Беседа 39

“At that time Jesus passed through the sown fields on the Sabbath; His disciples became hungry and began to pick the ears of corn and eat.” (Matthew 12:1) Exposition 12:1–8. Christ did not break the Sabbath without reason. - How He defends the disciples from the Pharisees accusing them of violating the Sabbath. – The purpose of the Old Testament law on the Sabbath. - Its uselessness in the new covenant. – A true holiday consists of moving away from all evil. – Grace makes it easy to fulfill the commandments when we make our own efforts. 1. And Luke says: “On Saturday, the first after the second day of Passover” (Luke 6:1). What does it mean “On Saturday, the first after the second day of Easter” (in the original - the second Saturday)? That is when there was a double celebration - both the Lord's Saturday and another subsequent holiday; Jews call every holiday the Sabbath. And why did He, foreseeing everything, bring them there, if not because He wanted to resolve the Sabbath? He wanted it, but not easily. That is why He never breaks the Sabbath without a reason, but only presents plausible cases so as to put an end to the law and not offend the Jews. There are, however, cases in which He breaks the Sabbath regardless of the circumstances; so when he anoints the eyes of the blind with clay, and when he says: “My Father works until now, and I work” (John 5:17). And He acts in this way in order to glorify His Father in the latter case, and in the former to enlighten the weak Jews. He does the same here, applying himself to the needs of nature. Obvious sins cannot be defended under any circumstances. Thus, neither a murderer can present the rage that possessed him as an excuse for himself, nor can an adulterer present lust or any other reason. Here, presenting hunger as an excuse, the Savior freed the disciples from all accusations. But you better marvel at the disciples who were so abstinent that they had no concern for bodily things at all, but partook of the bodily meal in passing, and despite the fact that they were constantly starving, they did not depart from Christ. If, after all, it had not been for severe hunger that forced them, they would not have done this. What about the Pharisees? “When the Pharisees saw this,” it is said, “they said to Him: Behold, Your disciples are doing what ought not to be done on the Sabbath” (Matthew 12:2). Here they are not very cruel. Although they can be like that, they are not very irritated, but simply accuse. When the Lord ordered him to stretch out his withered hand and healed her, then they became so furious that they even decided to destroy and kill Him. Where nothing great or glorious happens, they remain silent; but where they see the salvation of someone, they become embittered, indignant and become extremely furious. So human salvation is hateful to them! How does Jesus protect His disciples? “Have you not read what David did when he and those with him were hungry? how he entered the house of God and ate the showbread, which neither he nor those who were with him were to eat, but only the priests” (Matthew 12:3,4)? So, when He defends the disciples, He cites David as an example; and when he talks about Himself, he represents the Father. And look how strongly: “Have you not read what David did?” This prophet was in great glory. That is why Peter later, defending himself before the Jews, said: “Let it be allowed to boldly tell you about the forefather David, that he both died and was buried” (Acts 2:29). Why does Christ, when naming him, not mention his dignity either in the present case or later? Probably because He came from him. If the Pharisees had good feelings, He would have pointed out to them the hunger with which the disciples were languishing; but since they were wicked and inhuman, He brings to their memory a historical event. Mark, saying that this happened under the high priest Abiathar (Mk. 2:26), does not contradict history, but only shows that he had two names, and adds that he gave David the showbread, showing by this what a great justification the latter had if the priest himself allowed it, and not only allowed it, but also acted in this case. Don't tell me that David was a prophet. And this did not give him the right to eat, because only priests had such an advantage; That’s why it is said: “to priests only.” David may have been a glorious prophet, but he was not a priest. If he was a prophet, then those who were with him were not. Meanwhile, the bishop gave bread to them too. So what? Are the apostles equal to David? But what are you telling me about dignity where the matter seems to be a violation of the law, even if the necessity of nature forced it? And it was with this that the Lord especially protected His disciples from the censures of the Pharisees, when he presented as an example greater than they, a prophet who did the same. 2. But how, you say, can this be applied to our subject? After all, David did not break the Sabbath. You are offering me something most important, which especially shows the wisdom of Christ; precisely the fact that He, having stopped talking about the Sabbath, points to a more important subject than the Sabbath. In fact, breaking the day and partaking of that sacred meal that no one was allowed to partake of is not equally important. The Sabbath was often violated, and is always violated, both during circumcision and in many other cases; the same can be seen during the capture of Jericho (Joshua 6:4); Meanwhile, the indicated participation in the sacred meal occurred only under David. Thus