Why are you laughing? See how ridiculous (your curses) are, when you remember them in a calm state! And every other sin turns out to be just as shameful when you consider it, putting aside the passion for it. To a person who is carried away by anger, then remind him of the words he uttered in anger; he will blush with shame, laugh at himself, and would rather endure anything than agree to accept it as his own. Or, bring the profligate to the harlot with whom he fell; he will look at her with disgust, as at a useless woman. So now, being free from passion, you laugh at your words. They are worthy of laughter, because they are characteristic of drunken old women and pusillanimous women. Joseph, who was sold by his brothers, became a slave and was thrown into prison, did not say anything offensive against those who insulted him. What did he say? "I was stolen from the land of the Jews" (Gen. 40:15). He did not even mention through whom he was stolen. He was more ashamed of his wicked brethren than they themselves, who had done so. We should have the same feelings, and we should pity those who offend us more than they themselves, because all the harm passes on to them. Just as those who drive nails and are proud of them are worthy of pity and tears for their folly, so those who offend those who have done them no harm are more worthy of compassion and tears than of curses, because they destroy their own souls. Truly, there is nothing more contemptible than a soul that curses others in prayer, and more despicable than a tongue that offers (to God) such sacrifices. You are a man – do not pour out from your mouth the poison of adders. You are a man – do not be a beast. Your lips have not been given to you to wound, but to heal the wounds of others. "Remember," says God, "what I have inspired you: to forgive and forgive (trespasses). But you beseech Me that I also be your accomplice in the violation of My own commandments, and you devour your brother, you stain your tongue with blood, like madmen who tear their own limbs with their teeth." Have you ever thought about how the devil rejoices and laughs when he hears such prayers? Have you thought, on the contrary, how God is angry, how he is disgusted, and how He hates you when you pray in this way? What can be more criminal than what you do? In fact, if he who has only enemies should not approach the sacraments, then how should he not be forbidden to approach even the threshold of the temple to one who not only has enemies, but also prays for their destruction? Therefore, having considered what has been said, and remembering that the author of the sacrifice (which we offer) sacrificed Himself for our enemies, let us try not to have enemies. But if we have, let us pray for them, that we, too, having received the forgiveness of our sins, may boldly stand before the judgment of Christ, to whom be glory, dominion, and honor, now and ever, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.

CONVERSATION 6

"Are we really going to get to know you again? Do we really need letters of approval to you or from you, as for some?" (2 Corinthians 3:1)

1. Since some could say that (the apostle) praises himself, he says this in order to prevent such an accusation. Although he had corrected this idea several times before, when he said: "And who is able to do this?" and "We preach sincerely, as from God" (2 Corinthians 2:16, 17), nevertheless he is not satisfied; it is his custom to put aside as far as possible the idea that he is saying something great about himself. He avoids this with the greatest care and care. And you, for your part, notice here also the great wisdom (of the Apostle). For the circumstances which seemed disagreeable in themselves—I mean his calamities—he so exalted, and presented in such brilliance and light, that from his description such a suspicion might have arisen. He does the same further (in the epistle). After enumerating innumerable calamities, sorrows, straits, extreme need, and the like, he added: "We do not present ourselves to you again, but we give you cause to boast about us" (5:12). But there he says it much more strongly and with greater indignation. Here are his words: "Do we really need letters of approval to you or from you, as for some?" (Or do we demand, as if we were noticing, informative messages?) they express love, – there, as it was necessary and useful – his words are filled with special power and indignation: "Not again," he says, "we present ourselves to you, but we give you cause to boast about us" (we do not praise ourselves, but we give you the guilt of praise); and again: "Do you not yet think that we are [only] justifying ourselves before you? (Do you think that we are answering you?) Because we speak before God, in Christ (before God in Christ we speak)... I fear lest, when I come, I shall find you as I do not desire, and also that you also may find me as you do not desire" (12:19, 20). In order not to be reproached for flattery and solicitation of praise from them, He says to them: "I fear lest, when I come, I find you as I do not desire, and also that you also may find me as you do not desire." But he says all this with great reproach; At first, however, he does not speak in this way, but is much more lenient. What do his words mean? Above he spoke about temptations, dangers, and how God in Christ everywhere makes him victorious, and the whole universe knows about his victories. Having thus said something great about himself, he asks himself this question: "Shall we make your acquaintance again?" (Do we conceive us to inform you?) His words have this meaning: perhaps someone will say to us: "What does this mean, Paul? Why do you speak thus of yourself, why do you exalt yourself?" – in order to prevent such an objection, he says: "No, we do not want to boast and exalt ourselves before you; we are so far from asking for letters of approval to you, that you yourselves serve for us in lieu of a letter": "You," he says, "are our letter," v. 2. What does it mean: "You are our letter"? "If we need to recommend ourselves to others, we will put you in the middle instead of a letter of approval." He said the same thing in the first epistle: "The seal of my apostleship is ye in the Lord" (for the seal of my apostleship ye are) (1 Cor. 9:2). But here he said not simply, but with a certain irony, in order to give his speech more force: "Do we really need letters of approval to you or from you? (or do we demand notification messages?) And referring to the false apostles, he added: "As for some, letters of approval to you, or from you to others." Then, since what he said was difficult to hear, he further softens his words, saying: "You are our letter, written in our hearts, known and read by all men; ye show by yourselves that ye are the letter of Christ" (our epistle ye are, written in our hearts, known by all: we appear to be the message of Christ) (v. 2). Here he not only expresses his love for them, but also testifies to their virtuous life, i.e., that by their virtues they can prove before all the dignity of their teacher. This is the meaning of the words: "You are our letter." What your letters would do, in which you would approve and glorify us, you fulfill by your life according to the faith that all see and hear. The virtues of the disciples serve as the best adornment for their teacher, and approve of him better than any writing. "That which is written in our hearts," that is, which is known to all, because we carry you everywhere with us and keep you in our hearts. As if he were saying: "You serve us as an approval before others, and we always have you in our hearts, and before all we proclaim your virtues. Therefore, not only do we have no need of letters of approval from you to others, because you serve as our approval, but for yourselves we have no need of the testimony of others, because we love you very much. Letters of approval are needed for strangers, and you are in our hearts." And He did not simply say, "Ye are," but "written," that is, in such a way that you cannot be blotted out of our hearts. As we read our epistles, so we are convinced from our hearts, all know our love which we have for you.

2. If, then, letters are used to show that such and such a friend of mine enjoys my trust, then your love replaces all this for us. Therefore, whether we go to you, we have no need to take approval from others, since this completely replaces your love for us, or for others, we again have no need to take letters of approval from you, because instead of them, the same love is sufficient for us here. We carry the message in our hearts. Then, raising them to a higher understanding, he calls them the message of Christ, saying: "You show by yourselves that you are the letter of Christ" (v. 5). And having said this, he derives from this a reason to speak of the law; and again he calls them his epistle, but in a different sense. Above he called them an epistle, because they serve as an approval for him; but here he calls them the message of Christ, as having the law of God written in them. "What God has been pleased to reveal to all and to you, all these things," he says, "are written in your hearts; And we have prepared you for the reception of these letters. As Moses made stones and tablets, so we have prepared your souls. That is why He says: "Through our service" (which is served by us). But it will be said that both tablets are equal, because both are written by God, and these by the Spirit (of God). Where is the difference between them? "Written," he says, "not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone, but on fleshly tablets of the heart" (Not written with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not on tablets of stone, but on tablets of the heart of the flesh), and what is the difference between the Spirit and ink, and tablets of stone and flesh, such is the difference between the two writings: the same is the difference between those who served (the New Testament writings) and those who served (the Old Testament). But lest it be thought that he has said too much about himself, he immediately explains himself, saying: "Such is the assurance we have in God through Christ" (and this is the hope of the Imams of Christ to God). And in this way he again ascribes everything to God, and calls Christ the author of everything. "Not because we ourselves are able to think of what is of ourselves, as of ourselves" (v. 5). Look, here he is tempering his speech. And this is because he possessed the virtue of humility in the highest degree. And therefore, as soon as he said something great about himself, he immediately tried again by all means to soften what he said. He does this here too, when he says: "Not because we ourselves are capable of thinking of anything from ourselves, as if from ourselves." That is, I did not say: "Such assurance we have, by which we assimilate one thing to ourselves, and another to God; on the contrary, one according to which we entrust everything to God and impute to Him, because our ability is from God. He hath given us power to be ministers of the new covenant" (our pleasure is from God, who also pleased us to be ministers of the new covenant) (v. 6). What does "pleasure" mean? That God has made us capable of such service. It is no small thing to communicate to the universe such tablets and writings that are much more important than the former. Wherefore He added, "Not of the letter, but of the Spirit" (not in writing, but in the Spirit). Here is another new difference (between the old and the new tablets). What is it? Wasn't the Old Law Spiritual? How does the same Apostle say: "We know that the law is spiritual" (Romans 7:14)? He was spiritual, but He did not give the Spirit, because Moses did not bring the Spirit, but the writings, and we are sure that we give the Spirit. Showing this more clearly, he goes on to say: "The letter kills, but the spirit gives life" (the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life). And he says this not without purpose, but in order to rebuke those who were vain in the performance of the Jewish rites. By the "letter" (writing) he here calls the law that threatens to punish the sinner, and by the Spirit – grace, which through the sacrament of baptism gives life to those who are killed by sins. Having thus shown the difference between the two tablets from their very essence, he does not stop there; but he goes on to reveal this difference, and from the side from which it can most captivate the listener – that is, from the side of life-giving and lightness (of the latter). "The new covenant," he says, "is not difficult, and gives great grace." If, in reasoning about Christ, he especially puts forward that which belongs more to His love for mankind than to dignity, or that which belongs to both together, how much more should he speak in this way when discussing His covenant. So, what do the words "the letter kills" mean? He had previously said that one covenant was written on tablets of stone, and the other on hearts of flesh. But it seemed to him that such a difference was not yet great, and therefore he added that the old covenant was written in letters and ink, and the new one by the Spirit. But since this distinction could not yet fully excite his hearers, he finally points out something that could inspire them, namely, that "the letter kills, but the spirit gives life."

3. What does it mean? According to the (old) law, the sinner is punished; but here (in a new way) the sinner resorts to baptism and becomes righteous, but having become righteous, he comes to life, is freed from the death of sin. The law, if it catches a murderer, it condemns him to death, and if grace overtakes the murderer, it sanctifies and revives him. But what do I say about the murderer? The law also seized and stoned him who was gathering wood on the Sabbath (Num. 15:32-36). This is what it means: "the letter kills"! On the contrary, grace catches innumerable murderers and robbers, and, washing them with the waters of baptism, frees them from their former evils. This is what it means: "The Spirit gives life"! Whomsoever the law catches, he makes dead from the living; but grace makes alive a criminal from the dead. "Come unto me," she says, "all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I," she does not say, "I will punish you," but will give you rest" (Matt. 11:28). In baptism sins are buried, former unrighteousness is blotted out, a person comes to life, and all grace is imprinted in his heart, as on a tablet. Consider, therefore, how great is the preeminence of the Spirit, when His tablets are superior to the first, when He also shows something higher even than the resurrection itself. In fact, the death from which He delivers is much more dangerous than the first death, and so much more dangerous, in so far as the soul is superior to the body, and the natural life is held together by the life which the Spirit gives. If He can bestow this higher life, how much more can He give the lower; the latter was also given by the prophets, but the latter never, because no one can forgive sins except God alone (Luke 5:21). But the prophets could not communicate the lower life without the same Spirit. And not only is it amazing that the Spirit gives life, but also that He has given others the power to give life. "Receive ye the Holy Spirit" (receive ye the Holy Spirit), says (the Lord) (John 20:22). For what? Was it impossible without the Spirit? God says this to show that (the Spirit) has the highest authority, the same royal essence, and the same power. For this reason he adds: "To whom you forgive sins, they will be forgiven; On whom ye shall retain, they shall remain" (v. 23). And so, since (the Holy Spirit) gave us life, let us preserve this life, and let us not return again to our former deadness. "Christ ... dies no more... For because He died, He died once to sin" (Christ no longer dies, for if He dies, die to sin alone) (Romans 6:9, 10). And he does not want us to always expect salvation from grace alone: otherwise we will be deprived of everything; He wants something to be brought in from our side as well. Let us take care to bring something, and let us preserve the life of the soul.

And what the life of the soul consists in, you can learn from the life of the body. We call the body alive when it is in a healthy state. But when it is in a state of weakness and has disorderly motion, then, although it seems to live and move, such a life is worse than any death. Likewise, if (a man) says nothing sensible, but utters words peculiar to fools, and sees things wrongly, then again he who has such a body is much more worthy of pity than he who is dead. In the same way, if the soul has nothing sound, if, for example, it looks upon gold not as gold, but as something great and important, if it does not think in the least about the future, but grovels down and does what it ought not to do, such a soul, even though it seems to be alive, is dead. From what do we know that we have a soul? Is it not from the actions inherent in the soul? But if she does not do what is proper to her, then is she not dead? If, for example, it does not care about virtue, but steals what is not theirs and does iniquity, then why can I say that thou hast a soul? Is it because you walk? But this is also characteristic of irrational animals. Is it because you eat and drink? But animals also eat and drink. Is it because you stand in an upright position and on two legs? But from this I see more that you are a beast in human form. For when you resemble the beast in all other things, and differ from it only in your upright position, you only anger and amaze me the more, and I, looking at you, would rather consider you a monster. If I saw a beast speaking in human language, I would not say from this alone that he was a man, but I would consider him stranger than other beasts. How, then, can I know that you have a human soul? When you kick like a donkey, when you are vindictive like a camel, when you bite like a bear, when you are predatory like a wolf, when you steal like a fox, when you are cunning like a serpent, when you are shameless like a dog – how can I know that you have a human soul? Do you want me to show you a soul, dead and alive? Let us turn again to the men of old, and, if you like, let us imagine the rich man who lived in the days of Lazarus, in order to know what the death of the soul consists in. That this rich man had a dead soul is evident from his deeds. He did nothing to show a rational soul in him; but only ate, drank and made merry.

4. There are still people who are just as merciless and cruel. And they, like this rich man, have a dead soul, because they have killed in themselves all the warmth that comes from love for their neighbors, and their soul is deader than a soulless body. But the beggar was not like that: he shone as if he had ascended to the very summit of wisdom. Constantly struggling with hunger, and not having even the most necessary food, he did not utter a single blasphemous word against God, but bore everything generously. And this is no small matter of the soul, and even the strongest proof of its strength and health. When such virtues are not seen in the soul, it is a clear sign that they have disappeared from its deadness. Tell me, should we not call dead that soul which, when the devil attacks it, beats it, tears it, gnaws at it, tramples on it, does not feel all this, sleeps like a dead woman, and does not grieve over the plundering of its possessions: the devil torments it, but it remains motionless, like a lifeless body, and does not feel it. When there is no fear of God and no concern for one's own salvation in the soul, then it necessarily becomes such, and even worse than any corpse. The soul does not turn like the body into rotten liquid, into dirt and dust, but, what is even more disgusting, into drunkenness, into malice, into covetousness, into vile love, into criminal desires. But if you want to see the vileness of the wicked soul more clearly, then purify your soul, and then you will clearly see how abominable (the soul) is defiled and unclean. Now you cannot see this, because when we remain with the habit of impurity, then we do not feel it; but when we begin to feed on spiritual words, then we will understand how great this evil is – spiritual impurity, although for many it seems indifferent. I will not speak now of Gehenna; but, if you like, let us look at the vicious man here on earth, and not at him who does abominable things, but who only says abominable things – how ridiculous he is, how much he offends himself first of all, and how he, like a spit out of his mouth, makes himself abominable. If the stream is so disgusting, then think how disgusting the source of this slime must be: "For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh" (Matt. 12:34). But I grieve not only for this, but even more for the fact that some people do not even think it is shameful. From this all evil is multiplied, that is, when we sin, and yet we think that we do not sin.

And so, do you want to know how great is the evil of speaking shameful and shameful things? Look at how those who listen to you blush from your shamelessness. Indeed, what can be worse and more contemptible than a man who shamelessly swears shame? Such include themselves in the category of buffoons and promiscuous women. Or rather, profligate women have more shame than you. How can you teach chastity to a wife, when with shameless eyes you incite her to debauchery? It is better to spew rottenness from the mouth than foul language. If your breath smells bad, then you do not touch the common meal; but when there is such a stench in your soul, tell me, how dare you approach the mysteries of the Lord? If someone took an unclean vessel and put it at your table, you would beat him with sticks and drive him away; tell me now, do you not think to anger God, when at His table (and our lips are the table of God, when we partake of the sacraments of the Eucharist) you offer words more vile than any unclean vessel? And how could it be otherwise? Nothing angers Him, the Most Holy and Purest, so much as such words; nothing makes men so impudent and shameless as when they speak and hear such words; Nothing so easily upsets the nerves of chastity as the flame kindled by such words. God has put incense into your mouth, and you put into them words that smell more stinking than any corpse, you kill the very soul and make it insensible. For when you revile someone, it is not the voice of the soul, but of your wrath; when you are ashamed, it is not she who says so, but your folly; when you slander – it says hatred; when you deceive, it is a matter of covetousness: all this does not belong to the soul, but to the passions and illnesses of the soul. Just as corruption does not belong to the body itself, but to death and the passions that dwell in the body, so these vices belong to the passions that have entered the soul. If you want to hear the voice of the living soul, then listen to what Paul says: "Having food and clothing, let us be content with this. It is a great gain to be godly and content" (1 Tim. 6:8, 6). Also: "For me the world is crucified, and I for the world" (Gal. 6:14). Listen to what Peter also says: "Silver and gold I have not; but what I have, that I give unto thee" (silver and gold I have not with me: but if I am an imam, this I give thee) (Acts 3:6). Listen to Job, who gives thanks to God and says: "The Lord gave, and the Lord has taken away" (Job 1:21). These are the words of the living soul, which expresses in them the power and action that belong to it. In the same way, Jacob said: "And he will give me bread to eat, and clothes to put on" (if the Lord give me bread to eat, and garments to be clothed) (Gen. 28:20); Joseph also said, "How then shall I do this great evil, and sin against God?" (How shall I do this evil word, and sin against God?) (Gen. 39:9). But that drunken and violent wife did not say so when she said: "Lie down with me" (Gen. 39:12). Therefore, having learned all this, let us be jealous of the living soul, and let us flee from the dead soul, so that in this way we may receive the future life, which may we all be vouchsafed by grace and love for mankind (our Lord Jesus Christ, to whom be glory forever and ever, Amen).

БЕСЕДА 7

"Если же служение смертоносным буквам, начертанное на камнях, было так славно, что сыны Израилевы не могли смотреть на лице Моисеево по причине славы лица его преходящей, то не гораздо ли более должно быть славно служение духа?" (2 Кор. 3:7, 8).

1. (Апостол) сказал, что Моисеевы скрижали были каменные и начертаны буквами, а (новозаветные скрижали, т. е.) сердца апостолов плотяные и написаны Духом; сказал также, что "буква убивает, а Дух животворит". Оставалось, наконец, присоединить к этому сравнению еще нечто немаловажное, именно о славе лица Моисеева, каковой славы никто не видел в новом завете телесными очами. Потому первая и казалась великою славою, так как поражала чувства и созерцаема была телесными очами, хотя вместе была и недоступна. А слава Нового Завета есть духовна. Но постижение этого превосходства последней недоступно было для немощных; потому та (ветхозаветная) слава более восхищала и привлекала их к себе. И так как он допустил уже такое сравнение, то старается показать и превосходство (новозаветной славы). Но так как это было очень трудно по причине немощи слушателей, то смотри, что он делает и какой способ употребляет для достижения своей цели: сперва он показывает это различие и превосходство чрез умозаключения, которые извлекает из вышесказанного. Если то (ветхозаветное) служение, говорит, было служение смерти, а это (новозаветное) есть служение жизни, то несомненно, что и слава последнего служения больше славы первого. Так как он не мог представить ее (новозаветной славы) очам телесным, то превосходство ее и показал чрез умозаключение, говоря: "Если же служение смертоносным буквам, начертанное на камнях, было так славно … то не гораздо ли более должно быть славно служение духа?" (аще ли же служение смерти бысть во славу: како не множае паче служение Духа будет в славе), разумея под служением смерти закон. И смотри, какую великую осторожность наблюдает он в сравнении, чтобы не подать какого-нибудь повода еретикам. Он не сказал: (закон) виновник смерти, но: "служение смерти", так как закон служит к смерти, а не породил смерти. Виновник смерти был грех; а закон подверг осуждению за грех, и только обнаружил грех, а не произвел его; он яснее открыл зло, и только наказывал за зло, а не побуждал к злу; и служил не для того, чтобы производить грех или смерть, но чтобы наказывать того, кто грешит. А таким образом он был вместе и истребителем греха.

В самом деле, когда он показывал грех столь страшным, то, очевидно, этим заставлял и убегать его. Как тот, кто берет в руки меч и умерщвляет осужденного, служит только орудием судьи, произносящего приговор, и хотя он умерщвляет, однако, не есть убийца, равно как и тот, кто произносит приговор и осуждает виновного, но виною смерти есть преступление наказываемого – так и здесь не закон умерщвляет, но грех. Он и умерщвлял и осуждал; закон же, наказывая преступника, отнимал силу у греха, укрощая его страхом наказания. Но (апостол) не удовлетворился одним только этим сравнением, чтобы убедить в превосходстве (Нового Завета), но присовокупил и другое нечто, сказав: "начертанное на камнях" (писмены образовано в каменех). Смотри, как он опять низлагает иудейскую гордость. В самом деле, закон был не что иное, как письмена. А письмена никакой помощи, вроде того как бывает в крещении, не доставляли и не сообщали находящимся под законом; но скрижали и начертания приносили смерть преступающим письмена. Видишь ли, как он исправляет иудейское любопрение, и самыми наименованиями отнимает превосходство у закона, называя его то "камнем", то "буквами", то "служением смерти", и еще "образованным" или "начертанным". Этим он показывает или то, что закон привязан к известному только месту, а не так, как дух, который присутствует везде, и во все вдыхает великую силу; или то, что письмена дышат великими угрозами, и такими угрозами, которые не могут быть уничтожены, но всегда остаются как вырезанные на камне. Потом, хотя, по-видимому, и хвалит древний (закон), но тут же вместе и обличает опять грубость иудеев. Сказав: "начертанное на камнях, было так славно", присовокупил: "что сыны Израилевы не могли смотреть на лице Моисеево", что обличало в них великую слабость и плотяность. И опять говорит, что (иудеи) не могли взирать не ради славы скрижалей, но "по причине славы лица его преходящей". Этими словами он показывает, что не скрижали прославлены были славою, а тот, кто принес скрижали. Он не сказал, что они не могли взирать на скрижали, а говорит: "на лице Моисеево", равно как и не ради славы скрижалей, но: "по причине славы лица его". Но превознесши эту славу, смотри, как он опять унижает ее словом "преходящей". Впрочем, этим словом он не унижает Моисея, а только показывает временность славы его. Он не сказал, что она есть какая-нибудь нечистая или худая, но сказал только, что она престающая и имеющая конец. "То не гораздо ли более должно быть славно служение духа?" (Како не множае паче служение Духа будет в славе?). Теперь он уже с дерзновением высказывает превосходство Нового Завета, как уже не подлежащее сомнению. И смотри, что он делает – камень противополагает сердцу, а письмена духу. Потом, указав на следствия, которые должны произойти от того и другого (завета), он еще не сказывает, что действительно произошло от того и от другого; но показав следствие буквы (письмени), т. е. смерть и осуждение, умалчивает еще о плодах Духа – жизни и правде, а говорит только о самом Духе, что подало ему случай к большому распространению речи. Новый Завет не только даровал жизнь, но и сообщил Духа, дающего жизнь, что важнее самой жизни. Поэтому он и сказал: "служение Духа". Потом опять возвращается к тому же, говоря: "Ибо если служение осуждения славно" (аще бо служение осуждения слава) (ст. 9).

2. Показывая яснее значение слов: "буква убивает", (апостол) говорит то, что мы именно сказали уже выше, т. е., что закон только открывает грех, а не производит его. "То тем паче изобилует славою служение оправдания" (Множае паче избыточествует служение правды в славе). Те скрижали открывали только грешников, и наказывали их; а это (служение правды) не только не наказывает грешников, но и делает их праведными, потому что крещение дарует это (оправдание). "То прославленное даже не оказывается славным с сей стороны, по причине преимущественной славы" (Ибо не прославися прославленное в части сей, за превосходящую славу) (ст. 10). Сперва он показал, что и это (служение оправдания) в славе, и не только в славе, но и преизбыточествует (славою). Он не сказал уже (как выше): "не гораздо ли более служение Духа будет в славе?"; но – "изобилует славою" (избыточествует в славе), выводя это их вышесказанных умозаключений. Теперь показывает уже, и как велико это превосходство, говоря: "Если я сравню эту (славу) с тою (ветхозаветною), то слава Ветхого Завета не будет даже славою. Однако этим он не вовсе отнимает славу (у Ветхого Завета); но так говорит о нем сравнительно, почему и присоединил: "с сей стороны" (в части сей), т. е. сравнительно. И говоря так, он не охуждает Ветхого Завета, напротив, еще одобряет его, потому что сравниваются обыкновенно вещи, в чем-нибудь сродные. Далее он приводит еще другое умозаключение, иным образом показывающее превосходство (Нового Завета). Какое же именно? Заимствованное от времени: "Ибо, если преходящее славно, тем более славно пребывающее" (аще бо престающее славою, много паче пребывающее в славе) (ст. 11). То (ветхозаветное служение) прекратилось, а это постоянно пребывает. "Имея такую надежду, мы действуем с великим дерзновением" (Имуще убо таково упование, многим дерзновением действуем) (ст. 12). Так как слушатель, услышав столь много важного о Новом Завете, желал бы и видеть эту славу собственным очами, то смотри, как он обращает его к будущему веку. Для этого он и выставляет на вид надежду, говоря: " Имея такую надежду ". "Такую" – какую же? То, что мы удостоились бόльшаго, нежели Моисей, и не только мы – апостолы, но и все верующие. "Действуем с великим дерзновением" (Многим дерзновением действуем). Пред кем, скажи? Пред Богом, или пред учениками? "Пред вами, – говорит, – которым проповедуем мы", т. е.: "мы везде проповедуем с свободою, ничего не скрывая, безо всякого притворства, ничего не опасаясь, но говоря ясно, и не боимся поразить ваши взоры, подобно тому как Моисей поражал взоры иудеев". А что он именно это хотел сказать, увидим далее. Но прежде надобно рассказать самую историю, потому что и сам (апостол) постоянно обращается к ней. Какова же это история? Когда Моисей, получивши в другой раз скрижали, сошел с горы, то некоторая слава, исходящая от лица его, так сияла, что иудеи не могли приблизиться к нему и говорить с ним, доколе он не положил покрывала на лицо свое. Об этом в книге Исхода написано так: "Когда сходил Моисей с горы Синая, и две скрижали откровения были в руке у Моисея при сошествии его с горы, то Моисей не знал, что лице его стало сиять лучами … и боялись подойти к нему. И призвал их Моисей, … и разговаривал Моисей с ними … И когда Моисей перестал разговаривать с ними, то положил на лице свое покрывало. Когда же входил Моисей пред лице Господа, чтобы говорить с Ним, тогда снимал покрывало, доколе не выходил" (Сходящу Моисею с горы, обе скрижали в руку его, и Моисей не ведяше, яко прославися зрак плоти лица его: и убояшася приступити к нему. И воззва их Моисей, и глагола к ним. И егда преста глаголя к ним, возложи на лице свое покров. Егда же вхождаше глаголати пред Господа, снимаше покров, дондеже исхождаше) (Исх. 34: 29-34). Приведя на память эту историю, (апостол) говорит: "а не так, как Моисей, [который] полагал покрывало на лице свое, чтобы сыны Израилевы не взирали на конец преходящего" (и не якоже Моисей полагаше покрывало на лице своем, за еже не мощи взирати сыном Израилевым на конец престающаго) (ст. 13). Эти слова его имеют такой смысл: "Нам не нужны покрывать себя подобно Моисею: вы можете смотреть на ту славу, которою мы окружены, хотя она гораздо более и светлее той (Моисеевой)". Видишь ли преуспеяние (учеников)? В первом послании он сказал: "Я питал вас молоком, а не [твердою] пищею" (млеком вы напоих, не брашном) (3: 2); а здесь говорит: "мы действуем с великим дерзновением" (многим дерзновением действуем), и выводит на сцену Моисея, продолжая говорить о нем сравнительно, и таким образом, возводя слушателей к высшему. И во-первых, он поставляет их выше иудеев, когда говорит, что мы (апостолы) не имеем нужды в покрывале, как Моисей пред народом своим. А потом возводит их и в одно достоинство с (ветхозаветным) законодателем, или даже еще и выше. Послушаем же теперь, что он говорит далее. "Но умы их ослеплены: ибо то же самое покрывало доныне остается неснятым при чтении Ветхого Завета, потому что оно снимается Христом" (Но ослепишася помышления их: даже бо до сего дне тожде покрывало во чтении ветхаго завета пребывает не откровенно, зане о Христе престает) (ст. 14). Смотри, к чему он направляет речь свою. Что тогда однажды произошло с Моисеем, то навсегда осталось на законе его. Впрочем, сказанное относится не к обвинению закона, равно как и не к обвинению Моисея, что он тогда покрывал себя, но (к обвинению) грубости иудеев. Закон имеет свойственную ему славу, но иудеи не могли видеть ее. Итак, чему вы удивляетесь, говорит, если они не могут видеть благодатной славы, когда они не видели меньшей славы Моисея, не могли смотреть на лицо его? Что смущаетесь, если они не веруют во Христа, когда они не верят и закону? Потому они и не познали благодати, что не познали ни Ветхого завета, ни славы его. Слава же закона – приводить ко Христу.