Предисловие (Гал.1, 1–10)

a) Inscription and greeting (Gal.1:1 – 5). The inscription and greeting in the Epistle to the Galatians differ from others in that they introduce provisions that indicate in advance the content of the Epistle itself. Apparently, Saint Paul was deeply occupied with his subject, and the thoughts about him, which filled his soul, from the very beginning broke into the word. He had to prove his Apostolic dignity and find out what our salvation consists of. He foretells both here. He appends the word about his true Apostleship, in the inscription, to his name, and the word about salvation, which is in the Lord, in greeting to the worshiped name of Christ the Savior. A similar introduction into the inscription and greeting of outside thoughts, in accordance with the content of the Epistle, was done by Saint Paul later, as we see in the Epistle to the Romans and in the Epistle to Titus. Gal. 1:1 – 2. Paul the Apostle, neither of man nor by man, but Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised Him from the dead, and all the brethren who are with me, to the churches of Galatia. In the Epistles to Thessalonians, Saint Paul did not apply this word to himself: Apostle, not because then he was more humble, but now his humility was diminished, but because here there was a need to expose this title given to him by God, which they tried to take away from him, which did not take place there. "Neither from man nor by man." In those days, not only the twelve were called Apostles, but also all those who were sent to preach, whether by one of those who had weight and power or by the whole Church. Thus, Saint Paul calls Andronicus and Junia Apostles (Rom. 16:7), and also counts Apollos among the Apostles (1 Cor. 4:6). They are one with the Evangelists and differed from the shepherds and teachers who, staying in one place in their Church, created Christians with the word, while they passed through towns, cities and countries (Eph. 4:11). And the Church then awarded the title of Apostleship to all the famous collaborators of the Apostles and many others who worked in preaching the Gospel. January 4 is dedicated to their memory. There are seventy of them, according to the number chosen by the Lord, other than the twelve Apostles. But the Apostles themselves, the main stones of the building of the Church, from whom all Christian teaching and all the orders of Christian life, were twelve, who saw the works of the Lord, heard His teaching and were witnesses of His resurrection (Acts 1:21-22). The Judaizing false teachers could say about the Apostle Paul: he is not a real Apostle. The real ones saw the Lord Himself and were sent by Him, but what about this one? Ananias baptized him; Barnabas recommended it to the Apostles in Jerusalem, then he called him to Antioch, where he taught together with Barnabas; The Church of Antioch sent him with Barnabas to preach in other places; and after this first experience, the Apostles in Jerusalem gave their consent that they should labor in preaching the Gospel outside Palestine. So, his Apostleship has nothing special, above ordained. People saw that he was capable and sent him. But such persons cannot teach independently, on their own; they must agree in everything with the real Apostles. And believers should not trust them unconditionally in everything, but should verify their teaching by what the main Apostles say and how they act. Paul does not agree with them; for they, living in Jerusalem, do not forbid circumcision and fulfill other provisions of the law; and they themselves perform them. Therefore, Paul has abandoned them and should not be listened to. Against such suggestions, Saint Paul says that he is an Apostle - “neither from man nor by man” - that it was not Ananias and Barnabas who indicated, not Peter or the Church of Antioch who chose him to the Apostleship, but the Lord Himself. Here, however, he only expresses this position; he proves it at length in the first two chapters of the Epistle. With the words: “neither from man, nor by man,” he seems to be saying: one cannot think of my Apostleship in such a way that it is only a matter of human foresight and human election, whether one means one person or the whole Christian society. It goes beyond human affairs - it is from above. This is the meaning that appears in these words at first glance. Others distinguish these expressions: neither from man, nor by man - and in each of them they see a special thought, for they differ both in number and prepositions: in the first there is a plural number and the preposition “from”, in the second there is a singular number and the preposition “through” (δια). Based on this, they think that with his first expression Saint Paul denies the human origin of his Apostleship, denies that it was given to him for human reasons alone, without any participation from above; the second denies his heavenly origin, if we understand it as mediocre, denies the idea that although there is God’s will for his Apostleship, it was given to him through the medium of man, and not directly by the Lord, as was given to the other Apostles. Blessed Jerome sees in these words of the Apostle an indication of three types of elections: the first is that which is performed only by people, the second is that which, although it is from God, is carried out through some person, and the third is that which is performed directly by the Lord Himself. St. Paul takes credit for the latter. Blessed Theodoret writes: “(with these words) the Apostle said that he was honored with grace, not having received this gift from people; It was not any of the Divine Apostles who caught it, but the Master Himself called it from heaven, without using human assistance. This is what he meant when he said: “not by man.” "But Jesus by Christ and by God the Father". How Saint Paul was chosen by the Lord Jesus Christ is represented by the book of Acts. During the conversion of Saint Paul, the Lord who appeared to him on the way to Damascus did not tell him anything about his appointment, but only ordered him to go to the city, where it would be said, “what is fitting for him to do” (Acts 9:6). This corresponded to the calling of the holy Apostles to follow the Lord. In the vision of Ananias, the Lord predicted only the appointment of Saint Paul, saying: “This vessel has been chosen for Me, to carry My name before the tongues and kings and sons Israel" (Acts 9:15). The very election of Saint Paul as the Apostle of the Languages was carried out in the temple of Jerusalem directly by the Lord Himself, as Saint Paul testifies in Acts. While praying, he says, in Jerusalem, in the church, I was in a frenzy and saw the Lord, who said to me: “Be careful to get out of Jerusalem quickly; I will send you” (Acts 22:18, 21). This was the same for Saint Paul as for the other Apostles: “Go and teach all tongues, baptizing them” and so on (Matthew 28:19). What then happened in the Antioch Church, when the Holy Spirit commanded that Saint Paul be separated together with Barnabas for the work to which he was called (see Acts 13:2), was only the fulfillment of this Lord’s election. In this, however, one can see, in the relation of St. Paul to the other Apostles, a correspondence with the descent of the Holy Spirit on these last ones on the day of Pentecost, after which their Apostolic activity immediately began, just as after Paul’s. Thus, the direct election of Saint Paul as the Apostle of Languages ​​by the Lord is obvious. But how was he chosen by God the Father? since he was chosen by the Lord, he was also chosen by the Father; for the actions of the Father and the Son are inseparable. The persons of the Most Holy Trinity are separate in person, but inseparable in nature, actions and desires. The Lord Jesus Christ is God the Son incarnate. Therefore His actions are also the actions of the Father. While still on earth, He said: “Everything that the Father has is Mine; whatever the Father creates, the Son also creates. I do what I see the Father doing” (John 14:10; John 14:31; John 16:15). All this should be spoken all the more fully after His resurrection and His sitting at the right hand of God the Father. Saint Paul, introduced to the contemplation of the mysteries of God, clearly saw in his election to the Apostleship by the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, an election by God the Father; that’s why I expressed it in words. The Book of Acts makes it clear that the Holy Spirit also participated in this election, as mentioned, so that it is from the Most Holy Trinity. And everything in the Church of God is from God the Father in the Holy Spirit about the Lord Jesus. So, with one short saying, Saint Paul put himself on the same line with the other main Apostles. Let us listen to how Saint Chrysostom writes about all this: “at the very beginning, the Apostle points out what those who humiliated his dignity said, that is, that the other Apostles were Christ’s disciples, and he was an Apostolic disciple. That’s why the Epistle begins like this: “Paul the Apostle, neither of man nor by man.” For other false teachers claimed that Paul was less than all the apostles and that he had already learned faith from them. since Peter, James, John were called first, and occupy the first place among the disciples, and received the dogmas of faith from Christ Himself, then it is better to believe them than him. But they do not forbid circumcision and keeping the law of Moses. Saying this and similar things to the humiliation of Paul and the exaltation of these Apostles, not, however, in order to praise them either, but in order to more accurately deceive the Galatians, they taught them to fulfill the law at the wrong time. So, the Apostle began the Epistle with very decent words. since they humiliated the teaching of the Apostle, saying that it was from man, and the teaching of Peter from Christ; then at the very beginning he refutes this, saying that he is “an Apostle, neither of man nor by man.” Although Ananias baptized him, it was not he who led him out of error and not he who converted him to faith, but Christ Himself from above with a wonderful voice called and caught him. The Lord called Peter, and his brother, and John and his brother, while walking by the sea, and Paul upon his ascension into heaven... He immediately (after this) received baptism and then waged an irreconcilable struggle with the Jews and thus far surpassed the other Apostles; for he says: “I have labored more than all of them” (1 Cor. 15:10). But in the present case he does not concern himself with this, considering himself content to show his equality with the other Apostles; for he did not need to show his superiority before them, but to destroy the cause of temptation. Hence the word: “not of man” - refers to all preachers; and the word: “not by man” refers only to the Apostles. For God did not call them through people, but directly Himself.” "Who raised Him from the dead." Saint Paul often remembers the resurrection of Christ the Savior as the most solemn and victorious banner of Christianity; but its meaning, particular in one case or another, is determined by the flow of speech. Just as here Saint Paul has two things in mind - that he is a true Apostle and that salvation is only in the Lord Jesus; then one might think that he mentioned the resurrection here, so that the light from it would fall on one and the other of these objects. In relation to the first mention of the resurrection of Christ, he wanted to bring to mind the Galatians how he was called to the Apostleship by the Lord. According to St. Augustine, he hints by this that “he too was sent by Christ, but already glorified.” The Lord personally called the other Apostles, before death and resurrection, finally, however, appointing them to the Apostleship after the resurrection, and he called him, and elected him to the Apostleship, and confirmed him in it - everything after the resurrection and ascension, which does not diminish if his Apostleship does not exalt. Why in another place, listing the appearances of the Lord after the resurrection to the Apostles, he adds: “after all... appear to me also” (1 Cor. 15:8). That is, through this the Lord has placed him on the same line with others. It is not difficult to derive an idea in defense of the Apostleship of St. Paul from the fact that he here represents the resurrection of the Lord as having come from God the Father. Saying: I am an Apostle, chosen not only by the Lord, but also by God the Father, who raised Him from the dead, the Apostle suggests that the participation of God the Father in his election to the Apostleship is mediated by the resurrection of the Lord Jesus - how is this? So, God the Father, who resurrected Christ the Savior, thereby sanctified and confirmed in advance with His consent everything that the risen Lord had to create and establish. This is how my Apostleship ascends to God the Father, Saint Paul seems to say. In relation to the second, the mention of the resurrection, and therefore of death, brings to mind the main thing in the economy of our salvation - satisfaction with infinite truth and reconciliation with God, by faith in which we are worthy of all the blessings acquired for us by the incarnate Son of God. Whoever contemplates this and accepts it with heartfelt faith will not turn to the weak method of salvation through fidelity to the Law of Moses. Saint Damascus writes: “since they thought that they would be punished if they deviated from the law, he reminds us of such a deed by which all need for the law is swept aside, that is, the cross and resurrection, in which are the basis of salvation.” Saint Chrysostom comes into motion at the words: “to those who raised Him from the dead” - and says: “What are you doing, Paul, wanting to bring the Judaizers to faith? Why do you not bring to light any of His great and divine attributes, just as you wrote to the Philippians, saying: “He who was in the form of God was not equal with God through admiration” (Phil. 2:6), or as in the Epistle to the Hebrews he said about Him without insult that He “is the radiance of glory and the image of His hypostasis,” that is, the Father (Heb. 1:3); or as His son of thunder proclaimed at the beginning of his Gospel: “in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was to God, and God was the Word” (John 1:1); or as Jesus Himself often said before the Jews that He is equally omnipotent, like the Father, and has the same power with Him (see: John 5: 19 - 21)? Why didn’t you say anything like that, but, leaving all this, brought to mind what happened, according to God’s dispensation, upon His flesh, pointing to the cross and death. That’s how it should be, he replies. For if the word were addressed to those who knew nothing great about Christ, then it would be fitting to say this about Him. But since the matter concerns such people who are afraid that for leaving the law they will not be exposed to the wrath of God, he mentions what abolishes the need for the law, that is, the good fruits that have flowed for everyone from the cross and resurrection.” But let not any of us be embarrassed by the fact that the Apostle calls Christ the Savior resurrected from God the Father, and not resurrected by His power, which he does not only here, but also in other places (somehow see Rom. 4:24; Rom. 8:11; 1 Cor. 15:15; Eph. 1:20, 2, 6; Col. 2:12; 1Sol. 1, 10). We must take into account all the places where St. Paul speaks about the resurrection. Having done this, we find that he has no less places where the Lord is called the risen Himself (such as: Rom. 4:25; Rom. 6:4; Rom. 6:9; Rom. 8:34; Rom. 14:9; 1 Cor. 15, 4, 12, 20; 2 Cor. 5, 15; 1 Sol. 4, 14 and the like). This is to be expected. Since Christ the Savior is God and man, it is appropriate to say about Him that He is resurrected and that He is resurrected. Risen like God, and resurrected like a man. But with this or that expression, one should not lose sight of the unity of God the Father and God the Son, as Persons of the Most Holy Trinity. Looking from here to the resurrection, one must believe that Christ the Savior Himself was not resurrected without the action of the Father, and not resurrected by the Father without His action, like the Son; for the Persons of the Most Holy Trinity, separate in person, are inseparable in action. These expressions are used in the word of God: Lord Jesus Christ risen; or: God the Father resurrected, according to the demand of the flow of speech and the state of those to whom the speech is addressed. The Lord Himself, during His earthly life, predicted that He would resurrect Himself. This is what He said at the very beginning in the church: “Destroy the church, and in three days I will raise it up” (John 2:19) - this is about the church of the body... At Tabor he told the disciples to remain silent about glorifying Him in the transfiguration, “until the Son of Man will rise from the dead” (Mark 9:9), of course Himself. He said that He has the power to give His soul - life - and to receive it again, to come to life (John 10:18). And after the resurrection the Angel said to the wives: “There is no rising here” (Matthew 28:6), - He himself rose. – All this was given to us by the holy Apostles. Consequently, they understood the resurrection of the Lord in no other way. But in their speeches to the people, at first, of course, the Jews, they did not consider it prudent to speak so directly, so as not to blind the weak intellectual vision of the Jews with such brilliance. In the very first speech of the Apostle Peter one hears: “you killed, but God raised Him up” (Acts 2:23-24). Then and afterwards, all the Apostles often said this. The Jewish people were raised to believe in One God. It would be inconceivable for them if the Face of Christ the Savior were suddenly brought to their attention in the whole world of Divinity and, as it were, obscured by it the Face of God the Father. Why are They always remembered together, and, moreover, in such a way that everything is raised to God the Father, as to a single beginning. The intention was in this way to gradually lead the mind, infancy in faith, to the contemplation of the consubstantiality and unity of the Trinitarian God. In relation to the present place, Saint Chrysostom writes: “but the heretics object, saying: look, the Father resurrects the Son? For they, once infected with the disease of heresy, become deaf and incapable, spontaneously, however, of comprehending the height of dogmas, and they choose only what is said about Christ either according to the state of His humiliation, or according to His humanity, or in honor of the Father, or according to some other dispensation of God; and, considering such passages separately, they even more damage themselves, I won’t say Scripture. I would like to ask them: why are they saying this? Is it really in order to present the Son as weak and unable to even resurrect His body? But faith in Him alone brought about the fact that even the shadow of those who believed in Him raised the dead. So, if those who believed in Him, mortals themselves, raised the dead with the mere shadow of their earthy bodies and the clothes that clothed such bodies, then could He really not resurrect Himself? Isn't this sheer madness? Is this not the extreme degree of insanity? You have heard what Christ says: “Destroy this church, and in three days I will raise it up” (Jn. 2, 19); and again: “the region the imam will lay down my soul, and the region the imam will again receive” (John 10:18). So, why is it said that the Father raised Him up? Why is so much else attributed to the Father, which, however, the Son does? This is said in honor of the Father and because of the weakness of the listeners.” Blessed Theodoret sees in these words an indication of the unity of God the Father and God the Son. “The words: “to those who raised Him from the dead” do not convey thoughts of weakness in the Divinity of the Only Begotten (because suffering did not concern the Divinity), but show agreement in the work of preaching, namely, that it was not the Son alone who organized the mystery of the Divine Incarnation, but the Father Himself participated in this providence. since the defenders of the law assumed that God should serve as the guardian of the law, the Divine Apostle shows that the giver of the New Testament is not only the Son, but also the Father.” The Holy Fathers did not ignore both the manner of expression and the order of the Divine names in the words: “Jesus Christ and God the Father”; but in both they saw important dogmatic indications. It must be translated word for word from the Greek: “through Jesus Christ and through God the Father.” If only it stood here: “through Jesus Christ,” and then it would follow: “from God the Father” or something else; then it might seem that Christ the Lord is not self-initiated and not self-acting, but is only an instrument in the hands of the Father, both in being and in actions subordinate to Him. But as Saint Paul expressed himself in the same way about God the Father as about the Son, he thereby showed that he did not believe there was any difference in their nature and power. Blessed Theodoret writes: “so that someone else, having found the pretext “through” before the name “Jesus,” would not think that the Son is in the service of the Father, the Apostle added: “and through God the Father.” He used the preposition “through” before the name of One and Another Person, teaching that this preposition does not mean any difference in nature.” Saint Chrysostom, having derived the same thought from such an expression, that is, “that”, having used the same expression about the Father as about the Son, the Apostle taught us “not to lay down laws for the incomprehensible nature and not to assign the limits of the Divinity between the Son and the Father” and that “he does this not in order to attribute the Son to the Father, but to show that this expression does not allow any difference in their nature,” - extracts another, no less significant, thought from the order in which the Divine Persons stand here: “What will those now say who in baptism think to find some kind of diminishment of the Divine hypostases, just because they are baptized in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit? For if the Son is less than the Father because His name is placed after the Father, then what will they say now when the Apostle begins with Christ and then moves on to the Father? And we do not intend to say anything blasphemous here. For, when competing with those who err, we must not deviate from the truth; and, even if they come out of our minds a thousand times, we must still remain within the bounds of piety. Therefore, just as here, from what the Apostle mentioned before about Christ, we do not call the Son greater than the Father, for this would be the height of madness and all wickedness, so there, in the commandment of baptism, we should not consider the Son less than the Father, because the Son is placed after the Father.” “And all the brethren who are with me.” Who are they? They believe that this is the entire Church of Ephesus, based on the fact that the Apostle said not simply: “the brethren who are with me,” but: all the brethren. Against this, one could only say that it is unusual for Saint Paul to write Epistles on behalf of the entire Church in which the letter was located, although it is usual to send kisses from the entire Church at the end of the Epistles (as see: Rom. 16, 16; 1 Cor. 16, 20; Phil. 4, 22...). But here, in relation to the Galatians, special circumstances could have prompted him to do so. The false teachers explained to the Galatians that only Paul rejected circumcision and the Mosaic Law, while others, on the contrary, did not prohibit either one or the other. The Apostle Paul puts the whole Church of Ephesus with him at the beginning of his Epistle, showing that she agrees with him in everything. In Ephesus there were the beginnings of faith even before he came there (Acts 18, 21, 24). From here it directly followed that it was not true that he taught only this way; but that such is the spirit of Christianity that, where it takes root, there the synagogue must fall in its entirety. So St. Chrysostom: “Why doesn’t he say this anywhere in other Epistles, but puts either his own name or names others, but no more than two or three, but here he mentions the entire multitude of the faithful, why didn’t he name anyone by name? Why is he doing this? The Judaizing Christians reproached him that he alone preached this way and thereby introduced a new teaching into the dogmas of faith; So, in order to destroy such suspicion and show that he has many who think the same as him, he adds the brethren, showing that what he writes about is in agreement with their thoughts.” Others believe that these words do not mean the entire Church, but only those brethren who stood in a special relationship with the Apostle; there were also his colleagues, and, perhaps, besides them, others, but, as Blessed Jerome notes, “known to the Galatians and enjoying their respect, and, moreover, they themselves were of circumcision.” In the First Epistle to the Corinthians, which was written after the Epistle to the Galatians, Sosthenes is mentioned (1 Cor. 1:1), in the Second, written after the First, Timothy is mentioned (2 Cor. 1:1). Titus was sent to Corinth shortly after the First Epistle there (2 Cor 2:13). They were all apparently in Ephesus. Aquilla and Priscilla were also there (Acts 18:21); and Gaius and Aristarchus - Macedonians captured during the uprising against St. Paul by the unbelieving Ephesians (Acts 19:29). Here, perhaps, were some of those seven persons who are remembered by the companions of Saint Paul on his return journey from Corinth, some four months after his departure from Ephesus (Acts 20:4). All these are significant persons, known among all believers. St. Paul perhaps meant them, or all, or most of them, by the words: “all the brethren who are with me.” I didn’t mention them by name because there were many of them. So is blessed Theodoret, who saw in these brethren those who assisted Saint