Christ wins by giving the most important examples. Why did no one accuse David, when there was another reason for accusing him, more important than this - namely, that the beating of the priests took place on this occasion. But Christ does not mention this, but dwells only on this subject. He further explains the celebration of the Sabbath in other ways. First, He used David as an example to destroy their pride in the dignity of their face. When he has disgraced and humiliated their arrogance, then he resolves the dispute about the Sabbath more decisively. How? Or don’t you know that in the church “the priests in the church break the Sabbath, yet are innocent” (Matthew 12:5)? There, He says, a certain circumstance served as an occasion for the violation of the Sabbath, but here it is violated regardless of the circumstances. He did not directly resolve the issue, but first presents the violation of the Sabbath as something acceptable, and then strongly demonstrates its justice. The strongest proof had to come after, although the first had its force. Don't tell me that citing someone who has fallen into sin as an example does not mean being free from the accusation of such sin. When the person who committed any offense is not convicted, then such an act already serves as justification under the law. However, the Lord, not satisfied with this, objects stronger, saying that the act of His disciples is not a sin at all. In particular, He defeated the Pharisees by showing Himself as the abolitionist of the law, and justified the disciples in two ways - pointing to both the place and the Sabbath, and even threefold, since the action involved two circumstances and, moreover, something else in relation to the priests, and, more importantly, it was not even imputed to them as a sin - it is said: “yet innocent.” Do you see how many circumstances He brought? Place - because it happened, He says, in the church; face - because they were priests; time - because it was on Saturday; the most important thing is because they defile. Didn't say - they violated; but he said more strongly: they will defile. Finally, the Lord added that they not only were not executed for this, but were also free from condemnation. “But innocent,” He says. But do not think that David’s act was equal to the actions of the priests: it was done once and not by a priest and out of need, which is why David and those who were with him were worthy of forgiveness; this, on the contrary, is performed every Saturday, both by the priests, and in the church, and according to the law. Therefore, not only by leniency, but also by law, they are not subject to accusation. And I do not say this as an accusation against them, says the Lord, nor out of condescension, freeing them from guilt; but according to the law of truth. Apparently, He justifies the priests, but at the same time frees His disciples from accusations. When He says: The priests are innocent, are not the disciples more so? Are they not priests? But they are also more priests. Here is the Lord of the sanctuary himself - the Truth, not the image. That is why He said: “But I tell you that here is He who is greater than the church” (Matthew 12:6). And the Pharisees, despite the fact that they heard such important words, did not answer anything, since the proposed teaching did not concern the salvation of man. Then, since this teaching seemed difficult to the listeners, the Lord immediately covered it up, again justifying the disciples with His word, and denouncing the Pharisees, saying this: “If you knew what it means: I want mercy, and not sacrifice, you would not have condemned the innocent” (Matthew 12:7). Do you see how He again protects the disciples with His word and at the same time shows that they do not need justification at all? “Then they would not have condemned,” He says, “the innocent”; and now He applies the same thing to His disciples. However, this does not speak from Himself so much as it borrows from the law - He cited the prophetic word. 3. He goes on to indicate another reason: “For the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath” (Matthew 12:8), saying this about Himself. Mark says that He said this, applying it to human nature in general. He said: “The Sabbath is made for man, and man is not for the Sabbath” (Mark 2:27). But why was the one who gathered wood on the Sabbath punished (Num. 15ff)? Because the laws, neglected at the very beginning, would hardly have been observed later. The Sabbath brought many and great benefits at first; for example, she made people meek, philanthropic towards their neighbors; led them to the knowledge of the Providence and government of God and, little by little, as Ezekiel says, taught them to move away from evil and disposed them to spiritual objects (Ezekiel 20). If the one who laid down the law on the Sabbath had said to them: Do good on the Sabbath, but do not do evil, they would not have refrained from doing evil. Therefore, the general law is prescribed: do nothing. However, they could not resist, despite this. Thus, the Legislator himself, prescribing the law on the Sabbath, secretly indicated that in accordance with His will they should avoid (on this day) only evil deeds. Do not do anything, it is said, “only what each one eats” (Ex. 12:16). Meanwhile, everything was done in the sanctuary, and even with great care and double diligence. So the Lord revealed to them the truth and the very meaning. So, you say, Christ destroyed such a great good? No way; but multiplied it even more. The time had come for them to learn