235. Беседа о милосердии к бедным

(Printed in the Works of St. Ot. 1848 and in the collection 1861) 686 I say to you: make for yourselves other unrighteousness from mammon, so that when you become poor, you will be received into eternal shelter. (Luke 16:9). Isn’t a lot already said and said about mercy towards the poor? Shall we talk more? To whom mercy is dear, this will not be a burden to him: because they are not bored by talking about what they love. And if someone is not inclined to often hear about mercy, he, in fairness, may doubt whether he loves mercy enough; and in this case, it is not superfluous to remind more than once about mercy. How rich the world is in disasters and sorrows! It is necessary that the children of God become no less rich in feelings and deeds of mercy. Anyone who wants to get rich often thinks about ways to acquire it. And anyone who wants to be enriched by mercy also needs to often reflect on the acquisition of this incorruptible and non-stealing treasure. The Gospel can confirm us in this thought. It is known how cramped this book is for the many objects that would belong to it if they could fit in it. “The essence,” says the Evangelist, “is that what Jesus did, even if it were written one by one, is so many, I could not possibly contain the whole world to write the books” (John 21:25). Therefore, one might think that there is not much room in the Gospel for the teaching of mercy, apparently quite simple and ordinary: but the Gospel, or better yet, Christ the Savior Himself speaks about mercy many times and in a variety of ways, and this, no doubt, is in accordance with the needs of those taught. He sees people just beginning to seek the path of salvation and bliss: and, taking advantage of the aroused desire for salvation and bliss, on this soil he sows the seed of the teaching of mercy. “The blessings of mercy: for these will be mercy” (Matthew 5:7). He sees souls capable of sublime feelings: and in order to teach them mercy and selfless, generous charity, extended even to enemies, he shows them the highest example. “Be merciful, just as your Father in heaven is merciful” (Luke 6:36). “For His sun shines on the evil and on the good, and rains on the righteous and on the unjust” (Matthew 5:45). He enters the house of a person who loves hospitality: and turns the treat into a teaching of mercy. “When you hold a feast, call the poor, the weak, the lame, the blind; and blessed will you be, because they have no recompense, but he will reward you for the resurrection of the righteous” (Luke 14:13–14). He sees people who have no time to think about works of mercy, because their time is too busy with busy idleness and idle activities, strict compliance with the laws of modern luxury in clothing and decoration, feasts, amusements; who slumber spiritually the more deeply, the more elevated the activity of their sensory life, for the awakening of which, consequently, a strong means is needed: and with such a means he uses a parable, in which he presents for them a mirror of the present and the future. “A certain man was rich, and clothed himself in purple and fine linen, rejoicing brightly all the days” (Luke 16:19); and therefore he has no time to notice that at his gate lies the poor and sick Lazarus. This is the real thing! Here comes the future! The merciless rich man, in hellish fiery torment, cannot get a drop of water to cool that tongue, which so subtly felt the grace of the chosen food and drink. The Heavenly Teacher sees a lawyer who does not deny the commandment of love for mankind, but who tries to constrain and confuse it with cold inquiry: “Who is my neighbor?” (Luke 10:29): and in order to show that this imaginary bewilderment does not require mental investigation at all, and is resolved simply by the heart, in a parable he presents as an object of love for mankind a stranger, defeated on the road, naked and wounded by robbers. He sees the priests and Levites, not quite ready, not quite hasty to help the needy; and, in order to incline them to mercy through shame, he shows in the parable of the one who fell into the thieves, a priest and a Levite who passed by, and the Samaritan, according to the ordinary concept, a despicable person, helping the helpless, like a servant and like a relative. The Divine Teacher of mercy does not leave without special instruction “those who drew near to listen to Him” (Luke 15:1) and such “disciples” (Luke 16:1) as “tax collectors and sinners,” who, both in acquiring and in using wealth, were guided only by worldly wisdom, which is believed in cleverly acquiring, sacrificing, only for greater gain, to ensure themselves from lack. From their wisdom, just as before in the house of the host from the treat, He borrows for them an image of teaching; and offers a parable about the unrighteous steward of property, and accompanies it with the instruction: “make for yourselves friends from mammon of unrighteousness, so that when you become poor, you will be received into eternal shelter” (Luke 16:9). Apparently, those who heard this instruction guessed to understand it not in the sense of worldly wisdom, which the Divine Mentor never taught, but in the mind of pure spiritual wisdom: because the Mentor, the Knower of the Heart, did not find it necessary to add anything to protect His instruction from incorrect interpretation. Is it therefore likely that some Christians will not so easily enter into the true mind of the teachings of Christ, as the tax collectors once did? I would like to consider this even impossible: but sometimes I hear questions: what does the parable of the unfaithful steward mean? What does it mean: “to make for yourself friends from mammon of unrighteousness”? Is it possible that he who has collected wealth unrighteously, by giving alms from what he has unrighteously acquired, can thereby prepare for himself a good abode in eternity? I believe that it is necessary to eliminate this confusion: and for this we need to keep in mind more clearly the content of the parable. Someone had a steward of a rural estate; and having learned that he was squandering what was entrusted to him, he set out to take his position away from him, and for this purpose he demanded an account of the management. The manager, seeing that he had to be left without a place and without support, called on the people to whom bread and butter had been loaned from the managed estate, and, having ordered the debt records to be rewritten, with a reduction in the debt, he thus gave one fifty measures of butter, the other twenty measures of wheat, in the hope that, having lost his place and support, he would be accepted into their homes out of gratitude. “And the Lord praise the house of the unrighteous builder, for he has made him wise” (Luke 16:8). Note that the unrighteous builder is praised not for his unrighteousness, which cannot be the subject of praise, and for which he was already judged before and condemned to removal from office, but for the fact that he “did wisely,” which he skillfully ordered. For a correct understanding of this parable, one must take into account the general rule that just as the visible object of the parable, by the nature of things, cannot be in all respects similar to the object signified by the parable, then not everything that belongs to the narration of the parable can belong to its comparable meaning and interpretation. For example, in the parable of the unjust judge, “who does not fear God and does not put man to shame” (Luke 18:2), who finally gives the requested justice to the widow, who has been asking for protection every day for a long time, the likening interpretation includes, firstly, the very name of the judge, and secondly, the last part of the story, and this allegory means that God finally accepts and fulfills the fervent and persistent prayer: and The detailed features of the first part of the story, depicting the judge as unrighteous, “not fearing God and not putting man to shame,” do not belong to the comparable interpretation of the parable: because in these features there are human properties that are obviously not consistent with the holiness of the Judge God. Similarly, in the parable of the unrighteous overseer, untruth and infidelity are included only in the narrative of the parable for its completeness, and do not belong to the simile meaning of the parable, as features that are not consistent with the spirit of the teaching of Christ. The true meaning of the parable is determined by the following features. The steward manages someone else's property: similarly, every person in this life uses wealth and other gifts of God's creation and providence, not as an independent owner, not obliged to report to anyone, but as a steward, obliged to report to God, to Whom alone everything originally and essentially belongs. The bailiff must finally leave control and give an account of it: similarly, every person, with the end of earthly life, must leave what he managed on earth and give an account of his actions before the court of God. The dismissed overseer sees that he will remain poor and homeless: like this, those who are remitted from earthly life, some discover in good time in humble self-knowledge, and others lately perceive that they are meager in deeds and virtues, that they have not acquired enough faith and love for God, have not been sufficiently strengthened in prayer, have not performed sufficient feats of abstinence and self-sacrifice, or suffering for the truth, which one of the heavenly mansions would be opened for them. What should the poor bailiff do? What's a meager soul to do? -The bailiff has the hope of being accepted into the homes of those to whom he has done a favor out of the abundance of the administration entrusted to him. The soul, despite the lack of perfection, has the hope that the needy and mourning, to whom it gave help and consolation from its earthly well-being, through the grateful prayer of faith, will help it to open the door of eternal shelter, which they open for themselves through fidelity in the feat of patience. The final word of the parable clearly shows that, using worldly wisdom in the semblance of spiritual wisdom, it does not confuse them at all: “the sons of this age are wiser than the