Enchiridion to Lawrence, or On Faith, Hope and Love

In the work of Bl. Aurelius Augustine's "Enchiridion to Lawrence, or On Faith, Hope and Love" (421, 122 chapters) contains the most extensive statement of faith with detailed discussions about grace and double predestination. According to blzh. Augustine, the human race was initially distributed in Divine foreknowledge to those on whom the full power of God’s grace would be revealed—the elect (predestined), and on those on whom the full power of God’s justice would be revealed—the rejected. The foundations of such double predestination lie in Divine Wisdom and Will and are incomprehensible to the human mind (chap. 99-104). The power of grace acts on a person irresistibly and does not destroy his freedom, but restores it and resolves the bonds of sin by which a person is bound in his normal state (chap. 105-107). Blzh. Augustine presented Christian teaching in the form of a system. He called it a “textbook” because a layman, a Roman named Lawrence, asked him to write a small book that he could carry with him. The treatise touches on issues of triadology, anthropology, Christology, soteriology, eschatology, and ecclesiology. By definition, blzh. Augustine, the Church is the Church, or the City of God, located in heaven (the Triumphant Church) and on earth (the Traveling Church), which at the end of time must be reunited (chap. 56-61). Touching on the topic of the resurrection of the dead, the author writes that the bodies of the righteous will be spiritual (incorruptible, immortal) and will no longer interfere with the contemplation of God and Divine ideas (chap. 84-91). At the Last Judgment, the righteous will be separated from the wicked, over whom the final verdict will be pronounced. Sinners, together with the devil, will endure eternal physical and spiritual torment in hell fire. Eternal death is alienation from the life of God (chapter 113). According to the blessed Augustine, to some sinners, after the purifying fiery torment experienced by their souls after death in certain “hidden places” (a prototype of purgatory), God, through the prayers of their relatives and the entire Church, will show His mercy and will not send them to eternal fire (chapter 109). *The title of the work in Latin is Enchiridion ad Laurentium seu de fide, spe et caritate. 1. It is difficult to convey, my dear son Lawrence, how much I admire your curiosity, how sincerely I wish you to comprehend true wisdom. Not the one about whose owners it is said: “Where is the wise man? where is the scribe? where is the questioner of this century? Has not God turned the wisdom of this world into foolishness? (1 Cor. 1:20), but one about those who know which it is written: “The multitude of the wise is the salvation of the world” (Wis. 6:26) and which the apostle means when he tells his listeners: “I desire that you be wise in good and simple in evil” (Rom. 16:19). But just as no one can produce himself, so no one can become wise without the help of that Enlightener, about whom it is said: “All wisdom is from the Lord” (Sir. 1:1). 2. Human wisdom is piety. This can be seen from the book of St. Job: it says that Wisdom herself said to man: “Behold, piety is wisdom” (Job 28:28). If you ask what kind of piety she is talking about in this place, then know that in Greek piety is the reverence of God. The Greeks also have another word that has the meaning of piety, literally meaning “the right way of life.” However, it also indicates primarily the reverence of God. The best way to express the reverence of the Lord is precisely the phrase “human wisdom.” And when you tell me: “Let many things be said, but briefly,” do you not mean that you want to receive a brief summary of how to honor God? 3. If I answer you that God must be honored with faith, hope and love; then you will probably notice that this is said more briefly than you would like, and therefore, over time, you will again ask to explain to you everything related to these three points separately: what exactly you should believe in, what you should hope for, what you should love. And when I do this, then everything you ask for in your letter will be here, namely: so that you, having copies of it, can re-read it, and the other can be studied again in my presentation. 4. According to your words, you want me to write a book for you, which you would have as, as they say, an enchiridion, and which you could always carry with you; a book containing the basic requirements, i.e. what should be followed first of all and what, mainly, so as not to fall into heresy, should be avoided, as far as reason matters for religion, even when it is difficult to find agreement between them, what is at the beginning and what is at the end, what is the essence of confession and what is the true and only basis of the Catholic faith. Everything you ask about, you will undoubtedly know; you will learn what you should believe in, what you should hope for, what you should love. And this is the most important thing, even the only thing you need to adhere to in religion. Anyone who disagrees with this is either completely alien to the name of Christ, or a heretic. This essence of the Catholic faith must be determined in a rational way - either with the help of external senses, or with our mental ability. And regarding what cannot be comprehended by us either by reason or by experience, here we should believe without any doubt the witnesses who left scriptures that were already worthy of the name Divine: they could see everything by inspiration from above and even foresee, contemplating either with their bodily eyes or spiritually. 5. Taught in the rudiments of faith, the mind strengthened by love in a virtuous life sometimes even reaches a vision, where indescribable beauty is revealed to holy and perfect hearts, the contemplation of which is the highest bliss. This is undoubtedly what you are asking: “what is at the beginning and what is at the end.” They begin by faith and end by vision. The latter is the essence of the entire confession of faith. The true and only foundation of the Catholic faith is Christ: “for no one can lay any other foundation,” says the apostle, “except that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ” (1 Cor. 3:11). And, therefore, one should not deny that this is the only basis of the Catholic faith, since, otherwise, one would think that we agree with some heretics. After all, since we are talking about Christ, the name Christ is found among any heretics who call themselves Christians; in fact, they do not have Him. It would be too long to talk about this in detail - it would require setting out all the past, present and future heretical systems that call themselves Christian, and considering in detail how each of them corresponds to the truth. Such a study would take so many volumes that there would probably be no end to it. 6. You are asking us for an enchiridion, i.e. something “that would not require entire cabinets for its placement, but could simply be taken by hand.” So, returning to the three ways of worshiping God that we have noted, to faith, hope and love, it is easy to indicate what we should believe in, what we should hope for and what we should love; one can only protect oneself from the misinterpretations of dissenters through detailed and labor-intensive research. In order to study such a study, it is not enough to have the enchiridion in your hand, but hard work of thought is required. 7. Here you have the Symbol and the Lord’s Prayer; Which is shorter, listen or read? Which is easier to remember? When, as a result of sin, the human race was oppressed by severe sorrow and was in need of Divine mercy, the prophet, predicting the time of God’s mercy, said about this prayer: “Whoever calls on the name of the Lord will be saved” (Joel 2:32). And the apostle, when, speaking of the mercy itself, again cites this prophetic testimony, referring to the Symbol, he adds: “But how can they call on Him in whom they have not believed?” (Rom. 10:14). In these two sayings, pay attention to this: faith believes, hope and love pray. And since hope and love cannot exist without faith, then faith also prays. That is why, of course, it is said: “How can we call on Him in whom we have not believed?” 8. You can’t hope for something you don’t believe in. You can also believe in what you don’t hope for. Which believer does not believe in punishing the wicked? However, he does not hope; and whoever believes that this punishment threatens him, whoever shudders from fleeting emotional excitement, it is more correct to say about him that he is afraid than that he hopes. Someone, distinguishing between these two states, says: “let him who fears not be allowed to hope” (Lucan. Pharalia, book 2). Another poet, although in a figurative sense, said it even better: “if I could so hope for this torment” (Virgil. Aeneid, book 4). Finally, some use this word in grammar as an example, as an indication of a figure of speech with a figurative meaning, and say: “he said 'hope' instead of 'fear'.” So, there is faith in both bad and good, since both can be the subject of faith; faith itself is good, not bad. There is also faith in the past, in the present, and in the future. We believe that Christ died, this is the past; We believe that He sits at the right hand of the Father, this is the present; We believe that He will come for judgment, this is the future. Further, there is faith in both one’s own and someone else’s. Everyone believes that he once began to exist and was not, in any case, eternal, i.e. believes that it has a beginning in time, and the same applies to all others, and in general, to everything that exists. Moreover, we believe not only in those things which pertain to men, but also in many things which pertain to angels. One can only hope for the good, only for the future, and only for those who are considered capable of justifying this hope. Therefore, faith should be distinguished from hope both by difference in name and meaning. After all, as for the inaccessibility of objects of faith and hope to direct contemplation, it is the same for both. In the Epistle to the Hebrews, as evidenced by the glorious defenders of the Catholic faith, faith is defined as follows: “faith... is... the conviction of things not seen” (Heb. 11:1). When someone says that he believed not words, not witnesses, not some evidence, but the immediate evidence of objects, i.e. he says that, as if he had adapted faith, he does not at all seem so unreasonable that one could immediately take him at his word and say: “you saw, therefore you did not believe”; we have no grounds for asserting that the object of faith must necessarily be invisible. We simply primarily mean the faith about which Divine Scripture teaches, i.e. faith in the invisible. The apostle also speaks about hope: “hope... when it sees, is not hope; for if anyone sees, what can he hope for? But when we hope for what we do not see, then we wait with patience” (Rom. 8:24–25). When, therefore, we believe that a good future awaits us, then we hope for the same thing. Does anything more need to be said about love, without which faith has no meaning? And there can be no hope at all without love. “And demons believe and tremble,” says the Apostle James (James 2:19), but they do not hope and do not love. More precisely, they are afraid when they believe that what we love and hope for is approaching. Therefore, the Apostle Paul approves and commands faith driven by love (Gal. 5:6), which, in turn, cannot be without hope. Consequently, there is no love without hope, no hope without love, and neither without faith. 9. So, when one asks what one should believe in religions, there is no need to examine the nature of things, as those whom the Greeks call physicists do; one should not worry if a Christian does not know something about the strength and number of the elements, about the movement, structure and eclipse of the stars, about the shape of the sky, about the genera and breeds of animals, plants, stones, springs, rivers, mountains, about the measurement of space and time, about the signs of outstanding disasters and about many other things that physicists have either discovered or think that they have discovered - after all, not they themselves, distinguished by such intelligence, burning with zeal, having free time in abundance, then those who study human assumptions, then those who study historical experiences, and in those discoveries of which they are proud, who rather assume than know much, have invented all this. For a Christian it is enough to believe that the cause of creatures in heaven and earth, visible and invisible, lies only in the goodness of the Creator, Who is the one and true God; to believe that there is no nature that is not He Himself or from Him; that He is a trinity, namely, the Father, and the Son, begotten of the Father, and the Holy Spirit, proceeding from the same Father, but one and the same Spirit of the Father and the Son. 10. By this Trinity, infinitely, uniformly and invariably good, everything was created; created not infinitely, not uniformly and not invariably good, however, each creation individually is also good, and the whole world as a whole is very good (Gen. 1:31), since the amazing beauty of the universe was made up of the entirety. 11. The so-called evil, properly ordered and located in its place, more strongly sets off the good so that it more attracts attention and, from comparison with evil, acquires greater value. The Almighty Lord, to whom, according to the recognition even of unbelievers, belongs the supreme power over all (Virgil. Aeneid, book 10), and who is in the highest degree good, would in no way allow that in His affairs there should be any any amount of evil, if only he were not so omnipotent that he could turn evil into good. What else is called evil if not a lack of good? Just as in the bodies of living beings, illnesses and wounds cause only a lack of health (and the treatment itself is intended not to transfer the evil that has entered the body, i.e., illnesses and wounds, to some other place, but to destroy it completely); a wound or illness does not represent an independent substance, but only damage to the bodily substance, while the body is the substance itself, something truly good, in which evil occurs, i.e. deprivation of a good called health), so there are various types of damage to the soul, there is deprivation of natural good; during recovery, this deprivation is not transferred anywhere, because if it can be somewhere, it can only be in health itself. 12. So, all natures are good, since their Author is the highest good, but since they are not as invariably good as their Author himself, therefore the good in them can decrease and increase. A decrease in good is evil. However, no matter how much goodness decreases, it doesn’t matter that as long as this or that nature exists, there must be at least a bit of goodness in it. And no matter how small nature itself may be, the good of which it consists cannot decrease without decreasing itself. It is fair, of course, that pure and undamaged nature is praised, but it would be a hundred times more beautiful if it could not be damaged at all. To the extent that it is susceptible to corruption, its corruption is evil, since it deprives it of some good; for if it does not deprive of any good, then it does not cause harm, but if it causes harm, therefore, it takes away the good. So, no matter how much nature is damaged, there is good in it, which it could lose. Therefore, if there is something left in nature that can no longer be corrupted, then this nature itself will be completely immune to corruption, and this greatest good will be achieved precisely by corruption. And if she does not cease to be damaged, she will not cease to have the good that corruption could deprive her of. If corruption destroys nature entirely, then there will be no good, since there will be no nature. Therefore, corruption cannot destroy goodness except by destroying nature. So, all nature is good: great good, if it cannot be damaged, if it can, small good. The existence of good can be denied only through complete thoughtlessness. If it is destroyed by corruption, then the corruption itself does not remain, because there is no nature left in which it could exist. 13. Therefore, there would not be at all what is called evil if there were no good. Good, devoid of all evil, is pure good, the same good in which evil is found - corrupted or bad good; where there is no good, there cannot be any evil. An interesting conclusion follows from this: since every nature, simply by virtue of the fact that it is nature, is good, then when they say that a vicious nature is an evil nature, they say, in essence, that good is the same as evil, and evil is the same as good; for all nature is good and no thing would be bad if it were not nature itself. Therefore, only something good can be evil. Although this, at first glance, seems absurd, it inevitably follows from all previous reasoning. You just need to be careful not to fall under that prophetic saying: “Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil, who call the darkness of the night light, and light darkness, who put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter” (Is. 5:20). The Lord, however, says: “An evil man brings out evil things from the evil treasure of his heart” (Matthew 12:35). What is an evil person if not bad nature, since he is nature? If, further, man, since he is nature, is something good, then what is an evil man if not bad good? However, when we distinguish between the two, we do not consider a person evil because he is a man, and good not because he is vicious, but as a person we consider him good, and as vicious we consider him evil. Consequently, the one who considers the very existence of man to be evil or the depravity of man to be good falls precisely under that prophetic saying: “Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil.” He condemns God's creation - man, and praises man's vice - his depravity. So, all nature, even if it is vicious, insofar as it is nature, is good, and insofar as it is vicious, it is evil. 14. Therefore, the rule that two opposites never exist together does not apply to the opposites called good and evil. Just as air cannot be both dark and light at the same time, food or drink cannot be both sweet and bitter, a body cannot be white and black, ugly and beautiful, so in almost all opposites we can observe that they do not exist simultaneously and together. The same undoubted opposites as good and evil can not only exist together, but, moreover, evil without good, except in good, cannot exist at all. Good, however, can exist without evil. A man or an angel may not be unjust, but no one can be unjust except a man or an angel. And good is a person, good is an angel, and evil is injustice. And these two opposites exist together in such a way that if there were no good in which there was no evil, then evil could not exist at all, because corruption would not only have nowhere to exist, but also nowhere to arise; Only something good can be damaged, and damage is nothing more than the elimination of good. So, evil came from good, and does not exist except in some kind of good; and there was nothing else from which any nature of evil could arise. For if it existed, then, being a nature, it would, of course, be good: since this nature is not subject to corruption, it would be a great good, but even a nature subject to corruption would still be good, the destruction or diminishment of which corruption could harm it. 15. However, when we say that evil came from good, let no one think that this contradicts the saying of the Lord: “A good tree cannot bear bad fruit” (Matthew 7:18). It is impossible, so says the Truth, to gather grapes from thorns, because one cannot come from the other; but from good soil, as we see, both vines and thorns can grow. Likewise, although a bad tree cannot bear good fruit, i.e. an evil will cannot produce good deeds, but from the good nature of a person both good and evil will can arise; and there is no other source of evil will except the good nature of angel and man. The Lord himself indicated this very clearly in the same place where he spoke about the tree and fruits. He says: “Either judge the tree to be good and its fruit to be good; or recognize the tree as bad and its fruit as bad” (Matthew 12:33), says this, recalling that it is from a good tree that bad fruit cannot come, or from a bad tree that good fruit can come, but from the earth itself both trees can grow. 16. In view of the above, if we like the verse of Maronius: “happy is he who has been able to know the causes of things” (George, book 2, art. 490), then we do not think that in order to achieve happiness it is important to know the reasons for many movements in the world, hidden in the innermost recesses of nature: “where earthquakes come from, with what force the deep seas are disturbed and, breaking everything they meet on the way, again by themselves subside” (ibid., art. 479, 480); and so on. We need to know the causes of good and evil things (i.e., good and evil) as much as it is possible for a person to know them in this life, full of errors and disasters, in order to avoid them. Naturally, it is necessary to strive for such happiness when we would not be bothered by any sorrow, when we would be completely free from mistakes. And if we knew the reasons for the movement of bodies, then we should, first of all, know those on which our health depends. When, not knowing them, we turn to doctors, isn’t it clear how patient we are in not knowing what hides us from the secrets of heaven and earth. 