Sergey Hudiev

Assurance of salvation

WORDS FROM THE AUTHOR

This book is dedicated to the question of whether or not a believer can have assurance in his personal salvation. It was for the two reasons that I was prompted to undertake and examine this question. The reason is connected with my own personal dilemma–I know I am a sinner and that I will one day die and thus, to me it is important to find out in what I can personally hope and rely upon. The second reason is connected with a command given by the Lord to the Church and to every Christian:

Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation. (Mark 16:15)

 In order to fulfill this command it is necessary to clearly define (even if only for ourselves) what makes up this Good News which we are charged to preach. For when the Apostle demands: always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence (1 Peter 3:15)

 he definitely has in mind that "our hope"–this something which is being expressed fully in words, something as such that we can (and must) with clarity explain to any non-churched person.

 In this it is clear that what is in view in not our preparedness to take an exam in theology, liturgy or Church history, but a preparedness to explain what kind of hope we have as Christians and what kind of hope we want to present to our non-believing neighbors. As a rule when entering into a conversation with unbelievers, be it by verbal or by printed pages, the question of the Church tends comes up and people discuss cultures, politics, and economic questions and how these a re connected with Christianity, but they don't talk about Christian hope. Sometimes in regard to speaking to unbelievers people even see a kind of virtue in saying that our hope is something too fearful and too deep for us to speak openly and boldly of it.

This is understandable for when I share with another person the most precious thing I have, I run the risk of meeting with misunderstanding and showing a lack of respect of that which I hold dear and consider holy. Of course this kind of thing is very painful and I very much want to learn from it. Yet it seems to me that had it been incorrect to claim one's inability "to give an account" for fear of the possible emotional trauma or offense to people regarding some kind of unusually deep veneration then the Lord would not have turned our attention to his clear command:

 —What I tell you in the darkness, speak in the light; and what you hear whispered in your ear, proclaim upon the housetops. (Matt. 10:27) I think that it would be great to make every effort toward the goal of how a person can more clearly realize the hope which the Lord gives to us, as well as, the responsibilities that he has placed upon us. It seems to me that it would be incorrect to be content with some kind of vague and inarticulate ideas in such important questions as questions of our hope and our responsibility. This book is my attempt to examine the Apostolic Gospel just as it is presented in the Holy Scriptures. I must immediately say that I do not hold a ny kind of holy cloth nor do I have a systematic theology education. If someone were to ask me "who am I" to be discussing such important questions, I would immediately answer that "I am no one." I searched for the answer to the question of assurance of salvation not because I have the right or because I investigated this well, but rather because for me it was absolutely necessary to find the answer. After painstaking examination of the Scriptures (as far as this was humanly possible), I came to the conclusion that assurance of salvation is indeed possible. I want immediately to say to those of my readers who consider that such a position is unorthodox. Such a clear cut, formulated and obligatory teaching on salvation is not found in the Orthodox Church. One 6 of the important values of the Orthodox Church (O.C.) is that within the clear cut, defined, dogmatic borders established by the ecumenical councils exists a defined space differing opinions through which, according to the works of the Apostle Paul "must be" (1 Cor. 11:19). Attempts to formulate such teaching has been undertaken (i.e. in the book by Sergei Stargorodski called "The Orthodox Teaching of Salvation"), but the (O.C.) does not have some kind of set of obligatory dogmatic decrees. Although one can find with many of the holy fathers statements from which it is clear that they considered that assurance of salvation is not possible, yet there also exists a reason which is forbidden to consider such assurance as heresy.

 This reason is that assurance of salvation was stated by the Apostles:

—But we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in

 the same way as they also are. (Acts 15:11)

 "Having the desire to depart and be with Christ, for that is very much

 better" (Philippians 1:23)

 "in the future there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the

Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day; and not only to

me, but also to all who have loved His appearing." ( 2 Timothy 4:8)

 The Lord will rescue me from every evil deed, and will bring me safely to His heavenly kingdom; to Him be the glory forever and ever. Amen. (2 Timothy 4:18)

Beloved, now we are children of God, and it has not appeared as yet what we will be. We know that when He appears, we will be like Him, because we will see Him just as He is. (1 John 3:2)

If the Apostles are not heretics, then assurance of salvation is not a heresy. I will explain why I consider it necessary to hold such a position and to defend it as well. In the first place, the goal of the Christian life is to worship God: we a re c alled in all fullness to confess God's mercy, faithfulness and omnipotence and openly to " proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkne ss into His marvelous light" (1 Peter 2:9). Assurance of salvation does not exist for our psychological comfort, but rather " so that in all things God may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom belongs the glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen. (1 Peter 4:11). As I see it, to say " I have my hopes set on Christ and in this I am not assured of my salvation"–this would in effect mean and give rise to speaking of Christ as someone who is questionable and unreliable.

 Secondly, so far as understand the Apostles in fact were preaching a ssura nce of salvation. A person who says that he has " the de sire to depart and be with Christ, for that is very much better" (Philippians 1:23), was definitely assured of his salvation; thus, I am not falling into heresy if I follow his in this. Of course, it is possible that I have interpreted the Scriptures absolutely incorrectly, but then how, if that is truly the case and having presented the other view, can one so easily refute the "correct" interpretation.

 Thirdly, I have a definite person reason: if such an idea of salvation is the only one that is true when even a pious hero says "Whither Satan will be driven is thither also where they will drive me ", then I have no kind of hope a t all. Whither then will they drive me? After all, I am fa r from being like such pious heros. If a person's salvation is determined by his personal heroic feats and good works, then I am doomed for I have neither. Fourthly, not having assurance of salvation very strongly undermines the missionary opportunities of the Church–for how in the world can we proclaim salvation to someone, if we ourselves have no assurance? How can we say to anyone " believe–and you will be saved", if we ourselves believe and yet do not know whether we are saved or not? I will give an example: one day (during the time when I was still not assured of my salvation, I was chatting with one man who was not a believer and presented him with these 8 words from Scripture "For whoever will call on the name of the Lord will be saved" (Rom. 10:13). "Well, then, –he asked with interest–did you call on the name of the Lord? "Yes, --I answered, --I called and continue to call." "Well, what then are you saved?" This question that he asked me, needless to say, put me at a loss. If I am not assured of this truth in regard to myself, then how can I preach this to others? Fifthly, sometimes such uncertainty can weaken the moral will–for there is no difference between those who abide in faith and piety and those who abide dishonesty and offense. Both alike cannot be assured of their salvation. You are the one treading in vain hope, and then are again confronted with "whither Satan will be driven is thither also where they will drive you." For what purpose at all is there then to see yourself tormented if God all the same rejects you?

The Scriptures, so far as I understand, speak of faith as of a relationship with God, which from one side firmly makes man a partaker of well-known blessings, but from the other side firmly places upon him well-known responsibilities. Christian ethics do not exist separate from Christian hope. If it is forbidden for a person to believe in the fact that he is an heir of the Kingdom, then how can one demand of him to conduct himself as an heir of the Kingdom?

I have had many occasions to chat with people, with whom the warnings of the Apostles did not produce even the slightest impressions in regard to the fact that "those who so act will not inherit the Kingdom of God." Nothing was produced because these people ( but of course this is only because of their great humility) do not consider themselves heirs of the Kingdom. For the one who does not consider the heavenly inheritance as his own will not be afraid to lose it. Such an approach to salvation that gives to all hope but to none assurance often leads to people declaring their own "orthodox" faith, while continuing with complete apprehension to consider these moral and confessional duties which their faith has placed on them. No promises and no responsibilities either. Vague and indeterminate hope "upon the mercy of God" does not give any kind of guarantee, but neither does it impose any kind of responsibilities. The goal of this book, as far as it is possible, is to eliminate such uncertainty. The main source which has been presented in this book and upon which this discussion rests are the Holy Scriptures.

 9 For no divine and holy mystery of faith whatsoever should not by any means be communicated without the Divine Scriptures; [that which is] lower is being founded upon one likelihood and upon the choicest words; even you are not to believe me when I simply speak of Him; [that is] if my to my words there is not found evidences from the Divine Scriptures. For the power of the faith which saves us depends not on the choice of words, but on the evidence through the Divine Scriptures (Saint Cyril of Jerusa lem. Proclamation Homilies. The Fourth Homily, 17).

Indeed, a person who gives an answer based on his own hope and who speaks of observations of difficult spiritual realities–this person should be ready to answer the question: "but upon what, strictly speaking, are your assertions founded?" According to the opinion of Saint Cyril and many other holy fathers, the solid foundation of doctrine in which we are edified is found precisely in the Holy Scriptures. Saint Ambrose wrote:

Regarding God, we must discuss according to His [that is God's] own dictum, and not according to someone else's (On Repentance, chapt. 5).

Sa int Basil the Great in his "Rule s of a Pious Life" gives exhortation that:

Every word or deed must be confirmed by the witness of God-breathed Scriptures, in confirmation of good and to overthrow evil. (Rule 26).

Every word of the Lord should be received with complete certainty (rule 12:1.

The hea rers, those exhorted in the Sc riptures, should consider carefully and that which agrees with the Scriptures [they should] receive and that which does not to agree [with the Scriptures] they should reject. Like wise they should reject those who hold to the teaching which disagrees with the Scriptures in every way possible to avert it. (Rule 72)

All that is not God-breathed Scripture is not according to faith and is sin. (Rule 80:22)

 

 The Lord puts a clear distinction between His word and human words in which people would allege a "mystical experience":

 —The prophet who has a dream may relate his dream, but let him who has My word speak My word in truth. What does straw have in common with grain? declares the Lord. —Is not My word like fire?  declares the Lord, —and like a hammer which shatters a rock? (Jeremiah 23:28-29)

Of course, God's word must be interpreted within the limits of the church traditions1 and the synodal experience of the Church should be a defense from arbitrary and erroneous interpretations. I would like to note in connection with this two important points. First. Within the limits of the acknowledged church tradition, the holy fathers and teachers of the Church have held to differing opinions regarding some questions. For example, between Cyril of Jerusalem and Saint Augustine one can discover very serious discrepancies regarding the question of the relationship of freedom and grace. Anthony the Great made assertions which the Fathers of the Second Council of Orange considered erroneous. Sometimes (for example this is especially evident with Saint Agustine who himself speaks of this issue) the views of this or that teacher of the Church change over time. Questions exist (for example regarding the deity of Christ and questions of the Trinity), which are clearly defined and by the ecumenical decrees and by general agreement with the Holy Fathers. There also those questions which according to church tradition are allowed to exist with serious differings of opinions and without declaring this or that opinion as heretical. The bounds of church tradition are clear but are more wide than people sometimes think. The tradition of the Church–is rather more of a living and multi- branched tree (Matt. 13:32), than a concrete block. There are questions in which the conscience of individual Christians is not united with the ecumenical councils because of the fact that in regard to their questions

 1 Very Eastern Orthodox, Catholic teaching. 11 there is not general agreement among the opinions of the Fathers who themselves hold differing positions.

 

Secondly, the Lord says that references to "Tradition" should not in any case be used to repudiate or disregard the Word of God (Matt. 15:1- 9). As far as I understand His (i.e. Jesus') words when I see a clear contradiction between what the Scriptures say and what is asserted in the name of Tradition, I must first strive to clarify whether or not the Scripture allows such an interpretation in which this contradiction could be eliminated. Then if overcoming such a contradiction is not successful the remaining option is to simply have as one's preference the Word of God over that of any other words. The Bible makes a clear distinction between the Traditions of the Apostles in which we are commanded to "stand firm and hold to" (2 Thess. 2:15) and the "traditions of men" or even "worldly fables fit only for old women" which the Apostles command us to beware of (Col. 2:8) and to turn away from (1 Tim.4:7).

 In this book I will be speaking much from the first person and in general may be using too often the last letter of the Russian alphabet "" (which refers to "I" in English). I do this for the following reason: the people to whom I have given the manuscript of the book, have noticed that in parts of it sound a bit categorical and peremptory (which I myself in way desire) and thus have advised me to say, for example, instead of "it is very clear that.." something like "to me it seems clear that" which gives understanding to the reader that I am speaking of my own personal hope and am not trying to impose my own theological position as the only faith or possibility.

 Having made such preliminary remarks we will now turn to the heart of the question.