What does the Servant of God mean?
Slavery to God is, in a broad sense, loyalty to Divine will, as opposed to slavery to sin.
In a narrower sense, the state of voluntary submission to the Divine will for the sake of fear of punishment, as the first of the three degrees of faith (along with the mercenary and the son). The Holy Fathers distinguish three levels of submission of their will to God - a slave who obeys Him out of fear of punishment; a mercenary working for pay; and a son who is guided by love for the Father. The son's condition is the most perfect. According to St. Apostle John the Theologian: “There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear, because there is torment in fear. He who fears is imperfect in love ”(1 John 4:18).
Christ does not call us slaves: “You are my friends if you do what I command you. I no longer call you slaves, for a slave does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends ... ”(John 15: 14-15). But we speak of ourselves in this way, meaning the voluntary coordination of our will with His good will, because we know that the Lord is alien to all evil and unrighteousness and His good will leads us to blessed eternity. That is, the fear of God for Christians is not an animal fear, but a sacred awe before the Creator.
All confusion with this phrase comes from ignorance of God. It is terrible to be a slave to a tyrant, but we have no one closer and dearer to God. God is the source of life, truth, love, truth, all virtues. Slavery presupposes work, work, and in the context of relations with God - cooperation, because God is self-sufficient, he does not need our work. Is it humiliating to be, in this understanding, a slave of Love, a slave of Truth, a slave of Mercy, a slave of Wisdom; a slave of the One who voluntarily ascended to the Cross for the sake of His Creation?
The fact is that our spoken language is very different from the language of Holy Scripture, and such a concept as "God's servant" came to us from the Bible, moreover, from the most ancient part of it, which is called the "Old Testament". In the Old Testament, "servant of God" is the title of the kings and prophets of Israel. Calling themselves "servants of God", the kings and prophets of Israel thereby testified that they are no longer subject to anyone, they do not recognize anyone else's power over themselves except the power of God - they are His servants, they have their own special mission in the world. There is such a parable in the Gospel: about the evil winegrowers. It tells how the master planted a vineyard, encouraged the workers to work in this vineyard, cultivate it, and every year he sent his slaves to them so that they could look at the work and take accountability. The workers of the vineyard drove these slaves away, then he sent his son to them, they killed the son, and after that the lord of the vineyard is already passing his judgment. So - pay attention - it is not slaves who work in the vineyard, but hired workers, and the slaves represent the master - they are his confidants, they communicate the will of the master to the workers. These slaves were the prophets of Israel, who communicated the will of God to the people. Through the prophets, God himself spoke to people. Therefore, "servant of God" is a very high title, which indicated a special relationship between God and man, a special spiritual status of man.
In the New Testament, the title "servant of God" became more widespread, every Christian, every baptized person began to call himself a servant of God, and this is indeed shocking for many people. But in our minds, a slave is such a powerless creature chained in chains, and people say - we do not want to call ourselves slaves, we are free citizens, yes, we are believers, but we do not agree to call ourselves slaves! If you think about it, then it is simply impossible to be a slave of God in the sense in which we imagine slavery, because slavery is violence against a human person, but God does not force anyone to do anything.
After all, the very idea that God can forcefully subjugate someone is absurd, because it would contradict God's plan for man. After all, God created man completely free and man wants - believes in God, wants - does not believe in God, wants - loves God, wants - does not love God, wants - does what God tells him, but wants - does not do what God speaks to him. Remember, in the parable of the prodigal son, the son comes up to his father and says to him: "Give me the due part of my inheritance, and I will leave you." And the father does not interfere, he gives the part of the inheritance that was put to the youngest son and he leaves. And today, as at all times, the mass of people turns away from God and leaves him, and God does not force them to be with Him in any way, He does not punish them for this in any way.
He carefully treats human freedom, so what kind of slavery can we talk about here at all? The one who really enslaves man is the devil. A person is enslaved by sin and, once falling into the orbit of the attraction of evil, it is difficult for a person to get out of this vicious circle. We know, everyone knows from his own life - how difficult it is to overcome sin. And you repent of him, you bring repentance, you understand that this sin interferes with your life, that it brings you suffering, but a person does not always succeed in breaking out of these claws of the devil. Only with the help of God. Only the grace of God can pull a person out of the power of sin.
Here I will give an example. Of course, this example is extreme, but it is clear to everyone. Look at a drug addict - after all, he would be glad to become a healthy person, he understands that this disease leads him to suffering, leads him to an early death, but he cannot do anything! This is a real slave, chained hand and foot, not his will, he does the will of his master, he does the will of his master, he does the will of the devil. And in this sense, look, a person can easily leave God when he wants to and God does not interfere with him, but to escape from the devil can be very, very difficult!
Of course, the title "servant of God" is used only in the sacramental life of the Church, in such simple human communication we do not call each other servants of God. For example, at the service I do not say to my altar boy: “Servant of God Vladimir, give me a censer,” I just call him by name. But when the Church Sacraments are performed, then we add this title "servant of God". For example, “a servant of God is baptized such that”, “a servant of God such that is receiving communion”. Or a prayer for health, or for peace - the title "servant of God" is also added before the name. And in this case, the servant of God is evidence of this person's faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and his intention to do what God commands, because without a person's faith and without his intention to follow what the Lord tells him, any Sacrament will be profaned.
But what is also important to understand - the servant of God does not reflect the essence of our relationship with God, because through the Incarnation God became a man, He became one of us, He called us his brothers, moreover, He says: “I don’t call you slaves anymore , I call you my friends. " Christ taught us to address God as the Father - "Our Father", "Our Father" - we say in prayer. And between family members there is a commitment to each other and, as children of God, we show our love for our Heavenly Father by serving Him, fulfilling His commandments. As the Lord Himself said about it: "If you love Me, then you will keep My commandments!" A servant of God means a servant of God. And since in the New Testament God revealed himself as Love, as Truth, as Freedom, then a person who dares to call himself a "servant of God" must understand that this obliges him to be not a servant of the devil, not a slave of sin, but a servant of love, truth and freedom.
Written specially for the reference and information portal "Vozglas" vozglas.ru
I. Kramskoy. Christ in the wilderness. Painting of 1872.
I thought, why, calling ourselves "servants of God," in the prayer "Our Father," we turn to God as to the Father?
Weird? So we are the slaves of the master of the world - God or is it still His ... children, in the sacred reality of the Lord's prayer?
In the ancient Church, “already Clement of Alexandria (+215), influenced by the ideas of the Stoics about universal equality, believed that in their virtues and appearance, slaves were no different from their masters. From this he concluded that Christians should reduce the number of their slaves and some work do it yourself. Lactantius (+320), who formulated the thesis of the equality of all people, demanded that Christian communities recognize marriage among slaves. And the Roman bishop Calistus I (+222), who himself came out of the class of unfree people, even recognized the relationship between high-ranking women - Christians and slaves, freedmen and freeborns as full-fledged marriages. In the Christian environment, the emancipation of slaves has been practiced since the time of the primitive Church, as is evident from the admonition of Ignatius of Antioch (+107) to Christians not to abuse freedom for unworthy purposes. However, the legal and social foundations of the division into free and slave remain unshakable. Constantine the Great (+337) does not violate them either, who, undoubtedly, under the influence of Christianity, gives the bishops the right to free slaves by means of the so-called announcement in the church (manumissio in ecclesia) and publishes a number of laws that facilitate the plight of slaves. In the 4th century, the problem of bondage is actively discussed among Christian theologians. So the Cappadocians - Basil, Archbishop of Caesarea (+379), Gregory Nazianzus (+389), and later John Chrysostom (+407), relying on the Bible, and perhaps on the teachings of the Stoics about natural law, express an opinion about a paradise reality, where equality reigned, which due to the fall of Adam ... was replaced by various forms of human dependence. And although these bishops did a lot in order to alleviate the plight of slaves in everyday life, they vigorously opposed the general elimination of slavery, which was important for the economic and social structure of the empire. Theodorite of Kirsky (+466) even argued that slaves have a more guaranteed existence than the father of a family, who is burdened with worries about the family, servants and property. And only Gregory of Nyssa (+395) opposes any form of human enslavement, since it not only tramples on the natural freedom of all people, but also ignores the saving work of the Son of God ... In the West, under the influence of Aristotle, the Bishop of Mediollan Ambrose (+397) justifies legitimate slavery, emphasizing the intellectual superiority of the masters, and advises those who, as a result of war or accident, unjustly fell into slavery, to use their position to test virtue and faith in God. Augustine (+430) was also far from the idea of challenging the legitimacy of slavery, for God does not free slaves, but makes bad slaves good. He sees the biblical and theological substantiation of his views in the personal sin of Ham against his father Noah, because of which all mankind is condemned to slavery, but this punishment is at the same time a healing remedy. At the same time, Augustine also refers to the teaching of the Apostle Paul about the sin to which everyone is subject. In the 19th book of his treatise On the City of God, he paints an ideal image of human community in the family and state, where slavery takes its place and corresponds to the plan of God's creation, the earthly order and the natural difference between people "(Theologische Realenzyklopaedie. Band 31. Berlin - New-York, 2000. S. 379-380).
“Slavery appears with the development of agriculture about 10,000 years ago. People began to use captives in agricultural work and forced them to work for themselves. In early civilizations, captives long remained the main source of slavery. Another source was criminals or people who could not pay their debts. Slaves as a lower class are first reported in written records of the Sumerian civilization and Mesopotamia about 3,500 years ago. Slavery existed in Assyria, Babylonia, Egypt, and ancient societies in the Middle East. It was also practiced in China and India, as well as among Africans and Indians in America. The growth of industry and trade contributed to an even more intensive spread of slavery. There was a demand for a labor force that could produce goods for export. And therefore, slavery reached its peak in the Greek states and the Roman Empire. The slaves performed the main work here. Most of them worked in mines, handicrafts or agriculture. Others were used in the household as servants and sometimes as doctors or poets. About 400 BC. slaves made up a third of the population of Athens. In Rome, slavery was so widespread that even ordinary people had slaves. In the ancient world, slavery was perceived as a natural law of life that has always existed. And only a few writers and influential people saw evil and injustice in him "(The World Book Encyclopedia. London-Sydney-Chicago, 1994. P. 480-481. Efron I. A. Encyclopedic Dictionary. T. 51. Terra, 1992. S. 35-51).
AND Who Needs Slaves ... P II already considered this issue, but rather as an alternative view of the traditional understanding of these sacred relationships (man and God).
In fact, today the question is posed on a fundamentally different plane and a different historical retrospection.
So, I will try to figure it out (although I do not pretend to be the final solution to this problem, especially since the ancient tradition (which has a completely rational explanation) is much stronger than common sense), especially since some ancient phrases of the Church become so authentic for them "carriers" (installed in the mentality) that simply lose their historical retrospectiveness (and in reality just lose the meaning of what they meant in the past).
The fact is that the word "servant of God" dates back to the times of the so-called slave system (period) of human history. Indeed, those researchers who say that in those distant times the word "slave" simply did not have the negative connotation that it assumed in the New history of mankind (Age of Enlightenment + humanistic movement of the Renaissance) are right. Note that the Renaissance was return to the “roots” (all the favorite renaissance antitheses between “darkness” and “light”, “sleep” and “awakening,” “blindness” and knowledge, " strange, from the Holy Scriptures. ”And the very term“ Rebirth ”, by analogy with birth, enlightenment, awakening, - the thinkers of that time deduced from the Gospel conversation of the Lord Jesus Christ with Nicodemus:“ Jesus answered him: truly, truly, I say to you: if someone is not born (according to one version "Will be reborn" from above), cannot see the Kingdom of God. " (John 3; 3)
It is clear that due to elementary conservatism and a certain archaism of religious forms of divine knowledge + cult practice, an intellectual confrontation arose between the thinkers of the Enlightenment and clericals. It is necessary to clearly realize that then there was a REALLY clerical society + worldview that determined absolutely all forms and meanings of human life, elementary life. It is natural that the princes of the Church (as a rule, the most powerful and richest people of that time) saw in this movement not only an encroachment on the "God-established", centuries-old world order + personal wallet, but also an intellectual temptation to raise a Man to an "Olympic" pedestal. The second topic was thought by the most powerful intellectuals of the Church. Historically, their fears came true with ... absolute accuracy (but that's another topic).
I'll be back. Let's not forget that in those days, with secular-feudal fragmentation, the pivot that cemented the Western Empire was the Catholic Church. Subsequently, it was thanks to this fact that a powerful ecclesiastical force arose, giving birth to the papacy = the governorship of God on earth (in the slave-owning period) as an institution of the Church. If you will allow, this was a unique model of power over people and an absolute social relation - a slave and a sovereign Master (a kind of earthly god who has full power to execute and have mercy). One figure of Gregory VII (although I have a certain respect for him), his reforms (celibacy, destruction of simony, centralization of power, etc.) and the struggle for investiture with Emperor Henry IV, which ended in the defeat of the latter ( Henry IV brought repentance at Cannos in rags), cannot but cause amazement in front of this amazing, but in spirit, antagonistic phenomenon - the entry of the Church in all its volume into the world. At the behest of the Pope, whole nations, accepting the sword and cross, fight against those whom the Pope points to. " I am the emperor myself"- finished his speech in 1300, Pope Boniface VIII, who appeared at the celebration in imperial vestments, where two swords were carried in front of him as a sign of his spiritual and secular domination over the universe. In the 13th century and later, the popes not only handed out royal crowns to those they considered most worthy, but also interfered in the internal politics of independent states, deposed kings and emperors. And even allowed their subjects from the oath given to the kings.
At the same time, the objective contradiction inherent in Christianity itself could not but manifest itself in these historical conditions with all its strength. It is about "a fundamental instability between the Church and the world, between the kingdom of God and fallen man." The Church enters the world, historically dwells in it, but Itself is not of the world. The Church always speaks about the future parousia (that is, about Eschaton, the global liberation of man from real slavery), testifies to the deified, free in Christ humanity. The Church is in the world, but overcomes the world, which has always been felt by the most religiously sensitive souls (elders, confessors, mystics and ascetics). When you read about how the leaders of the Renaissance and Enlightenment eras troll the Catholic Church, you understand that they had very serious and real reasons for this (although criticism of the Roman clergy began much earlier). “The priests kept butchers, taverns, gambling houses and brothels, so that they had to repeatedly issue decrees forbidding priests“ to become pimps of prostitutes for the sake of money, ”but all in vain. The nuns read The Decameron and indulge in orgies, and in the dirty drains they find children's skeletons as a consequence of these orgies. The writers of that time compared monasteries with either robber nativity scenes, or with obscene houses. Thousands of monks and nuns live outside the monastery walls. What can we say about monks, when people like Pope Alexander VI, being a cardinal, had four illegitimate children from the Roman woman Vannozi, and a year before his accession to the papal throne, already being 60 years old, he entered into cohabitation with 17-year-old Julia Farnese, from whom he soon had a daughter, Laura. Pope Pius II, and Pope Paul III, and Pope Innocent VIII, and Pope Julius, and Pope Paul III also had illegitimate children; Moreover, it is interesting that they are all humanist popes, famous patrons of the Renaissance arts and sciences. Pope Clement VII was himself the illegitimate son of Giuliano Medici. Many cardinals maintained a relationship with the famous courtesan of the Empire, which Raphael portrayed on his Parnassus at the Vatican. Moral corruption at this time reached appalling proportions. In 1490 there were 6,800 prostitutes in Rome, and in Venice in 1509 there were 11,000. In Germany, this craft began to be practiced at the age of 12. At this time, palmistry, physiognomy, witchcraft, Satanism, occultism, astrology bloom in a magnificent color. When in the 16th century the Medici restored their rule in Florence (this cradle of the Renaissance), their entire further history was marked by murders, conspiracies, atrocities. The son of Pope Caesar Borgia was especially famous among them for some kind of absolute Satanism. On his conscience is a huge number of brutally tortured souls "(AF Losev" Aesthetics of the Renaissance "M. 1998." Thought ". Pp. 122-136)
"Servant of God"
Biblical-textual word "servant of God" dates back to the time of the exodus from Egypt. As Andrei Okhotsimsky rightly notes: “In Leviticus 25:55, the Lord says about the children of Israel:“ They are my servants, whom I brought out of the land of Egypt. ” dependence on God, but also about liberation from human slavery: they were slaves of the Egyptians - now only My slaves. "
This is a fundamental moment... If you will, God speaks to the people of that slave time, when another semantic verbalization would simply not be understood. As it would not be clear, the appeal of a modern preacher to modern people (for example, Christ who has not yet appeared to the world) with the words: "Listen to me! Slaves ...". There is a grain of reason in this. Remember how aggressively (in terms of worldview) simple Meanings leaders of the Ages of humanism and enlightenment and you will understand everything. Now, it is somewhat difficult to realize that over these simple and now self-evident words: about the meaning and meaning of man, so many foreheads were beating
And then, Christ was crucified for a man! Man is a value in the eyes of God. Moreover, so serious that it was not without the shedding of divine blood.
"The prophet Nehemiah calls the Israelites servants of God in his prayer (Neh. 1:10), which again is dedicated to deliverance - this time from the Babylonian captivity. Prophets are also called servants of God (2 Kings 24: 2), and from the context it is clear, that this emphasizes their independence from the secular authorities. The Psalmist repeatedly calls himself the servant of God (Psalm 115: 7, 118, 134). In the book of the prophet Isaiah, the Lord says to Israel: "You are my servant. I have chosen you and will not reject you." (Isaiah 41: 9).
The apostles call themselves servants of God (or Christ) (Rom. 1: 1, 2 Peter 1: 1, James 1: 1, Jude 1: 1), and this sounds like an honorary title, a sign of being chosen and apostolic powers. The Apostle Paul calls all believing Christians servants of God. Christians are “freed from sin and become slaves to God” (Rom. 6:22), they will have “freedom of glory” (Rom. 8:21) and “eternal life” (Rom. 6:22). For the Apostle Paul, slavery to God is synonymous with liberation from the power of sin and death, "continues Andrei Okhotsimsky (see http://www.vladhram-uspenie.ru/ "Servant of God - why" slave "?).
It is interesting in this sense to quote the great Saint. Theophan the Recluse: “Slavery in the ancient world was widespread. St. Paul did not rebuild civil life, but changed human mores. And so he takes the civil order as it is, and instills in them a new spirit of life. He leaves the external as it was established, but turns to the internal, and gives it a new order. The transformation of the external proceeded from within, as a consequence of the free development of spiritual life. Remake the inner, and the outer, if it is absurd, will fall away by itself ”(St. Theophan the Recluse. Interpretation of the Epistle of St. Paul to the Ephesians. Moscow, 1893.)
So, we can draw several preliminary conclusions (it is clear that the zealots will not like these conclusions at all, but I already wrote above about the fundamental inability of some people to common sense + see ... History) that:
a) the phrase "servant of God" was used in the slave-owning period (archaic), as understood by the ear of the then man.
b) the phrase "servant of God" is authentic only for the slave system and its social and legal system.
c) today's use of the phrase "servant of God" is a tribute to a tradition that has no real socio-cultural and state-legal basis. It is not even a symbol, since the symbol nevertheless reflects the reality hidden behind it.
G) since in the modern world slavery has an extremely negative, demonic-semantic connotation, its use (albeit under the "pious" roof of the "divine" tradition) can be: 1) authentic only for followers of the slave mentality; 2) simplified, in the absence of sociocultural soil + general social mental model of a modern man.
(to be continued...)
In the ancient Church, “already Clement of Alexandria (+215), influenced by the ideas of the Stoics about universal equality, believed that in their virtues and appearance, slaves were no different from their masters. From this he concluded that Christians should reduce the number of their slaves and some work do it yourself. Lactantius (+320), who formulated the thesis of the equality of all people, demanded that Christian communities recognize marriage among slaves. And the Roman bishop Calistus I (+222), who himself came out of the class of unfree people, even recognized the relationship between high-ranking women - Christians and slaves, freedmen and freeborns as full-fledged marriages. In the Christian environment, the emancipation of slaves has been practiced since the time of the primitive Church, as is evident from the admonition of Ignatius of Antioch (+107) to Christians not to abuse freedom for unworthy purposes.
However, the legal and social foundations of the division into free and slave remain unshakable. Constantine the Great (+337) does not violate them either, who, undoubtedly, under the influence of Christianity, gives the bishops the right to free slaves by means of the so-called announcement in the church (manumissio in ecclesia) and publishes a number of laws that facilitate the plight of slaves.
In the 4th century, the problem of bondage is actively discussed among Christian theologians. So the Cappadocians - Basil, Archbishop of Caesarea (+379), Gregory Nazianzus (+389), and later John Chrysostom (+407), relying on the Bible, and perhaps on the teachings of the Stoics about natural law, express an opinion about a paradise reality, where equality reigned, which due to the fall of Adam ... was replaced by various forms of human dependence. And although these bishops did a lot in order to alleviate the plight of slaves in everyday life, they vigorously opposed the general elimination of slavery, which was important for the economic and social structure of the empire.
Theodorite of Kirsky (+466) even argued that slaves have a more guaranteed existence than the father of a family, who is burdened with worries about the family, servants and property. And only Gregory of Nyssa (+395) opposes any form of human enslavement, since it not only tramples on the natural freedom of all people, but also ignores the saving work of the Son of God ...
In the West, under the influence of Aristotle, Bishop Ambrose of Mediollan (+397) justifies legitimate slavery, emphasizing the intellectual superiority of the masters, and advises those who, as a result of war or accident, unjustly fell into slavery, to use their position to test virtue and faith in God.
Augustine (+430) was also far from the idea of challenging the legitimacy of slavery, for God does not free slaves, but makes bad slaves good. He sees the biblical and theological substantiation of his views in the personal sin of Ham against his father Noah, because of which all mankind is condemned to slavery, but this punishment is at the same time a healing remedy. At the same time, Augustine also refers to the teaching of the Apostle Paul about the sin to which everyone is subject. In the 19th book of his treatise On the City of God, he paints an ideal image of human community in the family and state, where slavery takes its place and corresponds to the plan of God's creation, the earthly order and the natural difference between people "(Theologische Realenzyklopaedie. Band 31. Berlin - New-York, 2000. S. 379-380).
“Slavery appears with the development of agriculture about 10,000 years ago. People began to use captives in agricultural work and forced them to work for themselves. In early civilizations, captives long remained the main source of slavery. Another source was criminals or people who could not pay their debts.
Slaves as a lower class are first reported in written records of the Sumerian civilization and Mesopotamia about 3,500 years ago. Slavery existed in Assyria, Babylonia, Egypt, and ancient societies in the Middle East. It was also practiced in China and India, as well as among Africans and Indians in America.
The growth of industry and trade contributed to an even more intensive spread of slavery. There was a demand for a labor force that could produce goods for export. And therefore, slavery reached its peak in the Greek states and the Roman Empire. The slaves performed the main work here. Most of them worked in mines, handicrafts or agriculture. Others were used in the household as servants and sometimes as doctors or poets. About 400 BC. slaves made up a third of the population of Athens. In Rome, slavery was so widespread that even ordinary people had slaves.
In the ancient world, slavery was perceived as a natural law of life that has always existed. And only a few writers and influential people saw evil and injustice in him "(The World Book Encyclopedia. London-Sydney-Chicago, 1994. P. 480-481. Efron I. A. Encyclopedic Dictionary. T. 51. Terra, 1992. S. 35-51).
“We choose not between freedom from God and slavery to God, but between slavery to people and slavery to God, between people and God. Moreover: not even about oneself, but about others, it is more important to learn to say: "God's servant." He who sees in another a servant of God, he will not command his neighbors as his slave, judge as his own servant, rage at him as his servant. “Who are you, condemning someone else's slave? Before his Lord he stands or falls. And he will be raised up: for God is mighty to raise him up ”(Rom 14: 4).
To say "servant of God" means to humiliate not your neighbor in front of you, but yourself in front of your neighbor, it means to give up the rights to another, to respect his autonomy, to communicate with him only through God. When we become comfortable with the position of slaves, then we can begin our ascent to the position of a mercenary - and after that, to divine filiation. But the feeling of being a servant of God will not disappear.
Message from Luke
The Christian path is the path from God's servant to God's sonship. The slave has no will of his own. he gives it to the Lord. But this must be done voluntarily, as Christ gave His will to the Father. “Luke 22:42 saying: Father! Oh, if you were pleased to carry this cup past Me! nevertheless not My will, but Thine be done. "
But man himself cannot become a son of God by his own will, but the Heavenly Father recognizes him as such.
Jesus said I no longer call you slaves.
But, if you look at where ALL Apostles began their epistles, you will see that giving oneself into “slavery” to the teaching of Christ is the greatest HONOR.
The apostles also call believers SAINTS, all in the general mass, try to find where, during life, SOMEONE PERSONALLY CALLED SAINTS in the New Testament.
Therefore, the experiences of the top-starter about who he is “son” or “slave” are understandable, this is infantile.
Why do we call ourselves servants of God? Not children, not disciples, but slaves? Actually, we should call ourselves children, disciples, and servants of God. If we really give our heart to Him, then we become all of the above. Using these familiar words to all of us, God is trying to convey to us all the figurative meaning (all its nuances) of what the relationship between Him and us is. Therefore, we must concentrate not on the words themselves, but on their inner meaning.
Disciple - learning (comprehending)
Slave - performing (performing)
Child - inherits the state of the father (inheriting)
And all this cannot be divided, because how can you, for example, be a good slave if you do not learn to serve the master? Or how can you become a real child of God if you don’t want to learn from Him what it means to be His child or you don’t want to do what you have been taught?
Why is an Orthodox “a servant of God” and a Catholic a “son of God”?
Why is an Orthodox “a servant of God” and a Catholic a “son of God”?
Question: Why in Orthodoxy the parishioners are called "the servant of God", and in Catholicism "the son of God"?
Answer: This statement is not true. In prayer, Catholics also call themselves servants of God. Let's turn to the main service of Catholics - Mass. “The priest, having removed the cover from the cup, lifts up bread on a diskos, saying: Accept, Holy Father, Almighty Eternal God, this immaculate sacrifice, which I unworthy Thy servant bring to Thee, my living and true God, for my innumerable sins, insults and my negligence , and for all those present here, and for all faithful Christians, living and dead. " With the beginning of the Eucharistic Prayer (I), the priest asks for the living: “Remember, O Lord, Thy servants and servants…. all those present, whose faith you know and whose piety you know ... ”. During the canon of the Liturgy, the priest says: “Therefore we, O Lord, are Thy servants.
Some words in the Church become so commonplace that you often forget what they mean. So it is with the expression "Servant of God". It turns out that for many it hurts the ear. One woman asked me: “Why do you call people servants of God at divine services? Aren't you humiliating them? "
I must confess that I did not immediately find what to say to her, and decided to first figure it out myself and look in the literature why such a phrase was established in the Christian East.
But first, let's see what slavery looked like in the ancient world, say, the Romans, so that we have something to compare.
In ancient times, a slave stood close to his master, was his household, and sometimes an adviser and friend. The slaves, who spun, weaved and milled grain near the mistress, shared their occupations with her. There was no abyss between masters and subordinates.
But over time, the order changed. Roman law began to consider slaves not as persons (personae), but as things.
All messages Checking some verses from the Russian and English Bibles, I realized that in the English Bible, when translating, in contrast to the Russian Bible, they try to avoid the word SLAVE, replacing it with the word SERVANT only in order to fulfill TOLERANCE, regardless of the fact that that the Christian meaning of the word is violated. Likewise, in Russia there are believers who are offended by the Word of God and they are looking for a replacement for him according to their human concepts.
On the concept of "slave" in Orthodox Christianity
Dear Sergey Nikolaevich!
I have been reading your books for 20 years, starting with the first one. I am pleased to watch the recordings of your performances. This greatly helps to better understand ourselves and the position in which we are.
You rightly criticize Orthodoxy and Christianity in its present guise. But at the same time you make, as it seems to me, annoying mistakes that make the value of your criticism less than it is worth it.
I offer two comments, and I hope that you will heed them, and your work for the benefit of humanity will become even better.
The concept of "slave" in Christianity.
You say that "God's servant" is an incorrect expression, and you explain that God is in us. Therefore, we cannot be slaves of God, that this understanding of ourselves as a slave assumes that there is no God in us. The idea is clear, isn't it? Then why is this expression so widespread in our country? Is everyone who says and said so wrong and wrong?
Egor Koshenkov
It seems to me that these are the stages of spiritual ascent. In the beginning we are slaves, i.e. man takes on the yoke of heaven, being unable to understand the Higher Will on his own. Then, as a person grows up spiritually, he himself comprehends the will of Heaven and acts on the basis of the thought of the Supreme, thereby becoming a son, that is, a conscious person.
Evgeny Obukhov
Yes, Yegor, the path out of spiritual slavery is hard. The steps are not easy, and everyone goes through them independently. There is such a thing - obedience. They even say: "Obedience is more than fasting and prayer." But they just sometimes forget to explain to whom obedience, to God, or to the church father?
I do not believe in the "yoke of heaven". And not "obedience" is not clear to anyone, but Hearing the Will of God and not only Hearing, but also the fullness of the work according to the Will of the Most High on earth .... If you start with the yoke, then you can go no further than slavery.
On the meaning of the concept "Servant of God"
Throughout the 2,000-year history of the Church, Christians call themselves "servants of God." There are many parables in the Gospel where Christ calls His followers that way, and they themselves are not in the least indignant at such a humiliating name. So why does the religion of love preach slavery?
Letter to the editor
Hello! I have a question that makes it difficult for me to accept the Orthodox Church. Why do the Orthodox call themselves "servants of God"? How can a normal, sane person be so humiliated, consider himself a slave? And how do you order to treat God, who needs slaves? From history we know what disgusting forms slavery took, how much cruelty, meanness, bestial attitude towards people for whom no one recognized any rights, no dignity. I understand that Christianity originated in a slave-owning society and naturally inherited all of its "attributes".
If we consider this issue from the standpoint of the 21st century and from the Roman-Greek culture, then the whole text of Scripture looks indigestible.
Well, if you try to switch to Jewish positions, and their culture at the time of writing these texts, then many question marks are removed from the agenda.
The word "slave" in Judaism of that time, in relation to his fellows, is not the same as the Roman slave.
He did not lose any civil, religious, or other rights of members of the Jewish community.
The same is true of the way the Lord addresses His creation.
David calls himself a slave of God, although the Creator calls him a son:
7 I will declare the decree: The Lord said to me: You are my Son; This day I have begotten You; (Ps. 2: 7)
So there is no contradiction in these words.
There is only a problem in how a person considers himself, in relation to the One who gives him the breath of life.
If a person says that he is the son of God in order to glorify Him, then there is no problem.
I thought, why, calling ourselves “God's servants,” in the prayer “Our Father,” we turn to God as to the Father?
Weird? So we are the slaves of the master of the world - God or is it still His ... children, in the sacred reality of the Lord's prayer?
For a very long time, the following question has been worrying: why in Orthodoxy the parishioners (when performing sacraments, rituals, prayers) are called "the servant of God", and in Catholicism "the son of God"?
The priest Afanasy Gumerov, a resident of the Sretensky Monastery, answers:
This statement is not true. In prayer, Catholics also call themselves servants of God. Let's turn to the main service of Catholics - Mass. " The priest, having removed the cover from the bowl, offers bread on a diskos, saying: Accept, Holy Father, Almighty Eternal God, this immaculate sacrifice, which I, an unworthy servant of Yours, offer to You, my living and true God, for countless sins, my insults and negligence, and for all those present here, and for all faithful Christians, living and dead. ". With the beginning of the Eucharistic Prayer (I), the priest asks for the living: “Remember, O Lord, Thy servants and servants…. all those present, whose faith you know and whose piety you know ... ”. During the canon of the Liturgy, the priest says: “Therefore, we, Lord, are Thy servants and Thy holy people, remembering the blessed Suffering and Resurrection from hell and the glorious Ascension of the same Christ, Thy Son, our Lord, to Thy glorious Majesty from Thy blessings and gifts ... ". During the commemoration of the departed, a prayer is said: “Remember also, O Lord, Thy servants and servants … who preceded us with a sign of faith and rest the sleep of the world. " Continuing the prayer for the departed, the priest says: “And to us, Your sinful servants, who trust in the abundance of Your mercy, are pleased to grant some part and communion with Your holy Apostles and Martyrs, with John, Stephen, Matthias, Barnabas, Ignatius, Alexander, Marcellinus, Peter , Felicity, Perpetuei, Agathia, Lucius, Agnes, Cecilia, Anastasia and all your saints, into whose community you will receive us ... ”. The Latin text contains the noun famulus (slave, servant).
Our spiritual consciousness must be cleansed of worldly concepts. We should not apply concepts borrowed from the field of legal and social relations to a higher reality in which other principles and laws operate. God wants to lead everyone to eternal life. A person who has a nature damaged by sin, in order to find bliss in the Kingdom of Heaven, must not only believe in God, but also completely follow the all-good will of the Lord. The Holy Scriptures call a person who has cut off his sinful will and surrendered himself to the saving will of the Lord, "a servant of God." This is a very honorable title. In the biblical sacred texts, the words "servant of the Lord" are applied primarily to the Messiah-Christ, the Son of God, Who to the end fulfilled the will of the Father who sent Him. The Messiah speaks through the prophet Isaiah: “My right is with the Lord, and my reward is with my God. And now says the Lord, who formed Me from the womb into a servant to Himself, to turn Jacob to Him and that Israel might gather to Him; I am honored in the sight of the Lord, and My God is My strength. And He said: not only will you be My servant for the restoration of the tribes of Jacob and for the return of the remnants of Israel, but I will make You the light of the nations, so that My salvation may be extended to the ends of the earth ”(Isaiah 49:16). In the New Testament, the Apostle Paul says about the Savior: “He humbled Himself, taking on the form of a slave, becoming like men and in appearance becoming like a man; He humbled Himself, becoming obedient even to death, and the death of the godmother. Therefore, God also exalted Him and gave Him a name that is above every name ”(Phil. 2: 7-9). The Most Holy Virgin Mary says about herself: “behold, the Servant of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word ”(Luke 1:38). Whom else does the Word of God call "God's servant"? Great righteous people: Abraham (Genesis 26:24), Moses (1 Chronicles 6:49), David (2 Samuel 7: 8). The Holy Apostles apply this title to themselves: “Jacob, servant of God and the Lord Jesus Christ” (James 1: 1), “Simon Peter, servant and Apostle of Jesus Christ” (2 Peter 1: 1), “Judas, servant Jesus Christ "(Jude 1: 1)," Paul and Timothy, servants of Jesus Christ "(1: 1). The right to be called a servant of God must be earned. How many can say about themselves with a clear conscience that they are God's servants and are not slaves of their passions, slaves of sin?