17. Although it is necessary, if possible, to beware of mistakes not only in large matters, but also in small ones, and although the cause of errors lies in ignorance, it nevertheless follows that it is not the one who does not know something who constantly makes mistakes, but the one who believes himself to know something that he actually does not know. He takes the false for the true, and this means making a mistake. Moreover, what exactly he is wrong about is also of great importance. In relation to the same subject, the one who knows with an unprejudiced mind is preferred to the one who does not know, and the one who is not mistaken to the one who is mistaken. In various subjects, i.e. when one knows one thing, another - another, one - more useful, the other - less useful or even harmful, then in this last case who would not prefer the ignorant to the knowing? There is something that is better not to know than to know. Likewise, at a certain time, wandering was useful for some, although only wandering along an ordinary road, and not along a moral life. And it happened to us ourselves that we got lost at one crossroads, where, waiting for our passage, armed Donatists sat in ambush; however, we arrived by a roundabout road to where we were heading, and when the machinations of the enemies were discovered, we rejoiced at our wanderings and thanked God. Who would hesitate to choose a traveler wandering in this way over a robber who was not wandering? And perhaps that is why some unfortunate lover of the famous greatest poet says: “how did I see how I died, how did I succumb to an evil mistake?” (Virgil. Bucolics), because there is also a good mistake, which not only does not harm, but even brings some benefit. However, if we delve deeper into the matter, since to be mistaken is nothing more than to take a lie for truth and truth for a lie, to consider the known as unknown and vice versa (it makes no difference whether it is false or true), and since this is in reality as ugly and obscene as the affirmation or denial of “yes, yes; no, no" (Matt. 5:37) seems beautiful and decent to us; then, in fact, our real life is pitiful, for the preservation of which sometimes a mistake is necessary. God forbid that this is not the life where truth itself is the life of our soul, where no one lies and no one is deceived. Here people deceive and are deceived, and they are more pitiful when they lie and deceive than when they are deceived by trusting a lie. However, rational nature turns away from lying to such an extent and avoids error as much as possible that even those who themselves love to deceive do not want to be deceived; since to the one who lies, it seems that it is not he who is mistaken, but that he is deceiving another who trusts him. And he really is not mistaken in covering it up with a lie, since the truth is unknown to him, but he is mistaken in thinking that a lie does not harm him, whereas every sin harms the one who commits it more than the one who suffers from this sin. 18. Now a very difficult and complex question arises, about which we have already written a large book, when, of necessity, we had to defend ourselves against accusations. Should a just person sometimes lie? Some (Priscilianists) go so far that both perjury and lying about matters relating to the worship of God, even about the very nature of God, are sometimes considered a good and pious act. It seems to me that any lie is a sin, although it makes a big difference in what mood and about what subjects someone lies. The one who lies with the intention of helping someone sins less than the one who lies with the intention of harming; but the one who deceives a traveler onto another road does just as much harm as the one who spoils the road of life by deceit. One who accepts his own lie as the truth cannot be considered a conscious deceiver, because in his soul he does not deceive, but is himself deceived. Therefore, one who carelessly believes a lie and considers it to be the truth must be accused of imprudence rather than of lying. And, on the contrary, he deceives who presents a deliberate lie as the truth, since in his soul he does not think what he says, and therefore does not speak the truth, even if his words accidentally turn out to be true; and he who speaks the truth with his lips without knowing it, or, knowing it, deliberately deceives, is in no way free from lies. So, if we take into account not the very objects about which someone says something, but the intention of the speaker, then it is better for the one who tells a lie out of ignorance, considering it to be the truth, than for the one who knowingly introduces the spirit of lies, not knowing whether he is speaking the truth. The first has what is on his mind and on his tongue; with the second, no matter what it is in itself, what he is talking about, on the tongue is one thing, but in the heart is another; and this is what deception actually consists of. In relation to the very objects about which something is said, it is extremely important what exactly someone is mistaken or lying about; although being deceived (since it concerns the will of a person) is a lesser evil than lying, it is much more excusable to lie in something that does not come into contact with religion than to be mistaken in this matter. To explain this, let us pay attention to what happens if someone, deceiving, says that the deceased is alive, and if another, deluded, believes that Christ, after some time, will die again: isn’t deception in the first case much better than delusion in the second, isn’t it much less evil to lead someone into that mistake than to fall into this one yourself, thanks to someone? 19. So, in some cases we are deceived by great evil, in others by small evil, in some we are not deceived by any evil, and in some we are deceived even by good. A person is deceived by great evil when he does not believe in what leads to eternal life or leads to eternal death. The one who, taking a lie for the truth, is subjected to some temporary troubles, but with the help of firm patience turns them into useful good, is deceived by a small evil. This is the same as if someone, considering a bad person to be good, suffers some kind of evil from him. Whoever considers a bad person to be so good as to the extent that he does not suffer any evil from him, is not deceived by any evil, and the prophetic curse does not apply to him: “Woe to those who call evil good.” What the prophet said refers to what makes people evil, and not to the people themselves. Therefore, the one who calls adultery good is truly condemned by that prophetic word. Whoever calls the person himself good, whom he considers blameless, not knowing that he is an adulterer, makes a mistake not in recognizing good and evil deeds, but in the mysteries of human character; he calls a person good in whom, in his opinion, there is undoubted goodness, and considers an adulterer to be evil and an immaculate person to be good; considers this person to be good out of ignorance of the fact that he is an adulterer and not blameless. If, further, someone, thanks to a mistake, avoids destruction, which, as I said, happened to us on the way, then something good comes out of the mistake for the person. But when I say that in some cases someone is not deceived by any evil, or even deceived by any good, I call evil and good not the error itself, but the evil that, thanks to the error, is avoided and the good that is achieved through the error. An error in itself is an evil, big in a big matter and small in a small matter, but nevertheless an evil. Who, except the erring one, does not see evil in passing off a lie as the truth, or rejecting the truth in favor of a lie, or considering the unknown to be known and the known to be unknown? And with all this, it is one thing to consider a person good who is actually evil: this is a mistake; another thing is not to experience any other evil from this evil, if the evil person, mistaken for a good one, did not harm at all. In the same way, it is one thing to mistakenly consider the path to be the right one, and quite another thing to receive something good from this evil that came from a mistake, for example, liberation from the machinations of evil people. 20. I don’t know whether these kinds of errors should also be called sins, such as, for example, when a person thinks well of a bad person, without knowing what he really is like; or when, instead of what we perceive through bodily sensations, we encounter something similar, felt as if by a spiritual body or bodily spirit, which happened to the Apostle Peter when he, unexpectedly freed by an angel from his shackles and prison, believed that he was seeing a vision (Acts 12:9); or when in the material objects themselves the rough is considered smooth, the bitter is considered sweet, the fetid is fragrant, the rumble of a road cart is music, or one person is mistaken for another, when two are very similar to each other, which often happens with twins, which is why it is said: “... and a pleasant mistake for parents” (Virgil. Aeneid, book 10), etc. I am not now addressing that very difficult question that has occupied the wittiest academicians, as if a sage, in order not to fall into error and mistake a lie for the truth, should not assert anything, because everything (as they say) is either unknown or doubtful. I wrote three books about this at the very beginning of my conversion, so that what seemed to be a barrier at the very entrance would not serve as an obstacle for us. It was necessary to eliminate despair in achieving the truth, which from their point of view is inevitable. So, with them, any mistake is considered a sin, which, they argue, cannot be avoided otherwise than by leaving issues unresolved. They say that he who agrees with the unknown is undoubtedly mistaken; They prove in witty, but also very arrogant disputes that there is nothing undoubted in what people see, due to the impossibility of identifying optical illusions, even if what is perceived by sight was by chance true. With us, “the righteous man lives by faith” (Hab. 2:4; Rom. 1:17). And if agreement is eliminated, then faith is also eliminated, because without agreement there is no faith. And there are truths, although inaccessible to sight, but such, without faith in which it is impossible to achieve a blessed or, what is the same thing, eternal life. I don’t know if we need to talk with people who not only do not expect a future life, but also do not know whether they live in the present; they say that they do not know and what they cannot help knowing. After all, it is unthinkable not to know that you are living, since if you lived, you would not have ignorance; to have knowledge and ignorance is characteristic only of the living. By disagreeing with what they live, they supposedly warn themselves against making a mistake; whereas even by making a mistake they prove that they live, because whoever does not live cannot make mistakes. Just as it is true and undeniable that we live, so it is true and undeniable that there are many things, disagreement with which would rather indicate a lack of wisdom, if not to say madness. 21. In those things, belief or disbelief in which is indifferent to achieving the kingdom of God, which can be considered both true and false, to be mistaken in these things does not mean to sin, or if to sin, then it is very little and very easy. And no matter how great this mistake may be, it has nothing to do with the path we follow to God, and this path is faith in Christ, assisted by love (Gal. 5:6). The mistake in the twins, pleasant for the parents, did not lead him astray from this path; neither did the Apostle Peter when, thinking that he was seeing a vision, he so mistook one for the other that he did not distinguish the true bodies among which he was from the ghosts he imagined - until the angel who freed him left him; Patriarch Jacob did not deviate from this path when he considered his living son torn to pieces by wild beasts (Gen. 37:33). In these and similar types of deceptions, we are deceived without violating our faith in God, and we are mistaken, without leaving the path leading to Him: these errors, although not a sin, must nevertheless be considered among the disasters of real life, so subject to vanity that here the false is passed off as true, the true is rejected for the sake of lies, the doubtful is considered certain. This, however, is unusual for the faith through which, despite its truth and certainty, we strive for eternal bliss, but it is inevitably inherent in the poverty in which we now exist. If we had already enjoyed that true and perfect happiness, we would not be deceived in any sense of soul and body. 22. Every lie should be called sin, because a person is obliged to say what he thinks, whether it will actually be true or is only considered so, whether he himself knows the truth or, as a person, is mistaken and deceived. Anyone who lies against what he feels in his soul speaks with the intention of lying. And in any case, the words were not established so that people mutually deceive each other, but so that each could bring his thoughts to the attention of the other. Therefore, using words to lie, and not for what they were established for, is a sin. And therefore, no lie should be considered sinless on the grounds that by lying we can sometimes help someone. We can also sin by stealing, even if the poor man, who is given openly, receives a benefit, and the rich man, from whom it is secretly taken, does not suffer a loss; at least someone didn’t consider such theft a sin. We can also sin by adultery, even if some woman reveals her readiness to die for love, if we do not agree to this adultery; and in this case, rightly valuing chastity, we agree that it is much better when, for the benefit of others, chastity is not violated by adultery and the truth is not violated by lies. It cannot be denied that people who allow lies only to save a person do a lot of good; but in such a case their benevolence is justly praised, or even temporarily rewarded, and not their lies, which are only excused and not approved; especially among the heirs of the New Testament, to whom it is said: “let your word be: yes, yes; no, no, and anything beyond this is from the evil one” (Matthew 5:37). Because of this evil, inseparable from man in this life, even the co-heirs of Christ themselves say: “forgive us our debts” (Matthew 6:12). 23. So, now that, in order to study the causes of good and evil, we have briefly outlined which path leads us to a kingdom where there will be life without death, truth without error and unclouded happiness, we should under no circumstances doubt that the cause of the good that concerns us lies only in the goodness of God, and of evil in the will of changeable good, deviating from unchangeable good, first in the will of an angel, then of man. 24. This is the first evil of a rational creature, i.e. the first lack of goodness; then, even against the will of a person, ignorance of what needs to be done and a passionate attraction (lust) to what needs to be avoided imperceptibly crept up, and their companions were error and sorrow; when they feel that this double evil is threatening, the movement of the spirit avoiding them is called fear. When the spirit achieves what it passionately desires, even if it is harmful or useless, it, without feeling its error, is either overcome by unhealthy pleasure, or even indulges in vain joy. From these, as it were, sources of illness and need, all disasters of a rational nature flow. 25. However, even in the midst of disasters, this nature could not lose its desire for bliss. These disasters are common to people and angels, who were condemned by the truth of the Lord for their wickedness. But man also has a special punishment, being punished by the death of the body. God threatened him with the punishment of death in case of sin on his part, endowing him with free will so that he could control it so that he would beware of falling; and placed him in a paradise of sweetness, as if in the shadow of life, from where righteousness would arise even more perfect (Gen. 2:15). 26. Expelled from paradise after sin, man and his family, infected with sin in him, were bound, as at the root, by the punishment of death and condemnation; so that all the offspring of him and his wife, condemned with him, were born from carnal lust (in which lust the punishment corresponding to disobedience was given) and received original sin, leading through errors and various sorrows to that final, endless punishment, together with the fallen angels, their seducers, rulers and accomplices. “Just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, so death spread to all men, because all sinned” (Rom. 5:12). In this place the apostle calls the world, of course, the entire human race. 27. Consequently, the matter appears like this: the condemned mass of the entire human race lay in evil, or rolled and fell from one evil to another, and, joining a part of the sinning angels, suffered a worthy punishment for their wicked apostasy. But although not without the righteous will of an angry God, everything that the wicked do is done voluntarily by blind and unbridled desire, and clear and open punishments are suffered against their will, yet the goodness of the Creator does not cease to give life and vitality to the evil angels, without which they would perish, does not cease to form and animate the seeds of people (albeit born from a vicious and condemned offspring), does not cease to distribute members according to age, according to the difference in place, to revive feelings, to provide food. He decided that it was better to make good out of evil than to allow there to be no evil at all. And if He considered it best that there should be absolutely no restoration of people, just as there is no restoration of the wicked angels, then would it really be undeserved for nature, which abandoned God, which, using its evil power, trampled and transgressed the commandment of its Creator (and it could have preserved it very easily), which desecrated the image of its Creator in itself, stubbornly turning away from His light, which, with a free decision, suddenly evilly interrupted the beneficial submission to His laws; so that this entire nature would be abandoned by Him forever and would suffer a well-deserved eternal punishment? He could have done this if He had only been just, but not merciful, and if His undeserved mercy had not been revealed much more clearly in the deliverance of the unworthy. 28. While some angels fell away from God with wicked pride and were cast down from the highest heavenly dwelling into the underworld darkness of this age, the rest of the angels remained in eternal bliss with God and in holiness. For the others were not carried away by one fallen and condemned angel so that they, as people, were bound by the original evil with the shackles of forced succession and subjected everyone to due punishment; but after the one who became the devil with the allies of wickedness became proud and with this pride fell along with them, the rest remained in pious obedience to the Lord, receiving also what they did not have - undoubted knowledge, thanks to which they could be calm about their constant and unchanging state. 29. So, it was the will of the Creator and Provider of the universe that the lost part of the angels (since not all of their multitude perished, leaving God) should remain in eternal destruction; those who at this very time were invariably with God would rejoice in their most certain, always known bliss. Another rational creation, humanity, perishing in sins and disasters, both hereditary and personal, had to, as it was restored to its previous state, make up for the loss in the host of angels that had formed since the time of the devil’s destruction. For the resurrected saints are promised that they will be equal to the angels of God (Luke 20:36). Thus, the heavenly Jerusalem, our mother, the city of God, will not lose any of its many citizens, or perhaps will possess even more. We, of course, do not know the number of either holy people or unclean demons, whose place was taken by the sons of the holy mother, who appeared on a barren land (Isa. 54:1), and will remain in the world that they lost, without any limitation of time. But the number of those citizens, both present and future, is accessible to the contemplation of the Artist, Who “calls things that do not exist as if they exist” (Rom. 4:17) and disposes of everything by measure, number and weight (Wis. 11:21). 30. However, that part of the human race to which God promised liberation and an eternal kingdom, can it return to its previous state through the merits of its deeds? No. What good does a lost person do before he is somewhat freed from destruction? Perhaps the renewal of the human race can take place as a result of a free decision of the will? And this is not: because, using the freedom of self-determination for evil, man destroyed both himself and freedom. Just as if someone kills himself, he certainly kills while he is alive, and after suicide he no longer lives, and when he kills himself, he will no longer be able to bring himself back to life again, so when a sin was committed by the free determination of the will, then with the victory of sin, freedom was also lost. “For whoever is overcome by someone is his slave” (2 Pet. 2:19). This, as you know, is the saying of the Apostle Peter; if it is just, then what, I ask, can there be freedom for a slave, other than freedom to sin? He serves freely who willingly fulfills the will of his master. And therefore, whoever is a slave to sin is free to sin. Therefore, he will be free to do righteousness only if, having freed himself from sin, he becomes a slave of righteousness. This is true freedom, since a just deed is done with joy; at the same time, this is reverent slavery, since submission to the law is maintained. But where will such freedom come from for a man who is subjugated and sold, if the One who calls him does not redeem him: “If the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed” (John 8:36). Before this liberation begins in a person, to boast in the good work of a free person who is not yet free to do good is to arrogantly exalt himself with empty pride, about which the apostle warns with the words: “By grace are you saved through faith” (Eph 2:8). 31. And so that they would not appropriate even the faith itself to such an extent that they would cease to recognize it as given from above, the same apostle says in another place that he received grace to be faithful (1 Cor. 7:25); he also added: “and this not of yourselves, but the gift of God: not by works, lest any man should boast” (Eph. 2:8–9). And lest they think that the faithful will not lack good works, he again adds: “For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we might walk in them” (Eph. 2:10). So, we become truly free when God creates us, i.e. forms and creates not so that we would be people, he has already done this, but so that we would be good people, which He now does by His grace, so that we would be a new creation in Christ Jesus (Gal. 6:15), in accordance with which it is said: “Create in me a clean heart, O God” (Ps. 50:12). 32. Likewise, let no one boast not only of deeds, but also of the free decision of the will itself, as if the merit for which is given, as a due reward, complete freedom to do good; let him listen to the same herald of grace: “God works in you both to will and to do according to a good will” (Phil. 2:13). And in another place: “therefore... not... desiring, nor... running, but... God having mercy” (Rom. 9:16). Without a doubt, if a person is at such an age that he can already use reason, he cannot believe, hope, love if he does not desire, cannot reach the hand of the highest calling of God if he does not strive for it. How, therefore, “neither... willeth nor... runth, but... God hath mercy,” if it is not so that the “will itself,” as it is written, “is prepared by the Lord” (Prov. 8:35). However, if “not... willeth, nor... runth, but... God hath mercy,” is said because salvation is accomplished by both, i.e., by both the desire of man and the mercy of God, so that the words “not... willing and not... striving, but... “we can understand the merciful God” in this way: man’s desire alone is not enough, unless there is God’s mercy; God’s mercy alone is not enough, unless man’s desire exists; and if it is correct, therefore, to say: “not... a desiring man, but... a merciful God,” since human will alone does not accomplish this, then why cannot one say the other way around: not a merciful God, but a desiring man, since God’s mercy alone does not accomplish this? If not a single Christian dares to say, without becoming in open contradiction with the Apostle: “not a merciful God, but a willing man,” then this understanding of what was said: “not... a willing and not... striving, but... a merciful God,” so that everything is attributed to God, who prepares the good desire of a person in order to help him and helps the prepared one, remains correct. For a person's good desire precedes many of God's gifts, but not all; whichever it does not precede, even in those it is present. We read about both in St. Scripture: “And His mercy will go before me” (Ps. 23:6). The unwilling one is preceded to desire; accompanies the one who wishes, so that the wish is not in vain. And why do we receive the exhortation to pray for our enemies (Matthew 5:44), when they do not want to live godly, if not because God works in them the desire? Likewise, why are we admonished to ask in order to receive (Matt. 7:7), if not because everything we desire is fulfilled by Him by whom our very desire was made? Consequently, we pray for our enemies, that God’s mercy may precede them just as it precedes us, and we pray for ourselves, that His mercy will accompany us. 33. So, the human race was under righteous condemnation and all were children of wrath. It is written about this wrath: “For all our days have perished and we have perished in Thy wrath; our years are caught up like a spider” (Ps. 89:9). Job also speaks about this anger: “for a man born of a woman is short of life and full of wrath” (Job 14:1). The Lord Jesus also speaks about this anger: “he who believes in the Son has eternal life, and he who does not believe in the Son does not have life, but the wrath of God abides on him” (John 3:36); does not say: he will come, but “abides.” Every person is born with it. Therefore, the apostle says: “we were by nature children of wrath, like others” (Eph. 2:3). Since people were in this anger as a result of original sin, the more serious and destructive the more sins they added to it, then an Intercessor was needed, that is, a reconciliator who would calm this anger by offering a single sacrifice: “For if, being enemies, we. We were reconciled to God by the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled... now... by His blood, we will be saved from wrath through Him” (Rom. 5:9-10). When it is said that God is angry, this does not mean the agitation that occurs in the soul of an angry person, but from the name applied to human passions, the name of anger was given to His punishment, which can only be fair. Therefore, the fact that we are reconciled to God through the Intercessor and receive from the Holy Spirit, so that from enemies we become sons, “for as many as are led by the Spirit of God are the sons of God” (Rom. 8:14), this is the grace of God in Jesus Christ our Lord. 34. In order to say everything about this Intercessor as it should, one must speak at length, although it is impossible to search according to one’s worth. For who can express in entirely appropriate words only this one thing: “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us” (John 1:14), so that we might believe in the only Son of God the Father Almighty, born of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary? The Word became flesh so that the flesh was assumed by the Godhead, and not the Godhead changed into flesh. By flesh, further, here we must understand a person, by the use in speech of a part instead of the whole, as it is said: “for by the works of the law... no flesh is justified” (Rom. 3:20), i.e. no person. For it cannot be said that with that perception human nature lacked anything, even if nature were completely free from all sin; This is not the kind of person who is born of two sexes through carnal lust with an obligatory crime, responsibility for which is removed by rebirth, but who should have been born of the Virgin, conceived by the faith of the Mother, and not by passion: if Her purity had been violated at His birth, then He would no longer have been born of the Virgin and He would have been falsely (let it not be so!) confessed by the whole church as born of the Virgin Mary - a church that, imitating His Mother, daily gives birth to its members, remaining a virgin. Read, if you like, about the virginity of St. Mary, my letters to the glorious husband, whom I call with honor and consolation, Volusian (letter 137). 35. Thus, Christ Jesus the Son of God is both God and man. God before all ages, man in our age. God, because – the Word of God “for God was the Word” (John 1:1); man because the rational soul and flesh entered into the unity of person with the Word. Therefore, He is God, He and the Father are one (John 10:30); since man, the Father, is greater than Him (John 14:28). For, although he was the only Son of God, a Son not by grace, but by nature, therefore he was full of grace, and became the son of man: one and the same was both, of both is one Christ. “For, since He was in the form of God, He did not consider it robbery to be what He was by nature, that is, equal with God... but He emptied Himself..., taking the form of a servant” (Phil. 2:6-7), without losing or diminishing the image of God. And therefore he became smaller and remained equal, both are one, as it is said; but other than the Word, other than man: as the Word he is equal to the Father, as man he is lesser. One Son of God, and He is the Son of Man; one Son of Man and he is the Son of God; not two Sons of God, God and man, but one Son of God. God without beginning, man with a known beginning, our Lord Jesus Christ. 36. Here, without a doubt, the grace of God is solemnly and clearly revealed. For did human nature in the man Christ deserve to be received individually into the unity of the person of the only begotten Son of God? What good will, desire for what good goal, what good deeds preceded it, for which this person would deserve to become one person with God? Did, in fact, man exist before and thereby was exceptional favor shown to him when he exceptionally deserved God? After all, the one who began to exist as a man was none other than the Son of God; and this is a unique man of his kind, and for the sake of God the Word, who, having received him, became flesh, is also God; so that just as each person is one person, namely the rational soul and body, so Christ is one person, Word and Man. Where does such glory of human nature come from, as undeserved, undoubtedly free, if the great and exceptional grace of God is not clearly revealed here for those who reason with faith and soberly, with the purpose that people understand that by the same grace they are justified from sins, by which it happened that the man Christ could not have any sin? So the angel greeted His Mother when he announced to her the future of her Child: “Rejoice,” he says, “full of grace and.” And a little later: “you have found grace from God” (Luke 1:28, 30). And he says about her that she is full of grace and that she has found grace from God because she was the Mother of her Lord and the Lord of all. About this same Christ, the Evangelist John, after he said: “and The Word became flesh and dwelt among us,” says: “and we saw His glory...as the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth” (John 1:14). Indeed, the Truth itself, the only begotten Son of God, the Son not by grace, but by nature, by grace took man into such unity of person that He was also the son of man. 37. The same Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, that is, the only one, our Lord, was born of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary. And the Holy Spirit is certainly a gift of God, although He is himself equal to the Giver: therefore, the Holy Spirit is God, no less than the Father and the Son. What else but grace itself is revealed in the fact that the birth of Christ according to humanity is a birth from the Holy Spirit? For when the Virgin asked the angel how what he told her would happen, since she did not know her husband, the angel replied: “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the Holy One that is born of you will be called the Son of God” (Luke 1:35). And Joseph, when he wanted to let her go, suspecting her of adultery, since he knew that she was pregnant not from him, received the following answer from the angel: “Do not be afraid to accept Miriam your wife, for what is born in her is of the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 1:20), that is, what you suspect from another husband is from the Holy Spirit. 38. However, do we want to say by this that the father of the man Christ is the Holy Spirit, so that God the Father gave birth to the Word, the Holy Spirit to man, of which two substances consisted one Christ and the son of God the Father, as the Word, and the son of the Holy Spirit as man; Do we want to say that the Holy Spirit begat Him as a father from a virgin mother? Who dares to say this? And there is no need to prove in detail how absurd the conclusions from such reasoning are; it itself is already so absurd that no believing ears can bear it. We confess this: our Lord Jesus Christ, who, as God, is from God, but according to humanity was born of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, and both substances, divine and human, are the only Son of God the Father Almighty, from whom comes the Holy Spirit. How, therefore, do we call Christ born of the Holy Spirit, if He was not begotten by the Holy Spirit? Is it because He created Him? Since our Lord Jesus Christ, since He is God, “all things were created through Him” (Jn. 1:3), since man is also created, as the apostle says: “created from the seed of David according to the flesh” (Rom. 1:3). But if the creation that the Virgin conceived and gave birth to, although related only to the person of the Son, was created by the entire Trinity, for the actions of the Trinity are inseparable, then why is one of the three called His Creator, when it is understood that the entire Trinity acts? Yes, it is called, which can be confirmed with examples. But there is no need to dwell on this further. It is noteworthy how it is said: “born of the Holy Spirit,” if He is in no way the son of the Holy Spirit. After all, the world created by God cannot be called the son of God or born of God, but either made, or created, or founded, or arranged by Him. Consequently, when we confess the one born of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, it is difficult to explain how He is not the son of the Holy Spirit and is the Son of the Virgin Mary, although he was born both from Him and from her. Without a doubt, of course, He was born from Him not as from his father, but from her as from his mother. 