A person subject to this disease does not know friendship, does not remember affection, does not want to respect anyone at all; on the contrary, having expelled all that is good from the soul, the fickle, incapable of love, arms himself against all. The power of anger, although it is painful and unbearable, does not constantly disturb the spirit, but only at the time when it is irritated by others. On the contrary, the passion of vanity is always, and the thread, so to speak, of the time in which it could have left, because reason does not hinder it or tame it; it always remains, and not only does it incite us to sin, but if we manage to do something good, it snatches the good from our hands. And it happens that she does not allow you to start a good deed. And if Paul calls covetousness idolatry (Ephesians 5:5), then how can we justly call its mother (covetousness), the root and source, that is, vanity? It is impossible to find a name worthy of this evil!

Therefore, let us arise, beloved, let us lay aside this vicious garment, let us tear and cut it, let us one day become free with true freedom, and assimilate to ourselves the sense of dignity given to us by God. Let us despise the glory of the crowd. There is nothing so ridiculous and humiliating as this passion; nothing is so full of shame and disgrace. Everyone can see that the desire for glory is in many respects dishonor, and that true glory consists in despising glory, considering it as nothing, and doing and saying everything only to please God. In this way we can also receive a reward from Him Who sees all our deeds exactly, if only we are satisfied with this one spectator of them. And what need do we have of other eyes, when it is He who will judge our deeds who sees our works?

May it not be, I beseech you! But from whom we receive rewards, we will recognize Him both as a spectator and as a glorifier of our deeds. Let us not rely on human eyes for anything.

And if we wanted to attain glory among men, we would receive it when we seek the only glory from God. It is said: "... I will glorify those who glorify Me..." (1 Samuel 2:30). And just as we are especially abundant in riches when we despise them and seek riches only from God (for it is said: "Seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things will be added to you" - Matthew 6:33), so also in relation to glory. When both wealth and glory are safe for us, then God gives us them in abundance. But this gift is safe when it does not take possession of us, does not subdue us, does not possess us as slaves, but remains in our power as masters and freemen. That is why God does not allow us to love riches and glory, so that they do not take possession of us. And when we have attained such perfection, He gives them to us with great generosity. Who, tell me, is more glorious than Paul, who says: "... We do not seek human glory either from you or from others..." (1 Thess. 2:6)? Who is happier than he who has nothing and owns everything? When, as I said above, we do not submit to their dominion (wealth and glory), then we will possess them, then we will receive them. Therefore, if we desire to receive glory, let us run away from glory. Thus, having fulfilled the laws of God, we will be able to receive both the blessings here and the promised ones, by the grace of Christ, with whom be glory to the Father and the Holy Spirit forever and ever. Amen.

[1] St. Chrysostom means the Arians, who recognized the Son of God as a venerable being, only not co-eternal and not consubstantial with the Father.

CONVERSATION 4

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God" (John 1:1).

1. Children who are just beginning to learn are not subjected to many labors at once by teachers, and even at one time they occupy them a little with the sciences, but little by little, and moreover, the same thing is often repeated to them, in order to put their lessons more conveniently into their minds, and so that the children, bored at the very beginning with the multitude (of lessons) and their difficulty for their memory, do not thereby become more incapable of assimilating what is taught, because from difficulty a certain relaxation can occur in them. In the same way, desiring to arrange my own teachings and to facilitate the work for you, I take little by little from this divine table and pass it on to your souls. Therefore I shall again touch upon the same words of the Gospel, not in such a way as to say the same thing again, but only to add the rest to what has been said. And so, let us raise the word to the beginning. "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God." When all the other Evangelists began with the Incarnation (Matthew says, "the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the Son of David"; Luke first tells us about Mary; and Mark similarly gives the story of the Baptist first), for which John only briefly touched upon the subject, after those first words, saying, "And the Word was made flesh" (v. 14), and all the rest, His conception, birth, upbringing, growth, - bypassing, suddenly announces to us His eternal birth? What is the reason for this, I will tell you now. Since the other Evangelists for the most part narrated about the human nature of the Son of God, it was necessary to fear that, therefore, one of the people who crawl on the earth himself would stop only at these dogmas, which happened to Paul of Samosata[1]). Thus, raising people prone to fall from such groveling on earth and drawing them to heaven, John rightly begins his narration from above, from the eternal existence. While Matthew began to narrate, beginning with Herod the king, Luke with Tiberius Caesar, Mark with the baptism of John, the Evangelist John, leaving all this, ascends above all time and age, and there directs the mind of his listeners to one thing: "In the beginning was," and, not allowing the mind to stop anywhere, sets no limit to it, as those (the Evangelists) – Herod, Tiberius and John. But at the same time it is also worthy of wonder that just as John, having aspired to the lofty word, nevertheless did not leave the Incarnation without attention, so they, while narrating the Incarnation with special care, did not keep silent about the pre-eternal existence either. And this must be so, because one Spirit moved the souls of all of them; and therefore they showed perfect unanimity in their narration. But you, beloved, when you hear "about the Word," never tolerate those who call Him a creature, nor those who worship Him by a mere word. There are many divine words by which the angels also act, but not one of these words is the Divinity itself, but all this is only a prophecy and God's command. This is how the Scriptures usually call the laws of God, commands, and prophecies. For this reason, speaking of angels, it adds: "His servants, who do His will" (Psalm 102:21). On the contrary, this Word (of which the Evangelist John speaks) is a hypostatic Being, impassibly proceeding from the Father Himself. This, as I said before, (the Evangelist) depicted by the very name of the "Word." For just as the saying, "In the beginning was the Word," signifies eternity, so the expression, "It was in the beginning with God," shows His co-eternity (with the Father). And so that you, having heard: "In the beginning was the Word," and recognizing it as eternal, do not nevertheless think that the life of the Father precedes (the life of the Son) by a certain distance, that is, by a large number of centuries, and in such a way that you do not lay the foundation for the Only-begotten, (the Evangelist) adds: "It was in the beginning with God," i.e., He is as eternal as the Father Himself. The Father was never without the Word; but there has always been a "God" (the Word) "with God" (the Father), in his own hypostasis. But how, you will say, does the Evangelist say that the Word "was in the world," if He really was with God? Truly, God had it, and it was in the world: neither the Father nor the Son is limited to any place. If "great is [His] strength, and His understanding is immeasurable" (Psalm 146:5), then it is clear that His essence has no temporal beginning. Have you heard that "in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth"? What do you think of this beginning? Without a doubt, the heavens and the earth came into existence before all visible creations. Thus, when you hear of the Only-begotten that He was "in the beginning," understand His existence, first of all, conceivable and before the ages. But if anyone says, "How is it possible for the Son not to be after the Father in time?" He who comes from someone must necessarily be after the one from whom he came - we answer that only human reasoning is like this, and he who proposes such a question will probably give even more absurd questions. But this should not be allowed even to hear. We now speak of God, and not of human nature, which is subject to order and the necessity of such speculations. However, for the complete satisfaction of weaker people, we will answer this as well.

2. Tell me: Does the radiance of the sun flow from the very nature of the sun, or from something else? Anyone who has intact senses necessarily acknowledges that radiance comes from the very nature of the sun. But although the radiance proceeds from the sun itself, yet we can never say that it exists after the solar nature, because the sun never appears without radiance. If, then, in visible and sensible bodies, that which proceeds from something else does not always exist after that from which it comes, why do you not believe it in the reasoning of the invisible and ineffable nature? And here it is the same, only in the way that it is in accordance with the eternal being. For this reason Paul also called the Son the radiance of the glory of the Father (Hebrews 1:3), depicting both that He is born of the Father, and that the Son is co-equal to the Father. Tell me, then, did not all the ages and every space of time come into existence through the Son? And this must be admitted by anyone who has not yet lost his mind. Thus, there is no distance (time) between the Father and the Son; and if not, then the Son does not exist after the Father, but is co-existent with Him. The expressions "before" and "after" denote the concepts of time. Without the century or time, no one could have imagined such concepts. And God is above times and ages. If, in spite of this, you assert that the Son has received a beginning, then see to it that through such reasoning you do not come to the necessity of bringing the Father Himself under some beginning, under a beginning, even though it is the first, it is still a beginning. Tell me, when you ascribe to the Son any limit or beginning, and from this beginning ascend still higher, do you not say that the Father exists before the Son? Obviously, so. Tell me further: how much did the Father exist before? Small or great distance you will indicate here, in any case, you will bring the Father under the leadership. It is evident that if you call this distance great or small, you will measure it in this way, but you cannot measure it if there is no beginning on either side. For this, therefore, as far as depends on you, you also give rise to the Father; and, therefore, according to your reasoning, the Father will no longer be without beginning. Do you see how true what the Saviour said, and how His word everywhere manifests its power? What is this word? "He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father either" (John 5:23). I know that for many people what has been said is incomprehensible; Wherefore in many cases we are careful not to enter into such conclusions, since the common people cannot follow them, and even if they did, they do not retain anything of them with firmness and accuracy. "The thoughts of mortals are uncertain, and our thoughts are erroneous" (Wis. 9:14). In the meantime, I would gladly ask our adversaries what is meant by what the prophet said: "Before Me there was no God, and after Me there will be none" (Isaiah 43:10). If the Son exists after the Father, then how is it said: "And after Me there shall be none"? Or will you already reject the very essence of the Only-begotten? And it is necessary either to dare to do so, or to admit the one Divinity in one's own hypostasis of the Father and the Son. Likewise, how is it true that "all things were made through Him"? If there was an age before Him, how could that which existed before Him come to pass through Him? Do you see to what audacity their reasoning leads, after they have once shaken the truth? Why did not the Evangelist say that the Son came "from things that do not exist"[2]), as Paul explains this about all creatures, saying: "calling things that do not exist as things that are" (Romans 4:17), and says: "in the beginning they were"? The latter expression is the opposite of the first. But it is very true: God does not come from anything and has nothing before Himself. Tell me again: do you not acknowledge that the Creator is incomparably superior to His creatures? But if He were like them, in that He came from the bearer, where would His incomparable superiority be? And what is the meaning of the saying: "I am the Lord first, and in the last I am the same" (Isaiah 41:4), "before Me there was no God, and after Me there will be none" (Isaiah 43:10)? If the Son is not of the same being with the Father, then He is another God; if He is not co-equal (to the Father), then after Him; and if it did not come from His essence, then it is evident that He was created. But if it is objected that this is said to distinguish (God) from idols, then should we not agree that here in order to distinguish from idols it is said about the one true God? And if this is really said to distinguish it from idols, then how do you explain all this saying: "After Me there will be no other God"? Not rejecting the Son, he says the word of God in this way, but expressing only that besides God (the true God) there is no god – idols; but not that there is no Son. Very well, someone will say, but should not the words, "Before Me there was no God," be understood to mean that there was no idolatrous god, that therefore the Son was before the Father? But what demon could say that? I think that the devil himself will not say this. On the other hand, if the Son is not co-equal to the Father, then why do you call His being infinite? If He has a beginning, and at first, even though He be immortal, He cannot yet be infinite. The Infinite must be without limits on both sides. Explaining this, Paul also says: "He who has neither beginning of days nor end of life" (Hebrews 7:3), and thus expresses both carelessness and infinity, i.e., in both respects He has no limit; As there is no end, so there is no beginning.

3. Further, how, if the Son is "life," could there ever be a time in which He was not? If He is "life," as He really is, then everyone will agree that life must always exist, be beginningless and infinite. If there was a time when He was not, how could He have been the life of other beings, if He had never been life himself? But how, someone will say, does the Evangelist John himself give Him a beginning, when he says: "In the beginning was." And why, I say, did you pay attention to the expressions, "in the beginning," and "was," and do not think of the saying, "The Word was"? What then? When the prophet says of the Father: "From everlasting to everlasting Thou art God" (Psalm 89:3), does He set limits to Him by such an expression? In no way: it expresses eternity. Think the same here. The Evangelist, speaking thus of the Son, sets no limit to Him. He did not say of the Son: He had a beginning, but "in the beginning was," through this "was" suggesting the idea of the beginningless existence of the Son. But now, someone else will say, the Father is spoken of with the addition of the term (article – "ο"), and of the Son – without the member[4]. What then? When the Apostle says: "Our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ," and also: "God Who is over all," then here he mentions the Son without a member. But he also does this in relation to the Father. In the Epistle to the Philippians, he says: "He, being in the image of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God" (2:6). Also in the Epistle to the Romans: "Grace to you and peace from God our father and the Lord Jesus Christ" (Romans 1:7). And on the other hand, it was superfluous to add a term here, because it was above, often attached to the word: "God." Just as the Evangelist, speaking of the Father, expresses: "God is spirit" (John 4:24), and we do not reject the incorporeality in God, because there is no member attached to the word "Spirit," so here, although no term is used in the expression about the Son, nevertheless, the Son is therefore not lesser. Why is that? Because, repeating the words: "God" and "God", the Evangelist does not show us any division in the Godhead; but on the contrary, having said before, "The Word was God," he, lest anyone should consider the divinity of the Son to be less, immediately adds a proof of His true divinity, ascribes to Him eternity: "It was," he says, "in the beginning with God," and the creative power: "all things were made through Him, and without Him was not anything made." This is the same thing that the Father everywhere, through the prophets, provides as the pre-eminent proof of His (divine) being. And the prophets often use this kind of proof, and not only in this way, but also in arming themselves against the worship of idols. "The gods," it is said, "who did not create the heavens and the earth, shall perish from the earth and from under the heavens" (Jeremiah 10:11). And in another place: "I, my hands, have stretched out the heavens" (Isaiah 45:12); and in any case He presents it as a sign of divinity. But the Evangelist is not satisfied with these sayings, but also calls Him "life" and "light." If, then, He has always been with the Father, if He Himself has produced, arranged, and maintained all things (this is expressed by the word "life"), if He enlightens all things, then who is so mad as to say that the Evangelist wanted to show in these utterances a lesser degree of His divinity, when by them it is especially possible to prove His equality and indivisibility? Let us not confuse the creature with the Creator, lest we also hear the words: "And they worshipped and served the creature instead of the Creator" (Romans 1:25). Though some say that this is said of heaven, yet in speaking of them, the word of God completely forbids the service of every creature in general, as a pagan deed.

4. Let us not subject ourselves to this oath! For this reason the Son of God came (to earth), in order to free us from this ministry. For this reason He took the form of a servant, in order to deliver us from this slavery. For this reason He subjected Himself to spitting, to strangulation, for this He endured a shameful death. Let us not make all this fruitless (for us), let us not return to the former, or rather, even more grievous impiety. It is not the same to serve the creature, and to reduce the Creator Himself to the insignificance of the creature, as much as, at least, this depends on us, since He Himself always remains as He is, according to what is said: "But Thou art the same, and Thy years shall not end" (Psalm 101:28). Let us glorify Him, according to the tradition of the Fathers; let us glorify Him both in faith and in works. There is no benefit to our salvation from right dogmas when our lives are corrupted. Therefore, let us direct it to please God, keeping ourselves away from all impurity, injustice, and covetousness, as strangers and strangers, and strangers to this world. And if anyone has much money and acquisition, let him use it like a wanderer who, after a short time, willingly or unwillingly, must leave it. If someone suffers offense from someone, let him not be angry forever, but rather let him not be angry temporarily. The Apostle does not allow us to continue our anger for more than one day. "The sun," he says, "let not it go down on your anger" (Ephesians 4:26). And rightly so: it is necessary to wish that even in such a short time nothing unpleasant happens. And if the night overtakes us (in anger), it will be worse for us, because at the mere remembrance of it an immeasurable fire will be revived in us, and we will meditate on it with great grief in freedom. The Apostle commands to warn and avert danger. The passion of anger is strong, stronger than any flame; That is why it is necessary to warn the power of fire with great haste and not to allow it to ignite. And this illness is the cause of many evils. It overthrows entire houses, breaks up old associations, and in a short and short time produces the most disappointing cases. "The very movement of anger," it is said, "is a fall for man" (Sir. 1:22). Therefore, let us not leave this beast unrestrained, but let us throw a strong bridle over it on all sides – the fear of the future judgment. If a friend offends you, or one of your neighbors grieves you, then think about your sins against God, and that by your meekness in relation to them you will propitiate for yourself even that (future) judgment – it is said: "Forgive, and you will be forgiven" (Luke 6:37) – and anger will immediately flee (from you). At the same time, pay attention also to when you, being enraged, restrained yourself, and when you were carried away by passion; compare the two times, and you will receive a significant correction from this. Tell me, when you praise yourself, is it when you have been overcome (by anger) or when you have conquered? Is it not precisely then (when we are carried away by anger) that we most blame ourselves and are ashamed, even though no one rebukes us, and come to repentance for our words and deeds? And when we overcome anger, do we not then rejoice and boast as overcomers? Victory over anger does not consist in repaying offense in the same way (this is not a victory, but a complete defeat), but in meekly enduring insults and reproaches. Not to do, but to endure evil, is the true advantage. Therefore, do not say in anger: "Behold, I will rise, behold, I will attack him." Do not resist those who urge you to tame your anger, do not say: "I will not tolerate so-and-so laughing at me." And he never laughs at you, except when you arm yourself with him. And if he laughs at you even then, he will only do it in madness. But you, when you are victorious, do not seek glory from fools, but consider it sufficient for you to have glory from men of understanding. But why do I bring you out to a small and insignificant spectacle made up of people? Look immediately to God, and He will praise you. And he who is glorified by Him should not seek honor from men. Human honor is often dependent on people's hostility and enmity, and, in any case, does not bring any benefit. On the contrary, the judgment of God is alien to such a mood and brings great benefit to the one who is glorified by God. And so, it is to this glory that we will strive.

5. Do you want to know what a great evil anger is? Stand in the square when others are quarreling there. You can't see this ugliness in yourself like that, because your mind is darkened in anger and your consciousness is lost, like in drunken people. But when you have purified yourself from this passion, then observe yourself in others, for at that time your reason is not damaged. Therefore, look at the surrounding crowd, and in the midst of it at the people who are rampaging in anger, like those who are possessed. When rage, kindled in the chest, rises and becomes hardened, then the lips breathe fire, the eyes emit fire, the whole face swells, the arms stretch out in disorder, the legs jump ridiculously and jump on those who hold them. They are no different from the irritated and the insane, doing everything unconscious, and they are not even different from wild donkeys when they beat and bite each other. Truly, an irritated person is ugly. Later, when after this ridiculous sight they return home and come to their senses, they will have even greater sorrow and fear, imagining who was present at their quarrel. Like madmen, who did not see those present before, then, when they regain consciousness, they reason whether their friends were spectators, or their enemies and enemies. They are equally afraid of both: the first, because they will reproach them and increase their shame; and the second, because they will rejoice in their shame. And if they happen to inflict wounds on each other, then the gravest fear is that something even worse may happen to the wounded person, lest, for example, illness from wounds bring him death, or lest an incurable tumor arise and endanger his life. "And what was the need for me to quarrel? What kind of abuse and quarrels? They'll disappear completely." And so they curse all those accidental circumstances that served as a reason for the quarrel. And the most foolish of them blame the evil demons and the evil hour for the incident. But this does not come from an evil hour, because there is never an evil hour, and it does not come from an evil demon, but from the malice of those who are carried away by anger. They themselves attract demons, and bring all kinds of evil upon themselves. But the heart, someone will say, is indignant and tormented by insults. That is why I exalt those who tame this terrible beast. If we wish, we can reflect this passion from ourselves. Why are we not subjected to this passion when we are reproached by those in authority? Is it not because fear arises in us (in this case), which is equivalent to this passion, which strikes us and does not even allow anger to arise in us? Why do slaves, receiving thousands of reproaches from us, endure all this in silence? Is it not because the same bonds are imposed on them? In the same way, think about the fear of God, about the fact that God Himself then humiliates you, commanding you to be silent, and you will bear everything meekly. Say to the assailant against you, What can I do to you? Someone else is holding my hand and my tongue. And this thought will impel both you and him to prudence. Sometimes because of people we endure even unbearable offenses, and say to our offenders: "It was not you, but so-and-so who insulted me." Shall we not even have such reverence for God? What will be the justification for us? And so, let us say to our souls: God now despises us, God who restrains our hands; let us not be brave, and let not God be less honorable to us than men. Are you horrified by these words? But I wish that you should be afraid not only of words, but also of deeds. God has commanded us not only to endure being choked, but also to be willing to endure anything worse. On the contrary, we resist with such effort that not only are we not ready for suffering, but we try to avenge ourselves, and often we are even the first to raise unrighteous hands; we consider ourselves humiliated if we do not repay in kind. It is strange that we consider ourselves victorious, while we suffer extreme defeat and are prostrated; Receiving countless blows from the devil, we think that we overcome him. And so, I beseech you, let us know this kind of victory, and let us conquer in this way. To suffer is to be crowned. If we wish to be glorified by God, let us observe not the customs of worldly feats, but the law given by God for spiritual feats; let us endure all things with longsuffering. In this way we will conquer those who dispute with us, and all that is in this world, and we will receive the promised blessings, through the grace and love of our Lord Jesus Christ, through Whom and with Whom the Father and the Holy Spirit have not been able to do so. Glory, power, honor in the Spirit, now and ever, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.

[1] Paul of Samosata, Bishop of Antioch, heretic of the sixth century.

[2] Thus the Arians said of the Son of God.