everything through the most sublime objects, and there was no longer any need to tie the hands of the one who, freed from evil, strives for everything good; there was no longer any need to learn from the law that God created everything; there was no longer any need for those who were called to imitate the goodness of God to be meek according to the power of the law. “Be,” He says, “merciful, just as your Father is merciful” (Luke 6:36). There was no longer any need to celebrate one day for those who were commanded to celebrate their entire lives. “Therefore let us celebrate,” it says, “not with old leaven, not with the leaven of vice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of purity and truth” (1 Cor. 5:8). There is no longer any need to stand at the ark and the golden altar for those who have within themselves the Lord of all and enter into communication with Him in all ways - through prayer, and offerings, and writings, and almsgiving, and by carrying Him within themselves. So, what need does the Sabbath have for someone who always celebrates and lives in heaven? Let us celebrate unceasingly, moving away from all evil. This is what the true holiday consists of. Let us strive for spiritual objects, leaving earthly ones, and celebrate with a spiritual celebration, keeping our hands from covetousness, freeing our bodies from unnecessary and useless labor, with which the Jewish people in Egypt were once burdened. We, acquiring gold, are no different from those who dug clay, made bricks, collected straw and were tormented. And now the devil forces people to make bricks, like Pharaoh once did. Indeed, what is gold if not clay? And what is silver if not straw? Like straw, it ignites the fire of lust, and gold, like clay, defiles the one who possesses it. That is why the Lord did not send us Moses from the Egyptian desert, but His Son from heaven. So, if you remain in Egypt after His coming, you will suffer in the same way as the Egyptians; If, having left Egypt, you go out together with spiritual Israel, then you will see all the miracles. 4. However, even this is not enough for salvation: it is necessary not only to leave Egypt, but also to enter the Promised Land. And the Jews, although, as Paul says, they crossed the Red Sea, and ate manna, and drank spiritual beer, yet they all perished (1 Cor. 10:1, 3-4). So, so that we do not suffer the same thing, let us not hesitate and turn back. But if you now hear the wicked spies slandering the narrow and sorrowful way, and saying the same things that those spies once said, imitate not the crowd of people, but Jesus and Caleb the son of Jephoniah, and do not retreat until you receive the promises and ascend into heaven. Do not consider travel difficult. “For if, while we were enemies, we were reconciled to God... much more, having been reconciled, we will be saved” (Rom. 5:10). Is this path narrow and deplorable, you say? But the previous path you walked is not only narrow and deplorable, but also impassable and full of fierce beasts. And just as it would not have been possible to pass through the Red Sea if a miracle had not happened there, so it would not have been possible for those who led a carnal life to ascend to heaven if baptism had not been given as a means to this. If the impossible has become possible, then the more difficult will be easy. But that, you say, was the action of grace alone. But that is why you should strive especially. If, where there was only grace, it performed an action, then will it not perform even more so when you add your labors to it? If she saved the inactive one, then won’t she help the active one all the more? Above I said that you, looking at the impossible (and yet accomplished), must dare against all obstacles; and now I say that if we stay awake, then obstacles will not hinder us. Look: death has been trampled upon, the devil has been cast down, the law of sin has been abolished, the grace of the Spirit has been bestowed, life has been shortened, burdens have been eased. Know this from experience itself; Look how many people there are who have done more than Christ commanded, and you are afraid not to fulfill even the measure of what was commanded. So, what excuse will you have when you are lazy to do what is legal, while others rush beyond the goal? We advise you to give alms from your property, but the other rejected everything that belonged to him. We beg you to live chastely with your wife, but the other has not even entered into marriage. We ask you not to be envious, while others lay down their very soul out of love for their neighbors. We ask you to be lenient and meek towards those who sin against you, and another, being struck on the cheek, substitutes another. What will we say, tell me? How can we respond without doing what others are so superior to us in? But they would not have excelled if the matter had not been very easy. Who is drying up: the one who envies the happiness of others, or the one who has fun and rejoices over it? Who fears everything and is constantly afraid: the chaste one, or the adulterer? Who rejoices with good hope: the one who steals, or the one who has mercy and gives from his property to the needy? So, thinking about this, let us not weaken on the path of virtue, but with all zeal let us begin praiseworthy deeds, let us labor here for a short time in order to receive eternal and unfading crowns, which may we all be worthy to receive, by the grace and love of our Lord Jesus Christ, to whom be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen. You might be interested in: