeot), Renault (Renault) and Citroen (Citroen). German cars are complex. This applies especially to Mercedes Benz (Mercedes Benz), BMW (BMW), Audi (Audi) and Porsche (Porsch), in a slightly smaller - to Volkswagen (Volkswagen) and Opel (Opel). The next large group, isolated by design features, is made up of American manufacturers - Chrysler, Jeep, Plymouth, Dodge, Eagle, Chevrolet, GMC, Cadillac, Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Ford, Mercury, Lincoln . Of the Korean firms, it should be noted Hyundai / Kia, GM - DAT (Daewoo), SsangYong.

More recently, Japanese cars have had a relatively low initial cost and affordable prices for spare parts, but recently they have caught up with prestigious European brands in these indicators. Moreover, this applies almost equally to all brands of cars from the land of the rising sun - Toyota (Toyota), Mitsubishi (Mitsubishi), Subaru (Subaru), Isuzu (Isuzu), Honda (Honda), Mazda (Mazda or, as they used to say, Matsuda) , Suzuki (Suzuki), Daihatsu (Daihatsu), Nissan (Nissan). Well, and the cars produced under the Japanese-American brands Lexus (Lexus), Scion (Scyon), Infinity (Infiniti),

The VAZ-2114 has a lot of advantages. This model is characterized by dynamism, attractive appearance and good technical characteristics. However, in terms of reliability and quality, the VAZ 2114 instrument panel cannot be compared with other car systems, and therefore its owners often need to replace the light bulbs on the panel. Moreover, this issue should never be ignored, because if 60-70 years ago the dashboard contained only a speedometer, an ammeter and several signal lights, today this element of the car is much more complicated.

The dashboard installed in the vehicle will allow the driver to see a lot of useful information, control the main systems of the car, as well as diagnose and troubleshoot problems in a timely manner. For example, light bulbs in the VAZ-2114 can light up for the following reasons:

• lack of battery charging;
• lack of fuel in the tank;
• decrease in oil pressure;
• excessive water in the filter;
• problems in the fuel system;
• the handbrake is pressed;
• problems with the propulsion system and so on.

From all this it is clear that the lamps on the panel allow you to identify problems with the car, and if they themselves do not work, then an important breakdown can be easily missed, which is fraught not only with a decrease in the life of your VAZ-2114, but also with an accident. It is for this reason that when malfunctions are detected, it is very important to change the lamps in a timely manner (they cannot be repaired).

Varieties of light bulbs

To date, lamps for the VAZ-2114 dashboard are offered in many different variations, from the classic and more affordable solution to improved versions that make the atmosphere in the car more expressive. At the same time, professionals recommend installing LED bulbs on the instrument panel, because they significantly decorate the appearance of the cabin.

Among the currently most popular options that are available for the VAZ model 2114, the following can be noted:

• LED SM-T5 (white, blue or red) and SM-T5-cap-super (white);
• high-brightness SMD LED modules;
• halogen lamps from Philip or Osram.

The indicated bulbs for the VAZ 2114 instrument panel are distinguished by a fairly low cost, and they can be replaced independently without a lot of time.

How to change the lamps on the dashboard with your own hands?

If there are problems with the instrument panel in a VAZ-2114 car, many drivers immediately turn to a car service. However, such a decision cannot be called justified, because often experts will offer to replace not a few failed light bulbs, but the entire dashboard, which will easily make repairs 10 or even more times more expensive (several thousand versus several hundred rubles, depending on the number of purchased light bulbs). This task will require a minimum of skills and arsenal. You can replace the lamps with new ones, as well as a Phillips screwdriver. Armed with these elements, you should remove the decorative casing from the radio, because it is directly connected to the instrument panel. This pad is held on the fasteners, so it is recommended to use a screwdriver here, gently threading it under the casing, disconnecting it from the bottom edge. Next, you need to do the following operations:

1. 1. Disconnect the wire directed to the cigarette lighter;
2. 2. Remove the casing from the panel in the same way as it was disconnected from the radio. After that, the screws that need to be unscrewed will be visible.
3. 3. Carefully, but with little effort, detach the trim.
4. 4. Disconnect the wires from the clock, headlights, alarms and other things.
5. 5. Remove the instrument panel, for which you should unscrew the screws that hold it. To protect the wires from damage, it is better to disconnect them on one side.
6. 6. Before replacing the bulbs themselves, it is necessary to remove their cartridges, which is done by turning the latter counterclockwise. Then the defective lamps on the panel are replaced by new ones, and the structure is assembled in the reverse order.

When performing all operations, it is very important to be careful not to damage the instrument panel. Otherwise, the work cannot be called time-consuming, and even a beginner can handle it. In addition, this procedure does not require special power costs and financial investments.

The instrument panel on the VAZ-2114 is specially designed for the driver to control all the data coming from the engine, fuel level control, and other data.

Video with the replacement of light bulbs on the dashboard VAZ-2114:

The instrument panel should always be kept in good working order, because a non-working backlight can cause not only discomfort when driving a car, but can also cause a banal error due to missing a warning light malfunction.

Therefore, as soon as you find a non-working lamp on the VAZ-2114 instrument panel, it should be changed immediately, and how to do this is described in detail below in our article.

Reasons for the failure of the bulbs on the dashboard

There can be several reasons why the instrument panel lamps are out of order:

• Incandescent lamps burnt out , or in the case of LED counterparts, the tracks stopped working.
• In chain electrical appliances malfunction (there was a break, or oxidation of the contacts - approx.).
• Fuse box out of order.
• On the contact board instrument panel is damaged.
• going on short to ground .

In order to deal closer with this problem, it is necessary to dismantle the instrument panel.

Dismantling the "apron" of the dashboard

To get to the instrument panel, you need to carry out some preparatory work, which will allow you to easily access the main device:

1. First, remove the negative terminal from the battery.
2. Then, unscrew all the screws securing the torpedo pad on the right leg on the driver's side, and then do exactly the same procedure with the pad on the passenger side.
3. Further, for ease of dismantling, release the gearshift lever cover from its place of fixation.
4. Unscrew one screw on each side of the tunnel, and then one more, which is located directly under the ashtray for the rear passengers.
5. Now that the tunnel is holding nothing, move it back a little.
6. The next step is to dismantle the “apron” of the torpedo, and to do this, unscrew the 4 bolts that fix it to the steering column and the remaining ones that hold it along the edges of the center console, do not forget to dismantle the plug on the panel and unscrew the fixing bolt.
7. Disconnect the block with the wires of the cigarette lighter, radio, on-board computer (if any - approx.) And buttons.
8. When nothing else interferes, we dismantle the "apron" and put it aside.

On this, the dismantling of the “apron” of the instrument panel can be considered completed and you can proceed directly to work with the lamps.

Preparing to replace light bulbs on the instrument panel

When access to the instrument panel is open to us, it remains to unscrew the two bolts on the sides of the case and disconnect the power pads.

Upon visual inspection, it will be seen that in total there are 13 cartridges with lamps on the dashboard of a VAZ-2114 car, of which only 8 can be replaced with analogues or with LEDs.

Pay attention to the general condition of the board, as if there are signs of oxidation or corrosion, they must be cleaned, regardless of whether the lamp is working or not. Because in most cases, the cause of the failure is not the lamp, but the cartridge, which was with traces of corrosion.

The choice of lamps for the instrument panel VAZ-2114

Today, the market offers many choices of lamps for the VAZ-2114 instrument panel. Among them, there are both conventional incandescent lamps and LED counterparts, which are distinguished by an extended service life, the quality of the light emitted, as well as low power consumption.

When buying new lamps, always buy a few more elements, because breaks in the "legs" are possible during installation.

How to install new light bulbs

1. If there are malfunctions in a particular lamp, first of all we unscrew the non-working cartridge where it was located.
2. Unscrew it counterclockwise, being careful.
3. When the cartridge is in your hand, carefully remove the lamp so as not to break it.
4. Next, in its place we insert new lamps or LEDs, strictly observing the polarity.

Please note that the shape of LED lamps is square, and since it is different from conventional light bulbs, you just need to grind off the excess.

1. After all the new lamps are installed in place, we check them for operability by connecting the wire block to the instrument panel without first fixing it.
2. When everything is checked and working, you can assemble everything in reverse order, remembering to tighten each bolt securely.

Conclusion

After the instrument panel is assembled, once again check the correctness of the assembly, as well as the quality of the work performed. Pay special attention to the illumination of the arrows and individual elements of the instrument panel.

Psychologist Natalia Skuratovskaya comments.

“The priest killed his wife” is terrifying, but alas, not surprising. Family violence occurs in priestly families (and simply in "deeply churched") more often than "on average in the hospital." The reasons are simple: there are, to put it mildly, no less psychopaths among priests than among other citizens, but common ideas about marriage and marital relations are such that they actually legitimize violence and prevent a way out of a crisis family situation. (Moreover, these ideas are based on a false understanding of both the Gospel and the canons - another substitution that cripples, and sometimes even takes life).

I had occasion to communicate with a very young mother, beaten to the blue by her equally young husband (the offspring of a venerable priestly family "with traditions" - yes, including - with the tradition of "humble" his wife with beatings), and with large families suffering from domestic violence older mothers who have experienced more than one fracture over the years of family life, with broken kidneys, but not daring to change the situation. What do they usually hear from the confessor? “Be patient, humble yourself, this is your cross, this is for your own good, divorce is a mortal sin, let the wife be afraid of her husband ...”

And where in an ordinary family a woman would overcome fear and co-dependence, get to a crisis center and receive support and shelter, many mothers will endure to the last - and not only because of the above "edifications", but also because they are ashamed “defamate” the husband, drop his priestly authority, “bring blasphemy on the Church” (by the way, very often these abuser priests in the parish behave in a completely different way - and the parishioners consider them “good shepherds”).

In some cases, family violence is not a consequence of psychopathy, but a situation of colossal pressure in which the priest finds himself due to the peculiarities of our “church system”, and if he does not deal constructively with this chronic stress, then the consequences may fall on the family (which will be “take out” all negative emotions that do not find a way out)

And I really want to remind women who find themselves in a situation of domestic violence:

1. You are not alone with this trouble.- throughout the country there is a network of crisis centers for victims of domestic violence, which will provide both psychological and legal assistance, and, if necessary, shelter (and even with 6 children, yes). It's free.

And even if you are not going to leave yet, it is worth contacting the specialists of the crisis center and discussing your situation confidentially - so that there is an adequate perception of the situation as such, and the risk to which you expose yourself and the children, and opportunities to change the situation.

2. If you decide to leave your abusive husband, then first grab the children and go to a safe place(if relatives and friends do not have such a place, then in a shelter), and then sort things out, discuss a possible divorce, etc.

3. Your departure will not "destroy the marriage"(if there is a threat to life and health, everything is already destroyed), but it can give a marriage a chance to save (and this chance lies in psychotherapy, in some cases with the participation of a psychiatrist, which will help the abuser to restrain aggressive impulses, and possibly to cope with those own personal problems that push him to violence). Until the wife leaves, the abusive husband has no incentive to acknowledge the problem and begin to address it.

——————
Give rest, Lord, to the newly-departed Anna and accept her into Your heavenly abodes!

And help, Lord, those who can still be saved.

Natalya Skuratovskaya is engaged in an unusual business: he conducts psychological counseling for Orthodox people, including priests. In addition, she is the author of unique psychological trainings for future shepherds. Now these trainings are successfully held in the Khabarovsk Seminary. She recently delivered a public lecture, "Psychological Manipulation in the Church", which caused a great resonance in the Orthodox community. We talked with Natalia about the psychological problems that arise in the parish between priests and parishioners. Who is a “metaphysical father”, what does it mean to “laminate sins” and how can a priest protect himself from burnout and prohibition at the same time - read in the interview.

Where do neuroses hide?

- The topic “Psychological manipulations in the Church” arose for you when people began to contact you when they encountered similar things within the walls of the temple. Have you ever experienced manipulative practices?

- I had such an experience, but I was initially an unsuitable object for manipulation. This is how my childhood turned out: my parents were not authoritarian, and from the age of two or three they were ready not to demand, but to substantiate their demand, so we immediately developed a fairly mature relationship. This attitude was then preserved in communication with any authoritative people. It’s easy for me to disagree, to ask a clarifying question, I’m not afraid to be a black sheep, a “marginal”, I don’t worry that they will perceive me differently. I got a feeling of self-acceptance from my childhood, so my self-esteem does not decrease when they tell me that I am “wrong, not Orthodox enough”. I try to separate constructive criticism, which helps to work on myself, from manipulative techniques or depreciation.

I have been in the Church since the age of 18, Orthodox in the first generation, it was my own impulse. In the neophyte period, I faced different things. The end of the 1980s, church life was just being revived, there were many uncertainties and distortions. Even then I reacted to manipulations: either I retreated, or, according to youthful maximalism, I resisted. I constantly stood up for my friends, who turned out to be victims of manipulation, and, as it seemed to me, could not stand up for themselves.

Now I already understand that I did not always tactfully intervene, for example, in their relationship with the rector. The rector does not pay extra to the kliros, he says that you came to serve for the glory of God, how are you not ashamed to be so mercantile, they say, do not serve God, but mammon, and people, in fact, live on it. And I rushed to shame the abbot and extort money from him for this kliros — real case. Then I understood how to resolve such situations more gently, more tactfully and without conflicts. And in my youth, it turned out that the people I tried to protect fell into the category of uncomfortable along with me. This taught me a lot too.

— How do modern people, parishioners, perceive a priest? Whom, first of all, do they see - a demand executor, a psychotherapist, a celestial?

– All of the above options are present in real life, but, fortunately, priests, in addition to all of the above, are also pastors, counselors.

Indeed, someone sees in the priest a priest-executor. These are people who seek in religion a means to achieve their own pragmatic goals. I will light a candle in order to recover, so that my son will go to college. That is, I will give something to God so that God, in turn, will take care of my urgent needs and worldly affairs.

“But even here the attitude can be different. As a specialist in the service sector, if a priest refuses to bless something or baptize on demand, a stream of negativity immediately falls upon him. Or there is an attitude from the bottom up, as to some higher being. Recently I came across the wording “strong priest” somewhere on Facebook.

— Yes, when a priest is perceived as a bearer of some superpowers — this is a different distortion, and it is not useful either to the priests themselves or to those who treat them in this way. It is not useful, first of all, by the fact that a system of inflated expectations is being formed associated with the presence of holy orders. As if the priest should know the answers to all questions, should be almost a miracle worker, selflessly serve 24 hours a day, at any moment you can turn to him and demand attention. He is a holy man, he must always respond.

This is a temptation that is very difficult for pastors, especially young ones, to overcome. I want to match. As a result, we have either charm and youthfulness, or a breakdown, emotional and spiritual emptiness. — precisely because of the feeling of the futility of trying to justify these high expectations, because of the feeling of one's own duality, the discrepancy between the external image and the inner self-perception.

For parishioners who are looking for a celestial being in a priest, someone who will decide everything for them, this is also very unhelpful. They have a fixed state of spiritual infantilism and irresponsibility - a priest is seen as a metaphysical father, on whom you can dump all your problems and remain a baby spiritually until the end of your days.

It often happens that such a destructive relationship develops, but both parties are happy with it. Infantile parishioners find a priest whose pride is flattered by such an attitude, and he begins to believe that he is “not like other people”, special, that any thought that came to his mind was put in by the Lord.

If such a priest is asked about things about which he has no idea, he says any gag, but he believes that it is the will of God through him that is manifested in this way.

By and large, this is a charm. In such a relationship, both parties receive their own, including psychological, benefits. But it has rather a negative relation to the spiritual life. Such parishioners are in the illusion of the salvation of the chosen path, sometimes neuroses are hiding in these relationships, the fear of the unpredictability of life. Often it is precisely such parishes that surround themselves with a wall of hostility to everything external, worldly, looking for signs of the end of the world, eschatological neurosis. — everything is bad, only we have salvation, enemies are all around, only with our priest or in our monastery is salvation.

How can Christians be the “salt of the world”, with such an attitude towards this very world, is completely incomprehensible.

"We can't do otherwise"

- According to my feelings, many Orthodox people like just manipulative priests. Why do people want to be manipulated?

– Here it is worth starting with what many people come to the Church for in general and what they are looking for in it. When they are looking for protection from their fears, confirmation that there is some one and only correct path, then with the priests of a certain warehouse they find it. Often people bring to the Church their own experience of co-dependent relationships, in which they are the weak side, and there is someone strong, authoritarian, psychologically aggressive, who forces them ...

“…parents, husband, or boss?”

Yes, this all happens because people who are used to such relationships easily fit into the same relationships, in a certain sense they are comfortable in them, because there is no need to change anything in themselves.

- Such people usually really do not like it when the priest says: "Think for yourself."

- Yes, for them this is evidence that this is some kind of wrong, "weak" priest, he does not want to "adopt" everyone - in the sense of recognizing them as eternal babies who need to be manipulated, who do not understand differently.

The second point: people with a penchant for co-dependent relationships habitually justify these relationships - "It is impossible with us otherwise." They already have a distorted image of themselves. In such priests, who look down on them, they see a reinforcement of this distorted image, their picture of the world is confirmed, and this is reassuring: “I knew that I was not good for anything and would not live with my mind, well, the priest tells me this and we must obey him in everything.

This is a mentality that is a consequence of historical causes. Mother Maria Skobtsova wrote about this back in the 1930s: that when the Church in Russia ceases to be persecuted and the authorities support it, the same people will come to the surface who will recognize the party line from the Pravda newspaper - whom they should hate, whom to condemn and who to approve. That is, people with non-reflexive, non-critical thinking, who believe that there is only one answer to every question, and are not able to look at the problem in all its diversity.

People with such uncritical thinking, having come to the Church, will first study - look for a mentor who will give them this “only correct answer” in the same categories, and then, when they realize that they have already mastered the basic concept, in the same spirit of “infallibility "will teach in the name of the Church, anathematizing all who disagree with them. That it will become the dominant type of ecclesiastical — it was quite logically predicted, based on the socio-psychological facts of the early twentieth century.

- Believers really identify the opinion of any priest with the opinion of the Church ...

- Here the main substitution is that the authority of the Church in the high sense of the word extends to its individual representatives, and disagreement with individual representatives of the Church is presented as a rejection of the Church as such. At the same time, we forget that in the history of Orthodoxy there were different positions and disputes within the Church. Recall at least the Ecumenical Councils — in what discussions truths were born, and the fact that in the Orthodox Church there is no dogma about anyone's infallibility. We condemn Catholics for the dogma of the infallibility of the Pope, while in our country many priests (not to mention bishops) claim the same infallibility of their judgments, becoming “mini-popes” in the parishes, deaneries or dioceses entrusted to them, and any disagreement with their private opinion is perceived as an attack on the Church.

Loudest of all intolerant minority

- On the other hand, a priest who says something different from the opinion of the majority is perceived as "wrong."

“They see infallibility not in anyone, but only in those who confirm their own picture of the world and the Church.

As for the majority - here, too, everything is ambiguous. Especially in recent years, when various trends have clearly emerged within the ROC. Once, in the company of priests, teachers of theology, we counted 8 different “religions” inside the ROC, almost not intersecting with each other — from extreme fundamentalists to supporters of the Parisian school of theology. From within each faction, it is seen that “our Orthodoxy is the most correct, and those who disagree with us are not completely Orthodox.”

One's own opinion seems to be the opinion of the majority. Although we usually do not know the opinion of the majority — the voice of the intolerant minority is loudest. The same extreme fundamentalists — they are not the majority, but they are loudly declaring their position. And the hierarchy does not dispute them for various reasons, so someone begins to perceive this as the position of the entire Church. For example, some of the fundamentalists oppose certain cultural phenomena, while outsiders begin to think that the Church is interfering everywhere: theaters, schools, and so on. with their own opinions and restrictions.

“But non-church people usually see this opinion in the church press: such priests are printed, called on TV channels, and therefore they are perceived as the mouthpiece of the church. And the parishioners, as people who join the opinion of the majority, begin to believe that if you criticize all this, then you are some kind of non-church ... How unhealthy is this situation, or maybe it is natural? And what can this lead to?

- The situation is understandable, although, of course, abnormal. We observed this in Soviet times in relation to various phenomena: everything leads to the emasculation of meanings.

People in the Church do not gather to sort things out on social issues, but it is precisely through these discussions that the very concept of Christian, church life is substituted. The focus of attention shifts from salvation, deification to attempts to impose some external moral norms on the world around. Although if we return to the Gospel, the Holy Tradition, this has never been the task of the Church.

- Current seminarians, future pastors - what images are they now guided by? Do they understand what the parishioners want from them, what do they want?

- According to my observations, they understand, but not always. They come guided by a variety of considerations: from the desire to serve God and people to the perception of the seminary as a social elevator: I live in the countryside, I have no money, no prospects, and here for five years everything is free, and in general the main thing in the Church — settle down, and then somehow, you can live and earn ...

The seminary largely sets the atmosphere in which future pastors are formed. Seminaries are very different: both in terms of attitudes and methods of education. There are, in my opinion, quite destructive spiritual schools in which relationships of rigid co-dependence are brought up, where the main goal is — integration into the system of hierarchical relations.

Priests do not understand the basics of crisis psychology

– I communicate with a large number of priests, and it is easy to determine by communication: whether a person studied at a seminary or first graduated from a secular educational institution, and perhaps from a seminary in absentia. The style of public speech of young priests who have just graduated from the seminary is full of Church Slavonicisms, clichéd phrases, they absolutely do not know how to “switch registers” and speak like real people. And a person after a secular university easily switches these registers.

- Learned a certain manner of speech and behavior — this manifests one of the problems of modern spiritual education, and in general, intra-church communication. Most priests do not master the art of dialogue at all, they are monologues: he broadcasts - he is listened to. Any question (not to mention disagreement) causes an almost panicky reaction, which is often expressed in attempts to “shut up” the mouth of those who disagree.

“This is often seen in seminary teachers…

- Yes, this is where the inability to conduct a dialogue, manipulative techniques begin — using formal status as an opportunity to silence your opponent. This is then transferred to the priestly service.

When I worked with the guys at the Khabarovsk Seminary, we were developing communication skills, the ability to organize discussions, listen to the interlocutor, and speak the language of our audience. And then a project was carried out in the seminary (which, I hope, will continue further) “Pastoral Practice”: seminarians performed real church tasks, interacting not only with parishioners, but also with various non-church audiences: schoolchildren, students, boarding schools for sick children, soldiers emergency service. They organized a “landing force” from senior seminarians to rural parishes to help the local abbots: catechesis, conversations with parishioners, organization of events for schoolchildren in the village. The seminarians and I practiced communication skills in the language of the audience in order to understand the motives, interests of people, and adequately respond to objections.

We had such classes: I divided the group into "priests" and "anticlericals." The latter compiled lists of all typical claims against the Church, starting from the notorious "priests in Mercedes", and those who were in the role of "priests" had to reasonably answer these claims. — not with formal excuses, but in such a way that it corresponds to their convictions, without guile. Then the groups changed so that everyone had the opportunity to learn how to adequately respond to “controversial issues”. Fortunately, in the training format they had the opportunity to work with their own beliefs too. When an answer is given that is formally approved, but the priest himself does not believe in it, this answer does not convince anyone, it is perceived as hypocrisy. And when you manage to pull out, voice, comprehend your own doubts, the answers are already given at a different level, and there is no fear of facing questions.

Making claims against the Church is an easy task. A more difficult level of work with senior students is claims to God: why does He allow the suffering of the innocent, what to say to parents of disabled children or parents who have lost children.

In the life of a particular priest, this pops up constantly: it is grief that brings many to the Church. At the same time, the priests do not understand the basics of crisis psychology: what grief is, how it is experienced, what are the stages, how to work with it in terms of counseling - that a person can be told what is impossible in any case, which will destroy him.

(At the moment I am writing an article on this topic: “The Priest and Grief.”) I think that every priest should know this, but so far almost no seminary teaches this.

Unfortunately, we have deep-rooted opinions in the Church about “what kind of sins God punishes,” although I categorically disagree with this, and the holy fathers warn against this. People replace the judgment of God with their own judgment.

“Thus, injuring people who are already injured without it ...

—Yes, and sometimes leading to such despair that it pushes away from God forever. I came across such cases as a psychologist. People tried to get comfort in the Church after the death of their children or during a difficult pregnancy, the threat of a miscarriage. Or an Orthodox woman, but not very churchly, comes to confession, and they say to her: “Ah, your marriage is not married — your baby will die or the patient will be born! Cursed be your child from God for your sins, for your life!” And such a position, which was dominant in the 90s, still exists.

How spiritual are puffed cheeks?

— What is a “good” priest for parishioners? How important is his appearance, demeanor? How does this affect your attitude towards him? According to my feelings, the simpler the priest behaves, the less reverence for him, the weaker the perception of him as a priest. And the puffier the cheeks, the longer the beard, the more shocking, manipulative behavior, the more respect for him, the more spiritual he is seen by people.

And the idea of ​​what spirituality is is different for different people. Usually spirituality — it is a confirmation of their own ideas about what is good and what is bad. That is, the more the priest confirms this, the more spiritual he is. At the same time, representations can be aggressive, far from being Christian.

As for pouting cheeks, demeanor, emphasizing one's status — yes, there is a significant category of parishioners for whom this is evidence that the priest — a special person with special gifts. And if he behaves simply, it seems to them that he drops the dignity of the holy dignity, does not know how to earn authority.

At the same time, for people who think (not those who are looking for ready-made answers to all questions), the opposite is true: they will not communicate with “pompous and important”, but will look for someone who can speak normal human language. This is how the stratification of "church subcultures" occurs.

People go to different parishes, and if there are different priests in one parish, an internal conflict may arise, including between priests: there is some kind of competition. It is no secret that sometimes the priests are jealous of whom, how many parishioners cost for confession, how many spiritual children someone has. This can serve as a pretext for hidden wars, often manipulative, and sometimes, unfortunately, for intrigue.

But in the long run, relying on a good-looking appearance, on “puffed out cheeks” does not justify itself. In addition to the external, there is also the internal, and if the priest leads the flock to internal desolation or embitterment, he can bring nothing but harm with his ministry.

Few people seriously dealt with this issue from the standpoint of patristic asceticism. But there is, for example, Father Gabriel (Bunge), well-known to many, who was engaged in patristics while still a Catholic monk, and then converted to Orthodoxy and joined the Russian Orthodox Church. At one time, while exploring the issue of the spiritual devastation of clergy (I was interested in this in connection with the pastoral burnout syndrome), he wrote that an attempt to compensate for internal emptiness with external activity is completely destructive for both the pastor and the flock. As a result, the priest closes himself from his spiritual problems, and also leads his parishioners from the spiritual to the external.

External activity can be expressed in very good forms - social service, for example, but it can also be the notorious "Orthodox activism" with the pogrom of impious exhibitions, etc. Anything is fine to distract oneself from the spiritual life. And at the same time feel like people engaged in church work. But behind all this lies a devastating self-justification.

Laminate your sins

— The main meeting place for a priest and a parishioner is confession. Are there discrepancies in the understanding of the sacrament of confession by priests, on the one hand, and parishioners, on the other? Could there be manipulation?

- Certainly. And there are problems, and manipulations can be. Moreover, the problems are partly systemic. The very concept of repentance in the mass church perception is sometimes replaced by books like "A Thousand and One Sins." And the preparation for confession is often formal, and sometimes even manipulative, with the requirement to recognize as a sin what you do not internally consider to be a sin. The concept of repentance is replaced by some formal ritual act, which does not induce a person to internal changes.

Second substitution: confession for some parishioners — it is a substitute for psychotherapy. Under the guise of confession, they try to tell the priest about the hardships of their lives, instead of confession, they get self-justification: how bad everyone is, how I suffer from them. “Sinful with anger, but they will bring anyone!” Or they ask for advice on what to do about it, but the priest does not have the courage to say that he does not know, and he gives a standard-pious answer, which has nothing to do with the internal state of the questioner.

In my mind, a good, "strong" priest is one who is not afraid to admit that he does not know everything. Who can say to his flock: I don’t know what to answer you - let’s pray together. Who does not try to replace God for his flock.

"Father, what should I do?" is, on the one hand, manipulation of the priest, shifting responsibility to him. And most priests do not have that level of holiness and insight to reliably say whether or not to marry this person, to look for or not to look for another job (unless we are talking about something obviously criminal). But if such a question is asked, the priest often considers himself obliged to answer it. And these answers destroy fate. It turns out, on the one hand, the priest manipulated trust, his hidden fear of losing authority, as well as pride that I am so special, God gave me the right to judge everything.

Confession is not to list sins, but to change, to leave your passions. This is the recognition of their mistakes and the willingness not to return to them. But in real life, it happens that people come year after year with the same list, confession becomes a formal admission to Communion, and Communion becomes a formal procedure confirming your belonging to the Church. How one familiar priest joked bitterly: why do they come with the same list - let them laminate it, and if they get rid of something, I myself will give them a marker to cross out ...

It's one of those things that hasn't been fully revived in our church revival.

- And where did it have to be reborn, from what times?

– This is also a difficult question: many aspects of church life have actually been revived following the patterns of the end of the Synodal period — not the best, let's face it, the time of the existence of our Church. I think, first of all, it is necessary to revive the meanings, and look for forms in an honest open dialogue.

How is repentance different from guilt? It seems to me that people often confuse these two feelings: if a person does not feel the notorious “I am the worst of all, I am the worst of all”, it seems to him that he does not have any repentance.

- You can distinguish by the vector of application of efforts: a normal repentant feeling should encourage a person to change - not to self-destruction, not to self-flagellation, but to get rid of passions in oneself, to correct the mistakes made. It cannot be said that our feeling of guilt is always harmful, always unfounded, but one should not confuse the imposed feeling of guilt with the voice of conscience. We made a mistake, but can we fix it or not? We harmed a person: can we fix it or not?

What if we can't fix it?

- This happens if we killed a person or he himself died. But usually we think that everything, the relationship is broken and nothing can be changed, but in fact we can ask for forgiveness and fix something, do something for the person we offended. Our own fears, self-esteem interfere with this correction.

There are objective situations that we cannot correct. This begs the next question: How can we redeem this? — before God and people? Let us remember that in Orthodoxy there is no legal concept of salvation; we are saved by the grace of God. Man has done irreparable evil, but he can try to do some good. For example: a woman had an abortion, then became churched, repented, but nothing can be corrected, death is death. But everything can be redeemed with love: for your children, for strangers, for helping other women in such a difficult situation. — both psychological and material. If conscience tells you what needs to be redeemed, then you can always find opportunities.

- Penitent prayers that are served for women who have had an abortion - this is not a dead end? It is believed that this should give them some kind of support ...

— By themselves, these prayers can increase the destructive feeling of guilt, if everything is limited only to prayers, without good deeds. This leads to the realization of the incorrigibility of the deed at the same time as the realization (illusory) that God will not forgive. And it is impossible to hope for redemption through prayers: God forgives not because a person has performed certain actions a certain number of times, but because a person has changed.

Spiritual life — this is an internal rebirth, and if a woman who has had an abortion continues to live with a sense of unforgiveness, the irreparability of her deed, she will continue to bring evil into the world, she will not be able to give love to her children or her husband, she will not be able to help other people, and all her strength will be directed to self-destruction. Kill yourself even psychologically — it won't fix the evil. Our Church does not approve of suicide in any form.

The difference between repentance and guilt lies in the constructiveness or destructiveness of this feeling.

Pastoral split personality

- Friendship of a priest with parishioners: how common is the type of relationship, are there any pitfalls?

- According to my observations, this is not the most common type of relationship, precisely because it is often believed that a priest must be "special", too human relations can drop his authority. Sometimes the priest himself considers it necessary to play a certain role in front of the parishioners, which he learned either from the models of the theological school, or from those priests who contributed to its formation. Therefore, sometimes he considers friendships not very acceptable for himself.

There are real dangers here too: the excessive familiarity of a priest with parishioners can make him an object of manipulation on their part. Is it useful or not useful — depends on the maturity of the priest. If this is an adult relationship, it is rather useful. If this friendship is to drink beer together, and sometimes to slander, then this can then complicate pastoral relations.

- Professional split personality - how often does this happen to priests? How to avoid the fact that a person in the temple is alone, but with friends, family - another?

— It happens often, because the very system of church relations dictates a certain role. The priest does not find the strength to get away from the demands of the external environment. The danger is clear — it is an internal conflict. The question arises: where is he really? If he is not real in the temple, this ultimately undermines his faith, leads to crises not only psychological, but also spiritual: to “de-Churching”, leaving the priesthood.

A person understands the objective problems of church life, and an attempt to convince himself that these problems do not exist often leads to such a split - as a clergyman, he is also related to these problems, but cannot change anything, therefore it is easier not to notice or justify them. There is a "Stockholm syndrome" - the emotional justification of "their" aggressors. Such a split is fraught with deep neurosis.

How to avoid it? It is necessary that there be less fear and more sincerity in the inner world. And here are the methods to achieve this — there is no universal recipe, it depends on what a particular person has now.

— What ways do priests find out of this situation, besides defrocking?

— There are several ways out, and not all of them are constructive. One of the most common — church, professional cynicism. Yes, I have such a job, a censer-aspergator, a priest-executor, I will be like that, since the parishioners and the hierarchies want it that way. On the one hand, this is a devaluation of one's ministry, one's mission, on the other — protection from absolutely destructive acts: not to sleep, for example.

As I said, another "way out" is codependency, identification with the aggressor. Or leaving in denial, in a defensive position: they say, the Church is holy, and everything in it is holy, I am wrong in everything, and the Church is right in everything. This is a neurotic position, not useful either for the priest or for the flock, but quite common.

The third position: outgrow all this, “separate the wheat from the chaff” in yourself, get out of the myths, partly invented by yourself, partly imposed by the church environment, to a more objective understanding of church reality. Realize: what can I do specifically that corresponds to my beliefs, my faith. And through this to overcome duality.

Although in real life it happens that when a priest tries to follow this path - to be non-hypocritical with people and God, to be sincere - he encounters problems within the church. The system begins to squeeze him out: the authorities, the people who serve with him — and it's very hard to resist.

Mentally active burn out

- The notorious burnout: some argue that this is not a problem, not a reason for sympathy. It is a sin. Like, it happens to everyone, and whoever can’t cope is to blame, a loser, a traitor in a cassock, etc. And there is nothing to raise this topic at all.

- Usually the same people who believe that the priest — this is a superman, a fireproof terminator who, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, must be a holy miracle worker, an ascetic, giving everything to everyone that they ask. This is a manipulation with the aim of denying the priest the right to human feelings, the right to make a mistake, to be weak. Obviously, this is fundamentally wrong: the priest remains a person who finds it hard, who gets tired, he has doubts.

Emotional burnout — this is an occupational risk associated with constant communication with a large number of people. He is especially strong in "helping" professions, which include priests, doctors, psychologists. — all those to whom they go with problems, from whom they expect emotional support. Naturally, a person who conscientiously treats his ministry begins to invest in it emotionally. It's bad if there is no way to recover — both objectively and due to a lack of understanding of what an emotional resource is and how it should be restored. There is a request: must serve, come on, you have grace. And if you feel tired, empty, then you pray badly, you are a bad priest.

This is manipulation, on the one hand, love, on the other — pride, with a third — fear of depreciation. This is a very difficult situation for a priest. Many people themselves believe in this, and while they still have the strength to pull themselves out, serve, communicate with people, instead of taking a break in time, recovering and returning with renewed vigor to their service, they torture themselves out of this ministry and reach an extreme degree. devastation.

In the last stage of burnout, there is a physiological need for alienation from all people. So the priest feels that he has almost been “devoured”, and he goes into an extreme defensive position in order to leave at least something of his personality. Strength is running out, it is difficult to get up in the morning, not to mention more.

It's not a sin, it's an occupational hazard. Therefore, you need, firstly, to know that there is such a problem, and secondly, to stop and recover in time. But it is necessary that this be understood not only by the priests themselves, but also by the hierarchy. And the parishioners must understand that the priest is given a special power to perform the sacraments, and not superhuman abilities. Parishioners should not use the priest as a permanent "donor".

In trainings for priests, we dealt with this problem, because this is a frequent request: where to get the strength for everything? People often seek advice from the position “I can’t do it anymore”: “I’m overloaded, I can’t do anything, I don’t want to, my personal life has collapsed, I don’t see children, my mother is depressed, everything is bad.” And everything is bad because the balance between service and personal life, between bestowal and restoration is disturbed. There are high expectations that a person tries to justify. And then we need to stop and start to restore this balance.

In the Orthodox Church, this problem has been voiced literally in recent years. At the beginning of 2011, I spoke at the Christmas Readings with a report on pastoral psychology, on the results of the first school of pastors (then we held it in Kamchatka), on psychological inquiries. She touched on the topic of burnout and was literally anathematized by the indignant Orthodox community. Active women from the audience shouted to me: “How dare you! Blasphemy! You slander, the grace of the priesthood guarantees against burnout! It can not be!" At the same time, the priests who were sitting in the hall nodded, approached me, thanked that “at least someone saw people in us”, took the coordinates, saying that now, I have problems that I have no one to discuss with: “It seems that you will understand — can I come with you?"

So I began psychological counseling of priests. After that, literally a year has not passed since our Patriarch spoke about pastoral burnout and the topic ceased to be a taboo. But still, many still believe that pastoral burnout — it's about lazy priests. Although I would say that this is not about those who are spiritually lazy, but about those who are mentally active. Who strongly counted on the strength of the soul, and serving people was too long, with his head.

And the Catholic Church and Protestants have been working with this problem for more than a decade. For example, there is such a practice as “houses of gaining new strength” - in Germany there is exactly this, in my opinion, in Italy. It started with the Catholics, then united with the Protestants. This is a kind of sanatorium for clergy who have undergone pastoral burnout, a three-month course of therapy. This therapy includes time for individual prayer, and (when they have more or less recovered) participation in worship services. — the priest must liturgiss, the Eucharist is healing.

There is such a practice, but when I told our Orthodox priests about it, the reaction was bitter laughter: “I can see how my bishop will let me go to be treated for pastoral burnout, treat me with care, unload me from diocesan obediences…”

Our problem is complex. A priest can protect himself to some extent, and we figured it out at the trainings: how to organize your life so that the causes of burnout are minimized as much as possible. Find opportunities to recover both during the week and throughout the year — to include the same cyclic restoration in the cycle of liturgical life.

And one aspect — how to build a relationship with the bishop, how to defend yourself in case of refusal of some diocesan obediences, so as not to fall under the ban. It was on a self-help level. As you understand, bishops very rarely seek psychological advice.

What pushes away from the Church

- I think it's neither. The fact that the presence of priests in social networks is monitored, “every word of yours can be used against you” is very relevant in the church environment. For many, this is the only way to openly discuss some of their opinions and doubts. It happens that this is spontaneous psychotherapy — mental stress is so great that you can throw it out either in something destructive, or under a pseudonym to speak out about sore.

Unfortunately, many priests do not even allow themselves to think about psychotherapy, it seems to them that if they turn to a psychotherapist, they will drop their authority as a priest. But it's a trap — to maintain his authority at the cost of his own health and life.

But when a circle of the same people gathers with the same problems, disappointments (and since we have one system, the disappointments are similar), often, instead of awareness and understanding, this leads to mutual induction of cynicism and depreciation. From a psychological point of view, it helps, but from a spiritual point of view - if this is not a transitional stage, but the final one - it can be harmful.

— I heard that Catholics in Poland have rehabilitation centers for alcoholic priests. And how do we treat a priest, for example, with alcohol addiction?

- The attitude is different. In our trainings for priests there is such an exercise: we find out what brings people to the Church and what repels them. In most of the groups I've worked with, the number one reason most often cited is — these are the sins of the shepherd. Priests themselves are aware of how their sins and addictions can have a devastating effect on parishioners. But what they realize among themselves, in a narrow circle, does not mean that in the presence of parishioners they do not deny these sins (a common position — this is a denial of the problem). In people with addictions, in principle, denial — a very common position, and all those who try to point out the problem fall into the category of enemies, spiteful critics, and are excluded from the social circle.

The attitude of parishioners is most often judgmental. There is a category for which this is an excuse for their own sins: here, our father is not a saint, but I — so God himself commanded. But the attitude that would help the priest cope with addiction is almost never found. Understanding is needed: not to be an aggressor for him, but also not to become a “rescuer”, which helps to remain in this position.

- In my opinion, the only way we have to "help" the priest is to send him to a ban for some time ...

“I've run into exceptions a few times. The real situation: the priest serves alone in a rural parish, a difficult family situation, he began to drink out of grief and anguish. At some point, he slips into alcoholism to such an extent that the parishioners begin to complain to the bishop. The bishop does not send him into a ban, but transfers him to the city church under the guidance of the rector, who has the skills of rehabilitation.

In one diocese, there was even a joke that this is our “rehabilitation church”. The rector there was spiritually respected, and helped to cope not only with addictions, but also pulled out of despair — such a psychologist from God. And the bishop adequately assessed that there is such a treasure in the diocese, and this can be used to help priests in difficult situations. And for a year or two, such a priest was appointed to this church, and when the rector said that such and such a father was in order, he could be released, the priest received a new appointment.

But, firstly, such people are needed in the diocese, and secondly, this is possible in small dioceses, where there is at least some personal relationship between the bishop and the priests.

- How would the parishioners answer this question: what repels them from the Church? In my opinion, not the sins of the priest, but rather, hypocrisy.

— I would name two reasons for parishioners: the first — hypocrisy, and the second - "went for love, but received violence." Followed the Gospel, followed the outward promises that "God is love", Christianity — it is the way of salvation, the way of drawing near to God. But when they came to the Church, people did not see this love. On the contrary, they were quickly explained that they themselves are so bad that they do not see it, they need to work on themselves, come to terms, correct themselves. And when people realized that they had become even more unhappy than they had been, that there was even less love now than there was before coming to the Church, this became one of the reasons for leaving, up to falling away from Christianity, from faith in God.

— And people see the personal sins of the priest, while listening to his flowery sermons, in which the priest exposes these same sins in others...

- Yes, this is the very hypocrisy that a mentally normal person cannot reconcile with, he develops cognitive dissonance. If a priest shows sins, but he struggles with them, repents (spiritual warfare is not only among the parishioners, but also among the priest) ... Here we can recall the story told by Metropolitan Anthony of Surozh, how he had to confess to a drunkard priest in his youth, and This confession changed his life. The priest so sincerely cried with him, so empathized, realizing his unworthiness ...

Despondency or depression, father or psychotherapist?

How can a person (whether a priest or a parishioner) understand that he has a spiritual life? A person can sometimes confuse spiritual life with some kind of self-psychotherapy, which helps to cope with neuroses and depression. For example, you didn’t receive communion for a long time, a certain internal discomfort appears - you go, take communion, and the balance is restored, you live on. And then again. And a person might think: maybe this has nothing to do with spiritual life at all, only a sequence of rituals that helps a neurotic person keep himself in relative harmony.

— I believe that you can understand by the fruits. As the apostle Paul wrote, the fruits of the spirit — it is peace, joy, long-suffering, mercy, meekness, abstinence... And if a person goes to church for many years, and the fruits of the spirit do not increase, but, on the contrary, decrease, then this is a reason to think that instead of spiritual life there is some kind of illusion.

If a person in the Church learns condemnation instead of love, if instead of joy he feels depression, instead of peace — anger, then what is the quality of his spiritual life?

What is the difference between the psychological approach and the spiritual approach? How to understand in which cases you need to fast, pray and humble yourself more, and in which cases you should go to a psychotherapist?

- It is necessary to notice this not only in yourself. A wise and tactful priest should notice this in the parishioners and advise them to turn to a specialist.

One of the signs: walking in circles — the same sins, passions, situations. And it seems that a person fights with them, fasts, prays, takes on feats, they impose penances on him, but nothing helps. This may be an indication that the problem lies not only in the spiritual plane, but rather in the psychological one, and without overcoming this problem it is impossible even to begin spiritual life.

Second sign — constant self-justification. Everyone is to blame, it's not my fault. A person's inability to take responsibility for their actions — this is one of the signs of neurosis.

The same sign can be anger, aggression, the feeling that there are enemies around, fear. The whole range of negative emotions that often accompanies psychological trauma and neurotic perception of reality.

The Church often offers a different answer: these are your sins, you must fight them. But if it is a neurosis, then it is better to deal with the neurosis, and then with those consequences of deep-seated passions that darken the spiritual life as well.

And finally, it is worth paying attention to the symptoms of psychopathology and mental illness. The same endogenous depressions, which should not be confused with despondency, — it is, in a sense, the same metabolic disorder as diabetes. Only the balance is disturbed not of those hormones that affect the body, but of neurotransmitters that affect consciousness, the nervous system. And if the level of serotonin and dopamine in a person has dropped, then, of course, the Lord can heal by a miracle, but the position of the Church, nevertheless, — Do not tempt the Lord and do not refuse medical assistance.

If the depressive state does not go away, it gets worse, if attempts to fight despondency become more and more despondent, if you absolutely want to limit your social circle, do nothing to the maximum, if you don’t have the strength to get up in the morning, comb your hair, brush your teeth, you should consult a doctor to select appropriate drugs. Or, if it is not depression, but there is another physiological disorder behind it, determine the cause of these problems. Such a condition, for example, may be in some diseases of the thyroid gland.

Our mental and physical states are connected, and what we perceive as sin, passion, sometimes has a medical reason.

Interviewed by Ksenia Smirnova

Reviews

• Search - 07.11.2018 23:52
  biomehanik writes here with skill, no need to accuse him of lack of spirituality. Perhaps he is a priest himself, and probably selfless and deeply fundamental in a good way. But I think that both points of view are legitimate. Yes, they have different reference points and coordinate systems. Not everyone can endure the hardships of the world at the same level as a biomechanic. I think the psychologist here also acts out of love for his neighbor and can sometimes provide first aid. God Bogovo, businessmen - training, and psychos - ambulance. And the Lord will judge.
• White Horvat - 16.07.2017 21:29
  Olga, a biomechanic, writes about her internal problems. He read Skuratovskaya's text superficially. Re-read the text again, and you will understand that the text is beautiful, and the abuse is completely empty and soulless.
• White Horvat - 16.07.2017 00:56
  Noble fury beats in the words of biomechanics. Is it good? "Holy of Holies of the Church" - priests? Where is this from? I have always believed that the Holy of Holies is the Body and Blood of Christ. On the whole, the text is inconsistent, internally contradictory and a little "quixotic" - the biomechanic is struggling with windmills.
• Olga - 07/09/2017 23:04
  At first, I really liked the article by N. Skuratovskaya and I almost believed her that it was all about the priests, and after reading the review of Biomechanics, I was convinced that it was about me. Thank you for the admonition and "deliver us from the evil one and lead us not into temptation"!
• biomechanic - 06.02.2017 20:12
  New apostles: we are ours, we will build a new world

  A short response to the article by Natalia Skuratovskaya "What we consider a sin sometimes has a medical reason."

  A priest who needed the help of a secular psychologist is no longer a priest. The priest has only one Comforter - God. All the rest are from the evil one.

  If a priest cannot help himself, then he cannot help his parishioners in any way, and the price for him, as a shepherd, is a broken penny. If a priest comes for a consultation with a psychologist, it means that he himself, of his own free will, has renounced the Holy Spirit, the clergy handed down to him by Apostolic succession. To talk about the priesthood in isolation from the Holy Spirit and the succession of the hierarchy means either not fully understanding the essence of the issue, or cunningly leading it towards worldly simplification, where all the patterns of a society mired in sin can be easily applied to the priesthood. What in itself is very attractive to the world is to tarnish the priesthood with the label "one of us." Psychology and everything connected with it is one of such ways to reduce the role of the Church to another “service sphere”, replacing God with its postulates.

  Psychology, as a science, is an absolutely insignificant human doctrine, which is the fruit of purely mental conjectures and artificial methods of recent times. For thousands of years, humanity has existed without psychologists, turning to God for the healing of the soul and body. And then suddenly, almost the day before yesterday, it turned out that life without psychologists and psychoanalysts is impossible in principle, and the priests themselves urgently need specialists of this kind of very intimate services. What else can they be called?

  And if only a confessor... So also a "coach". Who are we talking about, horses? They are trained, I agree. And people, generally speaking, are trained. But doesn’t the “training” offered by the author for clergymen look too much like various express business courses with the so-called. "cases" - homemade template examples for memorization and subsequent "application in practice"?

  Noteworthy is the mention of holiness. To talk about the “level of holiness and insight” of a priest, which, according to the author, the parishioners are looking for in a priest, means to totally not understand the meaning of holiness. THERE ARE NO SAINTS AMONG THE LIVING PEOPLE. The living can only be righteous, but not saints. Only the living God is One Holy in the Most Holy Trinity.

  Holiness is, first of all, God's recognition of a righteous life lived by a person or his martyrdom for the sake of faith. And only then - the Church. Elevation to the saints without the will of God and during life is a sin. Priests are spiritual fathers, but not holy fathers. The author of the article has a deuce for an unlearned lesson!

  About the "strong priest". To admit that you don't know everything is not strength, but a statement of fact. There is nothing strong about it. For no one knows everything, no matter how burdened he may be with scientific degrees and all kinds of ranks and titles. The strength of a priest is not in his omniscience, but in the strength of his faith and his fidelity to God. The strength of a priest is in the tears of his parishioners during the service, when the soul yearns for God from his words and the singing of the choir. The strength of a priest lies in the fact that a person humbly and in reverence kneels before his Creator when he proclaims: “We thank the Lord worthy!”, even if everyone around is standing with their hands behind their backs. The strength of a priest is to give confession before communion to EVERYONE who came to God for confession and communion - even if this significantly increases the duration of the liturgy - because he fulfills his duty to God and to people. The strength of a priest is to give a person a blessing for a charitable deed, even if he is rejected by everyone, and to allow him to kiss his hand - for through it the parishioner kisses the hand of God. The strength of a priest lies in the fact that by his service he reveals the very secrets of a person's soul and elevates him to God. That's what the priesthood is for.

  But this power is not available to those who look at the Church as another “clearing ground” for starting a profitable business and those who visit the Church “just in case”. For them, the priest is the subject of close attention in order to discover something in him that can be criticized, ridiculed, and slandered. It doesn't matter where - on some garbage forum on the net or in a "respectable magazine for specialists." And if it burns out, then earn extra money on it.

  A few words about the misunderstanding of love - both by the author and those characters who "searched for it in the Church." All the same consumer infantilism. Can a person who has not found love in himself see it in others? Has God endowed some with his Love more than others - so much so that you have to hiccup it somewhere except in yourself, in your heart? And not having found, but rather, without making the slightest effort for this, yelling with all your might and on every corner and scattering leaflets: “I was deceived!” And you can clearly hear in this offended cry all the same raking "GIVE!" The church and the path to God is work on oneself, and not a place for free distribution of kisses and hugs. Did the author and the "goers" defended by her confuse the Orthodox Church with a charismatic sect?

  And the priest is not always obliged to exude love. Sometimes it is necessary to remind the sinner of his debts to the Almighty. About the coming Judgment and the fear of God. One mention of the Court should cause awe. But man does not know the fear of God and instead chooses to continue sinning. And what? He condemns the priest. Instead of repentance, there is a new sin, which the author obligingly covers up with the “subtly noticed” insufficient psychological preparedness of the priest and his supposedly flawed personal qualities. And are they the point?

  A superficial glance glides over the outside without penetrating deep...

  Forgetting about the beam in his own eye, the parishioner, dissatisfied with the priest, is looking for and will definitely find a lot of shortcomings and sins in the priest - both real and imaginary. But does it make sense? Everyone is responsible before God only for their sins. Nodding at the priest to justify one's inaction in relation to one's sins at the Judgment of God will not work. And let it be known to any jealous appraiser of the servants of God who reads these lines, that in addition to the commandments of the Lord common to all, for ALL members of the Church there are also the Rules of the Apostles (http://lib.pravmir.ru/library/readbook/1311#part_13887). There are 85 of them. They regulate relations within the Church itself and external relations between the Church and the world. The rules of the Apostles apply to bishops, and to priests, and to all other servants of the Church, as well as to Orthodox laity - including those who “walk” into the Church. Breaking these rules is also a sin.

  It is wrong to identify a priest with the Church and God. A priest is first and foremost a person. And by nature he is as sinful as the parishioner. And yet, the priest differs from the parishioner - in the Church (including outside the temple) it is he who represents God - according to the right given to him for this, according to the succession from the Apostles themselves. He may not be liked, he may even be antipathetic. But the priest is not the whole Church, and even more so, not God. To identify a priest with the entire Holy Church and to transfer one's attitude towards him to it means to think at the level of a plinth. But this is exactly what the “mentally normal person” thinks in the article of the author, about whom she cares so much and for whom all this psychological pseudo-Orthodox fuss is started, who in essence is a spiritual sloth who comes to the Church to please his many-sided consumer greed.

  The author has a too simplified approach to repentance, very far from the truly Orthodox. Especially for abortion. Repentance cannot be replaced by even the most kind deeds. This is what the holy fathers of the Church say, whose prayers, apparently due to the great employment in training seminarians, the author did not have time to get to, although it is with them that the day of every truly Orthodox person begins: “Let faith instead of deeds be imputed to me. My God, do not bring about deeds that by no means justify me. But let that faith of mine prevail in place of all, let that one answer, that one justify me, that one show me a partaker of Your eternal glory. And where there is faith, there is repentance. There is no Orthodox faith without repentance.

  God only accepts repentance. Otherwise, any sin could be smeared with “good deeds,” or even simply “smeared off” with a generous sacrifice. Human standards are not applicable to God and His Court. God does not bargain. Repentance, as something one-time and not too burdensome, so as not to “strengthen the destructive feeling of guilt,” is not good. "Destructive guilt" is a crafty Jesuit fabrication of a thinking theorist who is not even close to repentance.

  Abortion is a grave crime before God, and hoping for an easy deliverance from this sin is frivolous and very dangerous for the salvation of the soul naivety. Only God Himself can free a person from the sin of abortion. Personally. And only God will let the penitent about His forgiveness of the sin of abortion, the sinner-child killer, and they include both the woman-"mother" and the man-"father", as well as everyone who participated and assisted in the abortion, including the so-called "doctors who had an abortion. GOD and NOBODY else. And if for this it will be necessary to repent of burning tears and snot every day throughout life, then this is the will of God. There is no other way to forgiveness. The same one, as if merciful, will give you the mind to know His will. (Canon of repentance to our Lord Jesus Christ).

  Although, however, the author has his own version of the “solution of the issue”, which is happily accepted by the sinful society, mired in abortions – why tear yourself up in repentance, destroying yourself with “destructive guilt”, if “deeds” can fix everything. And then sin again and “correct” again. Will not work.

  It is criminal to replace Orthodox prayers and patristic penitential canons, not to mention the Gospel, with homegrown advice from a housewife with a “psychological” bias (or even a diploma). To confuse seminarians and readers means to push them from the path of God's commandments to the path of crafty wisdom and sin.

  About redemption. Conscience is not a salesman. Conscience is the voice of God in man. And not everything can be redeemed. And what can be redeemed, as a rule, is redeemed by blood. And, exclusively OWN. As did Christ Himself. If the author has in mind in his article and advises his readers and clients during consultations, it is in this spirit to redeem that “what needs to be redeemed” - i.e. to atone for their sins with blood, then the question arises, and who is the adviser? If these reasonings are frank trade with God (I give you good deeds, and You give me remission of sins), then they are insignificant and sinful.

  About mistakes. Whether we can correct a mistake by sinning against a person, or we can no longer correct anything - of course, it is important. But it's not just about "correcting a bug". If the author means by “fix” - to return to the place taken without asking, to glue the broken, to ask the person for forgiveness for the offense, then this is catastrophically insufficient.

  Although quite enough for a psychologist. Having convinced the person that he will die without him, it is then important for the psychologist to convince the client that not everything is as bad as it seems to him, that he himself is not so bad, despite all his folly and committed lawlessness. What is enough according to a certain "author's method" TO FORGIVE YOURSELF, and not blame yourself - so as not to fall out of the "clip of life" and continue your victorious march to the "tops of success and prosperity".

  And if you look more closely at what psychology does with a person, then you can, without digging too deeply, see that it gives him what he WANTS TO HEAR. Psychology is a prostitute of society.

  Unfortunately, it also penetrated into the Orthodox Church. And, judging by the article in question, they use her services, with the connivance of church authorities, none other than seminarians, future priests, and maybe already serving in parishes - confessors of repentant sinners coming before God. About 400 years ago, such priests, in the best case for them, would have been anathematized for apostasy, excommunicated and exiled forever to where even now a person can live only on a rotational basis - with all the achievements of civilization. I will keep silent about the worst options so as not to cause any non-positive "dissonance" in the reader - cognitive or worse.

  The services of a psychologist are a temptation for a priest. God tempts in different ways to strengthen in faith. And so too. And at the same time, this is a temptation for the psychologist himself - God gives him a chance to make the right decision and the opportunity to stop in time. This is how the Providence of God works - the test of choice. Everyone has their limits. The Church is the Body of Christ and there is no place in it for mental fabrications according to memorized scenarios. In the Church, as nowhere else, a person feels his unity with God – with his heart and with all his soul. And for this, man and God do not need any psychological tricks: the Creator and creation are one.

  And with regards to the correction of mistakes by atonement ... Committing any sin against his neighbor, a person first of all sins against God and all of Heaven. Any sin, no matter how it manifests itself, is ungratefulness to the Creator. Therefore, it is NOT enough for people to “correct” and “ask for forgiveness” - one must REPENT TO GOD and beg for forgiveness from HIM. Instead of lying on the psychoanalyst's couch, through a sweet slumber, listening to lulling tales so dear to him about the "healing self-forgiveness." The easy paths lead only to hell.

  Any professional psychologist is, first of all, a KOMMERSANT with his well-established practice - an office, clientele, a marketing plan and methods for increasing clientele, i.e. money making machine. In psychology, you won’t be able to make money if you tell the client the truth about him, which, in addition to everything, you still need to be able to see. But usually a superficial view, limited by templates - taken from textbooks or concocted in conceited self-admiration, does not allow one to see the truth that lies on the surface. As a result, the word spoken by the psychologist to the client is a lie. For there is no God in it. And if there is, it is only to justify the "psychological method". For cover. What we are seeing...

  It is impossible to serve two masters at the same time - both God and mammon. Thus, by psychology, a person is led astray from the true path - you know where.

  And the idea expressed in the article that “a wise and tactful priest”, who noticed troubles among his parishioners, should “advise them to turn to a specialist” (in the sense, to a psychologist) is an undisguised assertion of the author about the impotence of God and the omnipotence of a psychologist. Isn't it absurd? Slyly philosophizing in his office, rented in a business incubator, the "specialist" turns out to be stronger than God - he can heal the soul, and at the same time the body of a person, because they are inseparably linked during his lifetime, by some of his own methods, usually copyrighted, and from this is not as cheap as a free confession before the Creator, which relieves the soul from filth and gives healing to the body. But the filth of the soul is not a psychological or commercial concept. Tears of repentance are also rare in psychological practice. But arguments about cognitive dissonance, endogenous depressions and other highly wise nonsense, in the definition of which the “specialists” themselves are confused, are a frequent guest in their reasoning: before someone is brainwashed, they must be thoroughly powdered.

  Just don't take everyone but yourself as idiots. What is the value of this quoted paragraph, in which the author advises the priest how to behave with the parishioner: “Finally, it is worth paying attention to the symptoms of psychopathology and mental illness. Those endogenous depressions, which should not be confused with despondency, are, in a sense, the same metabolic disorder as diabetes. Only the balance is disturbed not of those hormones that affect the body, but of neurotransmitters that affect consciousness, the nervous system. And if the level of serotonin and dopamine in a person has dropped, then, of course, the Lord can heal by a miracle, but the position of the Church, nevertheless, is not to tempt the Lord and not to refuse medical help.

  As I understand it, before confession, now the priest must measure the level of serotonin and dopamine in the penitent to see if it has fallen, and to be sure, ask him to bring more urine and stool tests with him - you never know ...

  Let me gently remind the respected author that it is not the Lord who is tempted by man. This is absolute nonsense. Creation cannot tempt the Creator. Personally, I am strongly tempted to question the author's bold assertion about any of her involvement in Orthodoxy. Because one must try very hard to forget the prayer “Our Father”, given to mankind by Christ, which clearly says: “and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one.” Is it not because it is forgotten that it is about the evil one? And I very much doubt that the position of the Church - no matter on what issue - can sound in the context of "do not tempt the Lord." Such blunders are unforgivable for someone who undertook to teach the Orthodox priesthood to reason.

  To train a priest with psychological methods means to distort the essence of his ministry. Psychology and all its techniques, including Jesuit NLP techniques, operate from the mind. The priest is from the heart. Sin is born in the mind, but not in the heart of man. You can't connect the unconnected. A priest cannot be a psychologist in the sense that society puts into this word. The priest is the shepherd leading to the Savior through repentance. His calling is to bring the Word of God to the heart of a person, but not to tempt his mind with crafty ornate sophistication gleaned from psychological workshops and cases born in the wombs of business centers.

  And, finally, about the main thing. Think about the title of the article, which reads: “What we think is a sin sometimes has a medical reason.” WHAT IS THIS?! If you have not understood until now, then this is the author's programmatic statement about the revision of the Gospel and the denial of the truth of the Word of God. Which of the Orthodox - real, and not mummers, can decide on such a thing? Isn't it madness?.. As Jesus showed during his earthly ministry, ANY illness is a CONSEQUENCE of human SIN. ANY. With no exceptions. Nothing happens to a person outside the will of God. Isn't it for this that the Lord healed the crippled and the hopelessly sick, and raised the dead - so that a person would understand the destructiveness of sin and the omnipotence of the Heavenly Father? And is it not for this that, through the grace of the Holy Spirit, he gave the ability to heal diseases to his Apostles? Isn't that why He went up to the Cross?

  Another view of an Orthodox person on this issue takes him beyond the limits of Orthodoxy. After such a title, everything written by the author in the article can be called only one word - HERESY.

  A separate question is for the administrators of those Orthodox resources where such a heresy is published: what god do you serve? It does not interfere with delving into the meaning of at least the HEADINGS of the articles proposed for publication.

  Even a cursory acquaintance with other "works" of Natalia Skuratovskaya causes a persistent feeling of their transcendental "toxicity" - to use her own terminology. Those. poisoning, or rather, undermining and destroying the Orthodox Church. Again, its very foundation is the priesthood. The far-fetched and stereotyped problems of the Church and the “methods” of their solution, sucked from the finger (this is the most decent thing that comes to mind), mixed up on an equally superficial - purely rational, mental, but very often covered with quotations from the patristic heritage and for persuasiveness theological terminology - understanding the essence of Orthodoxy and spiced with a good portion of pride and vanity, and in addition a poorly concealed hostile attitude towards the Holy Orthodox Church, expressed in disdain for the priesthood, cause irreparable harm to the servants of the Church and Orthodox laity, who accepted all this pseudo-learned Jesuit godless "anti-sectarian" bullshit at face value.

  Not a single priest will be able to help him without his own work on his sins of a parishioner - even "from scratch" grown from a test tube in a business incubator according to the method of Natalia Skuratovskaya. God must be sought not in a temple, and not in some elusive "sharp-sighted" priest, in search of which many half their lives travel all over Russia, like pagans looking for a new idol for themselves. God must be sought IN YOURSELF, in your heart, but not in your mind. He is not hiding and never was hiding from a person. God is everywhere - the whole world is God. And there is no need for intermediaries between God and man. God will answer any question of His creation, seeking Him, and will help solve any problem - for those who not only pray, but also wait and hope to hear the answer from Him. The Temple of God is a place where a person, with the help of God and his Guardian Angel, who has ALREADY done the proper spiritual and prayerful repentant work on himself, can, having sworn allegiance to God on the Gospel and on the Cross, sincerely confess his sins with the intention not to sin anymore and receive their remission. through ANY priest, according to the right given by God, and partake of the Holy Gifts of eternal life. A priest is only a helper from God, but a worker to correct his sinful life is a man himself.

  ***
  Too sweet a piece of the pie for many - to impose their furry paw, clawed paw or even a delicate paw with a manicure on glued claws on the Holy Orthodox Church, the priesthood and parishioners. And the entry point was found - psychological consultations. Slowly and gradually, through the parishioners, the accompanying secular structures, powerful secular and church offices, the tentacles of society sticky with greed, finally stuck to the holy of holies of the Church - to the priests - the bearers of the Apostolic succession. And with saliva on their lips aggressively and “reasonedly” – on tables and flowcharts, they are now proving their right to tell those who have been entrusted by God with the secret of confession and the absolution of sins, how to confess the penitent.

  Are these new apostles? .. It is quite possible. But who is their god?

• White Horvat - 25.10.2016 20:23
  "We need to have less fear and more sincerity in the inner world."
  Here it is, the very word.

Your feedback
Fields marked with an asterisk must be filled in.