Paul in preaching. The motive for which Saint Paul puts many people with him, in addition to what was expressed by Saint Chrysostom, could also be the fact, as Jerome writes, that “in the matter of correcting people, the agreement of many in one opinion matters a lot.” For, according to Ambrosiastes, “it is easier for one to understand his error when he sees that many are convicting him of it.” "To the Churches of Galatia". There were churches not in one or two cities, but in many, perhaps in all four of the most famous cities, and not only in them, but also in their environs. This Epistle therefore resembles a Council or District Epistle. Saint Chrysostom writes: “to the churches of Galatia”: because the flame of error has engulfed not one city, not two or three, but the entire Galatian people. Note here too the great indignation of the Apostle. He did not say: to the beloved or to the saints, but simply: to the churches of Galatia. For this is the sign of one who grieves greatly and is sick, that he does not greet them either in the name of love or in the name of honor, but only in the name of their society; and does not even add: to the churches of “God,” but simply says: “to the churches of Galatia.” And with this same name he hastens at the very beginning to return their division to unity. This is why he mentioned the name of the Church, to bring them to shame and bring them together. For, divided into many parts, they could not be called by the name of the Church: because the name of the Church is the name of agreement and unanimity.” Gal.1:3 – 4. Grace and peace to you from God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ, who gave Himself according to our sins, so that He may deliver us from the present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father. "Grace and Peace". “Grace by which our sins are forgiven, peace by which we are reconciled and reunited with God” (St. Augustine). But together with the remission of sins, grace establishes the beginning of a new life in Christ Jesus through regeneration; and peace, beginning with reconciliation with God in conscience, ascends to perfect tranquility in Him, in living - felt and manifested - communication with Him, when God is in the soul and the soul is in God. The apostolic greeting, thus embracing the beginning and the last limit of life in Christ Jesus, also combines all those grace-filled actions with the help of which a Christian man reaches from that beginning to this end. "From God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ". And this image of expression, like the previous one: through Jesus Christ and God the Father, means the equality of power and authority and the unity of nature in God the Father and the Son. Christ the Lord is not only a mediating instrument, but also the very source of grace along with God the Father. The fact that in the first case the Lord the Savior stands in front, and here God the Father, shows that no matter who you put in front, you will not deviate from the truth - it makes no difference, for in the Holy Trinity there is nothing first and nothing last. Although this is an ordinary Apostolic greeting, in the ears of the Galatians it should have sounded in a special way: “grace,” which you trample upon, falling under the yoke of the law, and peace, which you violate with God, and with me, and with all the Churches, and with yourself. The Holy Fathers primarily direct their interpretation towards this and see in every word of greeting a denunciation of the Galatians. So Saint Damascus “the Apostle posits such a greeting everywhere, but now, when he writes to the Galatians, it was more necessary, since they were in danger of falling “from grace” if they began to be circumcised again.” Ecumenius: “he wishes peace in good time, for the Galatians rose up in war against God, turning to the law, which He abolished.” He is “from God the Father.” Where do you have the boldness to call God Father? Is it not from baptism? Why are you turning to the law?” Theophylact “and these names - “Jesus Christ” - are the pointers of Christ’s benefits to us (and the accusers of the Galatians). For “Jesus” He is “who saved His people from their sins” (Matthew 1:21), and “Christ” - because of the anointing of the Spirit, with which He was anointed for our sake, sanctifying our nature and giving us that name. To retreat from such a Benefactor is a sign of extreme ingratitude.” Ambrosiastes “by the grace of both, both the Father, that is, and the Son, the human race was restored. So, he says, if the grace of the Father and the Son is the same towards you, then how can you, thinking something less about the Son, make the law equal to Him, deciding to serve partly Christ, partly the law? Have you not heard what the Lord says: “The Lord is the Son of Man and on the Sabbath” (Luke 6:5)? The Apostle says this so that they can see what disrespect they show the Lord when they equate His servant (that is, the law).” Likewise, Theophylact: “It is not the law that is our ruler, but Christ Jesus.” Saint Chrysostom brings all these thoughts together: “grace and peace to you.” With this desire for grace and peace he begins all his Epistles, considering this necessary everywhere, but especially here, sending to the Galatians. since they were in danger of falling from grace, he prays to God that they would again be established in it. They became enemies of God, and therefore he asks God to reconcile them to Himself again. – And here he calls God Father, without condoning them, on the contrary, strongly denouncing them and bringing to mind the reason why they became sons. For it was not by law, but by the bath of existence that they received such an honor. That’s why everywhere at the beginning of his Epistles he points out God’s good deeds to people in such a variety of ways, almost saying: slaves, enemies, outcasts, how could they suddenly begin to call God their Father? Has the law granted you this high kinship? Why do you, having left the One who brought you so close to Himself, again turn to the mentor? – And not only the name of the Father, but also the names used about the Son are sufficient to show them also the goodness of God. For if we carefully consider the name itself - “Lord Jesus Christ”, then it will show all the favor and all the good deeds of God towards us. For for this purpose, he says, “and His name will be called Jesus, that He will save His people from their sins” (Matthew 1:21). And the name “Christ” brings to mind the anointing of the Spirit.” “He gave himself according to our sins.” In these and subsequent words is the second feature at the beginning of the Epistle to the Galatians. As in the inscription, by adding several sayings, Saint Paul indicated his true Apostleship; So here, in the greeting, with the addition of special provisions, he brings to attention what is the source and what are the conditions of salvation - the second main subject of the Epistle. Having shown this, he made it clear to the Galatians in advance that they began to look for salvation in the wrong place where it was supposed to be. The image of the dispensation of our salvation corresponds to the disastrous consequences of the fall. In our fall, we became criminals before God, angered by Him, and, in addition, we became upset within ourselves, having accepted the power of moral corruption - selfishness with all passions. Arranging our salvation, the Lord Jesus Christ by His death satisfied the righteousness of God, quenched His righteous anger against us, reconciled us with God, and by sending the Holy Spirit healed our moral corruption, through new birth by the grace of the Holy Spirit, placing in us the power of a pure moral life before God, in contrast to all the passions operating in us. Saint Paul expresses these two saving actions of the coming to earth of the Only Begotten Son of God through the incarnation here - the first with the words: “who gave Himself according to our sins,” and the second with the words: “may he deliver us from the present evil age.” “He gave himself according to our sins.” What this giving of Oneself means is explained at length in other places. Thus, in (Eph 5:2) it is said: “Christ loved to eat us, and gave Himself an offering and sacrifice for us to God as a fragrant aroma,” or as in another: “cleansing for our sins” (cf. 1 John 2:2). For “God ordained Him - cleansing by faith in His Blood, for the manifestation of His righteousness for the remission of former sins” (Rom. 3:25). And He “suffered for our sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that He might bring us to God” (1 Pet 3:18). Thus, “we are reconciled to God through the death of His Son” (Rom. 5:10), who “ransomed us from the curse of the law, being the curse of us” (Gal. 3:13). With this short word, the Galatians were already prepared to admit their error. They were thereby reminded of the reconciling power of the Lord’s death, the lack of understanding of which they denounced in themselves as deviation towards Judaism. No more sacrifices are needed: one was made for all and for all ages, and one did what the law was not strong enough to do. Why go under the yoke of a weak law? Faith in the atoning death of Christ the Savior gives us remission of sins; but if the power of Christ’s coming were limited to this, then our salvation would not be complete. It was necessary to add to this the taking away of the power of the sin living in us, otherwise it would constantly make us guilty again before God. Therefore, Saint Paul says that the Lord not only gave Himself as a sacrifice for our sins, but also “delivered us from this present evil age,” that is, delivered us from the power of sin, which rules all affairs in the people of this age. The “present age” is the order of things, mainly moral, established after the fall and intended to continue until the renewal of all creation. How this order was established by the fall, and it was the source of our moral damage, due to the selfishness that had taken root in us with the entire horde of passions that have taken possession of everything in people and dominate everything; then the “real” age is the same as the state of people in slavery to sin and passions. Why is he “evil”, evil and filled with evil? A person living in this century, in a circle of people acting out of selfishness and passions, where every step he takes is an attraction to sin and self-indulgence, cannot get rid of it himself; for the same power that rules everything outside of him also rules within him. Why is he always a slave to the world, which lies in evil (1 John 5:19), in which there is only “the lust of the flesh, the lust of the desire and the pride of life” (1 John 2:16). He is delivered by the grace of the Holy Spirit, which, having come into the heart, takes away the power over it from the sin living in us and gives moral strength to resist its inclinations. From then on, man no longer works for the world and sin (Rom. 6, 6), although subject to his attacks. But, having received the strength to resist it within himself, he, with the same power, resists everything outside himself with which people serve the world and passions, and thus becomes withdrawn from the general circular life of the people of this century. This is deliverance from the present evil age, when a person begins to “not be conformed to this age” (Rom. 12:2), “not to love the world, neither what is in the world” (1 John 2:15). Not removal from this age is deliverance from it, but the granting of the power to live in it not according to its spirit, and to live in it, and to be alien to it. This is done in us by the grace of the Holy Spirit, but this grace is deserved by the Lord the Savior, which is why St. Paul raises it to Him and the very action of grace, the Lord gave Himself up to death, then rose again, ascended into heaven and sent down to earth from the Father the Most Holy Spirit, Who takes everyone away from the sinful bonds of the world. And it turns out that the Lord, having betrayed Himself, delivered us from the present evil age. For “if I do not go,” he says, “the Comforter will not come to you; if I do go, I will send Him to you” (cf. John 16:7) In the work of our salvation, everything is connected by an inextricable union and is accomplished by the action of the One God in the Trinity of the worshiped, although in the explanations of these actions they refer to one or the other Person of the Most Holy Trinity. It is obvious that deliverance from the present evil age is not some kind of mechanical, but a moral change, not carried out without the participation of human will. In another place, Saint Paul speaks about this like this: “He who has given himself food for us, may he deliver us from all iniquity, and purify for himself a chosen people, zealous for good deeds” (Titus 2:14). Zeal for doing good, out of faith in the Lord, out of obedience to Him, for His glory, is a living sign of whether someone has been removed from the bonds of the present age. This is depicted in the same place as follows: “The grace of God, bringing salvation to all man, has appeared, chastising us, so that, having rejected ungodliness and worldly lusts, we may live chastely, righteously and piously in this present age, awaiting the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ” (cf. Titus 2:11-13). Saint Chrysostom explains at length that by the evil age one should not mean creatures or life itself, as the passage of time, but says “when you hear about the evil age, then understand by this evil deeds, corrupted freedom. Why did Paul say: “from the present evil age”? He said this based on the general use of the word among people. For we often say that today was a bad day for me, blaming not the time, but deeds and circumstances. So Paul, condemning evil will, used a generally accepted expression and shows that Christ has freed us from past sins and placed us in a safe haven from future ones. He showed the first with the words: “who gave himself according to our sins,” and with the subsequent ones: “may he deliver us from the present age of the evil one” - he indicated a safe haven for the future. The law was weak for liberation from some sins, but grace was strong for the cleansing of both.” St. Augustine says “the present age must be understood by the evil one because of the evil people who live in it, just as we sometimes call a house evil because of the evil inhabitants of it.” Ambrosiastes explains deliverance from the present age as follows: “so that, having been removed from under the yoke of the law, we would no longer be sinners before God, but righteous through the new birth, for the sake of which we are called sons of God; so that, having become alien to the spirit of this age, we may become partakers of the endless age.” Jerome too: “even in this age the Lord delivers us from the present evil age, when, having died with Christ, we are transformed anew in feelings and dispositions and are no longer of this world.” For the Galatians, these words, reminding them of the action in their hearts of the grace-filled power of faith in the Lord through the holy sacraments and of their internal renewal, served as a strong warning that, leaning towards the law, they leave the best and take on the worst. Saint Chrysostom writes: “We were mired in countless iniquities and were worthy of the most severe punishment. But the law not only did not ease us, but also condemned us, revealing our sins and unable to free us and deliver us from the wrath of God. On the contrary, the Son of God made the impossible possible, resolving our sins and placing our former enemies in the rank of friends, and granted us other countless benefits.” Having expressed similar thoughts, Theophylact adds: “How can you, having left the Savior, heed a law that has not brought any benefit?” Or as Ambrosiastes: “What a mistake it is to return after grace to the yoke of the law, that is, after receiving freedom, to want to be in slavery! He insults the one who bought it, who again runs back to the former master.” For those who love not to limit themselves to the direct thoughts presented by the well-known text of Scripture, but who are also looking for a solution to all the related questions raised by it, we present the thoughts of Saint Chrysostom regarding the words of the Apostle about delivering us from the present evil age. They brighten up the darkness of our life and restore respect for it, which is greatly shaken by the fact that this age is evil and the world around us, not excluding us, lies in evil. There were heretics who, seeing a lot of evil in the world, believed that it was not created by an all-good God, but was the product of some evil force. Saint Chrysostom directs his speech against them: “Some heretics admire this saying for their own benefit, slandering real life and bringing Paul as a witness to the slander. Behold, they say, Paul calls the present age evil. But tell me, what is a century? Time consisting of days and hours. So what? Are the continuation of days and the course of the sun crafty? I don’t think anyone will say this, even if they reach extreme madness. You will say: The Apostle did not call time evil, but real life. But these words mean the wrong thing, and you do not base the slander you have woven against life on the words of the Apostle, but arbitrarily compose your own interpretation. Let us also interpret what the Apostle said, and especially since our interpretation is pious and has a basis. What shall we say? The fact that no evil has ever in itself been the cause of any good; real life, on the contrary, acquires countless crowns and inexpressible rewards. That is why Blessed Paul himself respects this life so much when he says: “Even if I live in the body, this is the fruit of my work: and what I will, I do not know” (Phil 1:22); and, discussing the choice, that is, whether it is better to live here or to be allowed to be with Christ, he prefers to stay here. And if real life were evil, then he would not say this about himself and no one else could use it for exploits of virtue, no matter how hard he tried. For no one can acquire good by evil, nor acquire chastity through fornication, nor benevolence through envy. And when Paul says “about the wisdom of the flesh, that it does not repent of the law of God, for it can do worse” (cf. Rom. 8:7); he says that evil, since it is evil, cannot be good. So, when you hear about the evil age, then understand by this evil deeds, corrupted freedom. For Christ did not come to put us to death and thus take us out of this life, but so that, leaving us in the world, he would make us worthy of the inheritance of heavenly life. Therefore, in His conversation with the Father, He said: “These are in the world, and I am coming to You. I do not pray, but remove them from the world; but keep them from hostility,” that is, from evil (John 17:11, 15). But if you do not want to accept this explanation and do not stop saying that real life is evil, then do not condemn suicides after this. For he who redeems himself from evil is worthy not of blame, but of crowns. Thus, someone who ends his life by violent death, or by strangulation, or in any other way, will not be worthy of condemnation, in your opinion. On the contrary, God punishes such people more severely than murderers, and we all rightly turn away from them with horror. For if it is criminal to kill others, how much more so is it to kill oneself. If real life is evil, then murderers should be rewarded for saving us from evil. And the world should not be called evil. If you point me to murderers, fornicators and grave diggers, then I will say that these sins do not blame real life: they depend not on our life in the flesh, but on damaged freedom. For if they belonged to real life and were necessarily united with it, then no one would be free and pure from them. Look, no one can avoid the needs necessarily associated with life in the flesh. What are these needs? eat, drink, sleep, grow, hunger, thirst, be born, die and all other similar things. No one can escape them, neither a sinner, nor a righteous man, nor a king, nor a commoner, but we are all subject to this necessity of nature. Thus, if life were essentially associated with the need to do evil, then no one would avoid it, just as no one can avoid the inevitable needs of nature. Do not tell me that rare people lead their lives well: for you will not find even one who can avoid the necessary needs and demands of nature. Therefore, even if there is only one person who lives virtuously, the truth of our word will not tolerate anything from him. What else can you say, pathetic and poor? Is this an evil and evil life, through which we came to know God, think about the future, in which we become Angels from people and unite into one union with the heavenly Powers? And what other evidence can we find against your evil and corrupt mind? "According to the will of our God and Father". The Lord Savior gave Himself our sins and delivered us from the present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father. The entire arrangement of our salvation, that is, to be accomplished by faith in the Lord the Redeemer and the grace of the Holy Spirit, was according to the will of God the Father. Just as the Old Testament economy (economy) was according to the will of the Heavenly Father, so the new grace, which abolished it, became the property of the human race according to the same will. For the Galatians this instruction was very important. If false teachers instilled in them the fear of offending God, who gave the law through Moses, then the Apostle gives them the opportunity to drive away this fear, confirming that the New Testament dispensation of salvation is from the same God and that, by departing from it, they are more directly opposed to God. What was said before: “who gave to Himself” - in the thought that He Himself gave to Himself, and here: “according to the will of God the Father” - indicates the unity of the Persons of the Most Holy Trinity. What the Father does, he does not do without the Son, and what the Son does, he does not do without the Father. As in the Eternal Council about salvation, the Son also says: “I am willing to do Your will, O my God” (Ps. 39:9); and God the Father, before the foundation of the world, according to the good pleasure of His will, ordained our salvation to be in His Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, through sanctification and adoption (Eph. 1:4-5): so in time the Son of God lays down His soul for Himself (John 10:18), and is given over to death by the Father - according to the promised advice and providence of God (Acts 2, 18). 23), because this is what the hand of God and the advice of God foreordained to be (Acts 4:28). Saint Chrysostom, in response to the words: “Who gave Himself for our sins,” writes: “Look, He did not serve in a slavish or forced manner, and no one betrayed Him, but He Himself betrayed Himself. Therefore, when you hear John saying: “For the Father also gave his only begotten Son to eat for us” (Jn. 3, 16); then for this reason do not disparage the dignity of the Only Begotten and do not think anything human about Him. For although it is said that the Father betrayed Him, it is not so that you would consider the service of the Son slavish, but so that you would know that the service rendered by the Son was pleasing to the Father. Paul showed the same thing here when he said: “according to the will of God and our Father” - not by command, but by will. For the Father and the Son have one will; what the Son wanted, the Father also wanted.” In agreement with this, Blessed Jerome also says: “And the Son did not give Himself up for our sins without the will of the Father, and the Father did not give up the Son without the will of the Son. But that is the will of the Son, to fulfill the will of the Father, as He Himself says in the psalm: “I am pleased to do Your will, O my God” (Ps. 39:9). And for the Galatians, the Holy Fathers see strong admonition in these words. Thus, Blessed Theodoret says: “The Lord Christ not only himself arranged our salvation, but also has the good will of the Father for this. Why did the Apostle add: “according to the will of God and the Father.” Everywhere he compares the Father with Christ, teaching that the Father also wants us to live not according to the law, but according to the Gospel.” Ecumenius continues the same thought: “since they said that we should not abandon the law, as given by God; this shows that believing in Christ is the will of the Father.” Saint Chrysostom is more complete than both of them: “since they thought that they would disobey God, who gave the law, if they accepted a new one, and therefore were afraid to leave the ancient law, the Apostle corrects this prejudice of theirs, saying that this is pleasing to the Father. And he did not just say: “according to the will of the Father,” but: “our Father” (which is an addition he often makes), so as to shame them all the more by pointing out that Christ made His Father and our Father.” “And this is accomplished through our new birth from Him in baptism. Why circumcision? Why the law? (Ecumenius) Gal.1:5. To him be glory forever and ever. Amen. Saint Paul, who lived in God and always carried in a grateful heart God’s great good deed to the human race, revealed in redemption, and to himself in the calling not only to salvation, but also to the Apostleship, often, when writing his Epistles, came, from this consciousness, into movement and was delighted to glorify God. (So: Rom. 11:36; Rom. 1:25; 2 Cor. 11:31; Eph. 3:21; Phil. 4:20; 1 Tim. 1:17.) So it is here. Remembering the will of God and the Father, he ascended in thought above heaven, to the throne of the Trinitarian Divinity, on which the Eternal Council for the salvation of our race is placed - and gives glory to God for this good will of His will (Eph. 1:5). Eternal glory be to Him for such a great deed! for the words: “forever and ever” mean the same thing as the Holy of Holies, the Song of Songs, the heaven of heavens. The centuries of ages are endless eternity (Blessed Jerome). "Amen" The Savior said: “Amen, amen” - truly, truly. And here “amen” can be: “truly so.” Or he only expresses a desire for it to be so. To Him be glory from all who know His glorious name. This leads to the Savior’s testament: “so let your light shine before men, so that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father who is in Heaven” (Matthew 5:16). Let no one darken with his life and deeds the glory of the God he confesses. Saint Chrysostom writes in this place: “and this is new and hitherto uncommon; for we do not find the words “Amen” anywhere in the beginning or in the preface of the Epistles, but only after many and lengthy discussions it is delivered. Here, wanting to show that what has been said is already sufficient to convict the Galatians and that his word does not need to be spread, he put “Amen” at the beginning of his Epistle. For obvious offenses do not require lengthy preparations to expose them. Therefore, remembering the cross and the resurrection, the cleansing of sins and safety from them in the future, the will of the Father and the consent of the Son, grace and peace and all the wealth of God’s gifts, he concluded his speech with a doxology. And not only because he concluded so, but also from his excessive surprise at the greatness of the gift and the abundance of grace, and from the idea of ​​what we were and what God made us, beyond our hopes and in such a short time. Unable to express all this in words, he ended his speech with a doxology, sending praise to God for the entire universe - not such that would correspond to the greatness of God’s benefits, but such as was possible for him. And therefore, after this, he continues his speech with even greater force, ignited, as if by a strong flame, from the presentation of the good deeds of God.” b) The beginning of the Epistle (Gal.1:6-10). After the greeting, proceeding to the Epistle itself, Saint Paul indicates: aa) what makes him write the Epistle; and defines: bb) the subject that will be proved in it. What prompts him to write is the change of thoughts among the Galatians about the image of salvation, which was taught to them by the Apostle himself (Gal. 1:6-7); the subject of the Epistle will be the immutability of the Gospel preached by him. Wanting to return them to their previous way of believing, he undertakes to prove to them that the teaching that he taught them cannot be changed by anyone. Whoever encroaches on this will fall under a terrible anathema, no matter who he is, from earthly or heavenly (Gal. 1: 8-10). aa) What makes the Apostle write the Epistle (Gal.1, 6–7) Gal.1:6. I am surprised that you are so quickly converted from him who called you by the grace of Christ into another gospel. “I’m surprised” - I’m amazed, I don’t know how to understand, this surprise amazes me - your change and falling away from the faith: for they are usually amazed at what happens beyond expectation and what suddenly you don’t understand how it happened. This could not be expected both because they accepted faith with such fervor and because they had already experienced its saving fruits. Saint Chrysostom writes: “When he says: “I marvel,” he not only reproaches them for the fact that, after such great and abundant gifts, after such forgiveness of sins and such great love of God for them, they arbitrarily surrendered themselves to the yoke of work; but at the same time it also shows what opinion he has about them, that is, high and excellent. For if he had considered them weak and easily seduced, he would not have been surprised at what happened. But since, he says, you were one of those who sincerely believed and worked hard, that’s why I’m amazed. This was enough for their conversion and restoration to their previous state; He expressed his hope for this in the middle of the Epistle, saying: “You will suffer just as much as here and there” (Gal. 3:4). Ambrosiast: “I am amazed that from the freedom they received they rushed into slavery. It rarely happens that someone turns from what brings joy to what causes sorrow. The Apostle marvels at them that, being in a state of contentment and security, they gave themselves up to restless and empty work. This is the same as if an unreasonable shipowner, being in a safe harbor, set off into the open sea in a storm, into obvious dangers.” Thus, Saint Paul directly addresses the Galatians with a word of reproach, while in other Epistles he first praises those to whom he writes for accepting the faith and succeeding in it, although they were faulty in other ways. For what place is there for praise when one falls away from the faith? Other Churches, although imperfect, held the faith firmly; and these, having betrayed the faith, destroyed all goodness in themselves. Although there was some good in them, it lost its value, because it was no longer from faith. The Apostle does not even praise them. Or maybe he omitted this because immediately, upon receiving this unpleasant news, he took up his pen and hurried to lead them out of their delusion: there was no time to observe the usual formalities, but to get down to business. His attention was all occupied by their changes. This is exactly what we are talking about. You have changed, he says, in something that cannot be changed. And then he proves it. “It’s like tacos soon.” So soon, or after conversion, for this also happened not so long ago, about three or four years; or after the second stay of St. Paul with them, from which perhaps not even a year had passed. He seems to be saying to them: How long have I been with you and seen that you stood on a good path - “every time it was good” (Gal. 5:7). How did the soles of your feet become troubled so quickly? Or, “soon” to count from the appearance of false teachers among them. It’s like this: before the false teachers had time to appear among you, you were already flowing after them. Saint Chrysostom’s first thought is also visible, but the last is more visible. “Two guilt,” he says, “the Apostle places on them: retreat, and so a quick retreat. Of course, even then they would have been worthy of blame if they had disappeared after a long time; but here we are talking about seduction and deception. If the one who retreats not suddenly, but over a long period of time, is worthy of blame, then at the first attack of enemies, and from arrows fired from afar, the one who falls shows himself an example of extreme weakness. What does the Apostle reproach the Galatians with, as if saying: what does it mean that those who deceive you no longer need time, but even one first attack is enough for them to overthrow and take you all into captivity? Likewise, Saint Damascus: “then in me,” says (the Apostle), arouses great amazement, that so many have been taught the sacrament of faith that they could be teachers for others, that these so easily believe false teachers.” Blessed Jerome expresses both thoughts: “Paul marvels, firstly, at the fact that they were converted from the freedom of the Gospel into the slavery of legal deeds, and then at the fact that they were converted so quickly. For it is not one and the same guilt to be corrupted by someone slowly and quickly. Thus, in relation to the martyrs, the one who, without any resistance and without torture, immediately submits to renunciation is not equally accused - and the one who is forced by unbearable torment to renounce what he believed in. The preaching of the Gospel was still new to them; a little time passed after Paul led the Galatians from idolatry to Christ. It’s amazing how they so quickly retreated from Him, by whose name they recently began to be called Christians.” “Offered.” They have succumbed to false teaching and have wavered in their fidelity to the Gospel. They planned to come under the yoke of the law, but have not yet passed; the matter is in progress, but not yet accomplished. This makes him rush to them with a word of admonition; for it always happens that it is easier to keep one who falls away from the faith or one who falls into sin than to bring back one who has fallen away and raise one who has fallen. Saint Chrysostom writes: “he did not say: you have been transformed, but: you are being transformed, that is, I still do not believe and do not think that this seduction will have complete success; which again shows hope of converting them; and he later expressed this hope even more clearly, saying: “I hope for you in the Lord, that you will understand nothing else” (Gal. 5:10). "From the one who called". Who called? The first person introduced is the Apostle Paul. He called them to faith with his gospel, just as the Thessalonians were called (2 Thessalonians 2:14); he planted faith in them, as in the Corinthians (see: 1 Cor 3:6). Both he and all the Apostles were the closest instruments of calling peoples to the grace of Christ; for they were told: “Go and learn all languages” (cf. Matt. 28:19). It would not be inappropriate to understand this here either; for the first object of the Apostle will be to prove to them that they should not fall away from the faith, by the very fact that they have been converted and taught; for his teaching is not from men, but from above. The following words go more directly to this understanding: “by the grace of Christ.” And everywhere Saint Paul says that by the grace of Christ he is what he is, an Apostle, sent by the Lord Himself far into the world to carry His glorious name. But just like Saint Paul and the other Apostles, it is unusual, when explaining the call to faith, to dwell on themselves as instruments of calling, but they always raise their thoughts to the One who, acting through them, established the Kingdom of Christ on earth; then here too it is better to understand the Same Actor. Who is He? Jesus Christ, others say. The Greek text allows us to translate this place this way: you are offered by Christ, who called you by (His) grace. Blessed Jerome also finds this possible. “It is possible,” he says, “I am amazed that you are so quickly converted from Jesus Christ, Who called you into grace, just as He says about Himself in the Gospel: “He did not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance” (Mark 2:17),” meaning, of course, that He came to call everyone. But it is also unusual to speak like this, neither to the Apostle Paul nor to the other Apostles. All of them refer the invocation to God the Father, elevating everything to a single source of all good. Anyone can verify this for themselves by looking at the passages of Scripture that speak of calling (such as: 1 Pet. 1:15; 1 Pet. 2:9; 1 Pet. 5:10, 2 Pet. 1, 3; Rom. 8:30; Rom. 9:24 ; 1 Cor. 1:9; 1 Cor. 7:15, 1 Cor. 7:17; 1Sol. 2:12 ; 1Sol. 5:24 ; 2Sol. 2:14; 2 Tim. 1:9). And the purpose of the Apostle in this Epistle required that the title of Galatians, in the same spirit as it was accomplished through him, be proclaimed to God the Father. They were afraid of offending God the Father if they abandoned the law; The Apostle here makes it clear to them that they will not offend God if they do not obey the law, but if they deviate from the Gospel. So Saint Chrysostom: “since,” he says, “they, by keeping the law, thought to please the Father, just like the Jews, persecuting Christ: then he first shows that by doing this they insult not only Christ, but also the Father. For by doing this, you are leaving yourself, he says, not only from Christ, but also from the Father. For just as the Old Testament is not only from the Father, but also from the Son, so grace is a gift not only of the Son, but also of the Father, and everything they have in common: “all that the Father has is Mine” (John 16:15).” "By the grace of Christ"; in Russian it is translated: “into the grace of Christ.” The Greek text allows for both translations. Anyone who has looked at the passages quoted has already seen, of course, that calling is surrounded by such bright ideas: we are called by God the Father “for salvation” (2 Thess. 2:13), “into the fellowship of His Son our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Cor. 1:9), “into the world” (1 Cor. 7:15; see: Col. 3:15), “into His wonderful light” (1 Pet. 2:9 ), into His “kingdom and glory” (1 Sol 2:12), “into His eternal” glory (1 Pet. 5:10). All these expressions are unambiguous with the expression: in the grace of Christ - and they broadly define what the grace of Christ is. But there are other expressions that are unambiguous with the expression: “by the grace of Christ.” Thus, Saint Paul confesses himself to be called “by the grace of God” (Gal. 1:15) and says of all that God has called them “with a holy calling according to His good pleasure and grace, which was given to us in Christ Jesus before the years of eternity” (2 Tim. 1:9). From this we can conclude that although it is necessary to distinguish in which place it is better to say: by grace or in grace; but in essence both are inseparable. For without the grace of Christ there would be no calling; when the calling began, where should it be if not in the grace of Christ. If we pay attention to the expression in which God the Father appears to have called us by the grace of Christ, we will have the following thought: through the fall we angered God and lost His favor; The Lord Jesus Christ, by His death, reconciled us to God and returned His favor to us; This is the imprecise grace of Christ, for the sake of which all other mercies from God flowed to us, the first of which is calling. So Saint Chrysostom: “calling is the work of the Father, and the reason for calling is the Son. He reconciled us and gave us the gift of grace; for it is not by righteous works that we have received salvation.” Saint Chrysostom also expresses the thought that Saint Paul said: “by the grace of Christ,” referring to God the Father, for the sake of the fact that the Father and the Son have everything in common. “Or better,” he says (that is, the Apostle said: “by the grace of Christ” - because), what belongs to the Son also belongs to the Father; and what belongs to the Father belongs to the Son. For he says: “My essence is Yours, and Yours is Mine” (John 17:10).” The ecumenium ascends with these words from the unity of the Father and the Son to the unity of all the Persons of the Most Holy Trinity, saying: “The Son gives remission (of sins and reconciliation) by His blood; The Father calls; The Holy Spirit works. This is the common benefit of the Holy and Blessed Trinity to us.” If we dwell on the expression: in the grace of Christ, then by grace we will understand the entire dispensation of our salvation in Jesus Christ our Lord, that is: the incarnation of the Only Begotten Son of God, His teaching, miracles, suffering, death, resurrection, ascension and sitting at the right hand of the Father, the sending of the Holy Spirit, the revelation of saving truths through the Apostles, the establishment of the holy sacraments that bestow grace, and all institutions in the Church, as a result of which those who approach the Lord with faith and become sons of the Church are given justification, rebirth, sanctification, sonship and betrothal to the inheritance of eternal and ineffable blessings in heaven. All this together is the grace of Christ, into which the Galatians were called by God the Father and into which we are called by our very birth from Christian parents - which is the great, undeserved favor of our most merciful God and Father. The essence of calling into this grace can be expressed as follows: called so that, having been justified for the sake of repentance by faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and having received the grace of the Holy Spirit through the holy sacraments, the rest of our lives, with the help of this grace, are holy and blameless, in the hope of inheriting the glorious Kingdom of Christ. Behold the unexplored wealth of Christians, with which we are enriched through the poverty of Christ (2 Cor. 8:9)! “You have been called,” says Theophylact, “in order to be justified in Christ.” From which it is clear that in this place he understood the calling “into the grace of Christ.” In this he agrees with Ecumenius, who paraphrases this passage as follows: “God the Father has called you into the grace of His Son.” With these words, St. Chrysostom and Theodoret also pay attention to the reason why St. Paul said that the Galatians are not converted from teaching, but from Him who called them. This is not for nothing, but in order to have a stronger effect on the apostates. “He did not say,” writes Saint Chrysostom, “you are offered” by the gospel, but: “from Him who called you,” that is, God. Here he said something that was stronger for them and more likely to frighten them. If someone did a similar act against his friends, then he who left his former beneficent friends would, without a doubt, be worthy of condemnation. Think now, what kind of punishment is worthy of the one who forsook God who called him?” "Into a different gospel". Saint Paul preached the one true teaching about salvation, and those false teachers, having come, began to offer another teaching that disagreed with him. How his true teaching was the gospel, offering good news of salvation; so he called their false teaching also the gospel, only differently, without regard to both those who accepted this false teaching and those who proposed it. But the Apostle can also imply the idea that the Galatians took it for the real Gospel or that the false teachers said about themselves that they were preaching the true Gospel, perhaps even deliberately not remembering that they were going against the Apostle Paul or did not agree with his teaching, at least at the beginning of the sermon. So Saint Chrysostom: “those who wanted to deceive and seduce the Galatians did not do this suddenly, but, little by little changing the essence of the truths preached to them, did not change their names. This is how the devil usually deceives and deceives, spreading his nets unnoticed by those caught! For if they began to say directly: renounce Christ, then they would beware of them as deceivers and corrupters. But now, having left them in the faith and giving their false teaching the name of the Gospel, they with greater boldness undermined the building, covering the preached doctrine with names, like a veil, according to the custom of those who undermine the walls. So, since they called their false teaching the Gospel, or good news, the Apostle very opportunely stands up for the name itself when he says: “for another gospel, which there is no other.” Gal.1:7. There is no other way, but you are the ones who are disturbing, and who want to pervert the gospel of Christ. “There is no other way.” – Or this: you are converted into another gospel, but it is not another gospel, it is not a teaching that would be worthy of being called gospel, gospel. So Blessed Jerome: “You are converted into another gospel, which is not the gospel.” Although false teachers call it that, and although you have recognized it as such, in essence it is not such. Either this: you are converted into another gospel, of which there is no other, or: but there is no other. There is no other teaching that can be called the gospel. There is only one gospel, the one that I taught you. So Theophylact: “There is no other Gospel than the one you accepted. The Gospel containing Orthodoxy is one, the same one that I preached to you.” Saint Damascus points out the reason for this: “just as Saint Peter says: “For there is no other name under heaven, given among men, by which it is fitting that we should be saved” (Acts 4:12).” Blessed Theodoret adds: “having left this gospel, you will not find another, because the Lord preaches not another through us, but another through the other Apostles, but we all preach the same thing, who have loved the truth, and those who think contrary to us do not offer you anything Divine, but attempt to distort the Divine.” Both of these explanations, however, are essentially the same thing: you are deviating into another gospel, which is not another gospel, because there is no other gospel. It is one. Saint Chrysostom had the need to clarify the confusion: how do we have four Gospels? but he does not directly expose this, but enters into an argument with the Marcionites, who accepted only one Gospel of Luke, and then not in its entirety, and says: “just as the sick suffer harm from healthy food, so the Marcionites suffered here. For they, using these words, say: Paul also said that there is no other Gospel. Although they are funny, their lies must be exposed. What should we say? Even if very many wrote the Gospels, if they write the same thing, then many will be nothing more than one Gospel, and the multitude of those writing will in no way prevent it from being one. On the contrary, even if there was one who wrote, but wrote the opposite, then what he wrote would no longer be the same. One or more than one Gospel is known not by the number of writers, but by the identity or difference of what is written. From this it is clear that the four Gospels are one Gospel. For when four say the same thing, it is not one and the other or different, because they are speaking differently, but one by agreement and unity of what they wrote. And Paul here does not speak about the number of preachers, but about the disagreement and contradiction of what is preached.” “It’s just that you are troublesome,” and so on. It is expected, according to the flow of the speech, the answer to the following question: if the teaching of these newly arrived teachers is not the gospel, if there is no other gospel at all; then what is their teaching? Saint Paul answers: and this is nothing other than confusion of minds, confusion of concepts and transformation of the Gospel. But in the image of expressing this thought, instead of showing the phenomenon and the action, he shows the characters; just as the Savior Himself, in explaining the parable of the seed of the word, said: “these are the seeds,” instead of the seed sown or the Gospel preached (Mark 4:15-20). Saint Paul did this because he quickly wanted to cast a shadow on these new teachers, calling them troublemakers or troublers of minds and perverters of the truth. “Confusing”, Ταρασσοντες, - which word expresses both confusion among the people on any occasion, and mental confusion from incoming thoughts and arousal of passions. Although the Apostle does not mention the confusion of the believers and the unrest among them; but, of course, it was not without that. Not everyone suddenly agreed. Saint Paul did not pay special attention to this, perhaps because the confusion was insignificant, or rather, because he was exclusively occupied with their internal confusion, the disturbance of their faith and inner peace, from which all external disturbances originated. By making this inner turmoil visible, he thereby gives the Galatians an indication of how they themselves can understand the evil of the new teaching they have accepted. Having mentioned the confusion from false teaching, he brings to mind the blessed state in which they were when they accepted the true Gospel (see Gal. 4:15). Compare, as he tells them, that joy with this confusion, and you yourself will understand where the truth is and where the lie is. With the same word, Saint Paul explains how they managed to lead them astray. They told them who knows what, mixed up concepts, aroused fears - and they began to see one thing instead of the other. The eye of the mind became darkened and began to see the truth where there was nothing but lies and deception. Holy interpreters primarily pay attention to this state of mind with this word. So Theophylact: “those, wanting to transform the gospel of Christ, disturb the hair of your souls and do what you see one thing instead of another.” “For,” says Saint Chrysostom, “just as the eye, confused by something, sees one thing instead of the other, so the mind, outraged by the influx of wrong thoughts, is subject to a similar disease. And those suffering from madness imagine one thing instead of the other; but that disease (false teaching) is more dangerous than this, since it harms a person in the knowledge of not sensory objects, but spiritual ones, and produces a transformation not in the pupil of the eye, but in the eyes of the mind.” “Those who want to transform the gospel of Christ.” Confusion of minds was a means in the hands of false teachers, but their goal is the transformation of the gospel of Christ. And they have caused and are causing confusion only among the Galatians for now, but their goal is to transform the true Gospel everywhere. This is their main intention, and this prompts them to undertake such journeys and sow their perverse teaching everywhere. With this word they appear to be malicious destroyers of the most essential good on earth - salvation in the Lord. The intention is unfulfillable; but this does not make their guilt any less serious. Blessed Augustine says that these false teachers want to transform the Gospel of Christ, but it remains invariably firm. Even though the Galatians agreed to change the spiritual (service) to the carnal, but through this only the Gospel was transformed in their minds, and in itself it is inconvertible. What this transformation of the Gospel consisted of, Blessed Jerome expresses in a general statement, as did Augustine in his thoughts quoted above: “Whoever interprets the Gospel in a different sense and spirit than as taught by the Apostles, confuses the believers and transforms the Gospel of Christ, pushing back what should be in front, and putting in front what should remain behind. Whoever agrees with the interpretations of the Judaizers pushes back what in its meaning should be in front.” Saint Chrysostom expresses this transformation more definitely: “even if they added only one or two commandments, for example, about circumcision and observing the days; but, since even small things, allowed contrary to the law, spoil everything, that’s why he said: “transform the gospel.” In the royal coins, even if someone spoiled the seal of a coin, he would thereby make the entire coin unusable: likewise, whoever corrupted even the slightest dogma of the right faith would subject everything to the same distortion, gradually moving from the first damage to another, worse one.” We consider it not superfluous to cite the lesson of St. Chrysostom, which he gives regarding this transformation of the Gospel. He will find an application with us too. “As long as,” he says, “you are sound in mind and with the eyes of your mind you seek only what is right and not perverted, inventing what does not exist, you will not recognize and accept another Gospel. But listen to what Paul says - that they also transform the gospel by introducing into it something, although unimportant, that is contrary to the Gospel. Haven't you heard what was in the Old Testament? Someone who collected wood on the Sabbath and thereby violated one commandment, and a small one at that, was subjected to the most severe punishment (Num. 15:32-36). Uzzah wanted to support the Ark of the Covenant, which, in his opinion, was threatened with the fall and immediately died because he wanted to help the One who does not need his help (2 Samuel 6, 6 - 7). So, if the violation of the Sabbath and touching the falling ark angered God so much that those who dared to do both did not receive the slightest mercy, then the one who perverts the terrible and ineffable dogmas of faith will be justified by what and what kind of mercy will he receive? There is no pardon for him, no! This very thing is the cause of all evils, that we do not worry about small offenses; That is why they fell into grave sins, because the little ones remain without proper correction. What happens to bodies, that is, when those who suffer from the body leave their bodily wounds without healing, this produces fever, and decay, and the very death of the body; the same must be said about souls: those who neglect their small errors fall into large ones. So-and-so sins against fasting, and here, they say, there is nothing important. Another is firm in the Orthodox faith, but, pretending to yield to the times, sometimes speaks freely and boldly about faith, but this, they say, is not a very important matter. Another, being irritated by something, threatens to deviate from the right faith; and this, they say, does not deserve punishment: for he sinned in anger and passion. One can encounter every day countless other sins of this kind that forcibly invade the Church. That is why we have become worthy of ridicule, mercilessly cutting the Church into countless pieces. If everyone who has ever attempted to deviate from the Divine laws and even make a small change in them had been restrained from the very beginning by prohibition, then the current infection would not have appeared and such a storm would not have engulfed the Church. Some of us even observe many of the pagan customs, which are: sorcery, fortune-telling, prophecies, observation of days and superstitious remarks at birth and all sorts of wickedness, written letters, which, to greater evil, are placed on the heads of newly born children, teaching them from the first days of life to despise labor to acquire virtue and subjecting them to the false power of fate. But if “Christ benefits nothing from those who are circumcised” (Gal. 5:2), then can faith serve in any way for the salvation of those who introduce such wickedness? Circumcision was established by God, but since, if observed at the wrong time, it harmed the Gospel, Paul used everything to stop it. But if Paul cared so much about ending Jewish customs only because the time to observe them had passed, then how can we not be concerned about the destruction of pagan customs? And what excuse will we have? Because of this, everything with us is now in confusion and confusion, and those who were instructed, filled with the thoughts of many and proud, changed the order, and the higher ones became lower. Now, even if someone reproaches them lightly, they spit on and despise such their leaders. And this is because we taught them poorly in childhood.” bb) The subject which the Apostle will prove in the Epistle (Gal.1:8-10) Gal. 1:8–9. But even if we, or an Angel from heaven, preach the good news to you, let him be anathema. As I foretold, and now I say again, if anyone preaches the gospel to you any more than he eats, let him be anathema. In these verses St. Paul expresses the main subject of the Epistle - the immutability of the Gospel in the sense and spirit as he taught it to the Galatians. Although in the first part he proves his Apostolic dignity, that is, that he was taught the Gospel from the Lord Himself and received the authority to preach it to tongues; but the purpose of this is obviously to inspire that since the teaching of the Gospel, which he preaches, is from the Lord, Divine, it cannot be changed for human reasons. When God speaks, rational creatures must listen reverently and humbly accept. One’s own comprehension and considerations should be directed only to more fully and deeply assimilate what is commanded. The position of the Apostle is this: no one can change anything in the faithful Gospel. Whoever encroaches on this, from earth or heaven, is anathema to him. This is similar to what the Apocalypse says: “if anyone adds to these, God will add plagues to him... And if anyone takes away... God will take away part of him from the book of life” (cf: Apoc. 22, 18-19). That no one can change the Gospels is expressed by St. Paul in the words: “either we, or an angel from heaven.” The Apostle takes the highest persons - the Apostles and Angels: for on earth in the matter of faith there is no one higher than the Apostles, but heaven is filled with Angels. But if they, having attempted to change the Gospel, cannot avoid heavenly punishment, then who can do this with impunity? Under: “we” – the closest means the Apostle Paul himself and his companions; but, judging by the power of his speech, we can believe that Saint Paul embraced himself and all the Apostles with this word. So Saint Chrysostom: “Having pronounced a curse on the evangelists and Angels, he thereby embraced all dignity; and having said it to himself, he thereby pointed to all kinship and commonwealth. “Don’t tell me,” he says, “the same Apostles and your friends teach this; I won’t spare myself if I preach something else. However, he does not say this to condemn the other Apostles, who, as it were, perverted the preaching of the Gospel; No! For he says: “whether I am or they are, this is what we preach” (1 Cor. 15:11); but by this he only wanted to show that the dignity of persons is not respected when it comes to the truth.” By the words: “more than a hedgehog,” the Apostle means not only the opposite, but also various things that disagree with the spirit of the Gospel, generally not what was handed down to them from the face of God. “He did not say: if they preach the contrary gospel or change everything; but if they preach even something unimportant that does not agree with what we preached, or even slightly change something in the preaching, let him be anathema” (St. Chrysostom). In what power does St. Paul say this about the Apostles and Angels? He says so presumably. We believe that the Apostles, by the grace of the Holy Spirit, were protected from deviating from the truth and that the Angels were so firmly established in truth and goodness that for them lies and sin became a moral impossibility. It is not by their nature that they are recognized as such, but by the grace of God. By nature God alone is unchangeable; but this property is also communicated to those who enter deeper into communication with Him. The Apostle’s thought is that even if the impossible became possible, the Gospel must still remain and will remain unchanged. Blessed Theodoret says regarding the Angels: “the Apostle mentioned the Angels, not in the least suggesting that any of the holy Angels would begin to teach what was contrary to Divine preaching (for he knew that this was impossible), but thereby rejecting any human innovation.” Blessed Jerome prefers the same idea, but also gives another. “We can,” he says, “accept that this is said presumably (others read: hyperbolically), not because the Apostles and Angels could preach differently than as once taught; but even if it were possible for the Apostles and Angels to change, everything should not deviate from what was once accepted. The Apostle himself in another place presents the firmness of his faith as indestructible, saying: “We have learned that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers below, nor present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor anything else in creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God, even in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Rom. 8:38-39). And again: “I speak the truth about Christ, I do not lie, my conscience obeying me through the Holy Spirit” (Rom. 9:1). This is not the essence of the words of such a person who could ever depart from the faith and love of Christ. Those who do not want to accept that this is said tentatively, but think that it is said in the literal sense, that is, that both the Apostles and Angels can change for the worse, contrast this with the fact that Paul himself realized that he could fall if he was careless, saying: “I mortify my body and enslave it, lest by preaching to others, I myself will not be enslaved” (1 Cor. 9:27); and the Angels are changeable, since some of them did not retain their leadership (Jude 1:6). One God is unchangeable by nature, as it is written: “You are the same” (Ps. 101:28), and as He says about Himself: “I am the Lord your God and I do not change” (Mal. 3:6). Saint Paul was not content with uttering this formidable definition once, but he repeated it another time, saying: “As I foretold, now I speak again.” This was demanded by the importance of the subject and the desire to more deeply imprint this fundamental principle of faith in the hearts of the Galatians. For faith and the Church stand on it. “So that you do not think,” writes Saint Chrysostom, “that his previous words were either in anger, or exaggeratedly spoken, or somehow escaped involuntarily; then he repeats the same thing. Whoever, excited by anger, says something will soon refuse it; and whoever says the same thing another time, thereby shows that he said it after thinking and, having first reasoned in his mind, then said what was said.” St. Augustine adds: “this repetition strongly arouses the saving intention to firmly hold the faith, which is commanded with such persistence.” It is not important to determine with accuracy what Saint Paul meant by the word “prediction”, whether the previous verse or similar words spoken by him when he was with the Galatians. Saint Chrysostom, apparently, understood the previous verse; St. Augustine and Jerome mean both. The last thought is greatly weakened by the fact that then Saint Paul would have expressed himself something similar to how in the Epistle to Thessalonians: “Do you not remember that while you are still alive, these words were spoken to you” (2 Thessalonians 2:5). Other differences in speech do not make any change in the force of the Apostolic definition. There, in verse 8, it says: “we, or an angel from heaven,” and here: “if anyone.” Expressed generally (Blessed Jerome), the Apostle wants to say: whoever distorts the truth, the judgment against him is the same. There: “evangelizes”, - Ευαγγελιζηται, - would evangelize, but here: Ευαγγελιζεται, - evangelizes. This indicates the continuing effort of false teachers to seduce. There: “more so, the hedgehog has brought good news”, - and here: “more so, the hedgehog has eaten.” It's the same thing; for they received nothing else from the Apostle than what he preached to them. However, there is also a reproach here. Accepted; and now what? And not only a reproach, but also an indication of the path to return to the truth. He who hears the gospel may or may not be convinced, whether to accept it or not. But the one who receives it accepts it, of course, because he is convinced of its truth. The Apostle hints: you accepted my gospel with your mind and heart and rested in it; restore these beliefs; and you yourself will find the strength to repel those who pervert the truth. Or this: you yourself will be inspired to drive them away, to throw them out of your community. The words: “evangelism” - and: “priest” - embrace everything, dogmas, rules of life, and the entire structure of the Christian Church. The judgment of the Apostle falls on the perverters of the teaching, not only written, but mainly taught orally. The Apostle smites the seducers with anathema; but it is obvious that those who are seduced, if they do not obey the admonition and do not come to their senses, are subject to the same anathema; for by holding false teaching they become one with the false teachers. The anathematization decreed by the Apostle: “let there be anathema” - served and still serves as a rule and guide for the Church - how to deal with those who preach the good news, or, better, with those who preach the sinister news, and with those who themselves will willingly follow them. The meaning of the anathema is that the one subjected to it is ejected from the Church and, becoming outside it, is not only deprived of its grace, but is also subjected to all the gracelessness that is outside it. He is God’s outcast, angry with Him. This is enough to instill horror in the anathema and at the same time make everyone afraid of being subjected to it. This horror, more than any other, should be borne by scientists who, delving into the field of science, often forget that they have a duty before God and the Lord Jesus Christ not to preach more than the gospel of the Apostles, and that they should rather suspect the correctness of their conclusions than to encroach on the affirmation of anything that responds to the message of more than the gospel of the Apostles, heavenly, Divine. The Apostle only laid the foundation for anathematization. After the Church, all views worthy of this punishment have already been marked. At present there is no need to wait for a special Church Act to defeat the sinisters with this court. They themselves put their heads under this sword as soon as they invent opinions contrary to the truth and stubbornly begin to stand in them Gal.1:10. Nowadays, do I argue with people or with God? or am I looking to please a person? Even if he were still pleasing to man, he would not be a servant of Christ. Saint Paul with these words denies his philanthropy in order to ward off the thought of his own changeability. For they said that he applies to people and in one case he speaks and acts one way, and in another differently - he changes in his beliefs. From this it turned out that although the Gospel is unchangeable, the convictions of the Apostle himself are changeable. Saint Paul answers this with these words in connection with the previous ones. One can be changeable out of people-pleasing, in order to get something from people for oneself, but whoever pronounces such a terrible sentence on himself, as well as on others, cannot be suspected of people-pleasing, and, consequently, of changeability because of it. He seems to say after such speeches that define anathema to anyone who changes the Gospel or anything in the Gospel, judge for yourself, can I myself be changeable for the sake of pleasing people? Do I apply myself to people, do I try to please people in my preaching? If this were in me, if I had a people-pleasing disposition, I would not have become a servant of Christ. So stop believing the slander that I teach this way today, tomorrow differently. The Gospel is as unchangeable in me as it is unchangeable in itself. – He expressed the same thing in his Epistle to the Thessalonians, saying: “For when we were tempted by God, bring us back to accept the gospel, so we say, not as pleasing to man, but to God who tempts our hearts” (1 Thessalonians 2:4). I am the same in thoughts and feelings before God as I am in speech and deeds before people. Just as I received the Gospel from God, so I pass it on. God sees that it is so. “By leading fear, we admonish men, but we are the manifestations of God” (2 Cor. 5:11). This is the idea of ​​this text; but determining the meaning of some of his sayings is difficult, especially the first words: “Now do I argue with men or with God?” The difficulty depends on the fact that it is not clear what meaning to give to the word: “I argue.” In Greek it stands: πειθω, which means: I convince, through persuasion I attract to my side; In order to more successfully attract people to their side, they use cunning and various subterfuges, hence: I seduce; whoever wants to convince another puts forward his arguments, and refutes the other - argues; argues, defends himself, and denounces the other, as happens in defensive speeches: whoever stands his ground and convinces everyone deserves general approval and favor. Which of these values ​​should we take? Imitating St. Chrysostom, whatever you want, just bring it all down to making sure that the sincerity of St. Paul’s preaching is visible—that he preaches as before God. Saint Chrysostom accurately takes all the meanings and deduces this one thing from all of them. He takes this word in the sense: I deceive, I deceive - and says: “If, says the Apostle, I could deceive you with my words, but I could not deceive God, who knows secret thoughts and Whom to always please is my only desire. Do you see the Apostolic Spirit and the height of the Gospel? - He takes this word in the sense of: defending oneself - and says: “the teacher is forced to defend himself in front of his students; and although he bears this insult complacently, he is at the same time indignant, not out of pride, let it not be, but for the frivolity of those who are deceived and their distrust of their teacher. And therefore, having said this, he seemed to say: I have no business with you, it is not people who will judge me; I have a deal with God, and I do everything to be justified there, before His court. And we have not yet reached such a misfortune that, preparing to answer before the Lord of all in our preaching, we began to damage dogmas. So, to protect himself and at the same time to expose them, he said the above words. For those being taught are not to judge their teachers, but to believe and obey them. But when the order has already been perverted by you and you have sat in the place of the judges, then know that he says that I care very little about justifying myself before you; but just as we do everything for God, we will be justified before Him in the dogmas preached. He said the same thing when he wrote to the Corinthians: “It is not too much for me to eat, lest I get it from you, or from men” (1 Cor 4:3).” He also takes this word to mean “to gain favor and favor” and says: “Whoever wants to gain the favor of people uses many deceits and cunning, uses deception and lies in order to persuade and attract those who listen to him; on the contrary, whoever wants to gain favor with God and tries to please Him alone needs only a sound and purified mind; because God cannot be deceived.” Thus, Saint Chrysostom does not embarrass himself with the meaning of the word, but directs everything towards finding out that the Apostle sincerely preached the one Gospel truth, having God as a witness to his conscience. Chrysostom is imitated by Ecumenius and Theophylact. The latter writes: “since they slandered him that he preaches one thing to some and another to others, changing in words and teachings in relation to people, he speaks here against this: do I adapt to people and try to please them, or to God? If I wanted to please people, then, of course, I would do as you say.” Judging by this, “now,” according to St. Chrysostom, means now, when I am writing the Epistle, then all the time of preaching work, that is, “now,” when I abandoned Judaism and began to preach the Gospel, then a corollary particle: judge “now” after what has been said. Blessed Jerome now understands: by conversion and abandonment of Judaism. “Or am I looking to please a person?” They said that Saint Paul gave the pagans freedom from the Law of Moses for this purpose, in order to counterfeit them and more conveniently attract them: for the pagans did not favor the religious orders of the Jews. It turned out that he was deceiving himself and did not preach the pure truth. Against this, Saint Paul now says that this is not true, that he is not such in his convictions as to betray the truth out of man-pleasing. This already emerged from the sentence he pronounced against those who change the Gospel. Saint Chrysostom says: “We do not write this out of covetousness, and not in order to have disciples, and not desiring glory and praise for ourselves: for we are not trying to please men, but God.” Ecumenius continues: “I don’t want to please people; therefore, neither to you. I didn’t say that just to flatter you and please you.” “Even if he were still pleasing to man, he would not be a servant of Christ.” Another proof that St. Paul did not bend the truth to please people. The strict judgment on those who preach the gospel, under which he subjected himself, has already proved this. Now, as proof of the same thing, he points to his conversion from Judaism to Christianity. He says, as it were: if I did not love the truth and changed my thoughts, depending on the persons to whom I address my speech, of course, in order to enjoy their favor, then there would be no reason for me to leave Judaism. There I enjoyed great honor and had even greater prospects for the future. If I abandoned all this, then, without a doubt, it was out of the conviction that it was no longer necessary to remain in Judaism, that it had outlived its time, determined by God. The truth about Christ has been revealed, to which I have clung with all my heart and which I preach to everyone, both pagans and Jews, sacrificing all my earthly advantages to it. “If I wanted to please people,” says St. Chrysostom through the mouth of Paul, “even now I would be on the side of the Jews, and would still be persecuting the Church. since I have despised my people, and my friends, and relatives, and high glory, and suffer from them persecution, enmity, warfare and daily death: this clearly shows that everything I say now, I do not say to gain human glory. He said this because he wants to tell about his previous life and sudden change and by his very deed prove that he stands for the truth.” Ambrose from here makes the following point: “St. Paul, who taught to please God with all reverence, was not afraid to go against people when the glory of God demanded this. Before the coming of the Lord, the law was preached according to the will of God; but when the Lord, promised in the law, came, the law had to cease, as the Prophets had predicted. Why does the Lord say: “the law and the prophets until John” (Luke 16:16). It was no longer appropriate for the law to remain in force in the presence of the Lord. Consequently, whoever after this thinks to keep the law does not obey the will of the Lord, but resists Him.” Can anyone object: how does the Apostle write in other places: “I please everyone” (1 Cor. 10:33), “I give everything to everyone” (1 Cor. 9:22) - and advises every Christian to “please your neighbor” (Rom. 15:2)? But this is what Saint Paul says to show that he used all the methods that proved useful wherever he could, just to incite people to accept the one truth that he preached everywhere. He did not change the truth, applying it to people, but his own methods and techniques, so that people would more easily accept the truth that is common to all. His pleasing to people could concern everything else except the truth. With her, he fearlessly went against the whole world. Why, in the passages cited, does he say this: “I would give everything to everyone,” but: “Yes, I will save everyone; I please everyone in everything,” but: “not seeking your own benefit, but that of many, that they may be saved.” And he advises others to please only “for the good of creation.” St. Augustine writes: “Whoever tries to instill the truth in people is not concerned about how he himself will receive a favorable reception from people, but that the very truth that he instills in them becomes acceptable to them. Whoever is pleasing to people for the sake of truth, it is not he who is pleasing to them, but the truth itself.” Jerome adds: “Here the Apostle himself shows why he pleases everyone in everything: “not seeking,” he says, “his own benefit, but many, that they may be saved.” He who, out of love, which does not seek his own, but “his neighbor” (1 Cor. 10:24), pleases everyone so that they may be saved, pleases God, for whom the salvation of people is dearer, than people.” In the Apostle’s advice to please neighbors, Blessed Jerome sees the following meaning: “if it is possible to please both God and people, then we must please people too. If it is impossible to please people otherwise than by pleasing God; then we must please God more than people.” In the words: “if he had yet pleased man” - under the word: “man” - not only the Jews are meant, but all people in general. The thought is this: if only I had a people-pleasing disposition. By this he denies the people-pleasing nature in himself even before his conversion. Then he was zealous according to the law, but not out of man-pleasing, but out of the conviction that he was zealous for the truth of God; As soon as he was convinced of the opposite, he immediately distracted his jealousy from the previous subject and turned it to another. And this again is not to please any people, but because he was completely convinced of the truth of the Gospel. In the words: “Christ’s servant would not have been,” St. Paul expresses that he would not have become a Christian if he had not loved the truth, but had only been a people-pleaser. Others say this: I would not have been a servant of Christ, that is, an Apostle. But the first thought is more decent. Saint Paul strengthens his speech: not only would he not have been an Apostle, but he would not have been a Christian either, would not have turned to Christ, would not have accepted His Holy Gospel and would not have submitted to it. You might be interested in: