"Protecting the weak is the duty of the strong. Otherwise, we would live in the midst of chaos." - Commander Shepard. Defense" of weak states as a pretext for aggression

Is it possible to bring the modern world to a common legal denominator? How is it that good laws take the form of their opposite? What should be the basis of law? This is discussed by an Old Believer Fedoseyevite, a Russian religious scholar, philosopher and jurist, professor at the Sretensky Theological Seminary, a specialist in the history and philosophy of Old Believer literature, state-confessional relations Mikhail Olegovich Shakhov.

Anti-discrimination as degradation

The paradox of our modernity has become the transformation of good laws into their direct opposite. A prime example of this is laws protecting sodomy.

A little over 100 years ago, the English writer Oscar Wilde was sentenced to two years in prison for homosexuality, his marriage was annulled, and he was forbidden to communicate with his sons. And now in the same UK, as, indeed, in a number of other European countries, you can get a prison term already for the fact that you publicly express your condemnation or dissatisfaction with homosexuality, that you consider it a sin. How did this legal evolution proceed, or rather, degradation, if we look at this process from a Christian point of view?

The first step was to accept the postulate that sodomy was not a criminal offence. That is the decriminalization of homosexuality. This was followed by such a logical reasoning: if sodomy is not a criminally punishable act, something illegal, therefore, this is a normal phenomenon. And since this is a normal phenomenon, then the people who are engaged in these “normal” acts form the same social group as, for example, national, cultural, ethnic minorities, or, if divided into social groups according to other criteria, women, children , old men.

And since this is also a social group that is united by some common feature and does not do anything illegal, it means that it has the right to be protected from discrimination, like other social groups. The mechanism of anti-discrimination legislation is being launched, which was previously designed to protect and protect against violence, persecution and humiliation of blacks, Jews, women ...

Anti-discrimination legislation was initially well-intentioned to protect minorities (for example, national ones) from any infringement of the rights of these minorities by the majority. But now it has been applied to an entirely new minority, the minority that is born of sin. The critical point, after which there was a fundamental reversal, was the stage of decriminalization.

So here are the steps:

homosexuality is not a crime for which the state punishes criminally;
this is not something reprehensible from the point of view of public morality;
this is a certain individual feature or type of behavior that unites people into a certain social group, just as people of any nation, language, etc. are united in social groups;
extension of anti-discrimination legislation to this social group.

At the same time, we must not forget that everything is happening in that general context of the madness of tolerance and political correctness that we observe in the United States and European countries, when we started with a good desire not to offend any national, religious or ethnic minorities, but ended up rewriting, for example , the novel “The Adventures of Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn” in order to remove the word “Negro” from his text as an inadvertible.

Or here's another example. A few years ago, I came across a publication in the British newspaper The Telegraph dated 09/25/2011 that psychologists are concerned about how children are brought up in kindergartens in the UK, namely: in children's fairy tales, good fairies walk in pink clothes, and evil witches - dressed in black. Why did this cause concern? Because such a color scheme can instill in young children the idea that dark-skinned people are bad, since they have the same skin color as the color of the clothes of bad witches. Recommendations were given: for the sake of political correctness, it is necessary to change the good fairies into dark clothes, and the evil witches into multi-colored and pink ones. And one can recall quite a lot of such unfunny jokes from the field of political correctness and tolerance.

And since there is such a frenzy of hypertolerance, as one might call it, both in the field of interethnic relations and in the field of interreligious relations, then against this background, it is quite logical, although unacceptable for Christian traditionalism, that an increased concern for the feelings of perverts looks.

Law without God leads to lawlessness

What can stop the process of transforming the initially correct legal attitudes to protect the weak into their absurd opposite?

Laws protecting minorities could effectively fulfill their mission only in a society that is not very strongly divided into groups with opposing and mismatched ideas about morality, about good and evil. The current society, although it is not a war of all against all, but very often traditional Christians coexist in it with various kinds of renovationists who have more or less gone far from Christianity, with people who have non-Christian and anti-Christian views. And therefore, in such a society, creating laws that would suit everyone and not infringe on anyone is a rather difficult task.

The Christian approach to law proceeds from the fact that it has its source in Divine Revelation and Holy Scripture. Why can't you steal, kill, and so on? Because these are God-given commandments.

In its development, European society began to build law on other grounds. Such concepts as natural law and positive law are known. Natural law has tried to do without God and without Divine revelation; it asserts that the right to life, to freedom, to happiness, and so on, exists because it is inherent in nature itself, in human nature. But natural law theory stumbled on the point about who determines the list of these natural rights. If not God and not Divine Revelation, who determines which rights are natural and innate? Because the list of rights at different times was compiled in different ways. And some modern followers of this theory of law believe that the right to homosexuality is natural, because in their fantasies it comes from the very human nature of sodomites.

The next step was the positive legal concept. It declares that any law that is passed in accordance with formal procedures is true law, without questioning whether it is in accordance with Divine commandments or with any human nature. Hence the conclusion: if the law on the euthanasia of the mentally ill or infants born with defects is procedurally correct, then this law is correct. This is already the end point of the liberation of law from any correlation with Divine truth.

In today's world, when society is heterogeneous and mixed, consisting of people with different religious and ethical ideas, it is very difficult to develop some kind of general criterion for writing laws. Let me give you a very relevant example.

From the point of view of Christian ethics, the family should be monogamous. From the point of view of the Muslim, Sharia idea, if a person can provide four wives, then such polygamy is quite consistent with Islamic ethics and morality. The question is, under which traditional religious values should legislation be built in a multi-confessional country? There is no answer to this question yet.

Of course, law and justice cannot eradicate vice, as the old wisdom says - and in general it is true. But right should not allow vice to march with its head held high. Let us recall another aphorism: law should not seek to establish heaven on earth - it should prevent the reign of hell on earth.

But, of course, as pluralism strengthens and contradictions develop between what is considered good and evil, legal complexities increase. And even when we appeal to traditional values, we do not get out of this tangle of contradictions, because traditional values are different, and, for example, in Orthodox Christianity and Judaism they do not completely coincide. And who will act as an arbiter here, if we do not take a strictly mono-confessional idea of Divine truth, also remains incomprehensible.

social justice

government community protection right justice

Governments have a role to play not only in stimulating economic growth, but also in equitably distributing its fruits. Many believe that governments are needed to maintain social justice by redistributing wealth and other resources among citizens. In many countries, the distribution of income is highly unequal. Even more unevenly distributed, as a rule, land and other material values. Moreover, in many societies the inequality of wealth and income becomes more and more striking over time. Brazil is one of the countries with the most pronounced income inequality, and since the 1930s this inequality has been growing every decade.

Under these conditions, social justice often dictates a transition to the New Deal, especially if existing inequality deprives many people of the opportunity to receive education, decent medical care, and meet other vital needs. In other words, government intervention may be required to take some of the resources from the rich and redistribute them to the poor. Some theorists of distributive justice argue that such transfers of resources should be aimed at equalizing the living conditions of all citizens. Others, on the contrary, would like governments to reallocate the part of the resources that is necessary to "level the playing field", i.e. ensured equality of opportunity and then left individuals in charge of their own destiny. One way or another, but the citizens of many societies seem to be of the opinion that it is necessary to try to make the distribution of wealth and income more even. Although many individuals, organizations and foundations volunteer to help the poor, they tend to; do not have sufficient capacity and power to ensure large-scale redistribution. Governments, at least under certain conditions, have such opportunities and powers. Much of the tax and social programs are conceived for this purpose, although questions about how effective such measures are and how far redistribution should go are often heated debates. But even many who do not share the view that governments are in principle obliged to redistribute wealth seem to agree that they should provide all citizens with at least some minimum standard of living, a kind of social safety net,

Defense of the weak

We usually rely on government to protect individuals and groups (say, future generations) who are unable to speak up for themselves. Obviously, such groups are unable to take any action to protect their interests. However, governments can protect the interests of the unborn and prevent them from bearing the brunt of economic debt or environmental degradation. In recent decades, governments have become much more involved than before in protecting groups that, for various reasons, are politically weak or disenfranchised - children, the elderly, the infirm and disabled, as well as non-human parts of the universe - from whales and birds to trees and other components of our natural environment.

It is they who will force you to run around the circle of life, and the circle will narrow until you collapse and ask yourself: who will take pity on me?

Why are people divided into weak and strong? Not physically. And at the level of thoughts and actions. Why do some moan all the time, constantly demand participation and endlessly wait for help from everywhere, while others, clenching their teeth and clenching their will into a fist, silently help themselves, becoming a support and protection for others?

When they tell me that the weak are weak from birth, just as the strong are endowed with strength a priori, I don't believe it. I do not believe in this in the same way as in the fact that there are people who can read and write from birth.

When they try to convince me that the weak, even if they want to, cannot become strong, and the strong, by definition, do not need the support that is so vital for the weak, I want to rip off the stopcock and transfer to another train.

Being weak is not a pathology. Being strong is not a given, like eye color or nose shape. Both are life positions. A choice that everyone makes for himself. A program that defines a way of life. Only.

A weak person is weak not because he is weak, but because he can afford such a luxury. Because there is someone nearby who allows him to be just like that, someone who is ready to answer not only for himself, but also for that guy. I'll say more. There are no weak people. There are those who benefit from being weak.

The strong are often strong not because they want to, but because there is nothing else left but to be so, period. And what is there beyond this point on that other side of it, only they alone know. Well, and even to those few who really, really want to see and understand.

And often it is they, those who seem strong to you - iron, inflexible, those to whom you easily throw the usual “you-strong-you-can handle” on the go - they need that same support and protection more than others. In love and warmth.

Because they are more worn out. Because they are deeply wounded. And there is catastrophically more fatigue in them. And feelings of loneliness too.

Because being strong means, without reasoning, taking a hit on yourself. And by yourself and only by yourself to block any gap in any wall. Any leak on any ship. Anytime and anywhere. Both on the front deck and in the stuffy, filthy hold.

Take care of yourself strong. Take care of each other. You are welcome. Because there aren't many of you. And because your strength is often your weakest and most unprotected place.

Friends, support our group on Facebook. Share this post with your friends or click the "Like" button! and you will always be aware of the latest news from Kaprizulka!

For you, we collect the best materials from all over the Internet from the world of beautiful, energetic, cheerful and healthy people - like you and me!

Question: Are Christians allowed to practice physical culture, sports, and martial arts? Is self-defense and defense of the weak permissible (under what conditions)?

Answer: The Holy Apostle Paul answered this question. “Everything is permissible for me, but not everything is useful; everything is permissible to me, but nothing should possess me. 1 Corinthians 6:12.

Based on this word, who dares to point out to anyone, the admissibility or inadmissibility of playing sports. It is quite obvious that each person has his own understanding and personally decides what is useful and necessary for him.

This is generally one of the main principles of the gospel, the gifts of the grace of God, which makes a person free.

“He who eats, do not humiliate the one who does not eat; and who does not eat, do not condemn the one who eats, because God accepted it. Who are you, condemning someone else's slave? Before his Lord he stands, or he falls. And he will be raised, for God is mighty to raise him up. One distinguishes day from day, and another judges every day equally. Everyone, act according to the assurance of your mind. He who distinguishes the days distinguishes for the Lord; and whoever does not distinguish the days does not distinguish for the Lord. Whoever eats, eats for the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and whoever does not eat, does not eat for the Lord, and gives thanks to God. Romans 14:3-6.

I deliberately offer such a long quotation in order to show the principle given to us in this text of Scripture. There was and is a variety of traditions. Many of them have religious overtones. For many people, these are unshakable principles that they have adopted from childhood in the family. Now in the community, they meet people who do not observe the days at all, or on the contrary are very scrupulous in relation to food. There are Christians involved in sports, and there are those who consider sports an empty business. And there have always been and are people who, without hesitation, invade the territory of their neighbors, encroaching on their freedom, on their independence, on their responsibility. But this is not enough. Such activists unknowingly assume the role of God. After all, they always, in the name of God, impose unbearable burdens on their neighbors.

So, answering your question, I express my confidence, first of all, that each person has the right to decide this issue for himself. "Everyone should act according to the assurance of his mind." And no one has the right to tell another what he should do and what he should not do. I am not talking about reprehensible, criminal, sinful deeds.

Sports are not sinful activities.

For a Christian, sports are quite acceptable. I'll say more. For the majority of modern people whose life takes place in cities, such classes are mandatory. Urban living conditions have deprived a person of the main thing - the ability to maintain his body in a healthy state. Hypodynamia - who has not heard this word. It means low mobility. This condition, unusual for a person, leads to numerous diseases. Sports today is a prerequisite for maintaining the body in a healthy state.

“And may the God of peace Himself sanctify you in all its fullness, and your spirit and soul and body intact Yes preserved without blemish at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ." 1 Thessalonians 5:23.

Both the spirit and the soul are kept pure and holy by our faithfulness, and by our exercise in godliness. Likewise, our bodies are only healthy when we maintain them through physical exercises. It often happens that referring to the words of Scripture, “for bodily exercise little useful but godliness is beneficial in all things, having the promise of the present life and the future.” 1 Tim. 4:8, Christians generally refuse to engage in physical culture. Being engaged in overeating, without proper loads, they turn into patients, people who groan, do not get out of hospitals. "Little useful" does not negate the usefulness. But he speaks of usefulness, of necessity for earthly life.

« In all integrity without blemish”, both the spirit and the soul and the body must be preserved. It's the ordinance of the Word of God. Everyone needs such a healthy body, both for a personal full life and for serving the weak.

Such a command is given to Christians in the Word of God. " We, the strong, must endure the infirmities of the weak and not please ourselves.". Romans 15:1.

It's more about spiritual power, about the power of faith. But it is also about physical strength. When the ship going to Rome got into a storm, and fear struck the crew, the captain, and all the participants in the voyage, then the apostle Paul retained his composure, and in fact saved all the participants in that tragic expedition. Acts. 27ch.

In addition, we must be physically healthy in order to fulfill our earthly duties. Work, sometimes hard, is often associated with dangers. There are fires, there are earthquakes, there are floods. Christians are always the first to come to the site of such catastrophes. The Baptist World Alliance has a team of rescuers who, in the name of Christ, are always where there is pain, need and grief. So it was in Haiti. So it was in Krymsk. That's how it was in Japan. It is Christians, moved by the love of the Lord Jesus Christ, who specially prepare themselves to help people in distress.

There is a state rescue service. Fire, disaster. Rescuers, these are the ones to whom the suffering turn. For Christian men, this is a very suitable profession. But it requires physical health, skill, dexterity, endurance. All these qualities are cultivated by physical exercises.

There is disaster medicine, doctors who are the first to arrive in disaster areas. They have to not only give an injection or bandage. They have to carry all the weight and equipment and the victims themselves. The mode of work is such that only strong, trained, healthy bodies can withstand it and help those in need.

Christians organized the "Red Cross", a service in the name of Jesus Christ. On the battlefields, they pulled out the wounded, providing them with medical care.

Have you tried to carry a wounded man from the battlefield?

Without serious physical training, such a service is impossible. How about standing up for the weak? It's the highest expression of love. So said the Savior. “There is no greater love than if a man lays down his life for his friends.” John 15:13.

In general, the problem of intercession for Christians is now more relevant than ever. The war, it can be called the third world war, you can not call it, but this war, which is growing more and more, is being waged against Christianity. Political correctness in this process plays into the hands of all the enemies of the Gospel. Christians only state the fact that every year more than one hundred and fifty thousand people become victims for their faith. And that's it. You can’t even raise it to a common intercessory prayer. Discord. Quarreling. The showdown took Christians away from the battlefields for the souls of people perishing in their sins. The war moved inside the Christian community. All forces are thrown into the fight against dissent. And Christianity was weakened. And Christianity was devalued. And blind. And it went deaf. Lost purpose. Can't hear the voice of the Lord. And goes around in circles like Israel in the wilderness.

For lost profits, planes rise and bombs fall on the heads of those who encroach on the business of the strong. For the killed people, killed without guilt, killed only for their convictions, no voice of intercession is heard, no solidary Christian position is visible that would express true brotherly love.

This is a consequence of the fact that Christians profess non-resistance to evil by violence. Such non-resistance leads to indifference. And in fact, to the neglect of the precepts of the Savior. The power given to man by God, carries out the protection of truth, the punishment of evil with the help of force. “For the leader is God's servant, it's good for you. If you do evil, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain: he is God's servant, an avenger for the punishment of the one who does evil.

Romans 13:4. It's good when such a boss is a Christian. It is good when the boss does not use power and the sword for personal selfish purposes. Christianity is obliged to point out to people in power, their responsibility before God. Christians are obliged to intercede for the offended, humiliated, outcast.

Mammon became the main deity of Christian civilization. The well-known Protestant ethics of Weber, which untied the knot of the ban on usury, involved in the temptation to extract immeasurable profits, and the Christians were the first to take advantage of this loophole.

The increase in labor productivity, the expansion of the range of services and goods, moved the economy at such a pace that everyone was only happy. The growth of prosperity removed all doubts, was perceived as God's blessing. And imperceptibly, materialistic values captured the economic space, which is natural, then the political space, which is also quite logical, and now it turns out that the religious space has also been captured. Spiritual values faded into the background. Profit covers all sins.

Fresh data from the field of statistics. A hundred billionaires over the past year received such a total income that if 25% were directed to the fight against poverty, there would be no poor in the whole world. Only 25% of the income of hundreds of the richest people in the world. What are the appetites, and where is the limit of sufficiency?

In our "Christian Russia", there are already more than sixty billionaires, but 20% of fellow believers living below the poverty line. Thirty million people barely make ends meet, and sixty people burn themselves and their incomes, on yachts, on clubs, on unnecessary villas and on gambling. Helping the poor, the elderly or orphans is not prestigious. But this is God's commandment about love, laying down the soul for the neighbor.

Such deafness to suffering arose on the basis of the destruction of faith. On the state monopoly of social service, on the prohibition of private charity. Little by little, the people of faith atrophied these qualities, mercy, sacrifice, reverence for another greater than himself. It was forbidden to defend oneself, and one could end up in jail. Protecting the weak, all the more, has become dearer to itself. Remember the story of how Moses stood up for his people. He barely took off his feet. For forty years in the desert to feed the sheep.

There is a more recent example. John the Baptist reproached Herod for wantonness. And they removed the head of the prophet.

Today, only Navalny's RosPil allows itself to show aloud insatiable thieves from power. But the authorities have already filed several criminal cases against him. Deliberately cynical, deliberately invented, obviously custom-made. But that's the goal, to show everyone that everyone who dares to speak the truth will be the same.

The church is silent, seeing the obvious humiliation of teachers and doctors who receive a beggarly salary. At the same time, people in power do not spare money for themselves. Disabled people, orphans, old people are left without medicine, without hope. Those who are supposed to protect them fatten without measure, and create laws that prohibit criticizing the government. The church is silent. After all, a law has been invented that prohibits criticizing the church. Bought! Sales!

Strong government rots weak citizens. And there is no Christian voice. The voices of the intercessor. None of our business. This is the sin of the church. Christians preferred to be in a single ranks with the strong, they sold themselves to Mammon. No matter how bitter it is to admit, Russian Christians do not stand up for the persecuted, do not defend the weak. In their silence, they, along with the persecutors, they humiliate, they offend.

But Christ gives us an example. He gave himself as a sacrifice for us. And therefore, no matter how cruel the world is, the calling of a Christian to do mercy, to protect an orphan, to stand up for a widow, remains in force.

“And when you stretch out your hands, I close my eyes from you; and when you multiply your supplications, I do not hear: your hands are full of blood. Wash yourself, cleanse yourself; remove your evil deeds from my eyes; stop doing evil; learn to do good, seek the truth, save the oppressed, defend the orphan, intercede for the widow. Isaiah 1:15-17.

The story comes to mind of how a woman was brought to Jesus. She was rightly accused. She broke the law. And all accusers are unanimous. The law is on their side. Power is on their side. Public opinion is on their side. Christ alone. "What do you say, Master"?

“Which of you is without sin? Throw a stone at her first." I look at modern priests. Who would they be with? What do you think?

Today is the time for the church, albeit alone, in a minority, but in purity, in holiness, to intercede for the orphan and the widow, for all the humiliated and offended. Fearlessly denouncing the world. "Which of you is without sin"?

Leave the stones, go to confession.

Question: Are Christians allowed to engage in physical education, sports and martial arts? Is self-defense and defense of the weak permissible (under what conditions)?

Responsible: The Holy Apostle Paul answered this question. “Everything is permissible for me, but not everything is useful; everything is permissible to me, but nothing should possess me. 1 Corinthians 6:12.