3. The Old Testament is fulfilled with such examples, and the New Testament is fulfilled. When the angels preach the gospel to the shepherds, when they appear to Mary, when they appear to Joseph, when they sit at the tomb of Christ, when they are sent to say to the disciples: "Men of Galilee! Why do you stand and look up to heaven?" (Acts 1:11) - when Peter is released from prison, when they talk to Philip - is it not clear that they serve us? Imagine, then, what an honor it is for us when God sends angels to serve us as His friends, when an angel appears to Cornelius, when an angel releases all the apostles from prison and says: "Go and stand in the temple, and speak to the people all these words of life" (Acts 5:20). But what do I say about others? An angel appeared to Paul himself. Do you see how they serve us for God, and serve us in matters of great importance? That is why Paul says: "Either the world, or life, or death, or the present or the future, are all yours" (1 Cor. 3:22). And the Son was sent, not as a slave, not as a servant, but as the only-begotten Son, as wanting the same thing that the Father wills; or rather, He was not sent, because He did not pass from one place to another, but took on flesh, and they change places, leaving some places in which they were, then go to others in which they were not. This (the apostle) says in order to encourage them. What (he says) are you afraid of? Angels serve us. Having spoken of the Son, of the works of economy, creation, and the kingdom, having proved the equality (of the Son with the Father) and that (the Son) reigns as Lord, not only over men, but also over the heavenly powers, (the Apostle) further exhorts them, suggesting that we must be attentive to what is said, and says: "Therefore we must be especially attentive to what we hear" (Hebrews 2:1). Here he wants to say that it is necessary to pay attention to the "especially" of the law, but he is silent about this; but he explains this in proofs, and not in the exhortation or counsel itself, because it was better that way. "For if," he says, "the word spoken by angels was firm, and every transgression and disobedience received a righteous recompense, how shall we escape, neglecting a little salvation, which, having first been preached by the Lord, was established in us by those who heard [from Him]" (Hebrews 2:2-3)? Why should we be "especially" attentive to what is said? Is not the former as much from God as the present? Here he commands to be attentive either "especially" to the law, or very much; but by no means condemns (the law), - no. Since (the Jews) had a high opinion of the Old Testament because of its antiquity, so that the present, as the new, should not be despised, he strenuously proves that the latter should be given even greater attention. How does he prove it? As if he were saying: although both are from God, they are not the same. However, he explains this to us later; now he briefly points this out, and then he sets it out more clearly, when he says: "For if the first [covenant] had been without defect," and again: "That which is old and old is near destruction" (Heb. 8:7,13), and many other similar things. But at the beginning of his speech he does not dare to say anything of the kind, until he has prepared and disposed the listener to it by many proofs. Why, then, tell me, is it proper for us to pay "special" attention? But not when, he says, let us fall away, that is, so that we do not perish, do not fall away. Here he shows the gravity of falling away, how difficult it is to restore what has fallen away again, when it happens through negligence. And he borrowed the expression itself from Proverbs: "My son!" says (the Most Wise), "do not let it go" (Proverbs 3:21), expressing both the ease of falling away and the severity of perdition, i.e., that disobedience is not safe for us. By the very proofs (the Apostle) inspires that the punishment will be very great. However, he leaves this as a subject for investigation, and does not give it in the form of a conclusion. Such a way of speaking makes the rebuke not so harsh, i.e. when the denouncer does not pronounce the decision everywhere on his own, but leaves it to the will of the listener to give his voice; this makes (the hearers) more reasonable. This is what the prophet Nathan does in the Old Testament, and Christ in Matthew, when He says: "What will he do to these tenants?" (Matthew 21:40) – calling (the disciples) themselves to pronounce judgment. This is the greatest victory. Further, (the Apostle), having said: "If through the angels the spoken word was firm," he did not add: how much more so that which was spoken by Christ; but, leaving this, he said more meekly: "How shall we escape, neglecting a little salvation." And see how he makes a comparison: "if," he says, "the word proclaimed through the angels"; there – "Angels", and here – "the Lord"; there is the "word", and here it is "salvation". Then, lest any one should say, Is it Christ's that thou sayest, Paul? - he warns of this and proves the authenticity of what has been said, proving the authenticity both by the fact that he heard it from the Lord, and by the fact that even now God speaks it, not with a voice simply uttered, as it was in the time of Moses, but by means of signs and certifying events.

4. What does it mean, "if the word spoken by angels was firm"? In a similar way he says in the Epistle to the Galatians: "... given through angels, by the hand of a mediator" (Gal. 3:19); and in another place: "... they received the law in the ministry of angels, and did not keep it" (Acts 7:53); and everywhere he says that (the law) was given through angels. Some say that Moses is meant here, but this is not justified, because he here names angels in the plural; At the same time, he speaks here about the angels of heaven. What can be said to this? That he either speaks of the ten commandments alone, as Moses then spoke, and God answered, or that the angels were present when God taught the commandments, or that he speaks of all that was said and done in the Old Testament, because the angels took part in it. Why does it say in another place: "... for the law was given through Moses" (John 1:17), and here: angels? For (Moses) says, "And God descended into darkness" (Exodus 19:20). "For if by angels the spoken word was firm." What does it mean, "it was firm"? It means true and true, because all that was said came to pass in due time. Either he says this, or that the word was firm and the threats were carried out, or he calls commandments by a word, because many commands were given without law by angels sent from God, as for instance in the place of weeping, in the presence of judges, in the time of Sampson (Judg. 2:1; 8:3). For this reason the Apostle did not say, "law," but, "word." It seems to me more probable that he means here everything that was arranged through angels. What are we going to say? That at that time there were angels to whom the people (the Jews) were entrusted, who produced trumpet sounds, fire, darkness, and so on. "… and every crime," he said, "transgression and disobedience received a righteous recompense." Not so that one thing receives and the other does not, but: "everyone." Nothing, he says, remained unpunished, but "received a righteous recompense" instead of punishment. Why did he express himself in this way? Paul is usually not too strict in his choice of expressions, but sometimes he uses indifferently less precise instead of more precise ones, as, for example, in one place he says: "We take every thought captive to the obedience of Christ" (2 Cor. 10:5); and in another place he uses "recompense" instead of punishment, just as here he calls punishment "recompense": "For it is right," he says, "before God to repay those who offend you with tribulation, and to you who are offended with joy" (2 Thess. 1:6,7). That is, righteousness has not lost its power, but God fulfills it and subjects those who have sinned to punishment, although not all sins are manifest, but only those by which the commandments are directly violated. And so, "how," to say, "shall we escape, neglecting a little salvation"? By this he expresses that there was not a great salvation before; And therefore it is good, he added: "About a little." Now, he says, God will not deliver us from war, nor will He give us earth and earthly goods, but there will be the destruction of death, the destruction of the devil, the kingdom of heaven, eternal life. All this he briefly expressed in the words: "having neglected a little salvation." Further, he speaks of the authenticity of what was said: "Being first preached by the Lord," i.e. it received its beginning from the very source, because it was not man who brought this (salvation) to earth, not the created power, but the Only-begotten Himself. "Those who have heard [from Him] have been strengthened in us." What does it mean: "confirmed"? That is, it is correctly taught, or carried out; we, he says, have a pledge; it has not been destroyed, it has not ceased, but it is preserved and victorious; and the reason for this is the active divine power. What does it mean, "hearing"? That is, the very ones who heard from the Lord confirmed us. This is a great and reliable deed. In a similar way, Luke says at the beginning of the Gospel: "As those who were eyewitnesses and ministers of the Word from the beginning have handed them down to us" (Luke 1:11). 1:2). How was it established? And what, they will say, if those who heard from themselves made up an idea? In order to refute such an idea and to prove that this grace is not from men, (the Apostle) adds: "with the testimony of God" (Hebrews 2:4). Truly, God would not have testified about them if they had invented something themselves. They testify, and at the same time God testifies. How does He testify? Not with a word, not with a voice, although that would be true - but how? "… signs and wonders, and various powers." Well did he say, "by various powers," expressing the abundance of gifts; but the ancients did not have such and such different signs. We have believed them not simply, but in the testimony of signs and wonders; therefore, they did not believe them, but God Himself. "And by the giving of the Holy Ghost according to His will." How is it, when both sorcerers perform signs, and the Jews said of Christ that "He casteth out demons by the power of Beelzebub" (Luke 11:15)? But they did not perform such signs; wherefore (Paul) says, "by divers powers." Those signs are not power, but powerlessness, fiction and vain actions; That is why he says of these: "... And by the dispensing of the Holy Spirit according to His will."

5. Here, it seems to me, (the apostle) hints at something else; There were probably a few people there who had spiritual gifts, which became impoverished because the believers became less zealous. Therefore, in order to console them in this and to protect them from falling, he ascribes everything to the will of God: He Himself (God), he says, knows to whom what is beneficial, and in this way distributes grace. He says the same thing in the Epistle to the Corinthians: "But God arranged the members, each in the body, as it pleased Him"; and again: "But to each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for profit," according to His will (1 Cor. 12:8,7,11), proves that gifts depend on the will of the Father. Often many did not receive gifts for an unclean and negligent life; and sometimes even people who led a good and pure life did not receive them; For what purpose? So that they do not stumble, so that they do not become proud, so that they do not become negligent, so that they do not become too arrogant. For if even without gifts the very consciousness of a pure life can arouse pride, then how much more (this is possible) when the gifts of grace are added. For this reason they were communicated more to humble and simple people, and especially to simple people, who dwelt, as the Scriptures say, "in gladness and simplicity of heart" (Acts 2:46). In this way (the admonition of the Apostle) could have a stronger effect on them and, if they were negligent, stir them up. He who is humble and does not think much of himself becomes more zealous when he receives a gift, like a person who has not received what he deserves and considers himself unworthy; but whoever thinks that he has shown merit, considers the gift due and is exalted. That is why God arranges this matter in this way with benefit. This can be seen in the Church: one has the gift of teaching, while the other cannot even open his mouth. If a man - the owner of the house knows to whom to entrust what, then how much more so does God, Who sees the human mind and knows everything before fulfillment. Only one thing is worthy of sorrow - sin, and everything else - not at all. Do not say, Why do I not have wealth? - or: if I had, I would give to the poor. You do not know if you had, whether you would not become even more covetous; now you say this, but in fact if you had received it, perhaps you would have become different. Thus, when we are full, we think that we can fast; And when a little time passes, we have other thoughts. Also, when we are not drunk, we think that we can overcome this passion; but when we give ourselves over to it, we no longer (think). Do not say, Why do I not have the gift of teaching? - Or: If I had, I would edify many. You do not know if you had, whether it would not have served to condemn you, and whether envy or laziness would not have forced you to hide your talent. Now you are free from all this, and if you do not give a measure of torment, you are not subject to condemnation; And then you would be guilty of many things. However, even now you are not completely devoid of talent. Show in small things what you would be like if you had (the greater): "unfaithful in small things," says (the Lord), "unfaithful in many things... who will believe you" (Luke 16:10,11)? Show me like a widow; She had two mites, and she donated everything she had. Are you looking for riches? Show me that you despise small things, so that I may entrust you with the great; and if you do not despise the former, how much more will you not despise the latter. Likewise, with regard to the gift of speech, show that you will properly use it for exhortation and persuasion. Do you have no outward eloquence? Do you not have an abundance of thoughts? But general (truths) thou knowest; you have a son, you have a neighbor, you have a friend, you have a brother, you have relatives; if you cannot make a long speech before the people in the church, you can exhort them in private; there is no need for flowery and lengthy speeches; show them that if you had the gift of speech, you would not be negligent. But if you do not show diligence in small things, how can I believe you in great things? And that indeed everyone can do this, listen to how Paul commanded the laity to do this: "Exhort," he says, "one another, and edify one another" (1 Thess. 5:11); and again, "Comfort one another therefore with these words" (1 Thess. 4:18). God knows how much to give to everyone. Are you better than Moses? But he, too, listen to how he complained: "... "Have I," he said, "borne in my womb all this people, and have I borne them, that Thou sayest unto me, Carry them in thy arms, as a nurse beareth a child?" (Num. 11:12). What about God? He separated him from his spirit and gave it to others (Num. 11:17), showing that if he had guided (the Jews) before, it was not from his own gift, but from the Spirit. If you had a gift, you would often be exalted, you would often fall; you don't know yourself as God knows you. Let us not say: what is this for, and what is it for? - when everything is arranged by God; let us not demand an account from Him; This is utterly impious and insane. We are slaves, and slaves, far removed from the Lord, not knowing even what is under our feet. Let us not test God's counsels, but let us keep what He has given us, even if it be small, even if it be extremely small, and then we will surely deserve praise; or better, (let us not consider) any of the gifts of God to be small. Do you complain that you do not have the gift of teaching? But tell me: what gift seems greater to you, the gift of teaching, or the gift of healing? Of course, the latter. And does not giving sight to the blind seem to you more than healing diseases? And to raise the dead, does it not seem to you even greater? Tell me, then, does it not seem to you more to do this by means of shade and towels than to do it with words? What do you desire, tell me, whether to raise the dead by means of shade and towels, or to have the gift of teaching? Surely you will say: to raise the dead by means of shade and towels.

6. But if I prove to you that much greater than this gift is another gift that you can acquire, and that by not acquiring it you justly deprive yourself of others, what will you say? Moreover, such a gift can be acquired not by one or two, but by everyone in general. I know that you are amazed and amazed to hear that you can have a gift much greater than the gift of raising the dead, giving sight to the blind, and doing what was done in the time of the apostles; Perhaps you even think it is improbable. What kind of gift is it? Love. Believe me; these are not my words, but the words of Christ, who spoke through Paul. What exactly should he say? "Be zealous for greater gifts, and I will show you a way even more excellent" (1 Cor. 12:31). What does it mean, "even more excellent"? His words mean the following: The Corinthians were then exalted with gifts, and having the gift of tongues, which is the least of the gifts, they were proud above the rest. Therefore he says: Do you desire to have gifts? I will show you the path to gifts, not only the best, but also the most excellent. And then he says: "If I speak with the tongues of men and angels, and have not love, then I am sounding brass or a tinkling cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries, and have all knowledge and all faith, so that I can move mountains, and have not love, then I am nothing" (1 Cor. 13:1,2). Do you see (what a gift) it is? Try to acquire it. It means more than raising the dead; it is far above all other gifts. And that this is really so, listen to what Christ says in His conversation with His disciples: "By this shall all men know that ye are My disciples, if ye have love one to another" (John 13:35). Explaining by what they would know, he did not say: by miracles, but why? "… if you have love one to another." Also (in prayer) to the Father He says: "And that they may be one in Us, that the world may believe that Thou hast sent Me" (John 17:21); and to His disciples He said: "A new commandment I give unto you, that ye love one another" (John 13:34). Thus (the loving man) is more excellent and glorious than those who raise the dead, and rightly so, because the latter proceeds entirely from the grace of God, and the former together from your diligence; the first is characteristic of a true Christian, and proves that he is a disciple of Christ, crucified (for the world) and having nothing to do with the earth; In order to convince you of this, pay attention to the following: Blessed Paul in two respects attained the height of virtues, or rather, in three, in signs, in wisdom, and in life; but without love, he says, all this is nothing. And how this is nothing, I will explain: "And if I give away," I say, "all my possessions, and give my body to be burned, and have not love, it profiteth me nothing" (1 Cor. 13:2, 3), because even he who gives away possessions and squanders money may not have love. Of this I have said enough in the place where I spoke of love; thither I send those who wish. Let us, then, as I have said, strive to acquire this gift, let us love one another, and we shall have no need of anything else in order to progress in virtue, but everything will be possible for us without effort, and everything will be accomplished with great success. But, you will say, we love each other even now; one has two friends, another three, and another four. But this does not mean to love for God, but in order to be loved oneself; whoever loves for God does not have such an impulse to love, but is disposed to everyone as to his own brothers - he loves his fellow believers as his own brothers, while he pities heretics, pagans and Jews as his own brothers by nature, only as unkind and useless, he is crushed and weeps for them. We can become like God if we love everyone, even our enemies, and not if we perform signs; we are also amazed at God, it is true when He works miracles, but much more so when He shows love for mankind and mercy. If this is especially worthy of wonder in God, how much more so in men, and therefore it is evident that it gives us special respect. Let us take care of this, and then we will have no less than Paul, Peter, and others, who raised up a multitude of the dead, even though we could not heal fevers; but without love, even if we perform signs more than the apostles themselves, even if we expose ourselves to innumerable dangers for the sake of the faith, we will not benefit at all. It is not I who say this, but the pet of love himself knows it; We must believe him. In this way we will be able to receive the promised blessings, which may we all be vouchsafed by the grace and love of our Lord Jesus Christ, with Whom to the Father with the Holy Spirit be glory, dominion, and honor, now and ever, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.

[1] Some of the Arians asserted that the word God with a member (ό Θεός) is used in the Holy Scriptures only about God the Father, and from this they concluded that His Son, Jesus Christ, is not the true God. The saint refutes here and elsewhere such an incorrect teaching.

CONVERSATION 4

"For it was not to the angels that God subdued the world to come, of which we speak; on the contrary, someone somewhere testified, saying, "What is man, that Thou rememberest him?" or the son of man, that thou visitest him? Thou hast humbled him not much before the angels" (Hebrews 2:5-7).

1. I would like to know for sure whether anyone listens to my words with due attention, whether we do not sow seeds along the way; then I would offer the doctrine with greater zeal. Of course, even if no one listens, we will speak out of the fear inspired by the Savior. Speak, says (the Lord), to these people, and if they do not listen, you yourself will be innocent (Ezek. 3). But if I were convinced of your diligence, I would not only speak out of fear, but I would also do it with pleasure. Now, if no one listens, although I myself am not in danger as one who does my work, this work is without pleasure. What good is it when no one is edified, although I am not accused? And if you were attentive, we would not so much profit from not being punished as from your arrogance. How can I be convinced of this? Noticing some of you who are not very attentive, I will ask them especially when I meet them, and if I find that they remember some of what has been said—I do not say everything, it is not very convenient for you, but though a little of a great deal—then obviously I will not need to worry about the others. I should not have told you about this beforehand, and found you unprepared, but even then it will be pleasant if in this way I find (those who remember what I have said); or rather, even then I can find you unprepared. For what I ask I say beforehand, and when I ask, I do not declare it; Maybe today, maybe tomorrow, maybe in twenty or thirty days, maybe less, maybe more.

In the same way, God has not announced to us the day of our death, has not revealed to us whether it is today, or tomorrow, or in a whole year, or in a few years, so that in the absence of what is expected we may constantly keep ourselves virtuous. He said that we would die, but He did not say when. In like manner I have told you what I will ask, and when I have not added it, desiring that you should take care of it continually. Do not say, I have heard this for four, five, or more weeks, and I cannot remember; I want the hearer to remember in such a way that he never forgets, erases from memory, or loses what has been said, for I desire that you should remember, not in order to tell me, but in order to benefit you; That's what I care about. However, having said what needed to be said for a warning, it is necessary to begin the conversation in order. What are we going to talk about today? "For it was not to the angels," says (the Apostle), "that God subdued the future universe of which we speak." Isn't he talking about some other universe? No, about this very one: therefore he adds: "of which we speak," so as not to allow the erring mind to seek some other universe. Why does he call it the future? As in another place he says, "Which is the image of the things to come" (Rom. 5:14), speaking of Adam and Christ in the Epistle to the Romans, and calling the incarnate Christ the future in relation to the times of Adam, because Christ was to come, so here, having said, "When he brings the firstborn into the world" (Heb. 1:6), so that you do not think that he is speaking of another universe, he repeatedly affirms in another way, by the very name of its future, because the universe had to appear, and the Son of God was always. In this way, this universe, which was about to appear, God subdued not to angels, but to Christ. Obviously, he says that it was spoken of to the Son, and no one can say that it was to the angels. Further, he cites another testimony: "He testified," he says, "someone is nowhere." Why did he not mention the name of the prophet, but kept silent about him?

He does the same in other testimonies, as, for example, when he says: "Likewise, when He brings the Firstborn into the world, He says, And let all the angels of God worship Him" (Hebrews 1:6); and again: "I will be His Father" (Hebrews 1:5); and again: "Of the angels it is said: Thou makest spirits by Thy angels, and flaming fire by Thy servants. And about the Son: ..." - and - "In the beginning, O Lord, Thou founded the earth" (Hebrews 1:7,10). Thus also here he says: "A man hath testified somewhere, saying..." By the very fact that he is silent and does not name the name of the testimony, but cites it as well-known and indubitable, it seems to me that he shows that (his hearers) were very well versed in the Scriptures. "What is man, that Thou rememberest him? or the son of man, that thou visitest him? Thou hast humbled him not much before the angels; With glory and honor hath thou crowned him, and hath set him over the works of thy hands, and hath subjected all things under his feet" (Hebrews 2:6-8).

2. This, although it is said of mankind in general, may refer more principally to Christ according to the flesh; it is the words, "He subdued all things under his feet," that refer more to Him than to us. The Son of God visited us, insignificant creatures, and having taken on our (nature) and united with Himself, He became above all. "When," continues (the Apostle), "he subjected all things to him, he left nothing unsubjected to him. But now we do not yet see that all things were subject to him" (Hebrews 2:8). The meaning of his words is as follows: since he said: "How long will I make Thy enemies Thy footstool" (Hebrews 1:13), and (the listeners) after that could still give themselves over to sorrow, he, having then inserted a few words, adduced such a testimony as confirmed the former. Lest they say, "How did God put our enemies under His feet, when we are exposed to such calamities?" He had pointed out this very thing before, namely, the expression "until" signifies not the immediate fulfillment, but the subsequent time, and here he reveals the same thing in more detail. From the fact that they are not yet subdued, he says, do not conclude that they will not be subdued. That they should be subdued is known, because the prophecy also says about it: "When," he says, "he subjected all things to him, he left nothing unsubjected to him." Why is not everything subject to Him? Because it has to be conquered. If, therefore, all things are to be submitted to Him, though not yet subdued, do not grieve or be troubled. If the end had already come and all things were subdued, and you were subjected to such calamities, then you could justly grieve; but now we do not yet see everything submitted to Him, the Tsar has not yet fully assumed power. Why then are you troubled when you endure suffering? Preaching has not yet prevailed over everyone; The time has not yet come to submit completely. Further, another consolation is offered: He who has the power to subdue all is himself dead and has endured innumerable sufferings. "We see," he says, "that because of the endurance of death, Jesus was crowned with glory and honor, Who was not much humbled before the angels" (Hebrews 2:9). Then again he adds something desirable: "crowned with glory and honor." Do you see how he relates everything to Him? And the expression: "Not much more can apply to Him who was only three days in hell than to us, who have been subjected to corruption for so long"; in the same way, the expression, "in glory and honor," applies much more to Him than to us. (The Apostle) here again reminds us of the cross, trying to do two things - to prove His care and to persuade them to endure everything magnanimously, looking to the Teacher. If, he says, He whom the angels worship has suffered to humble himself a little before the angels for you, how much more must you, who are less than the angels, endure all things for Him. Then he explains that glory and honor are the cross, just as Christ Himself calls it glory, when He says: "The hour has come for the Son of Man to be glorified" (John 12:23). But if He calls (suffering) glory for the sake of servants, how much more so do you (call it suffering) for the sake of the Lord.

Do you see what the fruit of the cross is? Do not be afraid of him; it seems deplorable to you, but it produces innumerable blessings. By this (the Apostle) proves the benefit of temptations. Then he says: "... that by the grace of God he might taste death for all" (Hebrews 2:9). "That may," he says, "by the grace of God." And He suffered by the grace of God towards us: "Who did not spare His Son, but delivered Him up for us all" (Romans 8:32). Why? Not because he had to do it for us, but by grace. And again in the Epistle to the Romans he says: "... how much more shall the grace of God and the gift by grace of one man, Jesus Christ, abound for many" (Romans 5:15). "… that by the grace of God he might taste death": not only for believers, but for the whole world, He died for all. What is it that not everyone believed? He had done his work; And therefore (the Apostle) directly says: "Taste death for all." He did not say, "He will die," because He did taste (death) and remained in it for a short time, soon rising again. Thus, the words: "endurance of death" mean the true death of Christ; and the words: "more excellent than the angels" indicate His resurrection. As a physician, having no need to partake of the medicines prepared for the sick, out of his solicitude for him, tastes beforehand in order to persuade the sick man to boldly accept the food offered, so Christ, knowing that all men fear death, and wishing to persuade them to boldly go to it, tasted it himself, having no need of it. "For the prince of this world is coming," He says, "and in Me he has nothing" (John 14:30). Thus the word, "by grace," as well as the expression, "to taste death for all," suggest the same thing. "For it was fitting that He for Whom all things are, and from Whom all things come, Who brings many sons to glory, the Guide of their salvation through sufferings" (Hebrews 2:10).

3. Here he speaks of the Father. Do you see how in relation to Him he uses the expression: "Him"? He would not have done so if it had been humiliating and befitting only the Son. And the meaning of his words is as follows: God hath made, he says, that which is worthy of His love for mankind, by manifesting the Firstborn, the most glorious of all, and as it were a warrior of courage and superior to others, presenting Him as an example for others. "… the leader of their salvation," i.e., the author of salvation. Do you see what a difference (between Him and us)? Though He is the Son, and we are sons, yet He saves, and we are saved. Do you notice how (the Apostle) both unites us with Him and divides us? "He who brings," he says, "many sons to glory," here he unites; "… the leader of their salvation" - here, on the contrary, he divides. "He accomplished through suffering" - therefore, suffering is perfection and a means to salvation. Do you see that the endurance of suffering is not a sign of the outcasts?

But if the Father honoured the Son first of all by leading Him through His sufferings, then truly to take on the flesh and endure what He endured is a much greater thing than to create the world and bring it from non-existence into being; and the latter is a work of love for mankind, but the former is much more so, as the Apostle himself explains it when he says: "... in order to manifest in the ages to come the abundant riches of His grace", "... raised up with Him, and seated him in heaven in Christ Jesus" (Ephesians 2:7,6). "For it was fitting that He for Whom all things are, and from Whom all things come, Who brings many sons to glory, the Guide of their salvation through sufferings" (Hebrews 2:10). It behooved, he says, for Him, Who provides for all things and brought all things into being, to give a Son for the salvation of others, one for many. However, he did not say so, but says: "He accomplished through sufferings," expressing that he who suffers for someone not only benefits him, but also becomes more glorious and perfect. And this, he says, is for believers, in order to encourage them. And Christ was glorified when He suffered. However, when I say that He is glorified, do not think that He has received an increase in glory; the glory which is inherent in Him in essence, He always had, without adding to it in the least. "For both he who sanctifies and those who are sanctified, all are of One; therefore He is not ashamed to call them brethren" (Hebrews 2:11). This is how again he unites them (with Christ), giving them honor, comforting them, and calling them brothers of Christ, because "all are of One"; but at the same time he defines (his words) and shows that he speaks of Christ according to the flesh, expressing himself thus: "He who sanctifies and those who are sanctified." Do you see what a difference (between Him and us)? He sanctifies, and we are sanctified. And above He is called the author of their salvation. "We have one God the Father, of whom are all things" (1 Cor. 8:6). "Therefore He is not ashamed to call them brethren." Do you see how He shows His superiority again? By the expression: "not ashamed" he shows that all this does not depend on the essence of the object, but on the mercy and great humility of the one who is not ashamed. Though from one, He sanctifies, and we are sanctified. A great difference! He is from the Father, as the true Son, i.e. from His essence; and we are like creatures, i.e. out of nothing; therefore there is a great difference between Him and us. For this reason (the Apostle) says: "He is not ashamed to call them brethren, saying, I will declare Thy name to My brethren" (Hebrews 2:11-12). Having taken flesh, He also took on brotherhood; Together with the flesh it has surpassed the brotherhood. This is rightly said; but what is the meaning of these words: "I will trust in Him" (Hebrews 2:13)? And what follows them is not in vain: "Behold I and the children whom God has given me"; in them He calls Himself father, as He called Himself brother, when He said, "I will declare Thy name unto My brethren." Here again His superiority and great difference (between Him and us) are expressed, as well as in the following words: "But as children are partakers of flesh and blood" (Hebrews 2:14).