sons of light in their generation” (Luke 16:8). That is: what a pity that the children of worldly wisdom have enough skill, in the midst of destruction itself, to arrange their temporary well-being by dark means, but the children of light, students of Divine wisdom, often do not use enough care to, with its light, with its power, level and direct their path to eternal shelters! It remains to explain the expression: “mammon of untruth,” so that not clearly understood words do not obscure the purity of the teaching. The Syrians had an idol called “mammon”, and was superstitiously revered as the patron of wealth. From this the same name was transferred to wealth itself: “mammon.” The Lord, of course, not without reason, instead of the simple name of wealth, used the word “mammon”, in which the concept of “idolatry” is combined with the concept of “wealth”: and the reason for this can be assumed to be no other than the one that he wanted to mean not just wealth, but wealth, collected with passion, possessed with passion, becoming an idol of the heart. This is how the meaning of the whole expression is determined: “mammon of untruth.” This means wealth, which, through addiction to it, has become unrighteous, or vicious: for in the sacred language untruth can generally mean vice, just as truth can generally mean virtue. What, therefore, does the instruction mean: “make for yourselves friends from mammon of unrighteousness”? This means: turn wealth, which through addiction easily becomes a mammon of unrighteousness, a substance of vice, an idol, into good acquisition through doing good to the poor, and gain in them spiritual friends and prayer books for you. As for those rich who are not only not free from the untruth of addiction to wealth, but are also burdened by the unrighteousness of ill-acquired wealth: they are in vain looking for an easy way to cover up their untruth in the parable of the unrighteous bailiff. But if they want true instruction that actually applies to them, they will find it in the story of the publican Zacchaeus. Whereas he cleanses the unrighteousness of addiction to wealth with alms; “This half of my property, Lord, I will give to the poor,” another, more serious, injustice of misappropriation is made up by the fair satisfaction of the offended: “Whoever I have offended, I will return in fourfold” (Luke 19:8). The wise son of Sirach ascribes to alms the dignity of sacrifice and worship. “Give alms, like eating a sacrifice of praise” (Sir.35:2). But the offering to God must be pure not only from vileness, but also from baseness. “Thou shalt not bring,” says the Law, “the price of a speck into the house of the Lord thy God” (Deut. 23:18). Therefore, one can judge how care should be taken to ensure that what is given in alms is drawn from a pure source. At this point, the thought comes to ask: do they act very well when they say: give money for a spectacle, or for other vain entertainment; half of them will be spent for your pleasure, and the other will be turned into alms. What will happen here? Will alms cleanse vanity? Or will vanity deprive alms of purity? Is there an answer to this that would be more pleasant than the question? But, of course, there is no doubt that if the money allocated for charitable entertainment, with the elimination of entertainment and its costs, were given in full to alms; then the alms would be twice as large and incomparably purer. The Apostle teaches us to “weep with those who weep” (Rom. 12:15), and not to rejoice with thoughts of the unfortunate, and not to overflow the cup of joy so that the trembling goes to those who weep. I hope, however, that no one will be offended by our concern, so that the inventive art of charity, good in intention, has as much merit as possible in the means and methods of action. Let us calm the movement of thoughts and words in the unquestioningly true general rule: “honor the Lord with your righteous labors” (Prov. 3:9), both by deeds of piety and by deeds of goodness to your neighbor. Amen. We are publishing this Conversation here because in the collection. 1861, it dates back to 1848 and in the same year was published in the 1st book. Journal Creation Holy Father. But it was said, for some reasons, in 1847, precisely on December 6th. In the letters of Metropolitan Philaret to the Viceroy of the Lavra, Archimandrite. Anthony (n. 610 from December 10, 1847) speaks of a sermon on the day of St. Nicholas, in which the Preacher “allowed himself to doubt the dignity of entertainment established for charitable purposes.” But we do not find such a sermon anywhere in print, although according to the index in Read. General love Spirit. enlightenment (No. 389) and it appears that on December 6th, on the name day of Emperor Nikolai Pavlovich, a word was uttered that was approved by the censorship on December 18th. Meanwhile, the content of the Conversation about mercy towards the poor is the same as in the sermon mentioned in the letter. From this we can conclude that the Conversation printed here and the Word mentioned in the letter and in the index are one and the same. You might be interested in: