John Cassian, affirming himself on the experience of the sad reality of his time, when they did not even hesitate to pervert the true meaning of Scripture for the sake of the love of money. "No one can serve God and mammon," says St. John, — and no one who has put his hand to the plough, and looks back, is trustworthy for the Kingdom of God. Such people try to find for themselves a reason for their former greed in the witness of the Holy Scriptures. In a perverse sense, they try to pervert the saying of the Apostle, or rather the Lord, and to adapt it according to their own desire; not adapting his life or mind to the meaning of the Holy Scriptures, but making a stretch of the Holy Scriptures. The Scriptures, according to the desire of their passion, want it to be in harmony with their opinions, and say that it is written: There is more bliss in giving than in taking. By misinterpreting this, they think to weaken the following saying of the Lord: "If you want to be perfect, go and sell your possessions, and give to the poor, and receive treasure in heaven, and come and follow me." They think that they should not leave their wealth under this pretext, precisely because they consider themselves more blessed, if... from its abundance they give to others... Such people must know that they are either deceiving themselves and have not renounced this world in any way, relying on their former wealth, or, if they want to fulfill their monastic vows by their very deed, rejecting and squandering everything... with the Apostle they will be glorified in hunger and thirst, in cold and nakedness"[948]. "And so, if we wish to follow the commandment of the Gospel and to be imitators of the Apostle and of the entire primitive Church, or of the Fathers, who in our times have followed the virtues and their perfection, then we must not rely on our own opinions, promising ourselves the perfection of the Gospel from this cold and miserable state; but, following in their footsteps, we must try not to deceive ourselves, and in this way let us fulfill the monastic order and decree, so that we may truly renounce this world." The same is affirmed by Blessed Diadochos and St. John Climacus. The first gives the following instructions: "It is very proper and completely useful for us, who have learned the way of piety, to immediately sell everything that we have... and not to disobey the Saving Commandment under the pretext of a constant desire to fulfill the commandments... The Lord, of course, will demand of us an account of almsgiving, since we have. Therefore, if I have given what I have had to give for many years, through the fear of God I usefully squander in a short time, then I am having nothing, for what else will I be condemned? But someone will say: whence will the poor, who are constantly accustomed to support themselves from our insignificant possessions, receive alms? Let such a person learn not to blaspheme God under the pretext of his own love of money. For God does not cease to arrange His creation as from the beginning" (950).

Prep. St. John of the Ladder also points to the hypocritical basis of monastic speeches about the duty to give alms. And he commands: "Do not say that you collect money for the sake of the poor; for the widow's two mites bought the kingdom of heaven... The love of money begins under the guise of giving alms, and ends with hatred of the poor. A lover of money is merciful as long as he collects money, and as soon as he has accumulated it, he has clasped his hands" [951]. "The demon of the love of money, according to the conviction of the monk, struggles with the non-acquisitive, and when he cannot overcome them, then he presents them with the poor, and then by the appearance of alms he exhorts them, so that they should again become material from the immaterial" [952].

We will not dwell in detail on the teaching of the holy ascetic fathers about the properties of truly Christian almsgiving, since in general in the ascetic instructions little attention was paid to the teaching about almsgiving and they did not say anything new in this regard. Let us only quote the words of St. Abba Dorotheus about the complete unselfishness of Christian almsgiving, words distinguished by rare expressiveness. "It is acceptable (the will of God) when one gives alms, not from any human motive, but for the sake of good, out of compassion alone: this is pleasing to God. Perfect (the will of God) is that when one does alms not with avarice, not with sloth, not with contempt, but with all his strength and all his will, giving as if he himself had received it, and doing good as if he himself had received a good deed; then the perfect will of God is fulfilled... But one must also know the very good of almsgiving, and its very grace: it is so great that it can forgive even sins... The Lord Himself said: "Be merciful, as your heavenly Father is merciful." He did not say: "Fast, as your heavenly Father also fasts"; He did not say: "Be not acquisitive, even as your heavenly Father is not acquisitive." But what does he say: "Be merciful..."; for this virtue especially imitates God and depicts Him. Thus, one should always look to this goal and do good wisely, for there is a great difference in the purpose of almsgiving. Someone gives alms so that his field may be blessed, and God blesses his field. Another gives alms so that his ship may be saved, and God saves his ship. A man gives it for his children, and God saves and preserves his children. Another gives it in order to be glorified, and God glorifies him. For God rejects no one, but gives to each one what he desires, provided it does not harm his soul. But all these have already received their reward, and God does nothing to them, because they have sought nothing for themselves from Him; and the purpose they had in mind had nothing to do with their spiritual benefit. Thou hast done this that thy field might be blessed, and God might bless thy field; thou hast done this for thy children, and God hath preserved thy children. You did it to be glorified, and God glorified you. So, what does God owe you? He gave you the wages you made for. Some give alms in order to be delivered from future torment; this one gives it for his soul, this one gives it for God's sake. Yet he is not as God wills, for he is still in the state of a slave, and the slave does not voluntarily do the will of his master, but fears to be punished; likewise this one gives alms in order to be delivered from torment, and God delivers him from it. Another gives alms in order to receive a reward: this is higher than the first, but this one is not as God wills, for he is not yet in the state of a son, but, as a hireling, does the will of his master, in order to receive from him both payment and profit: in the same way this one gives alms in order to obtain and receive a reward from God. For in three ways, as St. Gregory says, we can do good: either we do good, fearing torment, and then we are in the state of a slave; or in order to receive a reward, in which case we are in the disposition of a hireling, or we do good for the sake of good, and then we are in the rank of a son; For the Son does the will of the Father, not out of fear or because he wants to receive a reward from Him, but because he wants to please Him, to honor and calm Him. In the same way, we should give alms for the sake of the very good, having compassion on one another as our own members, and please others as if we ourselves were receiving services from them; give as if we ourselves were receiving, and this is reasonable almsgiving; thus we come to the state of a son"[953].

Western church thought of the fourth and early fifth centuries elucidated the questions of almsgiving, in general, in accordance with the principles laid down in the basis of the understanding of Christian teaching by the great teachers of the ancient Church. But such an agreement in principle did not, of course, prevent the fact that in the West the question of alms was considered from a somewhat different point of view than in the ancient Christian East.

Let us confine ourselves to a few names: Lactantius, St. Ambrose, Blessed Augustine, and Blessed Jerome.

Lactantius examines the Christian teaching on alms in a very interesting apologetic elucidation of this teaching, comparing it with the negative views on the duty of charity of a certain part of Roman philosophical thought. And in this case, Lactantius asserts the debt of almsgiving, first of all, on the basis of a natural feeling of compassion, and then on the demand for true justice, as the rational principle of human relations. "We all," says Lactantius, "are united by kinship, because we are descended from the first man.... We are all brothers, because our souls are the creation of one and the same God. This union is much closer and holier than our union with the body; and Lucretius was not mistaken in saying that we are all born of heaven and all have one Father. Consequently, it is necessary to consider as ferocious beasts those who, having rejected all feeling of humanity, rob people, torture them and kill them. God wants us to preserve this fraternal union among ourselves religiously, that He forbids us to do harm to anyone and commands everyone to do good. He explains it this way: it is proper to help the brethren in need and to provide them with means of subsistence when they are in poverty. That is why God commanded that we live in society and see ourselves in each person... I intend here to refute the fallacy of those who think that it is not necessary to give anything to anyone... It is necessary to have the feelings of humanity if we want to retain the name of man. What else does it mean to have the feelings of mankind if not to sincerely love people, because their nature is the same as ours? Nothing is more contrary to human nature than disagreement and strife. The words of Cicero are very true that a person who follows the feelings of nature is not able to harm another person. If it is contrary to nature to harm man, then it is in accordance with nature to help him. Whoever does not fulfill this duty renounces the quality of man. I would ask him who asserts that a wise man ought not to have compassion: If he saw someone bearing a weapon, from whom another, in the clutches of a beast of prey, would ask for help, does he think the former should help the latter or leave him? It is difficult for him to have so much shamelessness as not to fulfill the duty of mankind in such a case. If a man were to burn in a fire, or groan under the ruins of a house, or fall into a river or into the sea, would he not confess that mankind demands help here? He would not have been a man if he had not confessed it, for there is no one who could not be exposed to such danger. He will certainly agree that a man who has a heart will do all he can to save the perishing man.

Guided by this feeling, Plautus uttered the following abominable words: "He who gives alms to the poor does evil; for besides being deprived of the money given, he, prolonging his life, continues his misery." However, Plautus can also be excused for putting these words into the mouth of such a person to whom they are befitting. But how to justify Cicero, who in his book on offices advises not to give anything to anyone? Here is how he says: "Generosity given out of one's own possessions exhausts capital, and thus generosity destroys itself, so to speak; for the more often it is fulfilled, the more it deprives us of the opportunity to fulfill it." After that, he adds: "Can there be anything more insane than to make oneself unable to do what we do with pleasure in the future?" This is how this professor of wisdom turns people away from the duties of mankind, and how he warns them to be more concerned about the preservation of their property than about the observance of righteousness. He himself, it seems, was so convinced of the incorrectness and cruelty of this advice, that in another place he seems to renounce it, expressing himself in the following way: "It is necessary, however, sometimes to give, giving a part of one's property to capable people." But who are capable people if not those who can appreciate good deeds? If Cicero were still alive, I would say to him: you are mistaken about this; Thou hast deprived people of righteousness, basing on interest the duties of philanthropy and mercy. It is not necessary to help those who are able to give thanks, but those who are not able to give thanks; for by helping them, without hope of gratitude, you will fulfill the duty of truth, mercy and love for humanity. This is the true truth, of which, in the opinion of many, we have no idea. You, Cicero, say in many places of your creations that virtue acts without interest, and in the book of the laws you confess that generosity is generous and does not require reward. "It is known," you say in one place, "that a generous and beneficent person seeks only glory for his deeds and does not think about the benefits that he can receive from it." Why do you say elsewhere that you will lend only those who are capable of appreciating a favor? Is it not the same that you want to receive a reward for it? Following your advice, we will allow a person to die of hunger and cold when we see that he is unable to appreciate the help we give him. Should not a person who is in abundance and luxury help another person who is in the most extreme need? You say that virtue expects no reward and deserves to be sought by men for its own sake. Judge of truth, this first virtue and as the mother of all other virtues, not according to your own interest, but according to her own dignity, and put your blessings into the hands of those who can never repay you anything. Why do you choose faces? You must consider all those who have recourse to your aid in the hope that you have love for mankind to be the same people. Observe the truth and flee the shadow of remark. Let the blind, the lame, the crippled, those who are deprived of help and in danger die without your help. If they are useless to men, they are not useless to God, who allows them to enjoy life. Do everything that depends on you to save their lives. Whoever has the opportunity to help a person who is in danger of dying, but does not help, will be the cause of his death. Those who renounce the senses of nature and do not know what reward will be for good deeds, lose their property, fearing to lose it. They are exposed to what they wanted to avoid, that is, they are either spent without any benefit, or, if they receive any benefit, it is for the shortest time... Those who give generosity to their fellow-citizens and friends undoubtedly do better than those who give games and battles to the people, because what they spend is not entirely lost; but after all this, their distributions are improperly made. In order to distribute well, it is necessary to do good to the poor and needy. Everything that is distributed to those who have no need of anything, or to people from whom one can expect a return, is misused. These distributions are not made in truth, because even if they were not made, they would not offend the truth. The only duty of truth and generosity is to use one's property to feed the poor who are in extreme need."

As we can see, in his refutation of Cicero's view of charity, Lactantius defends the absoluteness of the Christian commandment to do almsgiving; and here he emphasizes with particular force her unselfishness and complete devotion to the dictates of God's will. "The true use of riches consists in using them not for one's own pleasure, but for the maintenance of many people out of a sense of truth, which is an everlasting virtue. Our constant rule should be to show mercy free of charge. One must expect a reward from God alone. Whoever expects it from anyone else will trade in mercy, and not create it. He will not lend anyone and will act only for his own benefit. This does not mean that he who does good to another without expecting anything from him does not really have any benefit here: he receives a reward from God. Mercy is so important in all the acts of our lives that God commands those who are unable to show it to invite them to feasts... All the deeds of a just person should be beneficence. There is no charity when it returns. We have no right to it, because we have received payment for it.

Righteousness wants the blessings to be complete; and they cannot be complete otherwise than when they are shown to people who are not able to appreciate them... The chief duty of a good man is to feed the poor, and to ransom the captives. He who does good to his relatives and friends is not worthy of praise, because he fulfills only the duty of nature and friendship, which no one can omit without committing wickedness that deserves to be cursed. In such a case he avoids blame rather than gains glory. But whoever does good to the stranger and to the unknown is worthy of the greatest praise, because he does it out of the mere feeling of love for mankind. Some even do good out of pure motives of truth and honor when there is no need to do it" [955]. And on the way to fulfilling the duty to do alms, Lactantius sees no obstacles, up to the complete distribution of property and the endurance of poverty. "Some may say: 'I will have no property left if I perform all these duties; In one day I will spend all that I have, when I will help the poor, clothe all the naked, ransom all the captives, and bury all the dead. Should I thus squander the possessions which my ancestors had acquired with such difficulty, and bring myself to such a position that I should finally beg for help and compassion from others?" Are you so terribly afraid of poverty, which philosophers extol with such extraordinary praises, and which they call a safe haven, exempt from all the troubles and anxieties of wealth? Do you know the many adventures and accidents to which the possession of a large estate subjects us? You should consider yourself fortunate if you escape them without losing your life. You are burdened with treasures that arouse envy and ill-will in your fellow citizens. Why do you not hide in the safest place your property, which can easily be lost either from the robbery of thieves, or from unjust exile, or from the invasion of the enemy? What difficulty do you find in making eternal and unchangeable that possession which is temporary and temporary? Entrust your treasures to God, and they will not be subject to corruption, or to the theft of thieves, or to the injustice of tyrants. Those who give their wealth into the hands of God can never be poor. If you know the value of righteousness, then free yourself from the excess that burdens and troubles you, and follow it without hindrance. Cast off the chains that depress you, and flow to God. Great courage to trample earthly goods under foot. If you are not yet able to have perfection to transfer your treasure into the hands of God and to gain lasting blessings through the loss of perishing goods; then I will teach you how to achieve this and get rid of all fear here. These commandments are given not for you alone, but for all your brethren, who are so closely connected with each other that they constitute only one body with you. If you alone are unable to carry out such an undertaking, then at least assist in it by all means in your power and try to surpass others in generosity as much as you surpass them in wealth... Offer as a sacrifice to God the property that is perishing in your hands, and you will receive an eternal reward for it. God offered a huge price for works of mercy, promising remission of sins for them. It is as if He is saying to you: "If you hear the plea of those who ask you for help, then I will also hear your prayer. If you will be merciful to those who are afflicted, then I will be merciful to you in your time of grief. But if you do not pay attention to them and refuse them help, then I will do the same to you and judge you according to your own rules."[956]

From Lactantius' teaching on almsgiving, it is also interesting to note his view of its purifying significance, and Lactantius definitely notes the true meaning of the Church-wide belief in such a significance of alms in Christian life. "When someone comes to you asking for help, be sure that this is an experiment sent to you from God to see if you deserve to be granted your request. Do not think, however, that the power provided by alms for the remission of sins gives you the right to sin again. Alms only blot them out when it is accompanied by pity for them and a determination not to do them again. God truly desires to cleanse people from their sins and for this purpose He commanded them to turn to repentance. Repentance consists in a firm promise not to sin in the future. God forgives sins committed through immodesty, carelessness, and ignorance; but does not forgive sins that are knowingly committed. People who have been forgiven their sins should not think that because they are clean, they are already freed from works of mercy. From the moment they are justified, they are even more obliged to fulfill the duty of truth, and must maintain, so to speak, their health by the same means that they achieved before it. Moreover, no one is freed from sin as long as he is clothed in a mortal body"[957].

In the writings of St. Ambrose of Milan we naturally expect to encounter a teaching on alms that agrees with the views of the Eastern Fathers of the Church, especially Basil the Great, in view of the complete agreement of St. Ambrose with these Fathers in their view of the Christian understanding of the right of property. And indeed, in the essential questions connected with the teaching on almsgiving, St. Ambrose affirms himself from the Church-wide point of view. But, for all this, the views of this holy father also reflected the general spirit of practicalism, which was characteristic of Western thought in general, and which was expressed in St. Ambrose by very insistent indications of the need for a clergyman to be especially cautious in the matter of giving alms.

On the question of the significance of alms in Christian life, St. Ambrose asserts himself on the same foundations on which this meaning was founded by other teachers of the Church, but dwells in particular detail on the properties of almsgiving.

In expounding St. Ambrose's view of the right to private property, as well as to wealth, we saw that the distribution of property through alms is a duty for a Christian, as a demand for truth and the fulfillment of the will of God, the Supreme Owner of the world. Therefore, almsgiving is both the result of a natural feeling of compassion for the unfortunate fate of one's neighbors, and a religious activity proper, service to God. "The greatest motive for mercy is, in the words of St. Ambrose, compassion for the misfortunes of others and all possible help in their needs" [958]. "Beautiful is charity, which in itself makes (people) perfect, inasmuch as through it they become like the perfect Father. Nothing is so praiseworthy in the Christian soul as charity; but it is necessary to be merciful, first of all, to the poor, so that they too may enjoy the gifts of nature, which gives birth to earthly fruits for the use of all; therefore, of what you have, give to the poor and help your brother. Just imagine how much your alms mean to him. You give him a coin, and he gets life; you give him money... and your denarius is already a fortune for him"[959]. And the highest religious sanctification, the duty of compassionate help to the needy, is received in the awareness that in the person of the poor, Christ Himself, Who became impoverished for our sake, demands our love and compassion. St. In revealing this thesis, Ambrose stands on the basis of the Church-wide idea of almsgiving.

"Let us visit," exhorts the Holy Father, "the prisons, let us console them in their bonds, sharing in the poverty and torment of men with our condolences. For in all such is found Christ, Who, being incomprehensible in His Divinity, is nevertheless attained by works of mercy. He Himself says to the merciful in the Gospel: "For I am hungry, and give Me food; be thirsty, and give me drink; Be naked, and clothe Me. You see to what good deeds the word of God incites you. Here, in the person of the hungry, and the thirsty, and the naked, Christ Himself accepts alms"[960]. And with such a view of alms as a religious activity, it is quite natural that St. Ambrose, in agreement with other teachers of the Church, assimilates to it a purifying meaning and speaks of a heavenly reward for it. St. Ambrose speaks of the purifying significance of almsgiving, like St. Cyprian and Origen. "Almsgiving is to some extent a second bath for the soul, so that if someone sins after baptism due to human weakness, then there is still a means for him to purify himself by almsgiving, since the Lord said: "Give alms, and behold, everything is pure in you." Even with the exception of faith, I could say that alms bring forgiveness even more than baptism, because baptism is performed once and promises forgiveness once, and alms give forgiveness as often as it is given. Both are sources of mercy that give life and forgive sins. He who uses both is worthy of the Kingdom of Heaven. But he who, having polluted the living fountain (baptism) with sins, has recourse to the river of mercy, also receives mercy"[961]. St. Ambrose speaks no less definitely about the great heavenly reward for almsgiving, as an incentive for the latter. The poor who receive help repays the benefactor, according to the Holy Father, more than he receives, "since he is the author of salvation. If you clothe the naked, you clothe yourself in righteousness. If you bring a stranger into your house, if you receive a poor man, then he will bring you close communion with the saints, and will also lead you into eternal abodes. This gratitude is no small thing, since you sow bodily things, and in return you receive spiritual things... Truly blessed is he from whose house the poor have never left with an empty bag, for no one can be more blessed than he who perceives the need of the poor and needy, who takes to heart the sufferings of the poor; on the day of judgment he will receive salvation from the Lord, Whom he will have as the debtor of his mercy"[962]. Similar thoughts, sometimes literally similar to the teachings of St. Basil the Great, are revealed by St. Ambrose in his discourse on the parable of the mad rich man. Here the idea is revealed that a good deed is more useful to the giver than to the receiver, since if alms go to the poor, then the giver receives a hundredfold reward, like a sower scattering his seeds over the field, and at the price of "perishable food" "the incorruptible glory of the Kingdom of Heaven" is bought. Of course, the meaning of these speeches of the saint "about the purchase of heaven" must be understood in the same way as the teaching on this subject of other teachers of the Church, about which teaching we have already made small remarks. Here we note that St. Ambrose himself establishes the ethical meaning of his understanding of the meaning of almsgiving. "If you have money," says the saint, for example, "atone for your sin. God is not corrupt, but you yourself are corrupt... redeem yourself with your works, redeem yourself with your money. Money is insignificant, but mercy is precious. Almsgiving, he said, frees from sin"[964].