Having entered the Christmas season, we ask those who find the work of the Mystagogy Resource Center beneficial to them to help us continue our work with a generous financial gift as you are able. As an incentive, we are offering the following booklet.

In 1909 the German philosopher Arthur Drews wrote a book called "The Myth of Christ", which New Testament scholar Bart D. Ehrman has called "arguably the most influential mythicist book ever produced," arguing that Jesus Christ never existed and was simply a myth influenced by more ancient myths. The reason this book was so influential was because Vladimir Lenin read it and was convinced that Jesus never existed, thus justifying his actions in promoting atheism and suppressing the Orthodox Church in the Soviet Union. Moreover, the ideologues of the Third Reich would go on to implement the views of Drews to create a new "Aryan religion," viewing Jesus as an Aryan figure fighting against Jewish materialism. 

Due to the tremendous influence of this book in his time, George Florovsky viewed the arguments presented therein as very weak and easily refutable, which led him to write a refutation of this text which was published in Russian by the YMCA Press in Paris in 1929. This apologetic brochure titled "Did Christ Live? Historical Evidence of Christ" was one of the first texts of his published to promote his Neopatristic Synthesis, bringing the patristic heritage to modern historical and cultural conditions. With the revival of these views among some in our time, this text is as relevant today as it was when it was written. 

Never before published in English, it is now available for anyone who donates at least $20 to the Mystagogy Resource Center upon request (please specify in your donation that you want the book). Thank you.



October 22, 2025

Prologue in Sermons: October 22



It Is Not True That the Period of Prohibitions Cannot Be Shortened

October 22*

(To Parishioners Living Among the Schismatic Priestless People)

By Archpriest Victor Guryev

In order to separate you from the Orthodox Church, the schismatics, as you are all aware, employ all sorts of machinations. Not to mention that, because of certain rites and letters, allegedly altered — according to them — contrary to the times of the Holy Fathers, they threaten you with fiery Gehenna, they also blaspheme the entire structure of our Church... And they reproach it for everything! Take, for example, its approach to penitents. “What kind of church do you have?” you hear them ask: “It gives Communion to everyone! But is it right to give Communion to great sinners? Read the Nomocanon: what does it say? One must be excommunicated from Holy Communion for six years, another for ten, and another even for twenty years. That is what is written there!”

It is indeed written there, brethren, but consider, for example, such matters: Saint Basil the Great admitted a youth, who had renounced Christ and sold himself to demons, to the church and allowed him to receive Holy Communion only after forty days of repentance. How can this be reconciled with the Nomocanon? – Or how can the rules of the Nomocanon be reconciled with the circumstance that Mary of Egypt, having barely abandoned her sinful life, went to the Jordan and received the Holy Mysteries in the Church of the Forerunner? But this is not sufficient: how are we to understand, finally, those instances when the Holy Fathers imposed no penances on great sinners? And such cases indeed occurred. For instance, in the life of Saint Serapion, having converted a harlot to Christ, "he," it is said, "brought her to a women's monastery. And he said to the abbess: 'Receive this sister, and impose no penance upon her, but permit her to do as she wishes.'"

So, what does all this mean? The rules of the Nomocanon prescribe excommunicating great sinners from Communion for several years, while the Holy Fathers allow them to partake in Holy Communion after a few days, upon their repentance. How can all this be reconciled? It will be simple to reconcile when you take into account that the periods of prohibition set by the Holy Fathers are not absolute, and that a priest, depending on circumstances, has full authority to either shorten or extend the duration of penances. Thus, Saint Basil the Great, in one of his canons, specifically the 84th, states: "Do not judge the prohibition by time, but by conduct." What does this phrase mean? According to patristic interpretation, although "prohibitions have been ordained as written, one should not regard the prohibition in terms of time, but in terms of the manner of repentance" (Kormchaia Book, Part 1, p. 247). Do you hear? One should not regard the prohibition by its duration, but by the manner of repentance!

What am I to say, in conclusion, to uncalled teachers and accusers? It would have been better for them, if regarding confession, to have reflected upon themselves. It is known that repentance from a Christian is received by a presbyter legally ordained. And who among them? A layman imagines he can obtain forgiveness from another layman! – He imagines, but does he receive it? Alas! Such confession is in vain. It is performed by them contrary to the canons of the Church. Thus it always is: we see a speck in another's eye, yet fail to notice the plank in our own. Amen.

Source: Translated by John Sanidopoulos.

Notes:

* In the original text, there is no entry for October 22nd. There this is the second entry for November 2nd.
 

BECOME A PATREON OR PAYPAL SUPPORTER