39. So, everything that is born from something cannot necessarily be called the son of that from which it is born. Not to mention the fact that otherwise a son is born from a man, otherwise hair, an aphid, a worm come into being, of which nothing is a son; those who are born by water and the Holy Spirit, no one, of course, will rightly call the sons of water: but they are directly called the sons of God the Father and the Mother Church. So, therefore, he who is born of the Holy Spirit is the Son of God the Father, and not of the Holy Spirit. For what we have said about hair and other things is significant insofar as it convinces us that not everything that is born from something can be called the son of that from which it is born. So, it is not possible to say about all those who are called the sons of someone that they were born by him; There are those who are adopted. And the sons of Gehenna are not those born by it, but those prepared for it, just as the sons of the kingdom are those who are prepared for the kingdom. 40. So, if something can be born from something without becoming a son, and on the other hand, not everyone who is called a son is born from the one whose son he is called, then, indeed, the image of the birth of Christ from the Holy Spirit not as a son, and from the Virgin Mary as a son, communicates to us the grace of God, by which man, without any previous merits, at the very beginning of his existence was united with God the Word into such a unity of personality that one and the same was the Son God, who was the Son of Man, and the Son of Man, who was the Son of God; and so in the perception of human nature, that person was in some way communicated with natural grace itself, which cannot allow any sin. Through the Holy Spirit, this grace had to be revealed because He Himself, in fact, is such a God that it is also called the gift of God (John 4:10; Acts 8:20). A comprehensive discussion of this (if such is possible) can only be presented in a very extensive study. 41. So, fertilized or conceived without any satisfaction of carnal lust and therefore not having original sin, also by the grace of God in a wondrous and ineffable way united and ruffled in the unity of grace, but by nature, and therefore Himself not committing any sin, He, however, due to the likeness of the flesh of sin in which He came (Rom. 8:3), is called Himself sin, which must wash away sins victim. In the Old Testament, sacrifices for sins were called sins (Hos. 4:8); He became in reality a sacrifice for sins, in relation to which those sacrifices were a shadow. Why, when the apostle said: “We pray through Christ to be reconciled to God,” he directly adds and says: “He who knew no sin made... sin for us, so that we might be the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Cor. 5:20-21). He does not say, as we read in some erroneous codes: “He who knew no sin committed sin for us”; as if Christ himself sinned instead of us; but says: “He who knew no sin (i.e. Christ), for us... “God made sin,” with whom we must be reconciled, which is the same thing: He made it a sacrifice for sin, through which we could be reconciled. So He is sin, so that we may be righteous; and not ours, but God's; and not in us, but in Him: He, in the likeness of the flesh of sin (Rom. 8:3), with which He was crucified, thus showed sin, not His own, but ours, and not in Him, but in us, that, not having sin Himself, in some way died to sin, dying in the flesh in which was the likeness of sin; and Himself, never having lived the ancient sinful life, by His resurrection pointed to our new life, rising from the ancient death by which we formerly died in sin. 42. This is the great sacrament of baptism, performed in us so that all who achieve this grace, no matter what age they may be, die to sin, as He is called dead to sin, because He died to the flesh, i.e. for the likeness of sin; and they would live, being reborn from the font, just as He was resurrected from the grave. 43. From a newborn baby to a very old man, no one can be kept from baptism, just as there is no one who does not die to sin in baptism; only infants die for one original sin, adults die for all those who came to him from the bad life he spent from birth. 44. However, it is often said about adults that they die to sin, although, undoubtedly, they die not for one, but for many and even for all sins, no matter what they themselves have committed either in thought, or in word, or in deed; it is said this way because sometimes the singular number denotes the plural, as he says: “both are done by an armed warrior” (Virgil. Aeneid, 11.20), although they did it with the help of many soldiers. And in our books we read: “pray to the Lord to... remove the snake from us” (Numbers 21:7); although we are talking about many snakes from which the people suffered, and there are many similar examples. If one original sin is denoted by the plural, when we say that children are baptized for the remission of sins, and not for the remission of sin, then this is the opposite turn of speech, in which the plural denotes the singular. So in the Gospel it is said about the deceased Herod: “for those who sought the soul of the Child died” (Matthew 2:20), “died,” and not “died.” And in the books of Exodus: “he also made for himself golden gods” 1 – AV., while they made one calf, about which they said: “here is your god and Israel, who brought you also out of the land of Egypt” (Exodus 32:4, 31); and here the plural is used instead of the singular. 45. Although in that one sin, which through one person entered the world and spread to all people (Rom. 5:12), why even infants are baptized, many sins can be distinguished if we divide it into its own, as it were, individual members. There is also pride, since man wanted to obey himself more than God; and desecration of the shrine, since he cast himself into death; and spiritual adultery, since the integrity of human thought was destroyed by the serpentine council (Gen. 3:4–6); and theft, since prohibited food was stolen; and greed, since he sought more than was necessary; and other things, if anything can be found in this one offense, after thinking carefully. 46. ​​It is also not in vain that it is said that infants are responsible for the sins of their ancestors, not only the first people, but also their own, from whom they themselves were born. That Divine saying: “I will repay the sins of the fathers... in... the children” (Jer. 32:18) has them in mind, of course, before they, through regeneration, begin to belong to the New Testament. This Testament was prophesied when it was said through Ezekiel that the children would not receive the sins of their fathers and that in Israel there would no longer be that parable: “The fathers ate sour grapes, but the children’s teeth set on edge" (Ezek. 18:2). For this reason, everyone is reborn, in order to be freed from everything sinful with which he is born. For sins committed by a bad life can be erased by repentance, as, we see, it happens even after baptism. And for no other reason is rebirth established, but because birth is vicious, and so vicious that even one born in a lawful marriage says: “I was conceived in their iniquity.” in sin my mother nourished me in her womb” (Ps. 50:7). And he did not say: “in iniquity,” or: “in sin,” although this would have been correct, but preferred to say: “in their iniquity ... and in their sin.” Because that one sin that has passed on to all people and is so great that human nature is distorted and necessarily subjected to death, and other sins of the parents would bind the children with responsibility if the given grace and God’s mercy did not come to the rescue. 47. But about the sins of other ancestors, to which from Adam himself down to his father everyone approaches with their descendants, it is impossible to accurately decide whether everyone born has a connection with all the evil deeds and increased initial misdeeds, so that everyone is born as much worse as later than the others, or God threatens their descendants in the third or fourth generation for the sins of their fathers (Deut. 5:9), because He does not extend His wrath further on His own. mercy, so that those who are not given the grace of rebirth would not be burdened with an excessive burden in their eternal condemnation, since it would follow that from birth they participate in the sins of all their ancestors and bear due punishment for them. 48. However, that one sin, which in a place and under conditions of such great happiness received such power that in one person at the very beginning and, as I would say, at the very root, condemned the entire human race, this sin is not expiated and washed away except through the one Mediator of God and men, the Man Christ Jesus (1 Tim. 2:5), Who alone could be born so that he had no need of regeneration. 49. Those who were baptized with the baptism of John, with which He was also baptized, were not reborn, but, as if by the preparatory service of the one who said: “Prepare the way of the Lord,” they prepared for Him in whom alone they could receive rebirth. His baptism is a baptism not only with water, which was the baptism of John, but also with the Holy Spirit, so that everyone who believes in Christ is reborn by that Spirit (Matthew 3:13; Luke 3:4; Mark 1:8). Hence the voice of the Father, heard over the Baptized: “Today I have begotten You” (Ps. 2.7); he points not to that one transitory day on which He was baptized, but to the eternal, unchangeable day, in order to testify that this person is related to the person of the Only Begotten (Heb. 1:5, 5:5): for where the day does not begin with the end of yesterday and does not end with the beginning of tomorrow, there it is always present. So, He wanted to be baptized in water by John not in order to wash away some of His defilements, but in order to testify to his great humility. Baptism found nothing in Him to wash away, just as death found nothing to punish; and the devil, struck down and defeated not by the power of power, but by the truth of truth, since he very unjustly put Him to death without any guilt of sin, justly released through him those whom he had held back through the guilt of sin. So, both, i.e. both baptism and death were accepted for the sake of a certain separation, not out of necessity deserving of regret, but by a merciful will so that One would take upon Himself the sin of the world, as One sent sin into the world, i.e. for the entire human race. 50. The only difference is that he sent one sin into the world. This one destroyed not only him, but also everything added to him. Therefore the apostle says: “And the gift is not as judgment for one sinner; for judgment for one crime leads to condemnation; but the gift of grace leads to justification from many crimes” (Rom. 5:16). Because that one sin that is passed on from generation to generation, even if it remains only one, is subject to condemnation; grace justifies a person from many crimes, when in addition to this one original sin he has in common with everyone, he has committed many of his own. 51. Therefore he says: “As by one crime there is condemnation for all men, so by one righteousness for all... justification for life” (Rom. 5:18), showing that no one born of Adam is exempt from condemnation and no one is freed from it except the one reborn in Christ. 52. Having spoken about this punishment through one person and about grace through one Man as much as he considered necessary in this place of his epistle, he then testified to the great sacrament of baptism into the death of Christ on the cross so that we understand that baptism into the death of the crucified Christ is nothing more than a semblance of the remission of sin; so that just as in Him there was true death, so in us there is true remission of sin, and as in Him there is true resurrection, so in us there is true justification. The Apostle says: “What shall we say? Should we continue in sin so that grace may increase?” (Rom. 6:1). As he said above: “For where sin abounded, grace abounded all the more” (Rom. 5:20). Thus, he asked himself the question of whether it was necessary to remain in sin in order to achieve an excess of grace. But he answers: “It won’t happen.” And he adds: “If we died to sin, how can we live in it?” Then, to show that we have died to sin, he says: “Or do you not know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death?” (Rom. 6:2–3). If, therefore, we are declared dead to sin because we were baptized into the death of Christ, then, of course, infants who are baptized into Christ die to sin, since they are baptized into His death. After all, without any exception, it is said: “As many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death.” And it is said to show that we died to sin. For what sin do children die when they are reborn, if not for the one they received from birth? Therefore, what is said in the following words also applies to them: “Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, so that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life. For if we have become conformed to the likeness of His death, we will also be conformed to the resurrection; Knowing this, that our old man was crucified with him, so that the body of sin might be done away with, so that we would no longer be slaves to sin; for he who has died will be freed from sin. If we died with Christ, then we believe that we will also live with Him, knowing that Christ, having risen from the dead, dies no more: death will no longer have dominion over Him... For that He died to sin, He died once; and what lives... lives for God. Likewise, consider yourselves dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus” (Rom. 6:4–11). From this he began to prove that we do not need to remain in sin in order for grace to increase; and even earlier he said: “If we died to sin, how can we live in it?” And to show that we are dead to sin, he added: “Or do you not know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death?” Consequently, he ended this whole place as he began. He attributes such significance to the death of Christ that he also calls Him dead to sin. For what sin, if not for the flesh, in which there was not sin, but the likeness of sin and therefore called by the name of sin? So, to those baptized into the death of Christ, into which not only adults, but also infants are baptized, he says: “So also you,” i.e., like Christ, “even so you count yourselves dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus” (Rom. 6:11). 53. Everything that was accomplished in the crucifixion of Christ, in the burial, in the three-day resurrection, in the ascension into heaven, in sitting at the right hand of the Father was accomplished in such a way that these actual events were consistent with the Christian life that is lived here. For regarding His Crucifixion it is said: “Those who are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with its passions and lusts” (Gal. 5:24). Regarding burial: “We were buried with Christ by baptism into death.” Regarding the resurrection: “So that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life” (Rom. 6:4). Regarding the ascension into heaven and sitting at the right hand of the Father: “If you have been raised with Christ, then seek those things that are above, where Christ sits at the right hand of God; You set your mind on things above, and not on earthly things. For you are dead, and your life is hidden with Christ in God” (Col. 3:1–3). 54. The same thing that we confess as the future in Christ, that He will come from heaven and judge the living and the dead, this does not apply to our life, which is spent here, since it does not happen in its current events, but in those that are to come at the end of the age. This includes what the apostle further added: “When... Christ who is your life appears, then you also will appear with Him in glory” (Col. 3:4). 55. That He will judge the living and the dead can be understood in two ways: either by the living are meant those who will not die before His coming, but will still live in this body, and by the dead those who, before He comes, have left or will leave the body; or by the living we mean the righteous, and by the dead the unrighteous, because the righteous will also be judged. For in one case, God’s judgment is considered a punishment, in another case – a blessing, according to which it is said: “God! in Your name save me, and in Your power judge me" (Ps. 53:3). By the judgment of God, this separation of the good and the evil is, indeed, accomplished, so that the good, who must be freed from evil and not perish with the evil, would be separated on the right side (Matthew 25:33). That is why he exclaimed: "...Judge me, O God." And, as if explaining what he said, says: “And judge my dispute with an unrighteous people” (Ps. 42:1). 56. Having spoken about Jesus Christ, the Son of God, our only Lord, as far as the brevity of the Confession allows, we join in also believing in the Holy Spirit to complete the Divine Trinity; then the Holy Church is mentioned. This makes it clear that the rational creation, belonging to free Jerusalem (Gal. 4:26), had to be placed after the mention of the Creator, that is, the highest Trinity. Because everything said about the man Christ refers to the unity of the person of the Only Begotten. So, the correct order of Confession required that the Church be joined to the Trinity, as if to the inhabitant - his house, and to God - His church, and to the founder - his city. The whole of it is meant here, and not just that part of it that wanders the earth, from east to west, glorifying the name of the Lord (Ps. 112:3) and after captivity singing a new song; but also one who has always, since creation, been in heaven in union with God, and has not experienced the evil of the fall at all. This blessed one invariably remains among the holy angels and, as she should, helps her wandering part, because both will be united by a common destiny in eternity, and are now united by bonds of love, being together established for the worship of one God. Hence, neither the whole of it, nor any part of it wants to be revered instead of God, does not want anything related to the church of God, which is built from gods created by the uncreated God, to be God. And therefore, if the Holy Spirit were a creation, and not the Creator, then, of course, he would be a rational creation, since He is the highest creation. And, consequently, the Creed would not have mentioned the Church first, because he himself would have belonged to the Church in that part of it that is in heaven. And he would not have a church, but he himself would be a church. He has a church, about which the apostle says: “Do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit who dwells in you, whom you have from God?” (1 Cor. 6:19). In another place he says about them: “Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ?” (1 Cor. 6:15). How then is he who has a church not God? Or is He less than Christ, whose members He has as a church? After all, His church is the church of God, if the same apostle says: “Do you not know that you are the church of God” and, to prove this, adds: “And the Spirit of God dwells in you” (1 Cor. 3:16). God, therefore, dwells in His church; not only the Holy Spirit, but also the Father and the Son, who even about His body, through which He became the head of the church that dwells among people, “so that He may have the primacy in everything” (Col. 1:18), says: “Destroy this church, and in three days I will raise it up” (John 2:19). So, the church of God, that is, of the entire highest Trinity, is the holy Church, which is all in heaven and on earth. 57. But about the one that is in heaven, what can we say, except that there is no evil in it, that no one from there fell or was cast out after God “did not spare the angels who sinned,” as the Apostle Peter writes, “but, having bound them in the chains of hellish darkness, he delivered them up to be judged for punishment” (2 Pet. 2:4). 58. In what state is that most blessed and highest society, what and who has the advantages there (since, although they are all called by the general name of angels, as in the Epistle to the Hebrews we read: “For to whom... of the angels did he say..., Sit at my right hand?” (Heb. 1:13); however, there are also archangels there; or perhaps the same archangels are called powers, and what is said: “Praise Him all His angels, praise Him with all His might" (Ps. 149:2); and how do those four names differ from each other, with which the Apostle apparently designated the entire heavenly host, saying: "Whether thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers" (Col. 1:16), - let those who can speak about all this, if, however, they are able to prove what they say. I confess that nothing I don’t know about this. I’m also not sure whether the sun, moon and all the stars belong to the same host of angels, although it seems to some that light bodies exist without feeling and reason. 59. Likewise, can anyone explain with what bodies the angels appeared to people, so that they were not only recognizable, but also tangible; and on the other hand, they show some visions not in the real body, but with spiritual power and not with bodily eyes, but with spiritual or mental ones, or they say something not from the outside into the ear, but inside, in the soul of a person, being there themselves: as it is written in the book of the prophets: “And the angel who spoke in me said to me” (Zech. 1:9); did not say: “he who spoke to me” but “in me.” Or they appear in a dream and they talk as in dreams: in the Gospel we read: “Behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, speaking” (Matt. 1:20). By these means of appearance, angels seem to show that they do not have tangible bodies (Gen. 18:2, 19:2) and raise a very difficult question: how could the fathers wash his feet, how did Jacob wrestle with the angel so closely? touching him (Gen. 32:24). When this is made the subject of inquiry and when one makes conjectures, it will not be a useless exercise of the mental faculties, as long as the reasoning is carried on carefully and those who think do not attribute to themselves knowledge that they do not have. It is necessary that this and the like be affirmed, or denied, or determined demonstrably, since without proof it cannot be known. 60. It is much more important to decide and recognize whether Satan is deceiving him into something disastrous when he turns himself into an angel of light. Because when he deceives the bodily senses, but the mind does not deviate from the true and correct way of thinking that guides the life of every believer, then there is no danger for religion; or when, appearing to be good, he does or says things characteristic of good angels (2 Cor. 11:14), even if he is considered good, then this is not a dangerous and mortal delusion for the Christian faith. When, through this, something alien begins to incline towards one’s own, then in order to recognize it, and not follow it, great vigilance is required. But how many people are able to avoid all his deadly machinations if they are not guided and protected by God? And the very difficulty of this matter is useful so that no one relies on himself, or one on another, but all on God. None of the pious, of course, doubts that he can better resolve this for us. 61. That church which dwells among the holy angels and armies of God will become known to us as it really is when we are united with it in the end to receive eternal bliss. The one who wanders on earth is all the more known to us because we are in it and that it consists of people to whom we also belong. This latter is redeemed from all sin by the blood of the Intercessor, who has no sin, and this is her voice: “If God is for us, who can be against us? He...spared not His own Son, but gave Him up for us all” (Rom. 8:31). For Christ did not die for the angels. But for this reason it also goes beyond the angels, because each of the people through His death is redeemed and freed from evil, in some way reconciled with them after the enmity that sins caused between people and the holy angels, and by the very redemption of people the loss that occurred from that angelic fall is restored. 62. In any case, the holy angels, taught by God, in the eternal contemplation of whose truth they are blessed, know how great the number of people is that must fill that undamaged state. The apostle speaks about this: “To renew all things in Christ, that are in heaven... and that are on earth in Him” (Eph. 1:10). That which is in heaven is renewed when the part of the angels that fell from there returns from among men; that which is on earth is also renewed when people themselves, destined for eternal life, are renewed after ancient corruption. Thus, by the single sacrifice in which the Intercessor was offered, the heavenly is reconciled with the earthly and the earthly with the heavenly. Because, as the same apostle says: “It was good... that all fullness should dwell in Him, and that through Him He might reconcile all things to Himself, having made peace... by the blood of His Cross, both earthly and heavenly” (Col. 1:19-20). 63. This peace “exceeds it,” as it is written, “every mind” (Phil. 4:7) and cannot be known by us before we reach it. For how is the heavenly thing reconciled, if not with us, that is, by agreement with us? Because there is always peace, both among all rational creatures, and with their Creator. This “peace... is superior,” as it is said, “to all my mind" ; but only our mind, and not those who always see the face of the Father. But we, no matter how humanly intelligent any of us are, know only in part and now see as “a mirror in fortune-telling” (1 Cor. 13:12); when we are equal to the angels of God (Luke 20:36), then, like them, we will see face to face; and we will have the same peace towards them as they do towards us, because we will love them as we are loved by them. So, their world will be known to us, because ours will be the same and just as great and will not then exceed our mind; the peace of God existing there in relation to them will, without a doubt, surpass both our and their understanding. Since only a rational creation is blessed, it is, of course, blessed from God, and not He from him. In accordance with this, what is written: “The peace of God, which surpasses every mind” is better understood in such a way that in the word “every” an exception can be made not for the mind of the holy angels, but for the mind of God alone; for His mind does not surpass His peace. 64. The angels agree with us even now if we have forgiven our sins. Therefore, after the mention of the holy church, forgiveness of sins is placed in the order of Confession, because it stands for the earthly church, through it what was lost and found does not disappear (Luke 15:24). With the acceptance of the gift of baptism, which is bestowed against original sin so that by rebirth, that which is brought on by birth is removed, and at the same time it destroys active sins, all that are found by perfect thought, word, deed - with the receipt of this great forgiveness, the real renewal of man begins, in which all responsibility, both innate and acquired, begins. But the rest of life, life already at an age that uses reason, no matter how abundantly righteous it may be, is not spent without forsaking sins, because the sons of God, while they live mortally, struggle with death. And although it is rightly said about them: “As many as are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God (Rom. 8:14), however, they act in such a way by the Spirit of God and, as sons of God, they prosper for God, that when the mortal body is very burdensome (Wis. 9:15), then they betray themselves with their spirit, like sons of men, and with some human impulse, and therefore sin. But it is important, of course, that not every sin is a crime just because every crime is a sin. Therefore, we say that the life of holy people, while they live mortally, can be without crime, “if we say that we have no sin,” as the great apostle said, “we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us” (1 John 1:8). 65. But even regarding forgiveness in the Holy Church, even crimes, even large ones, one who repents in accordance with the degree of his sin should not despair of God’s mercy. In the act of repentance, where such a sin is committed, since the one who committed it is separated from the body of Christ, the measure of time should not so much be taken into account as the measure of sorrow. For God does not despise a broken and humble heart (Ps. 50:19). But since in most cases the sorrow of one heart is hidden for another and does not become known to others through words or any other signs, although it is in the face of Him to Whom it is said “my groaning is not hidden from You” (Ps. 37:10), then the heads of the churches correctly determine the times of repentance so that an apology is made to the church, in which the sins themselves are forgiven; outside of it they are not released. For she received the Holy Spirit as a guarantee (2 Cor. 1:22), without which no sins are forgiven, so that those who are forgiven will inherit eternal life. 66. For the remission of sins is performed mainly for the sake of the future judgment. In real life, what is written is so powerful: “The yoke is heavy on the sons of Adam from the day of their departure from their mother’s womb until the day of burial in the mother of all” (Sir. 40:1), that even babies, as we see, after the font of rebirth are tormented by grief from various disasters; and we think that everything done in the saving sacraments has more to do with the hope of future benefits than with the retention or attainment of present ones. It even seems that much is forgiven here and not punished with any punishments: but these punishments are postponed until last. For it is not in vain that the time when the Judge of the living and the dead comes is called the actual day of judgment (Matthew 12:36; Acts 10:42); and, on the contrary, what is punished here, for which, if forgiven, there will be absolutely no harm in the next century. For this reason, the apostle says about all temporary punishments determined in this life for those sinners whose sins are destroyed so that they are not retained to the end: “If we judged ourselves, we would not be judged by the Lord. Having been judged, we are punished by the Lord, so as not to be condemned with the world” (1 Cor. 11:31-32). 67. Others believe that those who do not abandon the name of Christ and are baptized into the Church by His baptism and are not put off from Him by some schism or heresy, no matter what crimes they live in, who do not wash away with repentance and do not make amends with alms, but very persistently remain in them until the last day of this life, will be saved through fire; one can be punished in accordance with the magnitude of wickedness and vices by prolonged fire, but still not eternal. But whoever believes in this and, however, remains Orthodox, it seems to me, is deceived by some kind of human benevolence. For Divine Scripture answers the question differently. On this subject I wrote a book entitled: “On Faith and Works” where, according to the Holy Scriptures, as far as I could, with God’s help, I showed that that faith saves, which the Apostle Paul depicted, saying: “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has power, but faith that works through love” (Gal. 5:6). If she acts badly and not well, I have no doubt, in agreement with the Apostle James, that she is “dead in herself” (James 2:17). He says: “If someone says that he has faith, but does not have works? how can... this faith save him? (James 2:14) If, further, an ungodly person is saved through fire by faith alone, and this is how the words of blessed Paul should be understood: “He himself will be saved, but as if through fire” (1 Cor. 3:15), then, consequently, faith will be able to save without works and what his co-apostle James said will be false. What Paul himself said will also be false: “Not “You are deceived,” he says, “neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor sex workers, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Cor. 6:9-10). 68. But since these clear apostolic testimonies cannot be false, then what was said in secret about those who build on the foundation, which is Christ, “not gold, silver, precious stones, but wood, hay and straw” (1 Cor. 3:12) (about them it is said that they will be saved through fire, because they will not perish due to the merits of the foundation), must be understood so that there is no contradiction to those clear testimonies. By firewood, hay and straw, not without reason, one can understand such an addiction to worldly things, although permitted, that they cannot part with them without spiritual grief. When does this sorrow burn, if Christ takes the place of foundation in the heart, i.e. Nothing is preferred to him, and if a person, burned by such sorrow, would rather lose what he loves so much than Christ, then he is saved through fire. If, during temptations, he wants to hold on to this temporary and worldly thing more than Christ, then he does not have Him as a foundation, because he preferred the worldly, whereas in a building there is nothing more important than the foundation. For the fire of which the apostle speaks in this place must be such that both pass through it: the one who builds on this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, and the one who builds wood, hay and straw. Then he added: “The fire will try everyone’s work, such as it is. Whoever's work that he built survives will receive a reward. And whoever’s work is burned, he will suffer loss; he himself will be saved, but as if through fire” (1 Cor. 3:13–15). Therefore, fire tests the work of not one of them, but both. Some fire is the temptation of adversity, about which it is directly written in another place: “the potter’s vessels are tested by the furnace, and the righteous people are tempted by adversity” (Sir. 27:5). This fire in real life does what the apostle said: if it happens to two believers, one who cares about God, how to please God (1 Cor. 7:32), i.e., building on Christ's foundation is gold, silver, precious stones; another, who cares about worldly things, about how to please his wife, i.e. who builds firewood, hay, straw on the same foundation: the work of the first is not burned, because he did not love what he could suffer from the loss of; the work of the second is burned, because without suffering what is acquired with love is not lost. 69. It cannot be that something like this could happen after this life; it is difficult to say whether some believers are saved through some kind of purifying fire as much slower or faster as they have loved temporal goods more or less, but not those are saved about whom it is said that “they will not inherit the kingdom of God” if, according to their repentance, their crimes are not forgiven (1 Cor. 6:10). In accordance with this, I said that alms are also useful, to which the Divine Scripture attaches importance because, as the Lord declared, only their fruit will be credited to the right and only their barrenness will be credited to the left, since he will say to some: “Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom,” while to others: “Go... into eternal fire” (Matthew 25:34, 41). 70. Indeed, one must beware lest anyone think that terrible crimes committed by those who will not inherit the kingdom of God are committed daily and are daily atoned for by alms. Life must change for the better and with alms one must propitiate God for past sins, and not bribe Him in some way so that it is always permissible to commit them with impunity. “For He gave no one permission to sin” (Sir. 15:20), although by mercy, if an appropriate apology is made, He destroys sins already committed. 71. For daily light and unimportant sins, without which real life is impossible, forgiveness is sought in the daily prayer of believers. For to say: “Our Father who art in heaven!” characteristic of those who have already been regenerated from the Father by water and the Spirit. This prayer destroys, of course, the smallest and daily sins. It also destroys those from whom the lives of believers are removed, even those spent wickedly, but changed by repentance for the better, as long as the words: “just as we forgive our debtors” will correspond to reality as well as the words: “forgive us our debts” (Matthew 6:9-12), because there really is something that is forgiven; and alms itself is the forgiveness of a debt to the asking person. 72. And therefore, to everything that is done by grace, the words of the Lord apply: “Give... alms, and behold, everything... is clean for you” (Luke 11:41). Therefore, not only is he who gives food to the hungry, drink to the thirsty, clothing to the naked, shelter to the stranger, shelter to the fugitive, who visits the sick or prisoner, frees the captive, gives help to the weak, support to the blind, consolation to the sorrowful, healing to the sick, a way to the lost, advice to the wavering, and everything that is necessary for everyone in need, but also he who forgives the sinner and gives alms; and whoever corrects with beatings the one over whom he is given authority, or curbs with some kind of discipline and yet from the heart forgives his sin, by which sin he was offended or offended, or prays that he be forgiven not only for what he forgives or for which he prays, but also for what he scolds and punishes with some corrective punishment, he also gives alms, because he shows mercy. For much good is given to those who do not want it, when one cares about their benefit and not about their desire; because they are their own enemies, but their friends are rather those whom they consider enemies and mistakenly repay good with evil, while a Christian should not repay with evil for evil. So, there are many types of alms, by performing which we contribute to the remission of our sins. 73. But there is nothing greater than forgiving everything that someone has done wrong to us. For it is less important to be benevolent or even beneficent towards someone who has not done you any harm, but that is a sign of the highest goodness, when you love both your enemy and the one who wishes you harm and, if possible, does evil, you always wish good and, if you can, do good, according to the word of God: “Love your enemies,... do good to those who hate you... pray for... those who persecute you” (Matthew 5:44 ). But since this is characteristic of the sons of God, to whom every believer is obliged to strive and everyone is obliged to bring the human spirit through prayer to God and struggle with oneself to this mood, however, since this such a great good is not characteristic of that multitude, which, as we believe, is heard when they say in prayer: “Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors” (Matt. 6:12), then I have no doubt that the words of this solemn promise are fulfilled, since a person, although he has not improved so much as to already love the enemy, however, when a person who has offended him asks for forgiveness, he forgives him; because he himself, when he asks, desires forgiveness for himself, saying in prayer: “just as we forgive our debtors.” 74. Whoever asks a person against whom he has offended, if he is prompted to ask by his own misdeed, he, of course, should not yet be considered an enemy, such that it would be difficult to love him, as it was difficult to love when he was plotting. Whoever does not forgive from the heart the one who asks and repents of his sin, let him not have hope for the Lord to forgive his sins, because the truth cannot lie. Which of the listeners or readers of the Gospel does not know Who said: “I am... the truth” (John 14:6)? When he taught in a conversation, he expressed this thought more strongly, saying: “For if you forgive people their sins, then your Heavenly Father will also forgive you your sins. But if you do not forgive people... then your Father will not forgive... your sins” (Matthew 6:14–15). He who does not awaken from such strong thunder does not sleep, but is dead; although this thunder has the power to raise even the dead. 75. In fact, whoever lives wickedly and does not try to correct such a life and morals, but in the midst of their very crimes and wicked deeds does not cease to multiply alms, he in vain deceives himself with the words of the Lord: “give... alms, and behold, everything... is clean from you” (Luke 11:41). He doesn't understand how far this can go. And in order to understand, let him pay attention to who the Lord said this to. After all, in the Gospel it is written like this: “When He spoke..., one Pharisee asked Him to dine with him. He came and lay down. The Pharisee thought to himself why He didn’t wash...before dinner. But the Lord said to him: Behold, you Pharisees cleanse the outside of the cup and the platter, but your insides are full of robbery and deceit. Foolish! Didn't the same One who created the external also create the internal? However, give... alms from what you have in abundance, and behold, everything... is clean for you" (Lk 11.37–41). Do we really understand this in such a way that among the Pharisees who do not have faith in Christ, even if they did not believe in Him and were not regenerated by water and the Spirit, everything is pure, since they gave as much alms as, in their opinion, needed to be given, while everyone is unclean who is not cleansed by faith in Christ, about which it is written: “purifying their hearts by faith” (Acts 15:9), and while the apostle says: “For the unclean and unbelieving there is nothing pure, but their mind and conscience are defiled” (Titus 1:15)? How, therefore, can everything be pure for the Pharisees if they gave alms and were not believers? Or how could they be believers if they did not want to believe in Christ and be reborn by His grace? And yet what they heard is true: “give... alms, and behold, everything... is pure. you." 76. Whoever wants to give alms in the proper order must start with himself and first of all give alms to himself. For almsgiving is a matter of mercy and it is very rightly said: “Have mercy on your soul, pleasing God” (Sir. 30:24). And we are reborn in order to please God, Who, in justice, does not like what we inherited at birth. The first alms is that which we give to ourselves, because we have found ourselves worthy of pity by the mercy of the merciful God, confessing His righteous judgment, by which we have become worthy of pity, about which the apostle says: “Judgment from one to condemnation” (Rom. 5:16), and thanking for His great love, about which the same announcer of mercy says: “God proves His love for us by the fact that Christ died for us while we were still sinners” (Rom. 5:8), so that we too, correctly thinking about our convenience and loving God with the love that He Himself has given us, would live piously and righteously. The Pharisees, abandoning this judgment and the love of God, gave tithes for alms from all, even the most insignificant fruits of theirs; and they just didn’t give alms, starting with themselves, showing compassion for themselves. Because of this order of love, it is said: “You shall love... your neighbor as yourself” (Luke 10:27). Consequently, when He reproached them for the fact that they cleansed themselves on the outside, but inside they were full of theft and unrighteousness, reminding them of some alms that a person must first give to himself in order to cleanse himself internally, then he said: “Nevertheless, give... alms from what you have in abundance, and behold, everything... is pure for you” (Luke 11:41). Then, in order to show what He reminded you of and what they themselves did not try to do, so that they would not think that their alms were unknown to Him, He says: “But woe to you Pharisees,” as if saying: “although I reminded you that you need to give alms, thanks to which everything would be clean for you, but “woe to you ... because you give tithes of mint, rue and all kinds of vegetables” - these are your alms I know - “and do not care about justice and love God's "by which alms you could be cleansed from all internal impurity so that your bodies that you wash would also be clean"; for this is everything, both internal and external, as in another place we read: “Cleanse... the internal... and the external... will be clean” (Matthew 23:26). But so that it would not seem that He rejected the alms given from the fruits of the earth, He says: “This ought to be done,” that is, the judgment and love of God, “and this also should not be forsaken” (Lk 11.42), that is, alms from the fruits of the earth. 77. So, let those who think that with some very abundant alms from the fruits of the earth or money they buy impunity and therefore can remain in terrible wickedness and evil vices, do not deceive themselves; because they not only commit them, but also love and always wish, if only they could remain unpunished, to abide in them. “But those who love unrighteousness hate their own soul” (Ps. 10:5) and whoever hates his own soul is not merciful to her, but is merciless. After all, loving her for the world, he hates her for God. And if he wanted to give her alms, thanks to which everything would be pure for him, then he would hate her for the world and love her for God. No one will give any alms if he does not receive it himself from the One who does not need. Therefore it is said: “His mercy will go before me” (Ps. 59:11). 78. Which sins - light and which - heavy, must be weighed not by human, but by Divine judgment. For we see that some sins were ignorantly permitted by the apostles themselves: such is the one about whom the venerable Paul says to the spouses: “Do not deviate from each other, except by consent, for a while, so that you can be free to pray, and then be together again, so that Satan does not tempt you with your intemperance” (1 Cor. 7:5). One might think that it is not a sin to unite with a wife not for the birth of children, which is the purpose of marriage, but for the sake of sensual pleasure, so that the weakness of the intemperate may avoid the deadly evil of fornication or adultery, or some other impurity, which is shameful to even talk about, which can tempt passion when tempted by Satan. This, as I said, might not have been considered a sin if he had not added: “I say this as permission, but not as commandment” (1 Cor. 7:6). Who will deny that this is a sin, even if he admits that those who commit it are given permission by apostolic authority? The same thing when he says: “Does anyone among you, when dealing with another, sue the wicked, and not the saints?” And a little later: “So, if you have worldly disputes, you appoint... people who mean nothing in the church. To your shame I say: is there really not a single reasonable person among you who could judge between his brothers?” . And here one might think that it is not a sin to have a lawsuit with another, but only a sin to want to litigate outside the church, if he had not directly added: “You are already to blame for this, that ... you have litigation among yourself.” And so that someone does not justify this by saying that he has a just cause, but suffers injustice, which he wants to get rid of by the verdict of the judges, he immediately responds to such reflections or justifications and says: “Why would you rather not to remain offended? Why would you rather not endure hardships? (1 Cor. 6:1, 4–5, 7) It turns out that the Lord says: “If anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, give him your outer clothing too (Matthew 5:40); and in another place: “From him who took what is yours, do not demand it back” (Luke 6:30). So, he warned his people against judging other people in everyday affairs; from this point of view, the apostle calls such judgment sin. However, when he allows brothers to settle such disputes among themselves in the church and strictly forbids them outside the church, it is clear that here too this is allowed for the weak by leniency. 79. Now there are some sins that could be considered very light, if Scripture did not indicate that they are more severe than they are thought to be. Whoever says to his brother: “a fool” could be considered guilty of Gehenna, if the Truth had not spoken about it? However, for this wound She immediately offers a cure, adding the rule of brotherly reconciliation, immediately She says: “So, if you bring your gift to the altar and there you remember that your brother has something against you...”, etc. (Matthew 5:22-23). Or who would think that it is such a great sin to observe days, and months, and years, as those who, on certain days, or months, or years, are willing or unwilling to do something, because they supposedly distinguish between happy and unhappy times; who would have thought how great a sin this is if we had not determined the magnitude of this evil out of fear of the apostle, who said to them: “I fear for you, lest I labor with you in vain” (Gal. 4:11). 80. Added to this is the fact that great and terrible sins, as soon as they become a habit, are considered minor sins or are not considered sins at all; and it seems that not only should they not be hidden, but they should even be praised and disclosed, according to what is written: “The sinner boasts in the lusts of his soul, and the offender is blessed” (Ps. 9:24). Such wickedness in the Divine books is called “cry.” So in the prophet Isaiah about a bad vineyard you read: “I waited,” he says, “for him to bring judgment , he committed iniquity, and not righteousness, but a cry” (Is. 5:7). Hence in Genesis: “The cry of Sodom and Gomorrah increased” (Gen. 18:20). Because those iniquities not only were no longer punished, but were committed in large numbers, as if legally, even in public. 81. Now I will talk about what I have already often talked about in other places in my short works. We sin for two reasons: either by ignorance of what we should do, or by not doing what we know we should do: the first of the two is the evil of ignorance, the second is the evil of weakness. That we must fight them, we agree with this; but we are completely defeated if Divine help does not come so that we not only see what needs to be done, but also so that when the integrity of pleasure comes, righteousness takes precedence in us over pleasure. That is why the psalm says: “The Lord is my enlightenment and my salvation” (Ps. 26:1). We must ask not only for forgiveness if we sin (“forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors”), but also for guidance so that we do not sin: “And do not lead us into temptation” (Matthew 6:12–13); so that enlightenment eliminates ignorance, salvation eliminates weakness. 82. For repentance itself, when there is a sufficient reason, performed according to the custom of the church, in most cases is done out of weakness because shame is the fear of being disliked, while people’s opinion is liked more than the truth, before which everyone humbles himself during repentance. Therefore, not only when repentance is performed, but also in order for it to be accomplished, God's mercy is necessary. Otherwise, the apostle would not have said about some: “Will God grant them repentance” (2 Tim. 2:25). And when Peter wept bitterly, before that, as the evangelist says: “The Lord looked at him” (Luke 22:61). 83. Whoever, not believing that sins are forgiven in the church, despises such riches of the Divine gift and, persisting in this way of thinking, ends the last day of life, is guilty of the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit, by whom Christ forgives sins (Matthew 12:32). Regarding this difficult question, in a book written for this sole purpose, I have given, as best I could, very clear explanations. 84. About the resurrection of the flesh, not about such a thing, when some would come to life and die again, but about the resurrection into eternal life, as the flesh of Christ himself was resurrected, whether I will be able to talk briefly and resolve all the issues related to this, I don’t know. In any case, a Christian should not doubt the resurrection of the flesh of all people, born before and being born, dead and dying. 85. First of all, the question arises about miscarriages, which, although they were already born in the mother’s womb, were not able to be born. If we say that they will be resurrected, then this can only be applied to those that have already formed; shapeless abortions, like unfertilized seeds, are generally believed to be more prone to final destruction. But who dares to deny (although no one dares to affirm) that with the resurrection that which was lacking in full form will be replenished? And in the same way there will be an improvement that would begin over time, just as there will be no shortcomings acquired over time: so that nature would not be deprived of what would eventually be revealed as suitable and expedient, and would not be distorted into what has already turned out to be unfavorable and harmful, but what was unfinished would be restored, just as what was damaged would be renewed. 86. And although the most subtle research and disputes are possible among scientists, I do not know whether anyone can determine when a person begins to live in the womb, and whether there is any hidden life that is not yet revealed in movements. For it seems extremely shameless to deny that those babies were alive who are cut into pieces and removed from the womb of their mothers for the purpose that they would not cause death to their mothers if they remained dead there. From the moment a person begins to live, from then on he can die. And the dead, wherever death happens to him, will be related to the resurrection of the dead. 87. No one will deny that freaks who are born and live, although they soon die, will be resurrected, or, more precisely, one must believe that a corrected and unspoiled nature will be resurrected. We do not at all think that that monster with double limbs, recently born in the East, about whom Presbyter Jerome of blessed memory writes, will be resurrected as the same monster, and not as two twins. 88. God does not lose the perishable substance from which the body of mortals is created; No matter what vapors it evaporates into, no matter what essence of other bodies or the simplest elements it turns into, no matter what food it passes into for animals or even people and changes into their bodies, it will return in an instant to that same human soul that first revived it so that man could come into being, live and grow. 89. So, the corruptible substance itself, which became a corpse after the departure of the soul, will not be restored after the resurrection in such a way that, having disintegrated and turned into certain types and forms of other objects, returning to the bodies from which it disintegrated, it will necessarily return to the very part of the body where it was. Otherwise, if the hair returns what was removed by frequent cutting, if the nails return what has been cut off so many times, then for those who reflect and therefore do not believe in the resurrection of the flesh, this seems to be an excessive and indecent disgrace. But just as a statue made of any metal, if it were melted by fire, and the artist again accurately restored it from the same amount of material, would lose nothing in its correctness, so God, the wondrous and ineffable Artist, will restore our bodies from everything that they consisted of, taking care of harmony and beauty. 90. It would also be foolish to think that the structure of the bodies of the resurrected will vary greatly, that the thin will be resurrected with the same thinness or the fat ones with the same obesity. But if the Creator’s plan includes preserving the properties and distinctive features of everyone in his face, then the remaining qualities of everyone’s bodies will be the same and the best. If, nevertheless, in the bodies of the resurrected there will be inequality justified by reason, like the inequality of voices in the harmony of sounds, then each will have it from the substance of his own body; this will introduce man to the councils of angels, and will not introduce anything that disagrees with their way of thinking. There will be nothing obscene there, but what will be there will be decent, because otherwise it would not be there. 91. So, the bodies of the saints will be resurrected without any defect, without any deformity, without any corruption, without anything heavy or inconvenient; there will be as much lightness as there is bliss. Therefore they are not called spiritual, since they will undoubtedly be bodies and not spirits. But just as now the body is called spiritual, although it is a body and not a soul, so then there will be a spiritual body, and yet it will be a body and not a spirit (1 Cor. 15:44). Also, regarding corruption, which now burdens the soul (Wis. 9:15), and the vices with which the flesh lusts against the spirit, then there will be no flesh, but the body (Gal. 5:17). Therefore it is said: “Flesh and blood of the Kingdom of God will not... inherit comfort.” And as if explaining what he said, he says: “And corruption does not inherit incorruption” (1 Cor. 15:50). What he first called “flesh and blood” he later calls “corruption” and what he first spoke of “the Kingdom of God” he later calls “incorruption.” In essence, even then there will be flesh. Therefore, even after the resurrection, the body of Christ is called flesh (Luke 24:9). But the apostle says: “The natural body is sown, the spiritual body is raised” (1 Cor. 15:44) because then there will be such a harmony of flesh and spirit that there will be no opposition to ourselves at all; but both outside and within us we will not have any enemies. 92. All those who are not liberated by the one Intercessor of God and men from the mass of destruction that came from the first man, although each will be resurrected with his own flesh, will be punished with the devil and his angels. And whether they will be resurrected with the shortcomings and deformities of their bodies, no matter what spoiled and deformed members they previously had, is it necessary to bother resolving such a question? We should be indifferent to the dubious appearance or beauty of those whose lot will be undoubted and eternal condemnation. And we cannot be interested in how they will have something incorruptible if it experiences suffering, or how something will be corruptible if it is not able to die. For true life exists only where there is a blessed life, and true incorruption exists only where prosperity is not disturbed by any suffering. Where the unfortunate is not allowed to die, there death itself does not die, and where continuous sorrow does not stop, there corruption itself does not end. This is called the “second death” in the Holy Scriptures (Rev. 2:11, 20:6–14). 93. However, if no one sinned, a person would not have the first death, when the soul is forced to leave its body, nor the second, when the soul is not allowed to leave the punished body. The lightest punishment will be for those who have not added a single sin to original sin; Of the rest, who added, each will receive condemnation there as much more tolerable as the less wickedness he showed here. 94. So when the rejected angels and men are left in eternal punishment, then the saints will know more fully what benefit grace has brought them. Then the works themselves will more clearly reveal what is written in the psalm: “I will sing to You of mercy and judgment, O Lord” (Ps. 101:1), because no one is saved except by undeserved mercy, and no one is condemned except by deserved judgment. 95. Then what is hidden now will not be hidden, when of two children one was to be taken by mercy, the other was to be abandoned by judgment, and the one who was taken did not know that he should have been punished if it were not for the assistance of mercy; why was he taken and not the other, although both had the same reason; why powers were not revealed to some, which, if they had been revealed, those people would have repented, and were revealed to those who did not intend to believe. The Lord says very clearly: “Woe to you, Chorazin! woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the mighty works that were done in you had been done in Tire and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes” (Matthew 11:21). And God, of course, rightly did not want them to be saved, although they could have been saved if they had wanted to. Then they will see more clearly than anything else what the righteous believe in now, before open knowledge: how definite, unchangeable, and very active the will of God is; how much she can do, but does not want, and does not want anything that she cannot; and how true is what is sung in the psalm: “But our God is in heaven... above, in heaven and on earth... whatever He wanted, He did” (Ps. 113:11). And it is not true that He willed something, but did not do it; and it is even more unworthy to believe that He did not do something because human will served as an obstacle to the fulfillment of the desire of the Almighty. So, nothing would have happened if the Almighty had not willed it, either by deigning it or by acting directly. 96. And beyond any doubt, God does good, even allowing any evil. He does not allow it except through a fair trial, and everything that is fair is, of course, good. Consequently, although evil, insofar as it is evil, is not good, it is, however, good in that there exists not only good, but also evil. Because if the existence of evil were not good, then it would in no way be allowed by omnipotent Good, which, without a doubt, just as easily as it is easy to do what is desired, it is also easy to prevent what is undesirable. If we do not believe this, then the very beginning of our confession is undermined, where we confess faith in God the Father almighty. And is it not because He is called omnipotent that He can do whatever He wants, and the will of any of the creatures does not limit the action of the omnipotent will? 97. However, the apostle very rightly noted about God: “Who wants all people to be saved” (1 Tim. 2:4). But since a much larger proportion of people are not saved, it seems that God’s desire is not being fulfilled and that it is the human will that limits the will of God. After all, when they ask why not everyone is saved, they usually answer: “Because they themselves do not want it.” Of course, this cannot be said about children; it is not their nature to desire or not to desire. For, although at baptism they sometimes resist, we say that they are saved even without wanting to. But in the Gospel, the Lord, denouncing the wicked city, speaks more clearly: “How many times have I wanted to gather your children together, like a hen...her chicks...and you did not want to!” (Matthew 23:37), as if the will of God was exceeded by the will of man and, due to the resistance of the weakest, the Strongest was unable to do what he wanted. And where is that omnipotence with which He did everything in heaven and on earth that He wanted, if He wanted to gather the children of Jerusalem, and did not? Don’t you believe that Jerusalem did not want her children to be gathered by Him, but even with her unwillingness, He gathered those of her children whom He wanted, because “in heaven... and on earth” He not only wanted and did one thing, but wanted and did not do another, but “he did whatever he pleased” (Ps. 113:11). 98. Who, further, would be so unreasonable as to say that God cannot turn the evil will of people, whatever, whenever and wherever he wants, into good? But if He does this, He does it out of mercy, and if He does not do it, He does not do it out of judgment. Because “he has mercy on whomever he wants; but he hardens whomever he wants” (Rom. 9:18). This, as the apostle said, pointed to grace, about the revelation of which in relation to those twins in the womb of Rebekah he had already said: “When they were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, (so that the purpose of God in election might stand, not from works, but from Him who calls), it was said to her: the older will be in bondage to the younger” (Rom. 9:11-12; Gen. 25:23). On this occasion, he cited another prophetic testimony, where it is written: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated” (Rom. 9:13; Mal. 1:2). Feeling how what was said could affect those who are not able to comprehend with their minds this height of mercy, he says: “What shall we say? Is it really not true with God? Let it not be” (Rom. 9:14). It seems untrue that God, without any merit, through good or evil deeds, loves one and hates another. If he wanted to indicate future deeds, either good of one, or bad of another, which God foresaw, he would never say: “not from works,” but would say: “from future deeds,” and in this way he would resolve this question and would not raise any other question to be resolved. Now, when he answered: “let it not be,” i.e. let there be no unrighteousness with God, he, to prove that this did not happen due to any unrighteousness of God, says: “For He says to Moses: I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy; I will have compassion on whomever I have compassion” (Rom. 9:15; Exod. 33:19). And who, except the madman, can consider God unjust when He either punishes the worthy through judgment, or takes pity on the unworthy? Then he concludes and says: “Therefore, (this is the work of) not... desiring and not... running, but... God who has mercy" (Rom. 9:16). So, both twins were born by nature children of wrath (Eph. 2:3), not for any of their own works, but by descent from Adam bound by the shackles of condemnation. But He who said: “I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy” loved Jacob by undeserved mercy, but he hated Esau by deserved judgment. Since this had been determined earlier for both, one of them clearly saw that since under the same circumstances the same punishment did not befall him, he needs to boast not of the excess of his merits, but of the riches of Divine mercy, because this is the work of “not... willing and not... struggling... God.” By the most sublime and most salutary sacrament it is revealed that the whole appearance and (if I may say so) the expression of the face of the Holy Scripture convinces those who are well-minded that “... the one who boasts should boast in the Lord” (1 Cor. 1:31; Jer. 9:24). 99. Having pointed out the mercy of God in the words: “So (this is the work of) not... desiring and not... striving, but... God who has mercy,” he then, in order to point out judgment (because where there is no mercy, there is not unrighteousness, but justice, since there is no unrighteousness with God), he immediately added and said: “for the Scripture says to Pharaoh: for this purpose... I set you up to show My power over you and so that “My name was preached throughout the whole earth” (Rom. 9:17; Ex. 9:16). In conclusion of what was said about both, that is, about mercy and about judgment, he says: “So he has mercy on whomever he wants; guilt. For grace alone separates the redeemed from the lost, whom the common original cause united into one mass of destruction. Who, hearing this, will say: “For what... can anyone resist His will?” (Rom. 9:19), as if the evil one seems not worthy of condemnation precisely because God “has mercy on whomever He wills; but he hardens whomever he wants,” let us not be ashamed to answer as the apostle answered: “Who are you, O man, that you argue with God? Will the product say to the person who made it: “Why did you make me this way?” Does not the potter have power over the clay, so that from the same mixture he can make one vessel for honor and another for reproach?” (Rom. 9:20-21). Some foolish people believe that the apostle was unable to answer in this place, and by the impossibility of giving an account, he tempered the boldness of the one who contradicted God. But the words: “Who are you, man?” are of great importance. And in such questions, he calls on a person to reflect on his susceptibility, calls on him in a short word, though, but in fact this answer is important. For if he is not able to understand, then who is he to argue with God? If he is able to understand, then he no longer finds anything to object to. He sees, if he understands, that the entire human race is condemned by such a righteous judgment of God that even if not a single person were saved, no one could blame God’s justice; and whoever is delivered should have been delivered in such a way that, not removed from the majority and left in the most just condemnation, it would be shown where the well-deserved judgment of God would have led even the saved, if undeserved mercy had not come to their aid; so that those who wish to boast about their merits, “let all lips be stopped,” and “let him who boasts boast in the Lord” (Rom. 3:19; 1 Cor. 1:31). 100. This is the essence of “great are the works of the Lord, exquisite in all His desires” (Ps. 111:2); and so wisely chosen that when angels and people sinned, that is, they did not what He wanted, but what they themselves wanted, He, through this will of creatures, by which the unwanted by the Creator was done, fulfilled what He wanted, using evil for good, as the highest good, for the condemnation of those justly predestined to punishment and for the salvation of those mercifully predestined for grace. For as far as they were concerned, they did what God did not want, but from the point of view of the omnipotence of God they could in no way do it. And by the fact that they acted against His desire, they fulfilled His will. For this is precisely why “great are the works of the Lord, exquisite in all His desires”, because in a wondrous and ineffable way, apart from His will, even what is done against His will cannot happen. Because this would not have happened if He had not allowed it: and He allows it not against desire, but at will; being good, He would not allow evil to happen if He could not, as the Almighty, make good out of evil. 101. Sometimes a person of his own free will desires something that God does not desire, and does not desire with His good will to a much greater extent, because He has no evil will. For example, if a good son wants his father to live, while God with good will wants him to die. And vice versa, it may happen that a person with an evil will will desire what God desires with a good will, for example, if a bad son desires the death of his father, and God also desires this. True, the first desires what God does not desire, but the second desires what God also desires; and yet the piety of the first is more consistent with the good will of God, although he desires something different than the wickedness of the second, who desires the same thing as God. It is so important that a person desires from what coincides with the desire of God and to what goal everyone directs his desire that he receives either approval or condemnation. For God fulfills some of His desires, of course, good ones, through the evil intentions of people; Thus, through the evil Jews, according to the good will of the Father, Christ was killed for us; This was such a good thing that the Apostle Peter, when he did not want this to happen, was called Satan by the One who came to suffer (Matthew 16:23). How good seemed the intentions of the pious believers who did not want to let the Apostle Paul go to Jerusalem, so that he would not be subjected to the disasters predicted by the prophet Agabus (Acts 21:12); and yet God wanted him to endure them for preaching the faith of Christ, experiencing the torment of Christ. And He fulfilled this good will not through the good intentions of Christians, but through the evil intentions of Jews; and those who did not desire what He desired were closer to Him, and not those through whose agency His desire was fulfilled. 102. But whatever the desires of angels or people, whether good or evil, desires that agree or disagree with the desire of God, the will of the Almighty is always unshakable; it can never be evil, because even when it defines evil, it is fair, and, of course, since it is fair, it is not evil. So, God Almighty, whether he has mercy on whomever he wants, or hardens through judgment on whomever he wants, in both cases he does not do anything unjust and does not do anything against his will, but does everything he wants. 103. Therefore, when we hear and read in Holy Scripture that God desires all people to be saved, although we know that not all people are saved, we should not in any way limit the almighty will of God; and the words: “Who wants all people to be saved” (1 Tim. 2:4) should be understood to mean that no one is saved except the one whom He Himself wants to save; not in the sense that there is no one whose salvation He would not desire, but that no one is saved if He does not want to save; and, therefore, one must ask Him what He wills, since salvation is necessarily accomplished if He wills. The apostle had in mind a prayer to God when he said this. This is how we understand what is written in the Gospel: “Who enlightens every man” (John 1:9); not because there is no one who is not enlightened, but because no one is enlightened except from Him. Or, rather, “Who wants all people to be saved” is not said in the sense that there was no one who did not want to save those who did not want to perform miracles among those who, according to Him, would have repented if He had performed them, but it is said so so that by all people we understand the entire human race: rulers, subordinates, nobles, commoners, nobles, commoners, learned, unlearned, physically healthy, the weak, gifted, mediocre, stupid, rich, poor, wretched, men, women, babies, boys, young men, girls, husbands, elders; the entire human race with all dialects, with all morals, with all crafts, with all occupations, with countless varieties of knowledge and desires, with all the differences that still exist among people. The Apostle gives instructions to pray “for all people” and then adds: “for kings and for those in power” who, one might think, due to worldly vanity and pride, are not inclined to the debased Christian faith. Further, saying: “For it is good in the sight of our Savior God, that we should pray also for such,” immediately, to prevent despair, he adds: “Who wants all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth” (1 Tim. 2:1-4). God really determined this well, so that through the prayers of the lower ones, the higher ones would be rewarded with salvation first of all, which we already see fulfilled. The Lord also used this turn of phrase in the Gospel when he said to the Pharisees: “You give tithes on mint, rue and all kinds of vegetables” (Luke 11:42). The Pharisees did not tithe on all vegetables. As here, therefore, by the words “all kinds of vegetables” we can understand: “every kind of vegetables”; so here too, by “all people” we can understand: “every kind of people.” You can somehow understand it differently, just not to allow the thought that some desire of the almighty God was not fulfilled, who, if “in heaven... and on earth,” as the Truth sings about Him, “he created everything that he wanted” (Ps. 113:11), then, of course, he did not want to create what he did not create. 104. Why would God want to preserve the first man in the blissful state in which he was created and at a certain time after the birth of his children, without introducing death, bring him to a better state, when he not only could not commit sin, but could not even desire to sin, if he foresaw that he would have a constant desire to remain without sin, as he was created. But since God knew in advance that man would use his freedom of choice for evil, i.e. sin, then He prepared His will to do good through the one who committed evil, so that man would not be deprived of his evil will, and the good will of the Almighty would be fulfilled in its entirety. 105. For it was more necessary for a person that he could desire both good and evil; not without reward if you wish for good, not without punishment if you wish for evil. Subsequently, it will happen that he will not be able to desire evil, although this will not deprive him of free will. Even much freer will be that will that will not be able to serve sin at all. And there is no need to blame the will, there is no need to say that there is no will or that it is not free, since we so want to be happy that we not only do not want unhappiness for ourselves, but also cannot want it. Consequently, just as our soul now does not desire misfortune, so it could always not desire wickedness. However, the order in which God wanted to show what good is a rational living being that is capable of not sinning should not be violated, although the best is a being that is not capable of sinning; just as there was less immortality, but still there was a time when a rational being could not die, although it would be greater if it could not die. 106. Human nature lost the first by free will, the second could have been due to grace, which, if it had not sinned, it would have received according to its deserts; although without grace even then there could be no merit. Because, although the basis of sin was free will alone, free will was not enough to preserve righteousness if divine help were not given by constant participation in good. For, although a person has the power to die whenever he wants, since there is no one who cannot kill himself, will alone is not enough to preserve life; so a person in paradise was able, having abandoned righteousness, to voluntarily kill himself, but to preserve a righteous life, his desire alone was not enough, if the One who created him had not helped. But after the fall, the mercy of God is of greater significance, since the will itself, over which sin dominates with death, must also be freed from slavery. And of course, she is not liberated on her own, but only with the help of God’s grace, based on faith in Christ; so that from the Lord, as it is written, the will itself is prepared (Prov. 8:35), which could receive other gifts of God, and through these gifts one could come to the eternal spirit. 107. Hence, eternal life itself, which really is a reward for good deeds, the apostle calls the gift of God: “for the reward for sin,” he says, “is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Rom. 6:23). Salary for military service is paid as due, and is not given freely; that’s why he said: “the reward for sin is death” so that to show that death is determined for sin not undeservedly, but as something due; a gift, if not a gift, is no longer a gift. Consequently, a person’s good merits themselves must be considered gifts of God; and when eternal life is rewarded for them, what else is rewarded but grace (John 1:16)? Consequently, man was created perfect in such a way that he could remain in this perfection not without Divine help, but could pervert himself at his own request. Whatever he chose from this, the will of God would be fulfilled. Therefore, in the fact that he desired to act more according to his own will than according to the will of God, the will of God was fulfilled in him, which from the same mass of destruction, which came from this root, makes one vessel for honor, another for reproach (Rom. 9:21); in honor - by mercy, in reproach - by judgment, so that no person can boast; and, moreover, he does it through him (i.e., man), and not by Himself. 108. For we would not have been delivered through the very one Mediator of God and men, the Man Jesus Christ (1 Tim. 2:5), if He were not also God. When Adam was created, as a perfect man, there was no need for an Intercessor. When sins removed the human race far from God, we had to unite with God even before the resurrection of the flesh into eternal life through the Mediator, Who alone was born without sin, lived and was killed in order to reveal and heal human pride through the humiliation of God, and to show man how far he had departed from God when he was again called by the incarnate God, and to present an example of obedience to rebellious man through the Man of God, and so that with by the adoption by the Only Begotten of the image of a slave, who had previously not deserved anything, the source of grace was opened and in the Redeemer Himself the resurrection of the flesh, promised to the redeemed, would be foreshadowed, so that the devil would be defeated through the very nature, having deceived which he rejoiced; and, however, so that a person does not boast, so that pride or anything else is not revived in him, if it can be noticed or said by more capable people about such a great sacrament of the Intercessor, or only - noticed, but expressed and cannot be. 109. During the time that lies between the death of a person and the last resurrection, souls are kept in certain hidden places, depending on what each of them deserves: either in peace or in hardship - according to what they deserve while living in the body. 110. And it should not be denied that the souls of the deceased receive relief through the love of their surviving relatives, when the sacrifice of an Intercessor is made for them or alms are performed in the church. But these sacrifices and alms benefit those who during their lifetime deserved so that they could later be useful to them. For sometimes there is a way of life that is not so good that a person has no need for them after death, and not so bad that they cannot bring him benefit after death; Sometimes a way of life is so good that a person has no need for them, and, on the contrary, so bad that they no longer become sufficient to help him when he departs from this life. Therefore, every merit is prepared here by which someone will be able to receive either relief or difficulty after this life. Let no one hope after his departure to earn from God what he will not care about here. Consequently, what the Church often does to relieve the deceased does not contradict the apostolic saying, which says: “For we will all stand before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive according to what he did while living in the body, either good or bad” (2 Cor. 5:10; Rom. 14:10). Because everyone has prepared this merit for himself while living in the body, so that sacrifice and alms can benefit him. For they do not help everyone, and why do they not help everyone, if not because of the difference in the life that each one spent in the body? Consequently, if sacrifices of the altar or any kind of alms are offered for all the baptized dead, then for those who are completely good they serve as an expression of thanksgiving, for those who are not entirely bad - as propitiation, for those who are completely bad, although they do not help the dead at all - for those to whom they benefit, they contribute either to complete pardon. or more lenient condemnation. 111. After the resurrection, when the general and final judgment is completed, two kingdoms will have their definite boundaries, one of Christ, the other of the devil, one of the good, the other of the evil; and yet both are the Kingdoms of angels and men. The former will have no desire, the latter will have no opportunity to sin, or any condition for death; the first, living blissfully in eternal life, the second, painfully remaining in eternal death without the opportunity to die, because both of them are eternal. But the first will remain in bliss, one higher than the other, while the second will endure torment, one worse than the other. 112. So, it is in vain that some, even very many, out of human benevolence, sympathize with eternal punishment and do not believe that it will be exactly that. Without becoming in obvious contradiction with the divine scriptures, they, at their own discretion, bypass everything harsh, which, in their opinion, is said rather to intimidate, and stop at a softer saying. “God will not forget,” they say, “to be merciful, or will not withhold His mercies in His wrath” (Ps. 76:10). Although this is read in the holy psalm, it undoubtedly refers to those who are called vessels of mercy, because they too are freed from suffering not by their own merits, but by the merciful God. Or if we believe that this applies to everyone, then in this case there is no need to think that it can the condemnation of those about whom it is said: “and these will go into eternal torment” will end; equally, there is no need to think that there will ever be an end and bliss for those about whom it is said: “the righteous into eternal life” (Matthew 25:46). But let them, if they please, think that the punishment of the convicted is to some extent mitigated at certain intervals of time. It can be understood that the wrath of God rests on them (John 3:36), that is, condemnation itself (for this is called the wrath of God, and not the indignation of the Divine soul); so that in His anger, that is, although His anger remains, He, however, cannot restrain His bounties: not by granting an end to eternal torment, but by using or using from time to time means to alleviate torment. Because the psalm does not say: before the end of His wrath, or after His wrath, but “in His wrath.” If this anger were only one, it could be thought of as something at the very least in this case; destruction for the kingdom of God, expulsion from the city of God, alienation from the life of God, deprivation of so much of the goodness of God, which He revealed to those who fear Him, and prepared for those who trust in Him (Ps. 30:20), this is such a great punishment that no torture known to us can be compared with it, even if it continues forever. 113. So, the uninterrupted death of the condemned will continue without end, that is, alienation from the life of God, and it will be common to all, no matter what people, according to their human motives, assume about the difference in punishments, about the relief or temporary cessation of suffering; how the eternal life of the saints, common to all, will continue uninterruptedly, no matter how they shine according to the differences in honors. 114. From this confession of faith, which is briefly contained in the Symbol and, considered in a carnal sense, is the milk of infants, and in the spirit is considered the food of adults, from this confession of faith is born the good hope of believers, accompanied by holy love. But of all the objects of faith, only that which is contained in the Lord’s Prayer belongs to hope. “Cursed is everyone,” as Divine Scripture testifies, “who trusts in man” (Jer. 17:5). And therefore, the one who trusts in himself falls under this curse. Therefore, except from the Lord God, we should not ask for what we hope to either do properly, or receive for good deeds. 115. Therefore, it seems that the Evangelist Matthew’s Lord’s Prayer contains seven petitions: in three of them the eternal is asked, in the other four - the temporary, which, however, must certainly follow the eternal, for what we say in the words: “Hallowed be Thy Name; Thy kingdom come; “Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven” (which some have understood, not without reason: both in spirit and in body), must be preserved without end: what is unfinished here, no matter how much we improve, it increases in us, and what is completed, which we hope will happen in that life, will always be our property. The same thing we talk about in the words: “Give us this day our daily bread; and forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors; And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil” (Matt. 6.9–13), is absolutely clear to everyone and relates to the needs of real life. So, in that eternal life, where we hope to always be, the sanctification of the name of God, and His kingdom, and His will in our spirit and body will remain in fullness and forever. Bread is called daily because it is necessary here, since it must be given to the soul and body, understood either in a spiritual sense, or in a carnal sense, or in both. Here, where there is the commission of sins, there is also the remission of them, which we ask; here there are temptations that either tempt or encourage us to sin; here, finally, is the evil from which we strive to free ourselves; there is none of this there. 116. The Evangelist Luke presented the Lord’s Prayer not in seven petitions, but in five; and not because he presented it completely differently from Matthew, but because he only briefly recalled how those seven petitions should be understood. The Name of God, of course, is sanctified in the spirit, but the Kingdom of God will come after the resurrection of the flesh. Consequently, Luke, showing that the third petition is in some way a repetition of the first two, omits it. Then he adds three other petitions: for daily bread, for the forgiveness of sins, for deliverance from temptation. And what the evangelist Matthew placed at the very end: “but deliver us from evil,” he omitted so that we could understand that what was said above about temptation applies to this (Luke 11:2-4). 117. As for love, which, according to the apostle, is greater than those two, that is, faith and hope (1 Cor. 13:13), then in proportion as there is more of it in someone, the one in whom it is is better. And when they ask about a person, whether he is good, they ask not about what he believes in or what he hopes for, but what he loves. Because whoever truly loves, without a doubt, truly believes and hopes; whoever does not love believes in vain, even if the object of his faith were true, hopes in vain, even if the object of his hope shows the path to true bliss; unless he believes in something and hopes for something that, at his request, could be given to him as an object of love. Because, although without love he could not hope, it may still happen that he will not love that without which it is impossible to achieve the object of hope. For example, if he hopes for eternal life (who does not love it?) and does not love righteousness, without which no one achieves it. Faith in Christ, commanded by the Apostle, is the kind of faith that works through love (Gal. 5:6); and what she does not yet have in love, she asks in order to receive, seeks in order to find, knocks in order to have it opened to her (Matthew 7:7). Because faith begs for what the law demands. Without the gift of God, that is, without the Holy Spirit, by which love is poured into our hearts (Rom. 5:5), the law will be able to command, but not help and, moreover, make a traitor of someone who, through ignorance, cannot justify himself. For where there is no love of God, carnal lust reigns. 118. When in the deepest darkness of ignorance, without encountering any opposition from the mind, they live according to the attraction of the flesh, this is the first state of a person. Then, when the knowledge of sin occurs through the law, if the Divine Spirit does not yet help, the one who wants to live according to the law is overcome, and, knowing, sins, and, enslaved, serves sin: “for whoever is overcome by anyone is his slave” (2 Pet. 2:19), since the knowledge of the commandment leads to the fact that sin produces in a person all lust, and it entails a whole series of crimes, and so what is written is fulfilled: “the law... came afterward, that sin might abound” (Rom. 5:20). This is the second state of man. If God looks to faith to help Him to fulfill what He has commanded, and a person begins to be led by the Spirit of God, then with a stronger power of love they desire what is contrary to the flesh (Gal. 5:17), so that, although, due to the persistence of weakness, that which is opposed to himself in a person remains, nevertheless, the righteous man lives by faith and lives righteously (Rom. 1:17), since, prompted by the sweetness of righteousness, he does not yield to evil lust. This is the third state, the state of a person’s good hope. If everyone, steadfastly remaining in it, succeeds in piety, peace will eventually come, which after this life will be replenished in peace of spirit, and then in the resurrection of the flesh. The first of these four states is the state before the law, the second is under the law, the third is under grace, the fourth is in complete and perfect peace. The people of God were distributed over such periods of time, as it pleased God, who arranged everything by measure, number and weight (Wis. 11:21). At first he existed before the law, then he was under the law given through Moses (John 1:17), then under grace, revealed by the first coming of the Intercessor. This grace was not absent before from those to whom it was necessary to give it, although in accordance with the distribution of time it was secret and hidden. For none of the ancient righteous could achieve salvation without faith in Christ, or if He was not known to them, then we could be foreshadowed through their ministry, either more clearly or more secretly. 119. In which of these four ages, as it were, the grace of rebirth finds a certain person, then all past sins are forgiven him, and the guilt acquired along with birth is removed by rebirth. And it is of such great importance that “the Spirit breathes where it will” (John 3:8), that some do not recognize that second slavery under the law, but at the same time with the commandment they begin to have divine help. 120. Before a person can become capable of receiving a commandment, he must live according to the flesh; but if he has already been washed by the sacrament of rebirth, then he loses nothing if he now departs from this life. “For to this end Christ both died and rose again, ... that he might be Lord both of the living and of the dead” (Rom. 14:9); and the kingdom of death will not hold the one for whom He died, free among the dead (Ps. 87:6). 121. So, all divine teaching is directed towards love, about which the apostle says: “the goal of edification is love from a pure heart and a good conscience and unfeigned faith” (1 Tim. 1:5). So, the goal of every commandment is love, that is, every commandment is directed towards love. If, either out of fear of punishment, or due to some carnal impulse, it happens that it (the commandment) is not directed towards the love that the Holy Spirit pours into our hearts (Rom. 5:5), then it is not yet fulfilled properly, although it seems that this love is precisely love for God and neighbor; and it is “on these two commandments that all the law and the prophets are based” (Matthew 22:40). Take the Gospels, take the apostles; after all, not from anywhere else - this voice: “the goal of edification is love (1 Tim. 1:5) and “God is love” (1 John 4:16). Consequently, everything that God commands, for example: “You shall not commit adultery” (Matthew 5:27), and everything that is not commanded, but is offered as advice, for example: “It is good for a man not to touch a woman” (1 Cor. 7:1), - all this is correctly fulfilled when it is directed towards the love of God and neighbor for God's sake, both in this age and in the future; God - now, through faith, then, through vision, and the neighbor himself - now, through faith. For we mortals do not know the hearts of mortals, but then “the Lord will illuminate the hidden things in darkness and reveal the intentions of the heart, and... everyone will have praise from God” (1 Cor. 4:5); because the object of praise and love from one neighbor to another will be that which, for the purpose of discovery, will be illuminated by God Himself. Lust decreases as love increases until this latter reaches here to such a height, greater than which nothing can be: “Greater love has no one... than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends” (John 15:13). Where there is no lust, who will indicate what love will be there? After all, when there is no claim on the part of death, then there will be the highest perfection. 122. But let there be an end to this work someday, about which you yourself will judge whether you should call it or consider it an enchiridion. But I, not considering it necessary to reject your zeal in Christ, with faith for your good, with hope for the help of our Redeemer and with love for you greater than for any other of His members, I wrote, as far as I was able, for you a book, oh, if only as useful as it was lengthy, about faith, hope and love. “The gods have created gold for themselves” – Editorial Board of “ABC of Faith” You might be interested in: