CONVERSATION 2

Against the Manichaeans. "Wherefore they came together, and asked him, saying, Is it not at this time, O Lord, that thou dost restore the kingdom of Israel?" (Acts 1:6). 1. The disciples, intending to ask (the Lord) something, approach Him all together, and they do this in order to incline Him to answer by their very numbers. They knew that His former plums – "of that day and hour no one knoweth" (Matt. 24:36) – were spoken by Him in order to divert the question from Himself – not out of ignorance, but out of unwillingness to answer. For this reason they come to Him again and ask; and they would not have asked if they had really been convinced (of His ignorance). Since they heard that they would receive the Holy Spirit, they wanted to know (that time) how they were already worthy of it and ready to be delivered (from troubles). They did not want to plunge themselves into danger, but to enjoy peace, since what had already happened to them was important, but on the contrary, they were in extreme danger. Wherefore, having said nothing to Him concerning the Spirit, they asked, "Is it not at this time, O Lord, that Thou dost restore the kingdom of Israel?" But, "Is it not at this time"? – so they wanted to know this day. That is why they approach with great reverence. And it seems to me that they did not understand quite clearly what this kingdom was, since they had not yet been taught by the Spirit. And they did not say, "When will it be?" –But what? "Is it not at this time, O Lord, that Thou dost restore the kingdom to Israel?" – as if it had already been destroyed. Thus they asked because they were still attached to sensible objects, though not to the same extent as before. They have not yet become better; however, Christ was already thought of above. And since they have been exalted, He also converses with them more exalted; He no longer tells them that "of that day" even the Son does not know (Mark 13:32) – but what? "It is not your business to know the times or seasons which the Father has set in His own power" (v. 7). You seek too much, he says, although they already knew what was much more important. And so that you may understand this exactly, see how many things I will enumerate. Tell me, what is more important than what was revealed to them? They learned that Christ is the Son of God, and that God has a Son of equal honor; they knew that there would be a resurrection; they knew that Christ ascended and sat down at the right hand of the Father. They also learned what is even more amazing than this, that the flesh sits in grief and that angels worship it. They learned that the Lord would again come to judge the whole world, and that then they too would sit as judges of the twelve tribes of Israel; they learned that the Jews were rejected, and that the Gentiles would enter the kingdom of God in their place. To know what it will be is a great thing; And to comprehend that someone or ever will reign is nothing great in this. Paul learned what "cannot be told to man" (2 Corinthians 12:4), he learned everything that preceded this world. What is more difficult to know: the beginning or the end? Obviously, the former. And this Moses learned, and by counting the years, he shows when (it was) and how long it was. Solomon also knew this, which is why he said: "I will not forget to number the things of the world" (Proverbs 8:21). And so, that (that time) was near, the apostles afterwards also learned about it, just as Paul says: "The Lord is near. be anxious for nothing" (Phil. 4:5-6); but at that time they did not yet know, although the signs were indicated to them. And Christ, as He said, "In a few days" (v. 5), but did not specify the exact time, desiring that they should watch, so He does now. On the other hand, they also do not ask about the end (of the world), but about the kingdom, which is why they said: "Is it not at this time, O Lord, that Thou dost restore the kingdom to Israel?" but then He answered them with greater severity, so that they would not think that their deliverance was near, and He exposed them to dangers, but now not so, but with greater meekness. And so that (His words) do not seem offensive to them and only an excuse – listen to how He immediately promises to grant them that which they would rejoice at – and Namely, He added: "But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and ye shall be witnesses unto me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and even unto the uttermost part of the earth" (v. 8). Then, so that they would not question Him again, He immediately ascended. Therefore, just as there He darkened them with fear and by saying, "I do not know," so here He was exalted by the fact that after these words He ascended. They had a strong desire to know about this and would not depart (from Christ), and yet it was very necessary that they should not know. Tell me: what do the pagans no longer believe, that there will be an end, or that God was made man, came from the womb of the Virgin, and appeared to people with flesh? Isn't it the last? No doubt you will say so. But I am ashamed to constantly talk about it as if it were some kind of indifferent subject. And lest they, in turn, say, Why dost thou value this matter so highly, He says, "The Father hath placed it in His power." But the authority of the Father and His authority are one and the same, as is evident from what He says: "As the Father raises the dead and gives life, so also the Son gives life to whom He will" (John 5:21). If where He should act, He acts with the same authority as the Father, then where it is necessary to know, He does not know with the same authority? Raising the dead is obviously much more than knowing that day. If He does a most important thing with the authorities, then is it not much more likely to do another, less significant thing? 2. But to make it clear to you, I will explain with an example. Just as we, when we see that a child is crying and constantly asking us for some thing he does not need, we hide this thing far away, show our empty hands and say: "See, we do not have it," so did Christ with the Apostles. But that child, although we do not show (the thing we are asking for), continues to cry, knowing that he has been deceived. Then we leave him and go away, saying, "So-and-so is calling me," and we give him something else in return for what he asks, in order to distract him from the thing he has chosen, and we praise this thing of ours more than that, and having given it, we depart. Christ did the same. The disciples asked; He said He didn't have it, and the first time He even frightened them. When they began to ask again, He again said that He had not, but only now He did not frighten them, but, having shown what He had done, He also gave a plausible reason, namely, "The Father has put it in His power." What then? Do you not know the things that belong to the Father? Do you know Him Himself, but do you not know what belongs to Him? You yourself said: "No one knows the Father except the Son" (Matthew 11:27). Moreover (it is said): "The Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God" (1 Corinthians 2:10); and you don't know even that? Far from it. He did not say this so that we should think so; He shows Himself ignorant in order to distract the disciples from an inappropriate question. They were afraid to ask again, lest they hear, "Are you so incomprehensible?" (Mark 7:18)? – because now they feared Him much more than before. "But ye shall receive power when the Holy Ghost shall come upon you." Just as there He did not answer what was asked, because the teacher's business is to teach not what the disciple wants to know, but what is useful for him, so now He predicts what they needed to know in order not to be afraid. They were still weak, and in order to inspire them with boldness, He encouraged their souls and covered their difficulties. Since He was soon to leave them, when He conversed with them, He did not say anything sorrowful directly; But how? To the words of sorrow he adds praise, as if to say: "Do not be afraid, for you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and ye shall be witnesses unto me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and even to the uttermost part of the earth." Formerly He said: "Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and enter not into the city of the Samaritans" (Matt. 10:5), but now He wants them to preach "in all Judea and Samaria"; therefore, what he did not say then, he now added, saying: "And even to the ends of the earth." And after he had told them what was most terrible, that they should not question him again, "he was lifted up in their eyes, and a cloud took him out of their sight" (v. 9). Do you see that they preached and fulfilled the gospel? Verily, He has granted them a great deed! Where, he says, you were afraid, in Jerusalem, there preach first, and then – "even to the ends of the earth." Then again the assurance of what was said: "In their eyes," says (the writer), "and the cloud took Him." They did not see when He was resurrected, but they saw when "the cloud took Him," for even here the sight could not comprehend everything. They saw the end of the resurrection, but they did not see the beginning; but the ascension saw the beginning, but did not see the end. It was superfluous to see the beginning of the resurrection, when the one who proclaimed it was present, and when the tomb showed that He was not there; and what followed the ascension had to be learned from the word. Since the eyes could not penetrate into the heights and show whether He had ascended exactly to heaven, or only as if to heaven, then look what is happening. That it was Jesus they knew from what He had conversed with them, since they could no longer discern Him by sight because of the distance; and that He was going to heaven had already been explained to them by the angels themselves. See how it is arranged that not everything is known from the Spirit, but also from sight. Why did "the cloud take Him"? And this is a sign that He ascended to heaven. Not fire, not a chariot of fire, as was the case with Elijah, but "a cloud took Him"; And this was a symbol of heaven. Thus the prophet says: "Thou makest the clouds Thy chariot" (Psalm 103:3), although this is said of the Father. Therefore, the expression: "the cloud took" means: on the symbol of the Divine power, since no other power is represented anywhere on the cloud. Listen again to what another prophet says: "The Lord will sit on a light cloud" (Isaiah 19:1). 3. This happened when the question concerned an important subject, when the disciples were very attentive to what was being said, when they were excited and did not doze. And on Mount (Sinai), when Moses entered into darkness (Exodus 24:15), the cloud was also for Christ's sake, and not for Moses' sake. (Christ) did not only say: I am departing, so that the disciples would not lament again; but at the same time said, "I send the Spirit." And that He went to heaven, they saw with their own eyes. Oh, what a vision they were vouchsafed! "And when they were looking up into heaven while he was ascending, suddenly two men in white robes stood before them, and said, Men of Galilee! Why do you stand and look up to heaven? This same Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way as you saw him go into heaven" (vv. 10, 11). They use the demonstrative word, "This Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way as you saw him go into heaven" (v. 11). Again a bright image! Certain angels, having put on human form, suddenly appeared and said: "Men of Galilee." For the very fact that they said, "Men of Galilee," they already seemed to the disciples worthy of faith. And if this were not their goal, why would they need to point out to their disciples their homeland, which they knew? And by their very appearance they attracted disciples to themselves and showed that they were from heaven. Why does not Christ Himself say this to the disciples, but the angels? He Himself had conversed with them about all things before, so that through the angels He only reminded them of what they had already heard. And they did not say, "Whom ye have seen ascended," but, "Whom ye have seen ascending into heaven," to show that His ascension is an ascension; but it is proper for the flesh to be exalted. That is why they say: "He who has ascended from you into heaven will come in the same way" – he will not be sent, but "will come". Where is the minority (of the Son)? "A cloud took Him." Beautiful, since He Himself ascended into the cloud, wherefore He who ascended is the same One Who also descended (Ephesians 4:10). But see how one thing is said in relation to their thoughts, and the other in accordance with the dignity of God. However, the minds of those who were watching were now exalted; The Lord granted them no small knowledge of the Second Coming. The words, "He will come in the same way," mean that He will come with a body, as they wanted to hear, and that He will come again to judgment in the same way, on a cloud. "Suddenly," it is said, "two men in white robes stood before them." Why is it said, "husband"? Because (the angels) took the perfect form of men, so that (the disciples) would not be afraid. "And they said, Men of Galilee! Why do you stand and look up to heaven?" With such words they show their affability, and do not allow them to wait for His return immediately. What is more important, they talk about, and they are silent about the less important. That He "will come in the same way," and that He is to be expected from heaven, this is said; and when they are silent about it. In this way they distracted the disciples from that spectacle and turned them to their speech, so that the disciples, no longer having the opportunity to see Christ, would not think that He had not ascended, but would stop in thought at their words. If the disciples had said before, "Where are you going?" (John 13:36), so much the more would be said now. "Is it not at this time, O Lord, that Thou dost restore the kingdom of Israel?" They knew His meekness so much that even after His sufferings they asked Him: "Is it not at this time, O Lord, that Thou dost restore"? True, He had already said to them: "Take heed, do not be terrified, for all these things must be, but this is not yet the end," and Jerusalem will not yet be taken captive (Matt. 24:6); But now they are asking about the kingdom, not about the end. However, after the resurrection, He no longer stretches out a long word to them. They ask, thinking that they themselves will be in glory if this comes to pass; but He did not declare whether He would build (this kingdom) or not. Why did they need to know about it? Wherefore, being afraid, they no longer said, What is the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world? (Matt. 24:3) but: "Thou dost restore the kingdom to Israel"? They thought it had already been revealed; yet He showed in parables that it is not near; and when they asked Him, He did not answer the question, but the following: "You will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you." See: He did not say that (the Spirit) would be sent, but, "He will come down," to show His equal honor. How then do you, Doukhobor, dare to call Him a creature? "And ye shall be witnesses unto Me." He had hinted at ascension, or rather, and now he was reminding them again of what they had heard before. It has already been shown that He ascended to heaven. "A cloud," it is said, "is darkness under His feet" (Psalm 96:2; 17:10); and this is the meaning of the words: "And the cloud took Him," that is, the Lord of heaven. As the king's chariot points to the king, so the king's chariot was sent to Him, so that the disciples would not say anything sorrowful and would not suffer the same thing as Elisha, who tore the robe when his teacher ascended. What then do (the angels) say? "This same Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way." And (it is said): "Two men stood before them." And so it should be, because "in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word shall be firm" (2 Corinthians 13:1). That's exactly what they say. "In white," it is said, "clothes." As before at the tomb (the women) had already seen an angel "in shining garments" (Luke 24:4), who announced to them what they were thinking about, so the witness of the ascension of Christ is an angel. However, this, as well as the resurrection, was repeatedly predicted by the prophets. 4. Angels are everywhere messengers, for example, at the birth of Christ, again at the (annunciation) of Mary, as well as at the resurrection; so also at the ascension; And at the Second Coming, the angels will appear as forerunners. Since they said: "This is Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven," then, in order not to perplex the disciples, they added: "He will come in the same way." The disciples were somewhat relieved when they heard that He would come again, and He would come in the same way, and would not be inaccessible. It is not without reason that the word "from you" is used, but it shows Christ's love for the disciples, their election, and that He will not forsake those whom He has chosen. Thus, Christ Himself testified to the resurrection, since after the nativity, or better, and before the nativity, the most amazing thing was that He raised Himself: "Destroy this," He said, "this temple, and I will raise it up in three days" (John 2:19); And the angels testify to the coming to come, saying, "He will come in the same way." Therefore, if anyone desires to see Christ, if anyone grieves that he has not seen Him, let him, having heard of His future coming, lead a perfect life, and then he will surely see Him, and will not be deceived in hope. He will come with greater glory, but also on a cloud, also with a body; and it is much more wonderful to see Him descending from heaven than ascending from the earth. That He would come, the angels said; but – for what purpose, this was not added. This is a confirmation of the resurrection, because if He ascended with a body, how much more did He rise with a body. Where are those who do not believe in the resurrection? Who are they, tell me? Pagans, or Christians? I don't know, or better, I know quite well. These are the pagans, who do not believe in the very creation of creation. It is their business not to admit that God creates anything out of nothing, and not to admit that He will resurrect what is buried. But they are ashamed that they do not acknowledge the power of God, and hence, in order to avoid reproach for this, they say: "Not because we say this, but because there is no need of a body." It is truly opportune to say: "The ignorant speaketh foolishness" (Isaiah 32:6). Aren't you ashamed when you don't admit that God creates out of nothing? But if He creates from something that exists, how does He differ from people? But where does evil come from, they say? Is it because you do not know where evil comes from, that you must introduce another evil – in the knowledge of evil? There are two inconsistencies here: the first is that you dare to say so; for if you do not acknowledge that God created things out of nothing, how much more will you not know where evil comes from; and the second is that, by saying this, you introduce evil that is unborn. Think how bad it is to wish to find the source of evil, but not knowing it, to bring in another one! Seek whence evil comes, and do not blaspheme God. But how, you say, do I blaspheme? What are you saying? Do you not blaspheme when you introduce unborn evil, when you admit that it is equal to God, that it has the same power that it is unborn? See what Paul says: "His invisible things, His eternal power and Godhead, are visible from the foundation of the world, through the contemplation of the creatures" (Romans 1:20); but the devil, on the contrary, said that both are of matter, so that we would no longer know God from anywhere. Which is more difficult, tell me: is it to make evil by nature beautiful (if only it exists: I speak in accordance with your opinion, because nothing can be done that is by nature evil, which promotes good), or to create from nothing? What is easier, I am talking about quality, to introduce a non-existent quality, or to turn the existing into its opposite? What is easier – to build a house that does not exist, or to rebuild a ruined house again? Obviously, the former. But this is (in your opinion) impossible. Therefore, just as this is impossible, so it is impossible to transform anything into its opposite. 5. Tell me: which is more difficult, to prepare the world, or to make the dirt produce the effects of the world? Which of the two is more agreeable, tell me (we subject God to our reasoning, but it is not us, no, but you): should we arrange the eyes, or should we make the blind man, while remaining blind, see, be sharper than the one who sees, take advantage of blindness in order to see, and deafness in order to hear? I think it is the former. Tell me, then, what is more difficult, you leave to God, and what is easier, you do not? But what do I say about this? And the souls themselves, in their opinion, come from the essence of God. But see how much (in their teaching) is impious and senseless. First, in order to show that evil is from God, they introduce another evil, more impious than this: they say that evil is contemporary with God, and that God is not in the least older than it, thus daring to ascribe to evil so great an advantage. Secondly, it is said that evil is immortal, because the unborn does not perish. Do you see what blasphemy? From this it follows either that nothing came from God, or that there is no God. Thirdly, by this, as I have already said, they contradict themselves and raise up the greater wrath of God against themselves. Fourthly, to a substance which cannot exist by itself (υλη αστατος) they ascribe such great power. Fifthly, it is said that the cause of God's goodness was evil, and that without it the Good One would not be Good. Sixthly, they block for us the path to the knowledge of God. Seventh, God is brought down into people, into plants and trees. For if our soul is from the essence of God, and during transmigration it passes into pumpkins, melons, and onions, then, consequently, the essence of God will also be in pumpkins. If we say that the Holy Spirit formed the temple in the Virgin, they laugh; if we say that He dwelt in a spiritual temple, they laugh again; and they themselves are not ashamed to bring down the essence of God into pumpkins, melons, flies, caterpillars, and donkeys, inventing some new form of idolatry. "But not the onion (you say) in God, but God in the bulb – let not the onion be God." Why do you not allow God to transmigrate into bodies? "Low," you say. In this case, even lower is that (what you say). "No, not low." Is that so? At least with us, if it were, it is truly low. Do you see the crowd of wickedness? But why do they not want the body to be resurrected? What will they say? That the body is evil? How, tell me, do you know God? Whence hast thou knowledge of things? How can a philosopher be a philosopher if the body does not help him in the least? Damage your senses and learn something you need to know. What would be more senseless than the soul if it had damaged feelings from the very beginning? If injury to one member alone, that is, to the brain, is completely detrimental to it, then what will it be good for, if others are also damaged? Show me a soul without a body. Do you not hear what the physicians say: the illness that befalls the soul is completely darkened? How long will you not hang yourself? Tell me: is the body made of matter? Ok. Therefore, it would be necessary to hate him. Why do you nourish it, why do you warm it? Therefore you should have killed yourself; he would have to free himself from prison. Moreover, God cannot conquer matter (υλη) unless He is mixed with it; It cannot command it until it is with it and spreads throughout its entire composition. What impotence! And the king does all things, giving commands; and God cannot command evil? In general, if matter did not partake of some good, it could not exist. For evil, by its nature, cannot exist unless it is united with some good; therefore, if it had not been mixed with good before, it would have perished long ago, such is the property of evil.

Let there be a city inhabited by evil people: can it exist? And let these people be evil not only to the good, but also to themselves: obviously, (such a city) cannot exist. Truly, "calling themselves wise, they have become fools" (Romans 1:22). If the body is evil, then everything that is visible without distinction – water, earth, sun, and air – is also evil, because air is also a body, although it is neither solid nor solid. Therefore, it is opportune to say: "The transgressors have told me their reasoning" (Psalm 118:85). But let us not hearken unto them; on the contrary, let us shield our ears from them. There is, indeed there is a resurrection of the body. it is the tree to which Christ was bound when he was scourged. "With Him," said the Apostles (of Christ), "they ate and drank" (Acts 10:41). Let us believe in the resurrection and act worthy of it, so that we may also be vouchsafed future blessings in Christ Jesus our Lord, with Whom the Father, with the Holy Spirit. By the Spirit, glory, dominion, honor, now and ever, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.

CONVERSATION 3

"Then they returned to Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet, which is near Jerusalem, at the distance of the Sabbath journey" (Acts 1:12). The office of the bishop. – His work and dignity. 1. "Then they returned." When – "then"? When they heard (the words of the angels). The disciples would not have endured (separation from the Lord) at all, if they had not been promised that He would come another time. And it seems to me that this happened on the Sabbath: otherwise the writer would not have marked the distance in this way, would not have said: "From the mountain called Olivet, which is near Jerusalem, at the distance of the Sabbath journey," if they had not passed through the space of the journey appointed for that day on the Sabbath day. "And when they came, they went up into the upper room, where they dwelt" (v. 13). This means that they remained in Jerusalem after the resurrection. "Peter," it is said, "and James, John." Not only John and his brother are already mentioned, but also Andrew and Peter: "Andrew, Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew, James of Alphaeus and Simon the Zealot, and Judas the brother of James." It was not without reason that he mentioned the disciples by name: since one of them became a traitor, another renounced, and a third did not believe, he shows that, except for one traitor, all were intact. "They all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication, with some of the women" (v. 14). Well done! Prayer is a powerful weapon in the midst of temptations. This, on the one hand, they had already been sufficiently taught by the Teacher Himself, and on the other hand, they were also disposed by the present temptation: for this reason they ascend to the upper room, because they were greatly afraid of the Jews. "With women," says (the writer), since (in the Gospel) he said that they followed Christ. "And Mary, the Mother of Jesus, and with His brethren." But how does (John) say that then "the disciple took her unto himself" (John 19:27)? After Christ gathered the disciples again, she was with them again. "With His brethren," says of those who had not believed Christ before. "And in those days Peter stood in the midst of the disciples, and said" (v. 15). Peter is always the first to speak, partly because of the vivacity of his character, and partly because Christ entrusted him with His flock, and he was the first in the countenance. "(And there was a congregation of about a hundred and twenty men): Men, brethren! It was necessary to fulfill that which the Holy Spirit had foretold in the Scriptures" (v. 16). Why did he not only ask Christ in his own person to give him someone instead of Judas? Or why don't the apostles (all together) make a choice for themselves? Peter is now better than he was before: this is how the first question can be answered. As to why they ask for the replenishment of their congregation, not simply, but by revelation, I will point out two reasons: first, that they were engaged in other work; and the other was that this was the greatest proof that Christ was with them. He, even in his absence (visibly), chose himself as accurately as when he was with them: and this was no small consolation for them. But see how Peter does everything by common consent, and does not dispose of anything arbitrarily and as a ruler. And he did not simply say, "In the place of Judas we elect so-and-so"; But in order to reassure the disciples about what has happened, see how he begins his speech. This event, indeed, caused them no small bewilderment; And there is nothing surprising in this: if even now many talk about him, then what should they naturally have said then? "Men," he says, "brethren." If the Lord called them brethren, then it was all the more fitting for Peter to be addressed in such a way, which is why he exclaims this in the presence of all. Such is the dignity of the church and its angelic state! No one was then separated from the others, neither man nor woman. And it is desirable for me that the churches be like this now. At that time, no one cared about anything mundane, no one worried about home. That is how useful temptations are! Such is the blessing of misfortunes! "It was necessary to fulfill what the Holy Spirit had foretold in the Scriptures." He constantly comforts them with prophecy. In every case, Christ acts in the same way. In the same way, Peter shows that there is nothing strange in this event, but that it has already been foretold. "It behooved," he says, "to be fulfilled that which the Holy Spirit had foretold in the Scriptures by the mouth of David." He does not say, "David said," but, "The Spirit is through him." Notice at the very beginning of the book what kind of teaching he uses. You see, it was not in vain that I said at the beginning of this work that this book (depicts) the dispensation (πολιτεία) of the Spirit. "The Holy Spirit foretold by the mouth of David"; See how he assimilates the prophet and exposes his name, knowing that it will be profitable for them that this saying belongs to David, and not to another prophet. "Of Judas, the Former Leader." Note here also the wisdom of this man: he does not revile or dishonor (Judas), does not say that he was a villain and the most terrible evildoer, but simply explains what happened. He does not even call him a traitor, but tries, as far as it was possible for him, to lay the blame on others. However, he does not strongly accuse them either: "former," so to speak, "the leader of those who took Jesus." And before he pointed out the place where this saying of David is located, he reminds us of the fate that befell Judas, in order to confirm through the present and in the future, and to show that (Judas) had already received punishment. "He was numbered among us, and received the lot of this ministry; but hath acquired the land with an unrighteous reward" (v. 17, 18). He depicts the temper (of Judas) and imperceptibly reveals (his) guilt worthy of punishment. He does not say, "The Jews (gained)," but, "He acquired the land with an unrighteous reward." And since people with weak souls look not so much at the future as at the present, he tells about the punishment that befell him in the present life. "And when he fell down." He did well to stop his speech not on the crime of Judas, but on the punishment that befell him. "His belly was split, and all his intestines fell out." This served as a consolation for them. "And this became known to all the inhabitants of Jerusalem, so that the land in their native tongue is called Akeldama, that is, the land of blood" (v. 19). 2. The Jews gave this name to the village, not for the sake of the village, but for the sake of Judah; and Peter carried him to the village itself and brought the enemies themselves as witnesses. Both by saying, "called," and by adding, "in their native dialect," he really wants to express this. Then, having first pointed out the event, he decently quotes a prophecy and says: "And in the book of Psalms it is written, Let his court be desolate, and let there be no one who dwells in it; and let another take his dignity" (v. 20; Psalm 68:26). This is (said) about the village and about the house. "And let another take his dignity," i.e., the authorities, the priesthood. Consequently, it is not according to my thought that this is done, but according to the will of Him Who foretold it. Lest it seem as if he was undertaking too great a deed, such as Christ did, he brought the prophet as a witness. "Therefore it is necessary," he says, "that one of those who have been with us all the time" (v. 21). Why does he consult with them? So that this matter would not become a subject of dispute, so that there would be no strife between them. For if this happened to the apostles themselves, how much more would it happen to those people. This he always avoids; That is why I said at the very beginning: "Men, brethren," it is necessary to choose from among us. He leaves this matter to the judgment of the majority, and through this he makes those who are elected venerable, and he turns aside the enmity of others, since such cases always give rise to great evil. And this, that it is necessary to do this, (to choose), to this he brings the prophet as a witness; And from what persons it is necessary (to make a choice), this he himself explains, saying: "One of those who have been with us all the time." If he had said, "It is necessary that these men be able," he would have insulted the rest; and now he left the matter to time, saying not simply, "We were," but, "All the time that the Lord Jesus dwelt and dealt with us, from the baptism of John to the day in which he ascended from us, he was with us a witness of his resurrection" (vv. 21, 22). What is this thing for? So that the (apostolic) face does not remain incomplete. What then? Couldn't Peter himself have been elected? Very possible. But he does not do this, so as not to appear partial; and on the other hand, he has not yet received the Holy Spirit. "And they appointed two: Joseph, who was called Barsabbas, who was called Justus, and Matthias" (v. 23). It was not Peter himself who ordained them, but all of them; and he gave an opinion, showing, however, that it did not belong to him, but had already been (proclaimed) in prophecy from ancient times, so that he was only an interpreter, and not a teacher. "Joseph, who is called Barsabbas, who is called Justus." The writer put both names, perhaps because (Joseph) had namesakes, since there were many namesake among the apostles, for example: James Zebedee and James Alpheus, Simon Peter and Simon the Zealot, Judas James and Judas Iscariot. On the other hand, this name could have been given to him as a result of a change in life, or, perhaps, at his will. "And they set two: Joseph, who is called Barsabbas, who is called Justus, and Matthias; and they prayed, and said, Thou, O Lord, knower of the hearts of all, shew one of these two, whom thou hast chosen to receive the lot of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas fell away to go to his own place" (vv. 23-25). They decently mention the crime of Judas, and thereby show that they are looking for a witness not in order to increase the number (of the apostles), but in order to prevent him from decreasing. "And they cast lots for them," because the Holy Spirit was not yet with them, "and the lot fell on Matthias, and he was numbered among the eleven apostles" (v. 26). "Then," it is said, "they returned to Jerusalem from the mountain called Olivet, which is near Jerusalem, at the distance of the Sabbath journey" (v. 12). Thus says (the writer), wishing to show that they are not undertaking a long journey, so as not to be exposed to any danger, since they were still trembling and afraid. "And when they came, they went up into the upper room" (v. 13). They did not dare to appear in the city, nor did they go up to the upper room in vain, but so that it would not be easy to take them by surprise. "They all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication" (v. 14). Do you see how they watched, "continued in prayer," and moreover, "with one accord," as if they were one soul? In these words lies the testimony of both. Joseph, perhaps, was no longer alive; therefore it is not mentioned (here). It is impossible that this man, who first believed (in Christ), should not be a believer now that the brethren also believed. For this reason, of course, it is nowhere seen that he ever looked upon Christ as a (simple) man, while the Mother said: "Thy father and I sought Thee with great sorrow" (Luke 2:48). Therefore he knew Him before all others; and Christ said to his brothers: "The world cannot hate, but it hates Me" (John 7:7). Look also at the modesty of James: he accepted the bishopric in Jerusalem, and yet, in the present case, he says nothing. Notice also the deep humility of the other disciples: they yield the throne to him and no longer argue among themselves, so that that Church was as it were in heaven; there was nothing worldly in it; it shone not with walls or marble, but with the jealousy of the persons who composed it. "And there was a congregation of about a hundred and twenty men," it is said, there was them. Among them, probably, were seventy disciples, whom Christ Himself had chosen, as well as others from among the most zealous in the faith, for example, Joseph and Matthias; there were also many women who followed Him and were always together. 3. Such is the solicitude of a mentor! He was the first to appoint a teacher. He did not say, "We are enough," so he was devoid of all vanity, and strove only for one goal, although he did not have the same significance as everyone else. However, this was quite natural because of the virtue of this man, and also because at that time superiority was not an honor, but a concern for subordinates. Hence it came about that even those who were elected were not proud, because they were called to danger; and those who were not chosen did not grieve, because they did not consider it a disgrace to themselves. But now it is no longer so, but quite the opposite. See, there were a hundred and twenty of them, and out of all this multitude he demands (that they choose) one, and (demands) justly. He is the first to dispose in this matter, since everyone is entrusted to him. For Christ said to him: "And when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren" (Luke 22:32). "He was numbered," he says, "among us"; and therefore it is necessary to appoint another, so that he may become a witness in the place of Judas. And see how he imitates his Teacher: everywhere he argues on the basis of the Scriptures and says nothing about Christ, that He often predicted this. Nor does he point to those passages of Scripture where the betrayal of Judas is mentioned, e.g.; "the mouth of the sinner and the mouth of the flatterer have been opened against me" (Psalm 108:2); but he cites only the passage where his punishment is mentioned, since now it was only useful for them to learn about this. Here again the Lord's love for mankind is especially visible. "He was numbered," he says, "among us, and received the lot of this ministry." Everywhere he calls it the lot, and thereby shows that everything here is the work of God's grace and the work of election, and at the same time reminds them of ancient times, expressing the idea that God made him His lot just as He made the Levites. Then, continuing to speak of him, he remarks that the reward for his betrayal has become a solemn herald of his punishment. "But he has gained," he says, "the land with an unrighteous reward." Notice how this event took place according to God's dispensation. "Unrighteous." There are many untruths; but there has never been anything more unrighteous than this unrighteousness; this is primarily an unrighteous deed. And this became known not only to contemporaries, but also to all who lived after that. The Jews unwittingly, without knowing it, gave the name (to the village), just as Caiaphas had predicted, without knowing it. God moved them to call him in Hebrew: Akeldama. From this it was already possible to foresee the calamities that would befall the Jews. Further, he shows that the prophecy has already been partially fulfilled, which says: "It would have been better for this man not to have been born" (Matt. 26:24). The same can be applied to the Jews, because if the former leader (suffered such a fate), then with even greater justice (should have experienced it) these people. But (Peter) does not yet say anything of the sort. Then, to show that (this field) is justly called Akeldama, he quotes the prophet's saying: "Let his court be desolate." And what, in fact, can be more desolate than a village turned into a cemetery? And this village, of course, can be called his village. Whoever has paid the next payment for it should justly be considered the lord of this great desolation, even if others have bought it. This desolation, if one delves into the matter attentively, is already the beginning of Jewish desolation. It is known that the Jews destroyed themselves by starvation and killed many, and that their city turned into a cemetery for strangers, for soldiers: they were not allowed to bury (the dead), because they were considered unworthy even of burial. "Therefore it is necessary," he says, "that one of those who were with us." Look, he wants them to be obvious witnesses. Although the Holy Spirit had come to them, for all this, extreme care was directed to this matter. "Therefore it is necessary that one of those who was with us," he says, "all the time that the Lord Jesus dwelt and dealt with us." This shows that they lived with Him, and not just were with Him as His disciples. Indeed, from the very beginning, many followed him. See how (John) points to this when he says: "one of the two who heard from John about Jesus, and followed Him" (John 1:40). "All the time," he says, "when the Lord Jesus dwelt and dealt with us, beginning with the baptism of John." Well done; for what was before this, no one knew by teaching, but learned from the Holy Spirit, "until that day," he says, "in which he ascended from us, was with us a witness of his resurrection" (v. 22). He did not say: "a witness" of the rest, but: "a witness" of the "resurrection" alone, because he (the witness) was more certain, who could say that He was the one who was risen, Who ate, drank, was crucified. There was no need for a witness either for what was before, or for what came after, or for miracles, the question was precisely the resurrection, since it was clearly and universally recognized, and the resurrection took place secretly, and only they knew it. And they do not say, "Angels have told us," but, "We have seen, Whence is it clear?" From the fact that we work miracles. Therefore, it was then that they should have been especially reliable. "And they set up," says (the writer), "two." Why not more? In order not to increase despondency among them, and not to spread this matter to many. And it is not without reason that he places (Matthias) after (Joseph), but by this he shows that he who enjoys respect among men is often less in the sight of God. And all pray together in this way: "Thou, O Lord, Knower of the Heart of all, show me" (v. 24). You, they say, not us. The Knower of the Heart is also called upon at the right time: it was fitting that He should make the election, and not strangers. So they were sure that one should certainly be chosen. And they did not say, 'Choose; but, "Show," they say, "the chosen one, whom Thou hast chosen," they knew that with God all things were ordained beforehand. "Show one of these two, whom thou hast chosen to accept the lot of this ministry and apostleship" (v. 24, 25), because there was another ministry. "And they cast lots for them" (v. 26). They did not yet consider themselves worthy of making their own choice; therefore they want to know by means of some sign. 4. On the other hand, if where there was neither prayer nor worthy people, the lot had such great power because it was the result of a just decision towards Jonah, then it was much more so here, where it was necessary to complete the countenance, to restore the order (apostolic). And the other (Joseph) was not grieved (because he was not chosen): otherwise the apostles would have said so, since they did not hide their shortcomings. For even of the chief apostles they did not fail to remark that they were sometimes dissatisfied; And this is not once, but twice, and even more often. Let us imitate them, for my word does not yet apply to all, but only to those who seek power. If you believe that the choice is made by God, then do not be indignant: otherwise you will be dissatisfied with Him, you will be irritated against Him, because He has chosen. If, in spite of His election, you dare to be grieved, then you act as Cain did. He should have approved (the sentence of God), but he was grieved because of the preference given to his brother's sacrifice; indignant when he should have been touched. But, however, this is not the point, but the fact that God knows how best to arrange things. It often happens that in character, for example, you are more modest, but do not correspond to the goal. Again, your life is irreproachable and you have a noble character, but this is not only what is needed in the Church. And moreover, one is suitable for one thing, and the other for another. Do you not see how much is said about this in the Holy Scriptures? But I will tell you why this matter has become an object of harassment: the reason is that we seek it, not as a duty to govern others and care for the brethren, but as an honor and a quiet life. And if you knew that a bishop should belong to everyone and bear the burdens of all, that others are forgiven when they are angry, but never him, that others, if they sin, are willingly excused, but he is not, you would not seek this leadership, you would not strive for it. The bishop is subject to the judgment of everyone, to the judgment of all, both the wise and the foolish; every day, every night, he is exhausted in cares; He has many ill-wishers, many envious people. Do not speak to me of those who please in everything, who want to sleep, who go to this work as to rest – I am not talking about them, but about those who watch over your souls, who prefer the salvation of their subordinates to their own. Tell me: if he who has ten children, who are subject to him and always live with him, is forced to take care of them unceasingly, then what should he be like who has so many persons who are not subject to him, who do not live with him, but freely dispose of themselves? For that, you will say, he enjoys honor. By what honor? The last beggars revile him in the square. So why don't you silence them? Ok; But this is not the bishop's business. And again, do not give to everyone, both those who spend their time in idleness and those who work, a thousand reproaches from all sides; no one is afraid to accuse and slander him. They are afraid to condemn (worldly) rulers; but these (bishops) do not, because the fear of God has no power in such people. And what can be said about concern for the word and for teaching? About the difficulty of ordinations? Or perhaps I am very weak, pitiful, and insignificant, or it is really as I say. The soul of a priest is no different from a ship tossed about by the waves; On all sides it is wounded by friends, enemies, friends, and strangers. Does not the king govern the world, while the bishop governs only the city? But the care of the latter is as much greater as the rising and raging sea differs from the water of the river, which is moved only by the wind. Why would this be so? Because there are many helpers there, and everything is done according to the law and by decree; but here there is nothing of the sort, and it is impossible to order at will. But if you act strongly, you will be called cruel; and if not too much, cold. It is necessary to combine both, so as not to be neglected, and not to deserve hatred. On the other hand, the matters themselves are especially difficult here. How many (the bishop) is forced to grieve, willingly or unwillingly! How many are forced to act harshly, whether he wants it or not! I speak in no other way, but exactly as I think and feel. I do not think that there are many among the priests who are being saved; on the contrary, there are many more who are perishing, and precisely because this work requires a great soul. A bishop has many needs that compel him to leave his home; He needs thousands of eyes on all sides. Do you not see how much he needs to have? He must be instructive, patient, and hold fast to "the true word according to doctrine, that it may be strong and instruct in sound doctrine" (Timothy 3:2; Titus 1:9, etc.). And how difficult it is! And then, when others sin, the guilt falls on him. Without saying anything else, I will only say that if only one person departs (from this life) without initiation into the sacraments, will this not overthrow all his salvation? For the destruction of even one soul is such a loss that no word can express. If her salvation has such a price, that the Son of God also became a man for this purpose and endured so much, then think what punishment her destruction will entail! If the one through whom another perishes is worthy of death in the present life, then it is much more so there. Do not say to me: a presbyter or a deacon has sinned, – the guilt of all of them falls on the head of those who ordained them. I will also point out something else: if one of the bad people happens to be received into the clergy, there is perplexity: what decision should be made regarding his former sins? There are two abysses here: he should not be left unpunished, and the rest should not be tempted. Is it necessary, then, to vomit it up? But at present there is no reason. Or leave him unpunished? Yes, you will, because the one who ordained it is to blame. So what is it? Is it not necessary, at least, to ordain him and elevate him to another degree? But then it will be clear to everyone that he is some kind of bad person, and, consequently, temptation will again arise from here. Or elevate him to the highest degree? But this is much worse. 5. And so, if everyone aspired to the episcopacy as a duty to care for others, then no one would soon dare to accept it. Otherwise we are chasing after him as surely as we are after worldly offices. In order to be in glory, in order to attain honor among men, we perish in the sight of God. And what is the use of honor? How clearly it has been proved to be nothing! When you strongly desire the priesthood, then oppose hell, oppose the account that should be given there, oppose the rest of life, oppose the degree of punishment. If you sin simply as a man, you will not tolerate anything of the kind; but if you sin as a priest, you are lost. Think how much he endured, how much wisdom he took, how much good Moses showed in himself; and yet, because he had committed only sin, he suffered severe punishment. And rightly so, because it was combined with harm to others. Thus, he was punished with special severity, not only because his sin was obvious, but also because it was the sin of a priest. And yet we are not subjected to the same punishment for open sins and for secret sins. Sin is one and the same, but the harm from it is not the same, or rather, the sin is not the same, because it is not the same – to sin secretly and imperceptibly, and to sin openly. And a bishop cannot sin secretly. It is already good if he is free from reproaches, when he does not sin; and there is nothing to say about when he sins. Whether he is angry, whether he laughs, whether he wants to rest himself by sleeping, there are many mockers, many who are offended, many legislators, many who remember the former (bishops) and blaspheme the present; and this is not done because they want to praise those – no, – they remember the former bishops and presbyters only in order to hurt them. War, they say, is pleasant for those who have not experienced it. The same is proper to say now; or better, we say so until we have entered upon the podvig; and as soon as we enter, we are not even known to the people. We no longer have a struggle against those who oppress the poor; we do not take the trouble to fight for our flock, but, like those shepherds mentioned in Ezekiel (34:2), we only slaughter and eat. Who among us shows the same concern for the flock of Christ as Jacob had for the flocks of Laban? Who can boast of anything that could be equal to enduring the cold of the night? Do not call me all-night vigils on a par with this great solicitude. No, now everything is completely different. District governors and local governors do not enjoy such great honor as the rulers of the Church. Will he enter the royal palace – who will take the first place? Whether it be with women, or in noble houses, no one else has greater honor before him. Everything is lost, everything is ruined! I say this not to shame you, but to keep you from this passion. With what conscience will you be, if you have coveted (this rank) either by yourself or through someone else? With what eyes will you look at the one who was your accomplice? What excuse will you have? Whoever (accepted this dignity) against his will, under compulsion, against his will, has some other justification; Though he is for the most part denied forgiveness, yet he has some excuse. Think what Simon was subjected to? What is the need, that you do not give silver, but, in exchange for silver, flatter and use all sorts of intrigues and tricks? "Thy silver shall perish" (Acts 8:20), he was told; and it will also be said to these people, Let your covetousness be with you unto destruction, because you have thought to acquire the gift of God through the machinations of men. But there is no one like that? Oh, if only it hadn't! For I do not wish that my words should apply to you; And now I had to say it only in the course of my speech. And when I speak against covetousness, my words do not apply to you either, or even to any of you. May God grant that we prepare medicines in vain. And the wishes of doctors are exactly the same: not what else they want, but that, after their considerable work, the medicines should be thrown away for nothing. We want the same thing, that is, that our words be spoken simply, in the air, so that they remain only words. I am ready to endure everything so as not to be forced to talk about it. However, if you like, we will be silent; only let our silence be safe: I do not think that anyone, however vain, would want to speak unnecessarily, and only to show himself. We will leave it to you to teach; Learning by works is a more important teaching. And the best physicians, notwithstanding that the sickness of the sick bring them profits, desire that their friends should be in good health; so I want you all to be healthy. I do not want to be praised and you to be condemned. I would like, if possible, to show by my very eyes the love that I have for you: then no one would reproach me with anything, even if my word were too harsh. What is said between friends is easily tolerated, even if there is something offensive in it, because "sincere are the reproaches of him that loves, and false are the kisses of him that hates" (Proverbs 27:6). For me there is nothing dearer than you, – not even this light is dearer. A thousand times I would like to lose my sight myself, if only through this it were possible to convert your souls, so your salvation is more pleasant to me than the light itself. And what profit does the rays of the sun profit me, when sorrow for you brings deep darkness to my eyes? Light is good when it appears in a time of joy; and for a sorrowful soul it seems even burdensome. And that I am not lying – God forbid that I should ever be convinced of this by experience! But, however, if it should happen that any of you sins, come to me while I am sleeping: let me perish, if I do not resemble the paralytics, if I do not resemble the ecstatic; then, in the words of the prophet, "the light of my eyes is not with me" (Psalm 37:11). What hope is there for you when you don't show success? And if you deserve praise, what kind of sorrow is possible? I think I'm flying (for joy) when I hear something good about you. "Complete my joy" (Phil. 2:2). This is the only thing I ask of you, because I wish you success: And I will argue with everyone about the fact that I love you, that I have become related to you, that you are everything to me – father, mother, brothers, and children. Do not think, then, that I am saying anything out of dislike for you; No, (I say) for your correction. "A brother," says the Scriptures, "is helped by a brother as a mighty city" (Proverbs 18:19). Therefore, do not disregard my words. For I do not refuse to listen to you; No, I would like you to correct me, I would like to learn from you. After all, we are all brothers, and we have one Teacher; but even among the brethren it is necessary that one should give orders, and the rest should obey. So do not despise my words, but let us do everything for the glory of God, for to Him be the glory forever and ever. Amen.

CONVERSATION 4

"At the coming of the day of Pentecost, they were all with one accord together. And suddenly there was a noise from heaven, as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were" (Acts 2:1-2). Why did the Holy Spirit descend on Pentecost? – The Holy Spirit. descended on the worshippers. – On Ap. Petra. – Comparison of the Apostles with the Philosophers. 1. What is this Pentecost? This is the time when it was necessary to cut the harvest with a sickle, when it was necessary to gather the fruit. Have you seen the image? Look, in turn, at the truth itself. When it was necessary to use the sickle of the word, when it was necessary to gather the harvest, then the Spirit flies like a sophisticated sickle. Listen, indeed, to what Christ says: "Lift up your eyes, and see how they are white, and are ripe for harvest" (John 4:35); and again: "The harvest is plentiful, but the laborers are few" (Luke 10:2). Thus, Christ Himself was the first to lay the sickle; He lifted up to heaven the firstfruits of our nature; therefore they call it the harvest. "At the coming," it is said, "the day of Pentecost," that is, not before Pentecost, but near Pentecost itself, so to speak. It was fitting that this also should take place during the feast, so that those who were present at the cross of Christ would see this event as well. "And suddenly there was a noise from heaven." Why did this event not take place without any sensible manifestations? Because, if the Jews also said, "They were drunk with sweet wine," then what would they not have said if nothing of the kind had happened? And not just a noise, but "from the sky". And by his suddenness he stirred up his disciples. "And he filled the whole house." This shows the great swiftness of the Spirit. Note, All were gathered together, that those present might believe, and the disciples might be worthy. And not only this (says Luke), but he adds what is much more striking: "And there appeared to them cloven tongues as of fire" (v. 3). It is beautifully added everywhere: "as if," so that you do not think anything sensual about the Spirit: "as if fiery," it is said, and "as if from a rushing strong wind." It was not the wind that usually spreads in the air. When John needed to recognize the Holy Spirit, He descended on the head of Christ in the form of a dove; and now, when all the people were to be converted, He appears in the form of fire. "And they rested on each of them," i.e., stopped, rested: to sit down means to be affirmed, to remain in place. What then? Did the Holy Spirit descend on the twelve disciples alone, and not on the rest? No, – He came down on all one hundred and twenty people. Peter not without reason cited the testimony of the prophet, saying: "And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, that I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy; and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall be admonished by dreams" (v. 17). And note, it was so that he might not only smite them, but also fill them with grace; therefore (it is said): "By the Holy Spirit and by fire" (Matt. 3:11). "And they were filled," he adds, "with all the Holy Spirit, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance" (v. 4). Before any other sign they receive this, because it was extraordinary, and there was no need of another sign. "And they rested," it is said, "on each of them," and therefore also on him who was not chosen; therefore he no longer grieves that he is not chosen like Matthias. It is said, "And all were fulfilled." Not only did they receive the grace of the Spirit, but they were filled. "And they began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance." I would not have said "all," although there were also apostles, if the rest had not participated. On the other hand, having previously spoken of them separately and by name, he would not have spoken of them now along with the others. If, where it was only necessary to say that the apostles were here, he mentions them separately, how much more would he mention them here. But notice, please see how the Spirit comes just when they're in prayer, when they're in love. And the words, "as if of fire," reminded them of another vision, for He appeared like fire in the bush. "As the Spirit gave them utterance"; Their words were indeed prophecies (αποφθέγματα). It is said, "And there were Jews in Jerusalem, a pious people" (v. 5). That they were reverent is evidenced by the fact that they lived there. How? Belonging to so many peoples and leaving their homeland, their homes, their relatives, they lived here. "And there were Jews in Jerusalem, pious men, of every nation under heaven. When this uproar was made, the people gathered together, and were thrown into confusion" (v. 5, 6). Since this event happened in the house, those who were outside the house naturally came running. "The people, and they were troubled." What does it mean, "in confusion"? I was embarrassed, surprised. Then (the writer), explaining why they were surprised, adds: "For every one heard them speaking in his own language." So the people gathered together, "saying among themselves, 'Are not all these who speak Galileans?' (vv. 6-7) Immediately they turned their eyes to the apostles. "Why," they say, "we each hear our own dialect in which we were born. Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the inhabitants of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya adjacent to Cyrene, and those who came from Rome, Jews and proselytes, Cretans and Arabians, do we hear them speaking in our tongues about the great works of God? And they were all amazed, and perplexed, they said to one another, What does this mean? (vv. 8-12). Do you see how they rush from east to west? "And others, mocking, said, They (γλεύκους) are drunk with sweet wine" (v. 13). 2. What madness! What great malice! Now was not the time for new wine (γλεύκους), because it was Pentecost. And what is worse still, while everyone acknowledges (the miracle), both the Romans and the strangers, and perhaps even those who crucified (the Lord), they say after all this, "they are drunk with sweet wine." But let us return to what has been said above. "And he filled the whole house." The stormy breath was like a font of water; and fire is a sign of abundance and power. This never happened to the prophets; so it was only now, with the apostles; but it is different with the prophets. For example, Ezekiel is given a scroll of a book, and he eats what he should have said: "And it was," he says, "in my mouth sweet as honey" (Ezekiel 3:3). Or again: the hand of God touches the tongue of another prophet (Jeremiah 1:9). And here the Holy Spirit Himself (does everything) and is thus equal to the Father and the Son. Again and in another place (the prophet) says: "Weeping, and groaning, and woe" (Ezekiel 2:10). The prophets naturally (grace was given) in the form of a book, they still needed images; moreover, they had to deal with only one people, with their own people, and the apostles with the whole universe, with people whom they had never known. Elisha receives grace through mercy; another, like David, by means of oil; Moses is summoned by means of the burning bush; But here it is not so, and the fire itself "rested" on the apostles. Why didn't the fire fill the houses? Because it would strike them with terror. However, from the words (of the writer) it is clear that this was so; Only pay attention not to these words: "And there appeared to them cloven tongues," but to others: "As of fire." Such a multitude of fires can engulf a huge forest in flames. And it is beautifully said, "divided"; for they were from the same root, so that you may know that this is the power sent by the Comforter. But look: the apostles also first showed themselves worthy, and then they were vouchsafed the Spirit. So it is with David: as he did while he was still with the flocks, so he behaved in the same way after the victory and after the triumph, in order to show his simple faith. Look again at Moses: he (at first) despises the royal chambers, and after forty years he receives the government of the people; or Samuel, who was brought up in the temple; or Elisha, who had forsaken everything; or Ezekiel again. And that this was indeed the case (with the apostles) is clear from what follows: they left everything that they had. Therefore, they receive the Holy Ghost when they have discovered their virtue. They also learned human weakness from what they experienced; learned that they had not performed these feats in vain. In the same way, Saul first had a testimony of himself that he was good, and only then did he receive the Holy Ghost. But no one, not even the greatest of the prophets, Moses, received as much as the apostles. Moses, when it was necessary for others to become spiritual, underwent a diminution himself; But here it is not so. On the contrary, just as the fire, no matter how many lamps one wants to light from it, does not diminish in the least, so it happened then with the apostles. By means of fire not only the abundance of grace was shown, but everyone received the (inexhaustible) source of the Spirit, just as Christ Himself said that those who believe in Him will have a fountain of water flowing into eternal life (John 4:14). And this is very natural, because they did not go to talk to Pharaoh, but to fight with the devil. And, what is more surprising: when they were sent, they did not contradict in the least, and did not say that they were ill-spoken and tongue-tied, as Moses taught them, and did not say that they were too young, in which Jeremiah made them wise. Though they had heard many terrible things, and much more than they (the prophets), yet they were afraid to contradict them. From this it can be seen that these were angels of light and ministers of higher works. No one appears to the prophets from heaven, because they still care about what is on earth; but after man has ascended on high, the Holy Spirit also comes down from on high, "as of a rushing," it is said, "a mighty wind." This shows that nothing will be able to resist them, but that they will scatter their opponents like dust. "And he filled the whole house." The house served as a symbol of peace. "The people gathered together, and were troubled." Do you see the piety of these people – how is it that they do not immediately pronounce sentence, but are perplexed? And those foolish ones pronounce judgment, saying, "They are drunk with sweet wine." Since according to the law they were allowed to appear in the temple three times a year, pious people from all nations lived here. Notice from the present case how the writer does not flatter them: he did not say that they gave their vote, but what? "The people gathered together, and were troubled." This is natural; they thought that the present event threatened them with destruction for what they had dared to do against Christ. On the other hand, their conscience also shook their souls, for the murder was still in their hands, so to speak, and everything frightened them. "Are not all these who speak Galileans?" So they recognized it. And they were so amazed by this noise that people from most of the universe gathered here. Meanwhile, for the apostles themselves, this served as a reinforcement; they did not know what it meant to speak Parthian, and now they learned from these people. And the writer mentions the peoples hostile to them – the Cretans, the Arabs, the Egyptians, the Persians – in order to show that they would overcome them all. 3. Since the Jews were in captivity at that time, it is probable that many of the Gentiles came here with them; and on the other hand, the rumor of the dogmas had already spread among the peoples at that time, and therefore many of them were present here, in remembrance of what they had heard. Thus, the testimony from all sides was indisputable – on the part of citizens, on the part of foreigners, on the part of strangers. "We hear them with our tongues, speaking of the great works of God." They did not just speak, but said something wonderful; and therefore these people were rightly perplexed, since there had never been anything like it. Notice the prudence of these people: they were amazed and perplexed, saying: "To one another, what does this mean? And others, mocking, said, They are drunk with sweet wine" (v. 12, 13). What shamelessness if they laughed about it! And what, however, is surprising here, if they say of the Lord Himself, when He cast out demons, that "He hath Beelzebub in Himself" (Mark 3:22)? Where insolence prevails, there is only one thing to worry about saying something; not about saying anything reasonable, but just to say something. "They're drunk on sweet wine." True, it is so, because people surrounded by so many dangers, trembling for life itself, which is in such sorrow, dare to say such things! And behold, since this was incredible, in order to deceive the hearers and show that (the apostles) were really drunk, they attribute everything to the quality (of the drink) and say: "They were drunk with sweet wine." "And Peter stood with the eleven, and lifted up his voice, and cried unto them." There you see his solicitude, and here his courage. Let them be amazed, let them be amazed; But at the same time not to give a voice among such a multitude of people? If even when you speak among your own people, you are confused, then how much more so when you speak between enemies, between people who breathe murder. And that (the apostles) were not drunk, this was immediately made evident from their voices, because they did not fall into a frenzy like the possessed, and were not deprived of the freedom to control themselves. But what does "with eleven" mean? That is, they defended themselves with a common voice: Peter ministered through the mouth of all, and the other eleven (disciples) stood before him, confirming his words with their testimony. "He lifted up his voice," i.e., he spoke with great boldness. And he does this in order that they may know the grace of the Spirit. In fact, before he could not bear the question of an insignificant servant, but now, in the midst of the crowd of the people, when everyone breathes murder, he speaks with such boldness! This was an unmistakable testimony to the resurrection, because he acts with such boldness among people who laughed and mocked at such a great event. Think how much insolence, how much impiety, how much shamelessness is needed to consider the extraordinary gift of tongues as the work of drunkenness! But all this did not in the least embarrass the apostles and did not take away their courage, although they heard these ridicules. With the coming of the Spirit, they have already changed and have become above all things carnal – because where the Holy Spirit appears, there also the perishable become golden. Look, for example, I beg you, at Peter and recognize in him that man – fearful, foolish, just as Christ said: "Do you not yet understand?" (Matt. 15:16), a man who, after his wondrous confession, was called Satan (Matt. 16:23). Pay attention also to the unanimity of the apostles: they yield to him to speak to the people, because it was not necessary to speak to everyone. "He lifted up his voice," it is said, "and began to speak to them with great boldness. This is what it means to become a spiritual man! Let us also make ourselves worthy of the highest grace, and then everything will be easy for us. Just as a fiery man, having fallen into the stubble, will not suffer any harm, but on the contrary, he himself will cause harm, because he himself does not suffer in the least, and the stalks that attach themselves to him destroy themselves, so it was now. Or better: just as a man who has fire in his hand boldly enters into battle with the one who carries hay, so the apostles came out against these people with great courage. And, in fact, what harm did this large crowd do them? Tell me: did they not struggle with poverty and hunger? Have you not fought with dishonor and bad reputation? After all, they were considered deceivers. Were they not subjected to ridicule and abuse from those present? After all, both fell upon them: some laughed at them, and others cursed at them. Were they not subject to the fury and fury of entire cities, to rebellions and malice? Were they not threatened by fire, and iron, and beasts? Did they not have to fight with innumerable enemies on all sides? Were they not in such a state as if they had seen these disasters in a dream or in a picture? And what happened? Have they not exhausted the fury of their enemies? Have you not put them in difficulty? Were not these people most obsessed with both anger and fear? Were they not anxious, fearful, and trembling? In fact, listen to what they say: "You want to bring the blood of that man upon us" (Acts 5:28). And, what is surprising, the apostles, completely unarmed, took up arms against the armed, against the leaders who had authority over them; Inexperienced, unskilled in words, and utterly simple, they confronted and waged a struggle with the artificers, the deceivers, the crowd of sophists, rhetoricians, and philosophers, who had rotted away in the academies and in the school of the Peripatetics. And he who had previously exercised only near the lakes, conquered them as accurately as if he were fighting with dumb fishes; Yes, he defeated everyone as a true fisherman defeats dumb fishes. And Plato, who had been so delirious, fell silent; but this one speaks, and not only to his own people, but also to the Parthians, to the Medes, to the Elamites, and in India, and everywhere on earth, even to the ends of the universe. Where is the pride of Greece now? Where is the glory of Athens? Where is the ravings of philosophers? A Galilean, a Bethsaidite, a commoner, defeated them all. Tell me, are you not ashamed at the mere name of the country that was the homeland of your conqueror? And if you hear his name, and learn that his name was Cephas, you will be even more ashamed. It is precisely this that has ruined you, that you consider it humiliating for yourself, that you find all glory in eloquence, and consider the lack of art in the gift of speech a disgrace. You did not follow the path you should have taken; but you have left the royal path – convenient and smooth, and have followed the uneven, steep and difficult path. That is why you have not reached the kingdom of heaven. 4. But why, you say, did Christ not act through Plato or Pythagoras? Because the soul of Peter was much more capable of wisdom than the soul of those people. Those were real children, who were carried away everywhere by empty glory; but Peter was a man of wisdom and capable of receiving grace. And if you laugh when you hear this, there is nothing surprising in it. For the Jews also laughed at that time and said that the apostles were drunk with new wine. But later, when they suffered those grievous and most cruel disasters, when they saw that the city was perishing, that the fire was spreading and the walls were falling to the ground, when they saw those various furies that no one can depict in words, then they no longer laughed. In the same way, you will not laugh when the time of judgment comes, when the fire of hell is kindled. But why am I talking about the future? Do you want me to show you what Peter is like and what Plato is like? Let us examine their manners for the time being, if you will, and see what both of them did. The latter has spent all his time in studying useless and empty subjects. Indeed, what is the use of knowing that the soul of a philosopher becomes a fly? Truly (Platonov's soul) is a fly; it did not turn into a fly, but the fly entered the soul that dwelt in Plato. What idle talk this is! Where could it have occurred to me to talk such nonsense? He was a man full of mockery and envious of everyone. It was as if he were trying not to produce anything useful from himself or from others; Thus from another he borrowed the transmigration of souls, and he himself introduced the doctrine of civil society, in which he prescribed the most abominable rules. Let the wives be common, he said, let the naked maidens fight before the eyes of their lovers, let the fathers and the children who are born be common. Is this not above all madness? But such is Plato with his teaching. Here it is not nature that makes the fathers common, but the wisdom of Peter. As for the teaching (of Plato), it even destroyed (the common fathers), because it produced nothing else than that the real father was almost unknown, and the real father was recognized as the father. Plato plunged the soul into a kind of intoxication and filth. Let everyone, he says, use women without any fear. Therefore I will not examine the teachings of the poets, lest it be said that I am engaged in fables; but I will speak of other fables, which are much more ridiculous than these. Have the poets ever said any such absurdity? And he who was revered as the head of the philosophers even cloths women in weapons, helmets and greaves, and asserts that the human race is in no way different from dogs. As among dogs, he says, both female and male have the same share in affairs, let the women also take part in everything, and let everything be turned upside down. The devil has always tried to prove through these people that our race has no advantage over dumb animals. In fact, some of them have gone so far as to assert that there are rational animals among dumb animals. And see how variously the devil raged in their souls. The chief among them said that our soul passes into flies, dogs, and animals; and their successors, ashamed of this, fell into another abomination, ascribed to animals all rational knowledge, and constantly proved that the creatures created for us were worthily superior to us. And not only do they say this, but also that animals have foreknowledge and piety. The raven, they say, knows God, as does the crow; and they have the gifts of prophecy and foretell the future; there is, they say, justice among animals, there is society, there are laws, and the dog among them, according to Plato, is envious. Perhaps you do not believe my words? This is natural, because you have been brought up in sound dogmas: whoever is nourished by this food cannot believe that there is a person who eats impurities with pleasure. And yet, when you tell them that all this is fables and complete madness, they answer: you do not understand. And we will never want to understand such a ridiculous teaching of yours. Yes, very funny! For it does not require a deep mind to comprehend what all this impiety and confusion mean. Is it not like a crow, madmen, you say, as boys do? Truly, you are real children, just like those! But Peter said nothing of the sort; on the contrary, he gave a voice which, like an abundant light shining in some dark place, dispelled the darkness of the universe. And how meek, how modest is his disposition! How he stood above all empty glory! How he had only one heaven in mind, and how he was a stranger to boasting, even though he raised the dead! If one of these foolish people were to do something of the kind, even if it were only illusory, would he not immediately demand for himself an altar and a temple, would he not want to be among the gods? After all, even now, when there is nothing like that, they always dream about it. What, in fact, do Athena and Apollo and Hera mean to them? These are the births of spirits. They also have a king who wanted to die in order to be considered equal to God. But the apostles do not (act) in this way, but quite the opposite. Listen to what they say when they heal a lame man: "Men of Israel! Why are you amazed at this, or why do you look at us, as if by our own power or piety we had done that He walks?" (Acts 3:12); And in another place: "And we are men like unto you" (14:15). But there is great boasting, great pride; everything is only for honors from people and nothing for anyone. And when something happens for the sake of glory, then everything is low: let a man have everything, but do not possess it (the contempt of glory), he is completely alien to wisdom and is possessed by the strongest and most abominable passion. Contempt for glory can teach all good things and banish from the soul every destructive passion. Therefore, I urge you also to show great zeal to uproot this passion; otherwise there is no possibility of pleasing God and gaining favor before this vigilant eye. And so, let us strive in every way to obtain heavenly help, so that we may not experience present sorrows, and be vouchsafed future blessings, according to the grace and love of humanity of our Lord Jesus Christ, with Whom to the Father with the Holy Spirit be glory, dominion, honor, now and ever, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.

CONVERSATION 5

"Men of Judah, and all who dwell in Jerusalem! let it be known to you, and give heed to my words" (Acts 2:14). Flattery should be avoided. "What do you mean, the moon will turn into blood?" – What is the true benefit of a bishop? – Christ established new laws. 1. Here the Apostle addresses his speech to those whom he called foreigners above; apparently he speaks only to them, and meanwhile he corrects those who laughed. And that some laughed was arranged (by God) so that (Peter) would begin to speak in defense (of the apostles) and, defending them, teach others. And so, these people considered it a great praise for themselves that they lived in Jerusalem. "This be done unto you," he says, "and be aware, and give heed to my words." This arouses their attention for the time being, and then begins to protect them. "They are not drunk, as you think" (v. 15). Do you see how modest his defense is? Though he had the greater part of the people on his side, yet he spoke to them very meekly; And first he refutes their sly assumption, and then proceeds to defend them. Wherefore he did not say, "As ye speak, mocking and laughing at us; but, "What do you think," wishing to show that they say these things unintentionally, and attributing it rather to their ignorance than to malice. "They are not drunk, as you think, for now is the third hour of the day" Why does he say this? Is it not possible to be drunk at the third hour? Of course you can; But he did not want to dwell on this for a long time, since (the apostles) were not at all in such a position as these people said in mockery. From this, therefore, we learn that it is not necessary to speak much unnecessarily. And on the other hand, his further words serve as confirmation of this. Now his speech is addressed to everyone in general. "But this is what was foretold by Joel the prophet: and it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God" (vv. 16, 17). The name of Christ is still nowhere to be seen, and this promise is not His promise, but that of the Father. Notice the prudence (of the Apostle). He did not omit (this circumstance) and did not immediately speak about Christ himself, namely, that He promised this after His crucifixion: otherwise, if he had said so, he would have spoiled everything. But this, you will say, would be sufficient to prove His Divinity. Thus, when this is believed, in the meantime there was only care that it should be believed; and when they do not believe, the consequence would be that they would be stoned. "I will pour out My Spirit upon all flesh." He gives them good hopes, if only they want it. And he does not allow them to think that this is only the advantage of the apostles, since displeasure would arise from this, and thus removes envy. "And your sons shall prophesy," he says. This great deed does not belong to you, he says, and this praise is not yours; Grace has passed on to your children. He calls himself children together with the other apostles, and them fathers. "And your young men shall see visions, and your elders shall be taught by dreams. And upon my servants and on my handmaids in those days I will pour out my Spirit, and they shall prophesy" (vv. 17, 18). He goes on to show that the apostles were favored (by God) because they were worthy of the Holy Spirit, and they were not, because they crucified Christ. In the same way, Christ, wishing to tame their wrath, said: "By whose power do your sons cast them out?" (Matthew 12:27) He did not say, "My disciples," because it would seem that He was flattering Himself. In the same way, Peter did not say that they were not drunk, but that they spoke under the inspiration of the Spirit, and not simply (said this), but ran to the prophet and, guarding himself against him, spoke with perfect confidence. In this way he himself absolved them from the accusation, and as for grace he brings the prophet as a witness. "I will pour out My Spirit upon all flesh." This is said because grace was poured out on some in dreams, and on others in reality. After all, even in dreams, the prophets had visions and received revelations. Then (the apostle) continues the prophecy, which contains something terrible. "And I will show," he says, "wonders in heaven above, and signs on the earth below," v. 19. With these words he hints both at the future judgment and at the destruction of Jerusalem. "Blood and fire and smoking smoke." Look how he depicted destruction. "The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood," v. 20. He said this in relation to the situation of the suffering. However, it is said that many of these things really happened in heaven, as Josephus (Flavius) testifies. At the same time (the Apostle) frightened them by this, reminding them of the former darkness and making them wait for what would happen. "Before the great and glorious day of the Lord comes." If now, he says, you sin with impunity, then do not yet consider yourself safe. After all, this is the beginning of some great and difficult day. Do you see how he shook and shook their souls, and turned their laughter into justification? For if this is the beginning of that day, it must necessarily follow that they were in the greatest danger. What then? Does he continue to talk about what inspired fear? No. And what? He gives them rest again, and says, "And it shall come to pass, whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved" (v. 21). This is said of Christ, as Paul says (Romans 10:13); however, Peter does not dare to express this clearly. But let us return to what has been said above. Peter rises up beautifully against those who laugh and mock, saying: "Let this be known to you, and give heed to my words." And in the beginning he said, "Men of the Jews," calling, as it seems to me, Jews those who lived in Judea. Let us offer, if you will, the very words of the Gospel, so that you may know what Peter suddenly became. A slave girl went out, says (the Evangelist), "and said, 'Thou wast also with Jesus of Galilee'; and he answered: "I do not know what thou sayest," and when they asked him again, "then he began to swear and to swear" (Matt. 26:69-74). 2. And here see with what boldness he speaks, with what great freedom. He did not praise those who said, "We hear them with our tongues speaking of the great works of God"; but, on the contrary, along with others, he burdens them with his own words, wishing to make them more zealous and to present his word as alien to flattery. This is always beautiful to observe, so that with condescension the word is devoid of all flattery, as well as of any insult, which is not easy. It is not without reason that this was done at the third hour: when the splendor of the light appears, then the people are not yet busy with the trouble of dinner, then it is a clear day, then everyone is in the square. Do you see the word full of freedom? "And give heed to my words." Having said this, Peter did not add anything (of himself), but added: "But this is what was foretold by the prophet Joel: and it shall come to pass in the last days." This shows that the end is already near. That is why the words "in the last days" have a certain special expressiveness. Then, lest it should be thought that this matter concerns only sons, he adds: "And your elders shall be taught by dreams." Note the order: first the sons, as David says: "Instead of Thy fathers were Thy sons" (Psalm 44:17); and in turn, Malachi: "And he shall turn the hearts of the fathers to the children" (Mal. 4:6). "And on My servants and on My handmaids." And this is a sign of virtue, because we have become servants of God, having been freed from sin. Yes, the gift is also abundant when the gift passes to the other sex and is not limited to one or two persons, as was the case in ancient times, for example, Devor and Oldana. And he did not say that it was the Holy Spirit, nor did he interpret the words of the prophet, but gave only one prophecy, leaving him to speak for himself. Nor does he say anything about Judas, because everyone knew what kind of punishment had befallen him. But he is silent, knowing that nothing has such a powerful effect on them as when they are conversed with on the basis of prophecy; This is stronger even than the deeds themselves. When Christ performed miracles, He was often contradicted; and when Christ quoted to them the following words from the prophecy: "The Lord said to my Lord, Sit at my right hand" (Psalm 109:1), they fell silent, so that they could no longer say a single word in answer to Him. And in many places He reminds them of the Scriptures, for example, when He says: "He called them gods, to whom the word of God was" (John 10:35), or better, this can be found everywhere by everyone. That is why Peter also says here: "I will pour out My Spirit on all flesh," i.e., on the nations; but does not yet reveal and explain (the prophecies), because it was not profitable. In the same way, these words are not clear: "And I will show miracles in heaven above," because by their vagueness they frightened them even more. If he had explained to them, he would have armed them more against him. That is why he bypasses it, as if it were clear, wishing to suggest such a concept. Of course, afterwards he explains to them when he talks to them about the resurrection, when he has prepared them for it by his word. Wherefore he willingly evades (this prophecy), because benefactions were not able to attract them: this never happened. After all, no one was saved then; and now the faithful were saved under Vespasian. This is the meaning of the words (of the Saviour): "And if those days were not shortened, no flesh would have been saved" (Matthew 24:22). What was more difficult happened beforehand, for first the inhabitants were taken prisoner, and then the city was destroyed and burned. Then (Peter) dwells on the allegory, in order to bring the devastation and captivity closer before the eyes of his hearers. "The sun will turn into darkness, and the moon into blood." What does the expression "the moon will turn into blood" mean? It seems to me that by this he means the excessiveness of the bloodshed, and he deliberately speaks in such a way as to inspire them with great fear. "And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved." "Everyone," he says, whether he be a priest (though he does not yet say so), or a slave, or a freeman, because "there is neither Jew nor Gentile; there is neither slave nor free; there is neither male nor female: for you are all one in Christ Jesus" (Galatians 3:28). And rightly so: this distinction really takes place only here, where everything is a shadow. If in the royal palaces there is neither noble nor ignoble, but everyone is marked by his deeds; if in the arts everyone is valued according to his work, then how much more – in that state. "Whosoever shall call." "He will call" not simply, because "not everyone," says (Christ), "who says to Me, Lord! Lord!" (Matt. 7:21), – but He will call with zeal, with a good life, with due boldness. Thus, his word is not yet burdensome, since he introduces a speech about faith, although he does not hide the fear of punishment. Why? Because it shows that there is salvation in invocation. 3. What do you say, tell me? Do you remember the salvation after the crucifixion? Be patient a little. God's love for mankind is great; and the very fact that the Lord calls them proves His divinity no less than the resurrection, no less than miracles. For what is expressed in extreme goodness is primarily characteristic of God. That is why (Christ) says: "No one is good, but God alone" (Luke 18:19). But let us not turn this goodness into an excuse for carelessness, because He punishes as God. And so this was done by the One Who said, "Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved," I am speaking of what was done upon Jerusalem, of that most grievous punishment. About this I wish to tell you a few words that will be useful to you for the denunciation of the Marcionites and many other heretics. Since they assert that Christ is a good God, and he (who punishes) is evil, let us see who did it. Who did it? Is he evil in vengeance for Him? No way; otherwise, how can he be alien to Him? Or kind? But (from the Scriptures) it turns out that both the Father and the Son did this. With regard to the Father, this is evident from many places, for example, where it is said that He sends His armies into the vineyard, and with regard to the Son, from the words: "Bring my enemies, those who would not have me to reign over them, and slay them before me" (Luke 19:27). And on the other hand, Christ Himself speaks of the coming tribulations, which, in their cruelty, surpass all that has ever been done, and He Himself announced them. Do you want to hear what happened? They were pierced with horns. Could there be a more horrible sight? Or do you want me to tell you about the sufferings of the woman, about that sad event that surpasses any calamity? Or talk about hunger and contagion? I omit what is even worse than this. At that time, people did not recognize nature, did not recognize the law, they surpassed animals in cruelty; and all this happened as a result of the necessities of war, because it was pleasing to God and Christ. It will be fitting to point this out both to the Marcionites and to those who do not believe in Gehenna: it will be enough to curb their shamelessness. Are not these calamities more terrible than the evils that were in Babylon? Isn't this hunger much more unbearable than that of that time? About this Christ Himself said thus: "Then shall there be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until now, nor shall it be" (Matt. 14:21). How then do some say that Christ has forgiven them of their sin? Perhaps this question is considered ordinary; but you are able to resolve it. No one can point out anywhere a fiction similar to what really happened. And if the writer had been a Christian, his words might still have been suspicious; If this is a Jew, and the most zealous Jew, who appeared after the Gospel, then should not these events be authentic for everyone? For you will see everywhere how he extols everything Jewish. Thus, there is Gehenna, and God is good. Were you not horrified when you heard of those sufferings? But the sufferings here are nothing compared to what will be there. Again I am forced to seem to you unpleasant, burdensome, and intolerable. But what am I to do? That's what I'm set up for. Just as a strict educator, by his very duty, inevitably incurs the hatred of his pupils, so do we.

Such is the doctor. But it is not yet too disagreeable, because it immediately makes the usefulness of its art felt; And we are in the future. Such is the judge: he is burdensome to criminals and rebels. Such is the legislator: he is disagreeable to those who must obey his laws. But not so is he who calls for pleasure, who arranges public festivals and celebrations, who crowns the people; no, these people are liked because they amuse the cities with various spectacles, sparing no expense and expense. For this reason those who have received pleasure from them reward them on their part with praises, curtains, a multitude of lamps, wreaths, branches, and resplendent clothing. Meanwhile, the patients, as soon as they see the doctor, become sad and despondent. In the same way, the rebels, as soon as they see the judge, are disheartened, and do not rejoice or rejoice, unless he himself goes over to their side. Now let us see who is most useful to the cities, whether they are those who organize these festivals, these feasts, sumptuous dinners, and various amusements, or those who, rejecting all this, bring with them sticks and whips, bring executioners and terrible soldiers, pronounce terrible words, make severe reprimands, cause sorrow, and disperse the people in the square with a stick. Let's see, I say, on which side there is a benefit. After all, they are burdened by the latter, and they are loved very much. What then happens to those who amuse the people? The only empty pleasure that remains only until the evening, and the next day disappears, is disorderly laughter, indecent and intemperate words. And what about these? Fear, abstinence, modesty in the way of thinking, meekness of soul, avoidance of carelessness, curbing internal passions, guarding oneself from those that invade from without. Thanks to this, each of us owns his own property, and through those festivals we lose it, and, moreover, to the detriment of ourselves – we lose it not because robbers have invaded us, but because, to our own pleasure, we are robbed by vanity. Everyone sees how this robber carries away all his possessions, and enjoys it. This is a new kind of robbery, which makes those who are subjected to it rejoice! 4. But there is nothing of the kind there; there we are protected by God, as a common Father, from all things visible and invisible: "Take heed," says He, "do not your alms before men" (Matt. 6:1). There the soul learns to avoid unrighteousness. For the unrighteousness consists not only in the criminal greed for money, but also in giving the belly more food than necessary, and in the enjoyment of pleasures we overstep their proper measure and reach a frenzy. There the soul learns chastity, and here – debauchery. For debauchery does not consist only in copulation with a woman, but also in the fact that we look with shameless eyes. There he learns meekness, and here – arrogance: "All things are lawful for me," says (the Apostle), "but not all things are profitable" (1 Corinthians 6:12); there – decency, here – shamelessness. I am already silent about what happens at the spectacles; There is not even any pleasure here, but rather sadness. Point out to me, after one day of the feast, both those who bore the costs (of organizing the feast) and those who were amused with spectacles, and we will see that they are all despondent, especially the one who spent the money. This is natural. On the previous day he had amused the commoner, and the commoner was indeed happy and enjoyed great pleasure, for he was pleased with the splendid clothes; but he could not always use it, and therefore he grieved and was consumed with sorrow when he saw that it was taken from him. As for the one who spent money, it seems that his happiness was small in comparison with the happiness of the first. That is why the next day they change with each other, and the greatest discontent falls to the lot of the latter. But if in human affairs that which pleases has so much unpleasant in it, and that which is burdensome brings such benefit, then how much more so in spiritual matters. For this reason no one complains about the laws, on the contrary, everyone considers them to be generally useful, since it is not foreigners who have come from outside, nor enemies who have decreed them, but the citizens themselves, the overseers, the trustees. And this is considered a sign of prosperity and benevolence, when laws are decreed, although the laws are filled with punishments, and it is impossible to find a law without punishment. Is it not strange after this if you call the people who expound those laws saviors, benefactors, intercessors, and you consider us some kind of cruel and intolerable people, although we are talking about the laws of God? After all, when we talk about Gehenna, we cite the same laws. And just as secular legislators set forth laws about murder, theft, marriages, and the like, so we cite laws about punishments, laws that were not made by man, but by the only-begotten Son of God himself. He who is merciless, he says, let him suffer punishment; this is precisely the parable (of the debtor) (Matt. 18:23-35); let him who holds a grudge be subjected to extreme torment; let him who is angry in vain be cast into the fire; let him who curses suffer execution in hell. If you think that you hear strange laws, do not be embarrassed. Why would Christ come if He did not have to decree extraordinary laws? For we already know that the murderer and adulterer must be punished; therefore, if we were to hear the same thing, what would be the need for a heavenly Teacher? Therefore He does not say, "Let the adulterer be punished," but he who looks with shameless eyes, and adds also where and when he will be punished. And not on boards. and He did not paint His laws on pillars; And He did not set pillars of brass, nor did He inscribe letters on them; no, He raised up for us twelve apostolic souls, and upon them by the Holy Spirit He wrote these letters. And we, in all fairness, read them to you. If it was lawful among the Jews, so that no one could excuse himself by ignorance, how much more so with us. But if anyone says, "I do not hear, and I will not answer before the court," then he will be punished especially more for this. In fact, if no one taught, it would still be possible to excuse oneself with this; But if there are teachers, then it is no longer possible. See how Christ takes away this excuse from the Jews when He says: "If I had not come and spoken to them, they would have had no sin" (John 15:22). Again Paul (says): "But I ask, Have they not heard? On the contrary, their voice went out into all the earth, and their words to the ends of the world" (Romans 10:18). Then there is forgiveness when no one speaks; but when the overseer sits and has it as his duty, then there is no forgiveness. And yet, Christ did not want us only to look at these pillars, but to be pillars ourselves. And since we have made ourselves unworthy of these writings, let us at least look at these pillars. As the pillars threaten others, but they themselves are not subject to responsibility, just as the laws themselves are – so also are the blessed apostles. And look: such a pillar does not stand in one place, but these writings are widespread everywhere. If you go to India, you will hear about them; whether you go to Spain or to the very ends of the earth, you will not meet anyone who has not heard of them, except through your own negligence. So do not be angry, but be attentive to what is said here, so that you may be able to take up works of virtue and receive eternal blessings in Christ Jesus our Lord, with whom to the Father, with the Holy Spirit, be glory, dominion, honor, now and ever, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.

CONVERSATION 6

"Men of Israel! hear these words" (Acts 2:22). The dignity of Peter. – What does it mean to love Christ? – What is the difference between a gentle soul? – The harm caused by anger. 1. This is not said (by the Apostle) out of flattery: but since he has strongly rebuked the Jews above, he now makes allowances for them, and timely reminds them of David. He begins again with an introduction, so that they would not be dismayed, since he intended to remind them of Jesus. Hitherto they had been calm because they had listened to the prophet; but the name of Jesus would immediately arm them. And he did not say, "Believe," but, "Hear," which was not burdensome. And notice how he does not say anything lofty, but begins his speech with an extremely humiliating one. "Jesus," he says, "Nazarene," he immediately mentions a homeland that was considered contemptible. And as yet nothing great is said about Him, not even what some would say about a prophet. "Jesus," he says, "a Nazarene, a man testified to you from God." Notice how much it meant to say that he was sent from God. This was always and everywhere tried to prove by Christ Himself, John, and the Apostles. Listen, for example, to what John says: "He said to me, On whom you see the Spirit descending and abiding upon Him, that is he who baptizes with the Holy Spirit" (John 1:33). And Christ Himself even predominantly inspires this, saying: "I have not come of Myself, but He has sent Me" (John 8:42). And everywhere in the Scriptures this is the primary concern. For this reason also this holy leader in blessed countenance, an adherent of Christ, an ardent disciple, to whom the keys of heaven were entrusted, who received spiritual revelation, humbled them with fear, showed that (the apostles) were vouchsafed great gifts, and made them certain, and then he already talks about Jesus. Oh, how he dared to say among the murderers that He had risen! However, He does not immediately say, He is risen, but first, He has come to you from God. This is also evident from what He did. And he does not say, "He has done," but, "God through him," in order that by modesty he might attract them the better, whereby he calls them to witness, and says, "A man who has been testified to you of God by powers, and wonders, and signs, which God has done through him among you, as you yourselves know" (v. 22). Then, when you have come to that terrible crime of theirs, see how he tries to free them from guilt. After all, despite the fact that this was predestined, they were still murderers. "This," he says, "according to the definite counsel and foreknowledge of God, you have taken, and nailed with the hands of the wicked, and killed" (v. 23). He speaks in almost the same words as Joseph, who also said to his brothers, "Do not be afraid; it was not you who sold me, but God sent me here (Gen. 45:5). And since he said that this was the will of God, so that they would not say, "It means that we have done well," he warns this thought by adding: "They nailed them with the hands of the wicked, and killed them." Here he alludes to Judas and at the same time shows them that they would not have been able to do this if God had not allowed and betrayed Him. This is the meaning of the word "devotee." Thus, all the blame is laid on the head of Judas the traitor, since he betrayed Him with a kiss. Either this is meant by the words, "by the hands of the wicked," or he is speaking here of the soldiers, expressing the following thought: "You did not simply kill Him, but through the intermediary of lawless people." Notice how everywhere (the apostles) take care that His sufferings should be recognized first. As for the resurrection, since it was a great deed, (Peter) covers it up for the time being, and only then makes it visible. Sufferings, namely the cross and death, were universally recognized, but the resurrection was not; wherefore he speaks of him afterwards, adding, "But God raised him up, breaking the bands of death, because it was impossible for her to hold him" (v. 24). Here he pointed to something great and lofty. The words, "impossible," show that Christ Himself allowed Himself to be restrained, and that death itself, holding Him, was tormented as it were by the sickness of birth and suffered terribly. It is known that the Scriptures everywhere usually call danger a mortal disease. At the same time, the idea is expressed here that He has risen so that He will no longer die. Or with the words: "because it was impossible for her to hold Him" – (the Apostle) shows that the resurrection of Christ was not the same as the resurrection of other people. Then, before any thought could be born in their minds, he set before them David, who put aside all human thoughts. "For David speaks of Him" (v. 25). And behold, what a despised testimony again! For this reason he brought him first, saying that which is more humiliating, in order to show that the death (of Christ) was not a sorrowful event. "I have always seen the Lord before me, for he is at my right hand, that I may not be shaken. For Thou wilt not leave my soul in hell" (vv. 25, 27). Then, having finished the prophetic testimony, he adds: "Men brethren!" (v. 29). When he intends to say something especially important, he always uses such an introduction in order to arouse their attention and attract them in himself. "Let it be allowed," he says, "to speak to you boldly about the forefather David" (v. 29). What great modesty! So he always condescends when it was harmless. Wherefore he did not say, "This is said of Christ, and not of David; on the contrary, he very prudently shows deep respect for Blessed David, in order to touch them; and of that which is acknowledged by all, he speaks as if it were impudent to say, trying to win them over in his favor with those praises (David) which he discreetly introduces into his speech. That is why he does not simply say: about David, but: "about the forefather David". "That he died and was buried." He does not yet say, "And he is not risen; but in another way he immediately expresses this, saying: "And his tomb is with us to this day" (v. 29). Now he proved what he wanted; but even after this he had not yet passed over to Christ, but again spoke with praise of David, "Being a prophet, and knowing that God had promised him with an oath" (v. 30). 2. Thus he speaks, in order that they, at least out of respect for David and his family, should accept the word of the resurrection, as if otherwise the prophecy and their honor would suffer. "And knowing," he says, "that God had promised him with an oath" (v. 30). He did not simply say, "He promised," but, what was stronger, "With an oath I promised him of the fruit of his loins to raise up Christ in the flesh, and to set him on his throne" (v. 30). See how you have again pointed out the high truth. Since he softened them with his words, he boldly offers this saying of the prophet and talks about the resurrection. "That his soul was not left in hell, neither did his flesh see corruption" (v. 31). This is surprising again; from this it is evident that the resurrection (of Christ) was not like the resurrection of other people. Death held Him and at the same time did not do what it is accustomed to do. Thus Peter spoke secretly about the sin (of the Jews), but did not add anything about the punishment; He showed that they had killed (Christ), and then proceeds to the sign of God. But when it is proved that the slain was a righteous man and a friend of God, then, even if you keep silent about the punishment, the sinner will condemn himself even more than you. So (Peter) attributes everything to the Father, so that they may receive his words. Then he quotes from the prophecy the expression: "impossible." Therefore, let us look again at what is said above, "Jesus," says (Peter), "a Nazarite, a man testified to you from God," i.e., a man of whom there can be no doubt, but for whom works speak. So Nicodemus said: "Such miracles as Thou doest, no one can do" (John 3:2). "By powers," he says, "and by wonders and signs which God has wrought through him among you" (Acts 2:22); then it is not secret, if it is "among you." First he talks about what they know, and then he moves on to the unknown. Then, with the words, "which God created," he shows that it was not they who could do it, but that it was the work of God's wisdom and providence, since it was from God. And what was unpleasant for them, it passed quickly. The apostles everywhere tried to show that (Christ) died. Though you, says (Peter), deny it, they will testify. And He who embarrassed death itself, of course, could have inflicted much more trouble on those who crucified Him. However, Peter doesn't say anything like "He could have killed you," he just lets them know it. Meanwhile, from these words we also learn what it means that death held Him. Whoever is tormented by holding something, no longer holds and does not act, but suffers and tries to give up as soon as possible. Also (Peter) said beautifully, "David speaks of Him," so that you do not attribute these words to the prophet himself. Do you see how he finally explains and exposes the prophecy, showing how Christ sat on His throne? After all, the spiritual kingdom is in heaven. Notice how along with the resurrection he also pointed to the kingdom, saying that (Christ) was risen. (Further) shows that the prophet was made compelled (to speak so) because it was a prophecy of Christ. Why did he not say, "Of His kingdom," but, "Raised up" (v. 31)? It was too high (for them). But how did He sit on the throne? Being king over the Jews. And if it is over the Jews, how much more over those who crucified Him. "And his flesh," he says, "saw no corruption" (v. 31). This is apparently less than the resurrection, but in fact they are one and the same. "This Jesus God raised up." See how (always) he calls Him no other way. "We are all witnesses to this. Therefore he was lifted up by the right hand of God" (v. 32, 33). Again he turns to the Father, although what he has already said was enough; But he knew how important it was. Here he alluded both to the ascension and to the fact that Christ dwells in heaven; but he does not express this clearly either. "And having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit" (v. 33). See: in the beginning He said that it was not Christ who sent Him (the Holy Spirit), but the Father; and when He reminded them of His miracles and of what the Jews had done to Him, when He spoke of the resurrection, He boldly began to speak of this also, and again brought them to witness, referring to both of their senses (i.e., sight and hearing, v. 33). And he mentions the resurrection often, but their transgression only once, so as not to be burdensome to them. "And having received," he says, "from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit." This is again (the truth) great; and I think he is speaking now of the promise that was before the suffering. See how, finally, he assimilates all this to Christ, doing it very imperceptibly. For if He poured out (the Holy Spirit), it is evident that the prophet said of Him above, "In the last days, saith God, I will pour out My Spirit upon all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy" (v. 17ff.). See what (truths) he imperceptibly puts into his words! But since this was a great deed, he again covered it up, saying that Christ received it from the Father. He spoke of His beneficences and miracles; said that He was the King and that He had come to them; said that He gives the Holy Spirit. But no matter what anyone says, it will all be in vain if he does not have the benefit in mind. John acts like Peter when he says: "He shall baptize you with the Holy Spirit" (Matthew 3:11). At the same time, (Peter) shows that the cross not only did not diminish Christ, but, on the contrary, glorified Him even more, since what God had promised Him of old, He has now granted. Or to put it another way: Peter is speaking here of the promise that He has given us. Thus, He already knew in advance about the future promise and after the cross He gave us even more. "Poured out." Here (the apostle) shows His worthiness, as well as the fact that He is not simply (bestowed the Spirit), but in abundance. Hence, in order to make this (dignity) obvious, he adds further words. Having spoken of the gift of the Holy Spirit, he now speaks boldly about the ascension (of Christ) into heaven, and not simply, but again brings a witness and reminds us of the very person to whom Christ also pointed. "For David did not ascend," he says, "into heaven," v. 34. 3. Here (the Apostle) speaks without hesitation, animated by what he said above; He no longer says, "Let it be lawful" (v. 29) or anything like that; but to speak plainly: "The Lord said to my Lord, Sit at my right hand, until I make thy enemies thy footstool" (v. 34, 35). And if He is the Lord of David, how much more so is it. "Sit at my right hand." With this, he expressed everything. "Until I make Thy enemies Thy footstool." With these words he aroused great fear in them, just as he first showed how God deals with His friends, and how He deals with His enemies. And in order for them to believe him better, he again ascribes power to the Father. And since he has spoken the high truth, he now again brings down his word to the humiliated. "Know therefore with certainty," he says, "all the house of Israel" (v. 36), that is, do not doubt or object. And then he says with authority, "What God hath made this Jesus Lord and Christ" (v. 36). He remembered this from the Psalm of David (Psalm 2:2). He should have said, "Know therefore with certainty, all the house of Israel," that he sits at the right hand; but since this was too high, he, leaving this, to cite another, which is much more humiliating, says: "He did," i.e., he set it. Consequently, he says nothing about the essence here, but everything about this object (i.e., about the incarnation). "This is Jesus, whom you have crucified" (v. 36). With this he concluded his word beautifully, in order to shake their minds. First he showed how great this crime was, and then spoke openly about it, in order to better understand its importance and incline them with fear. After all, people are not so much attracted by good deeds as they are admonished by fear. But wondrous and great men and friends of God do not need any of this. Such, for example, was Paul: he spoke neither of the kingdom nor of Gehenna. This is what it means to love Christ; it means not to be a hireling, not to look (at a pious life) as a trade and trade, but to be truly virtuous and do everything out of love for God alone. What tears are we worthy of, when such a great duty lies upon us, and we do not try, like merchants, to acquire the kingdom of heaven? So much has been promised to us, and yet we do not listen? What can such hostility be compared with? People who are possessed by an insane passion for money, whomever they meet, whether they are enemies, or slaves, or their most wicked opponents, the most worthless people, if they only hope to get money through them, resolve to do anything, and flatter, and serve, and become slaves, and consider them the most honorable people, if only to get something from them: the hope of getting money produces that they don't think about anything like that. And the kingdom does not have the same importance with us as money has; or better, does not have even an insignificant fraction of that significance. Yet it was promised not by some ordinary person, but by Him Who is incomparably higher than the kingdom itself. But if the kingdom is promised, and God Himself gives it, then, obviously, it already means a lot to receive it from such a Person. And now, meanwhile, the same thing is happening, as if we had despised the king, who, after innumerable other blessings, would make (us) his heirs and co-heirs with his own son; And to the chief of the robbers, who was the cause of so many misfortunes both for us and for our parents, who himself is full of innumerable evils and has disgraced both our glory and our salvation, they began to bow down if he showed us even one ox. God promises us a kingdom, and we despise Him; The devil is preparing hell for us, and we honor him! This is God, and this is the devil! But let us look at the very difference in their commandments. After all, even if none of this had happened, that is, if there had not been God, and this is the devil. If the former did not prepare for us kingdoms, and the latter for hell, would not the very nature of their commandments be sufficient to induce us to be in union with the former? What do both command? One is that which covers us with shame, and the other is that which makes us glorious; the one is that which subjects to innumerable calamities and disgrace, the other that which gives great consolation. In fact, look: one says: "Learn from me, for I am meek and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls" (Matt. 11:29); and the other says: be cruel and harsh, angry and irritable, be better a beast than a man. Let us see what is more useful, what is more beneficial. But not only this (keep in mind), but think that one of them is the devil. Then that which is more useful will be especially revealed, and the celebration will be greater. For it is not he who gives easy commands that is caring, but he who commands what is useful. And fathers give onerous commands, as masters give to their servants; but for this reason some of them are fathers, and others are masters; but the enslavers and destroyers command everything contrary. However, that (the commandments of God) also give pleasure, this is clear from the following. What, in your opinion, is the condition of an irritable person, and a person who is not malicious and meek? Is it not true that the soul of the latter is like a solitary place where great silence reigns, and the soul of the former is like a noisy square, where there is a terrible cry, where the drivers of camels, hinnies, and donkeys shout with all their might at those who pass by, so as not to crush them? Or again, does not the soul of the latter resemble the midst of cities, where there is a great noise now from the silversmiths, now from the other from the coppersmiths, and where some offend and others are offended? And the soul of the former is like a certain mountaintop, where a gentle wind blows and where a pure ray (of the sun) falls, from which transparent streams pour and where one meets a multitude of lovely flowers, as in spring meadows and gardens, adorned with plants, flowers and flowing streams. If there is any sound here, it is a pleasant sound, giving great pleasure to the one who hears it. Here either songbirds sit on the branches of the trees, and grasshoppers, nightingales, and swallows sing harmoniously one concert; or a gentle wind, lightly touching the branches of trees, often produces sounds similar to the sound of a flute or the cry of a swan; or a meadow covered with roses and lilies, with which they bend to each other and shimmer blue, represents, as it were, a blue sea in a moment of slight agitation. In a word, there are many similarities to everyone: when you look at roses, you think you are seeing a rainbow; and if you look at the violets, you will think that you see a sea agitated; if you look at the lilies, you will think that you see the sky. And it is not only the sight that you enjoy here at the sight of such a spectacle, but also the body itself. Here man finds for himself consolation and rest for the most part, so that he considers himself more likely in heaven than on earth. 4. There is another sound here – when the water rolls effortlessly from the top along the crevasses and, lightly hitting the pebbles encountered, murmurs softly and pours such sweetness over our limbs that soon even sleep, from which the limbs involuntarily fall, descends on our eyes. Have you listened to my story with pleasure, and perhaps you have even been captivated by the desert country? And yet the soul of a magnanimous man is incomparably more pleasant than this desolate country. And I have not touched upon this likeness in order to describe to you a meadow, or to praise it with eloquence, but so that you, seeing from the description how great is the delight of generous people, seeing that the treatment of a generous person gives incomparably more pleasure and benefit than life in such places, try to imitate such people. In fact, if such a soul does not produce a stormy breath, but only gentle and friendly words, truly like a gentle breeze, only convictions in which there is nothing coarse, but on the contrary something like the singing of birds is heard, then is it not true that this is better? The breath of the word does not fall on the body, but revives the soul. It is not so soon that a physician, no matter how hard he may try, will free a sick person from fever, as a magnanimous man cools a man who is both irritable and burning with anger with a breath of his words. But what do I say about the doctor? And red-hot iron, lowered into water, will not lose its warmth as soon as a hot-tempered person, if he meets with a patient soul. But just as songbirds have almost no value in the market, so our beliefs are considered empty words by irritable people. So, meekness is more pleasant than anger and rage. But not only this (it must be borne in mind), but also that one is commanded by the devil, and the other by God. You see, I have not said in vain that if it were not for the devil and God, the commandments themselves would already be sufficient to distract us (from the devil). A meek person is pleasant to himself, and useful to others: but an angry person is disagreeable to himself, and harmful to others. Indeed, there is nothing worse than an angry person, nothing more burdensome, nothing more intolerable, nothing more shameful; and vice versa – there is nothing more pleasant than a person who does not know how to be angry. It is better to live with a beast than with such a man: a beast can only be tamed once, and it will forever remain what it has been taught to be; and this one, no matter how much you tame him, he becomes hardened again, because he will humble himself only once. As a bright and bright day is different from a stormy and extremely sad time, so is the soul of a man who is angry with the soul of a meek man. But we will not now consider the harm that comes (from irritable people) to others, but let us look at the harm they do to themselves. Of course, even this is no small harm if we do any harm to another; But we will not pay attention to this for the time being. What executioner can tear his sides to such an extent? What red-hot horns can puncture the body like that? What madness can deprive us of common sense as much as anger and rage? I know many who have become sick from anger; and cruel fevers are most of all from anger. And if (these passions) are so harmful to the body, then think (how harmful) to the soul. Do not take into account that you do not see this; But consider that if that which perceives evil suffers such harm, what harm will that which begets it receive? Many (from anger) lost their eyes, many fell into the most serious illness. Meanwhile, a generous person can easily endure everything. But in spite of the fact that (the devil) gives us such burdensome commands and offers hell as a reward for this, despite the fact that he is the devil and the enemy of our salvation, yet we listen to him more than to Christ, although Christ is our Savior and benefactor, and offers us such commandments as are more pleasant, and more useful, and more beneficial, which bring the greatest benefit to us and to those who live with us. There is nothing worse than anger, beloved; There is nothing worse than inappropriate irritability. Anger brooks no further delay; This is a stormy passion. It often happens that in anger someone will say a word, for the reward of which a whole life is needed; or he will do a deed that will overthrow his whole life. For it is terrible that in a short time, through a single deed, through a single word, (this passion) often deprives us of eternal blessings and makes innumerable labors in vain. Therefore, I beseech you, use all measures to restrain this beast. This I have said about meekness and anger. But if anyone begins to reason about the rest (qualities), for example, about covetousness and contempt for wealth, about debauchery and chastity, about envy and good nature, and compares them with one another, he will know that there is a difference here too. Have you seen how clearly it is revealed from the commandments alone that the one is God and the other is the devil? Let us obey God and let us not cast ourselves into the abyss, but, while there is still time, let us try to wash away everything that defiles the soul, in order to be vouchsafed eternal blessings, according to the grace and love of mankind of our Lord Jesus Christ, with Whom to the Father, with the Holy Spirit, be glory, dominion, honor, now and ever, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.

CONVERSATION 7

"When they heard this, they were pricked in their hearts, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, What shall we do, men brethren?" (Acts 2:37). Meekness is a great blessing. The wicked are his own enemy. 1. Do you see what a great blessing meekness is? It hurts our hearts more than cruelty and causes a more sensitive wound. Just as he who strikes hardened bodies produces a sensation that is not so strong, but he who softens them in advance and makes them tender strikes harder, so it is also here – first it is necessary to soften, and then to strike. But it is not anger that mitigates it, nor strong accusation, nor reproaches, but meekness: anger increases hardness, and meekness destroys. Therefore, if you want to touch someone who has offended you, turn to him with great meekness. Look, and here is what meekness does. Peter meekly reminded the Jews of their transgressions, and added nothing more; He spoke of the gift of God, pointed to grace as a testimony to past events, and stretched out his word still further, the Jews were ashamed of Peter's meekness, because he conversed with the people who crucified his Lord and plotted murder against themselves (the apostles) as a father and a caring teacher. They were not only convinced, but also condemned themselves – they came to the realization of what they had done. This is because he did not allow them to be carried away by anger and did not allow their reason to be darkened, but by his humility he dispelled their indignation like a kind of darkness, and then he exposed their crime. For this is how it usually happens: when we say that we have been offended, the offenders try to prove that they have not offended; And when we say that we have not been offended, but rather we have offended ourselves, they do the opposite. Therefore, if you want to bring the offender into difficulty, do not blame him, but stand up for him, and he will blame himself: the human race loves to argue. This is what Peter did. He did not condemn (the Jews) with all his might, but on the contrary, he tried to defend them with all possible meekness, and therefore touched their souls. How can it be seen that they were touched? From their words. What exactly do they say? Those who were called deceivers are now called brothers, not so much to compare themselves with them, as to dispose them to love and care. And on the other hand, since the apostles vouchsafed them this name, they say: "What shall we do?" They did not immediately say, "Let us therefore repent; but they gave themselves over to their will. As a man caught in a shipwreck or illness, seeing a helmsman or a doctor, leaves everything to him and obeys him in everything, so they confessed that they were in an extreme situation and had not even hope of salvation. And behold, they did not say, 'How shall we be saved?' but, 'What shall we do?' What about Peter? Here again, although all (the apostles) were questioned, Peter answers. "Repent," he says, "and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ" (v. 38). And yet he does not say, "Believe," but, "Let every one of you be baptized," because they received faith in baptism. Then he also shows the benefit (of baptism): "for the forgiveness of sins; and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost" (v. 38). If you receive a gift, if baptism gives "forgiveness" (of sins), then why do you delay? Then, to make his word convincing, he added, "For the promise belongs to you" (v. 39). And here he means the same promise of which he spoke above. "And to your children." This means that the gift is greater when they have heirs of good things. "And to all those who are far away": if they are far away, then how much more so are you, those who are near. "Whomsoever the Lord our God shall call" (v. 39). Look, when he says, "far off"? Then, when they were already disposed towards him and condemned themselves; for the soul, when it condemns itself, can no longer envy. "And with many other words he testified and exhorted, saying" (v. 40). See how everywhere (the writer) speaks briefly, how far he is from ambition and boasting. "He testified," he says, "and exhorted, saying." This is the perfect teaching, inspiring both fear and love! "Be saved," says (Peter), "from this perverse generation" (v. 40). He says nothing about the future, but about the present, which is what guides people most of all; and shows that preaching frees from both present and future evils. "Therefore those who gladly received his word were baptized, and about three thousand souls were added that day" (v. 41). How many times more do you think this inspired the apostles than the sign? "And they continued continually in the doctrine of the apostles, in fellowship" (v. 42). Two virtues: both that which was endured and that which was unanimous. "In the teaching," he says, "of the Apostles," in order to show that even afterwards the Apostles taught them for a long time. "In fellowship, and in the breaking of bread, and in prayers." Everything, he says, was done together, everything was done with patience. "And there was fear in every soul; and many signs and wonders were wrought by the apostles in Jerusalem" (v. 43). This is natural. They no longer despised them as some simple people, and no longer listened to what they saw, but their minds were purified. And since Peter had said so many things above, set forth the promises, and showed the future, they were justly stricken with fear; and the testimony to what he said was the miracles. As with Christ – first signs, then teaching, then miracles, so it is now. "And all the believers were together, and had all things in common" (v. 44). See what immediate success: not only in prayer and not in teaching, but also in life. "And they sold their possessions and all their property, and divided them to all, according to the need of each" (v. 45). Look at the fear they have. "And they shared it with all." He said this to show how they disposed of the property. "It depends on the need of each one." Not merely (distributed), as among the pagans, the philosophers, some of whom left the earth, and others threw much gold into the sea: this was not contempt for money, but stupidity and madness. The devil always and everywhere tried to slander God's creatures, as if it were impossible to make good use of property. "And they continued daily with one accord in the temple" (v. 46). Here he indicates the way in which they accepted the teaching. 2. Notice how the Jews did nothing else, neither small nor great, but only remained in the temple. Since they became more zealous, they had more reverence in the right place; and the apostles had not yet distracted them, so as not to harm them. "And breaking bread from house to house, they ate with gladness and simplicity of heart, praising God, and having love with all the people" (vv. 46, 47). When he says: "bread," it seems to me that he indicates both fasting and a strict life, since they took food, and did not indulge in luxury. From this, beloved, understand that it is not luxury, but food, that brings pleasure, and that those who live in sorrow, and those who do not live in joy. Do you see that Peter's words led to this as well, to abstinence in life? So there can be no joy if there is no simplicity. Why, you say, did they have "the love of all the people"? By his own works, by his almsgiving. So do not look at the fact that the bishops rose up against them out of envy and hatred, but at the fact that they had "the love of all the people. And the Lord added daily to the church those who were being saved" (v. 47). "All the believers were together." So everywhere it is beautiful – unanimity. "And in many other words he testified." This (the apostle) said, showing that what was said was not enough; or again: the former words were spoken in order to lead to faith, but these showed what the believer should do. And he did not say, "About the cross," but, "And let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ." He does not constantly remind them of the cross, so that it does not seem to blaspheme them; but simply says, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins." In the courts here, the law is different; but in preaching, the sinner will be saved when he confesses his sins. See how Peter did not miss what is more important; but, having first spoken of grace, he added this also: "And ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." And his word was certain, because they themselves (the apostles) received (the Spirit). First he speaks of what is easy and what gives a great gift, and then he leads them to life, knowing that the reason for their zeal will be that they have already tasted so many blessings. And since the listener wanted to know what was the essence of his very many words, he added this also, showing that this was a gift of the Holy Spirit. In this way, those who accepted his word approved of what he said, although his words were filled with fear, and after approval they proceed to baptism. But let us see what has been said above. "And they continued continually in doctrine." From this it is evident that they did not study for one day, or two, or three, but for many days, because they had passed on to a different way of life. "And there was fear in every soul." If "on everyone," then also on those who do not believe. Probably, they felt fear when they saw such a sudden conversion, and perhaps (it happened) from the signs. He did not say, "Together," but "with one accord," because it is possible for someone to be together, but not with one accord, being divided in thought. "In prayers." And here he does not expound the doctrine, taking care of the brevity of the word, although from this it can be seen that (the apostles) fed them like children with spiritual food, and suddenly they became angels. "And they divided it to all, according to the need of each." They saw that spiritual goods are common and that no one has more than another, and therefore they soon came to the idea of dividing their possessions among all. "All the believers were together." And that they were "together" out of place is evident from the following words: "and had all things in common." "Still," he says; and not so that one had and the other did not. It was angelic society, because they didn't call anything their own. From here the root of evil was plucked out, and by their deeds they showed that they had heard (the word of the sermon). And the Apostle said this: "Be saved from this perverse generation. Therefore those who gladly received his word were baptized, and there were joined that day about three thousand souls" (vv. 40-41). Since they were now three thousand, they had already led them out, and they came daily to the temple with great boldness and dwelt in it. and the very reverence for the place passed to the Lord of the temple. Have you seen the success of godliness? They renounced their possessions and rejoiced, and great was the joy, because the goods they had acquired were greater. No one reviled, no one envied, no one enmity; there was no pride, there was no contempt; Everyone, like children, accepted the instructions, everyone was in the mood like newborns. But why do I speak in a dark way? Remember how humble everyone was when God shook our city? They were in the same state then: there were no treacherous, there were no evil ones. This is what fear means, this is what sorrow means! There was no cold word: mine and yours; Therefore, there was joy at the meal. No one thought that he had his own; no one (thought) that he was eating someone else's food, although it seems a mystery. They did not consider that which belonged to the brethren to be strange, since it was the Lord's; nor did they consider it their own, but belonged to their brothers. Neither the poor were ashamed, nor the rich were proud: this is what it means to rejoice! And he considered himself beneficial, and felt that he enjoyed more beneficence, and these found their glory in this; And everyone was very attached to each other. For it happens that in the distribution of property there is resentment, pride, and sorrow; therefore the Apostle said: "Not with grief or compulsion" (2 Corinthians 9:7). See how much (Luke) glorifies in them: sincere faith, right life, constancy in hearing, in prayer, in simplicity, in joy. 3. Two (things) could plunge them into sorrow: fasting and the distribution of goods. But they rejoiced at both. Who would not love people with such feelings as common fathers? They did not plot any evil against each other and left everything to the grace of God. There was no fear between them, despite the fact that they were in the midst of dangers. But all their virtue, much higher than contempt for possessions, and fasting, and constancy in prayer, (the Apostle) expressed (in the word): "in simplicity." In this way they praised God irreproachably; or rather, this is the praise of God. But see how they immediately receive a reward here: the fact that they are "in love with all the people" shows that they were loved and were worthy of love. And who would not be amazed, who would not marvel at a man of simple disposition? Or who would not become attached to someone in whom there is nothing deceitful? To whom else but this does salvation belong? Who, if not to them, are the great blessings? Were not the pastors the first to hear the gospel? Was it not Joseph, this simple man, that the suspicion of adultery should not frighten him and induce him to do any evil? Did not the Lord choose simple villagers (as apostles)? After all, it is said: "Blessed is every simple[1] soul" (Proverbs 11:25). And again: "He who walks simply[2] walks confidently" (10:9). So, you will say, but prudence is also needed. What else is simplicity but prudence? For when you do not suspect anything evil, then you cannot plot evil. When you are not upset by anything, then you cannot be vindictive. Has anyone offended you? You were not sad. Did he slander him? You didn't suffer anything. Did he envy you? And you didn't suffer from it in the least. Simplicity is a certain path to wisdom. No one is so beautiful in soul as a simple person. As in relation to the body, a sad, gloomy, and gloomy person, even though he is handsome, loses much beauty, and a carefree and gentle smile increases beauty, so it is with regard to the soul. A gloomy one, even if he has a thousand good deeds, robs them of all their beauty; and open and simple - on the contrary. Such a person can be safely made a friend, and if he becomes an enemy, it is (not dangerous) to reconcile with him. Such a person does not need guards and guards, nor fetters and fetters; he himself will enjoy great tranquillity, and all who live with him. What, you say, if such a person falls into the company of bad people? God, who commanded us to be simple, will stretch out his hand to him. Which is simpler than David? What is more cunning than Saul? And in the meantime, who remained the winner? What (to say)