Беседа 19

Acts 8:26–27. And to Philip the Angel of the Lord said: Get up and go at noon, to the road that goes from Jerusalem to Gaza, to the one that is empty. He got up and went. The prudence of a eunuch. – Why Paul’s conversion occurred after the resurrection of Christ. 1. It seems to me that (Philip) received this command while in Samaria, because from Jerusalem (to Gaza) it is necessary to go not to noon, but to the north, and from Samaria to noon. "Which is empty". This is said so that he does not fear attack from the Jews. And he didn’t ask: for what? - but “he got up and went.” “And behold,” says (the writer), “an Ethiopian husband, a eunuch, a nobleman of Candace, queen of the Ethiopians, keeper of all her treasures, who came to Jerusalem to worship, returned and, sitting on his chariot, read the prophet Isaiah” (Acts 8:27, 28). Much praise has been said about him in these words; despite the fact that he lived in Ethiopia, was busy with so many things, was in a superstitious city, and there was no holiday, he came to worship in Jerusalem. His great zeal (is evident) from the fact that, sitting on his chariot, he read. “The Spirit said to Philip: Come and dock with this chariot. Philip came up and, hearing that he was reading the prophet Isaiah, said: Do you understand what you are reading? He said: How can I understand unless someone instructs me? (Acts 8:29–31). This is another commendable quality. Which? What he read without understanding. But then, after reading, he tries to understand. “And he asked Philip to come up and sit with him. And the passage from the Scripture that he read was this: He was led like a sheep to the slaughter, and like a lamb that is silent before its shearers, so He opens not His mouth. In His humiliation, His judgment was completed. But who will explain His generation? for His life will spring up from the earth. The eunuch said to Philip: I beg you to tell me: of whom is the prophet saying this? Is it about yourself or about someone else? Philip opened his mouth and began at this Scripture and preached the gospel to him about Jesus” (Acts 8:31–35). Do you see how the matter of his (conversion) is being arranged? At first he reads and does not understand; moreover, he reads the place where it is told about suffering, resurrection and gift (of the Lord). “Meanwhile, continuing their journey, they came to water; and the eunuch said, Here is the water; What prevents me from being baptized? ( Acts 8:36 ) Have you seen the readiness? Did you see the zeal? “And he ordered the chariot to stop, and both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water; and baptized him. When they came out of the water, the Holy Spirit descended on the eunuch, and Philip was taken away by the Angel of the Lord, and the eunuch no longer saw him, and continued on his way, rejoicing” (Acts 8:38, 39). Why, you say, did the Spirit of the Lord capture Philip? Then, that he had to go to other cities and preach; and this was done so that he himself would later, marveling at this, not consider what happened to him to be a human matter, but a divine one. “And Philip found himself in Ashdod, and as he passed through he preached the gospel to all the cities until he came to Caesarea” (Acts 8:40). And from this it is clear that he was one of the seven (deacons); he later ends up there in Caesarea. It was not without purpose that the Spirit delighted him; otherwise the eunuch would have asked him to accompany him, and Philip would have saddened him by not agreeing and refusing, since the time had not yet come (for this). Have you seen how angels promote preaching, not by preaching themselves, but by calling them (the apostles)? And here something worthy of surprise is revealed: what previously happened rarely and hardly happened, now happens here very often. In addition, this incident was some kind of omen that (the apostles) would convert foreigners. A credible testimony could have caused others who learned about it to be equally jealous. That is why the eunuch went “rejoicing”; and if he had not known, he would not have rejoiced. But what, you say, prevented him from knowing all this well, sitting on a chariot and especially in the desert? What it was was not clear. But let's look at what we read above. “And behold, an Ethiopian husband, a eunuch, a nobleman of Candace, queen of the Ethiopians.” From this it is clear that (the Ethiopians) were ruled by her; in ancient times women also ruled; This was their law. Thus, Philip did not know why he “went” into the desert, since it was not (before) the angel, but (after) who delighted him. The eunuch does not see any of this, either because he was not yet perfect, or because this is not a matter of physical, but of spiritual eyes, and does not yet know what Philip teaches him. Why doesn’t the angel appear to him and lead him to Philip? Perhaps because then he would not listen, but would only be amazed. Look at Philip’s wisdom: he did not reproach, he did not say: you don’t know, I will teach you; did not say: I know this well; did not flatter and say: blessed are you who read. Thus, his words were alien to arrogance and flattery, but more expressive of care and philanthropy. He himself had to ask, he himself had to wish. Having said: “Do you understand what you are reading?” he expresses that he knows that he knows nothing, and at the same time shows that the great treasure lies (in what he has read). 2. But look how prudently the eunuch also answers: “How can I,” he says, “understand if someone does not instruct me?” He didn’t look at (Philip’s) appearance, didn’t say: Who are you? - did not reproach, does not become vain, did not say that he knows, but admits that he does not understand; That's why he receives instructions. He shows the wound to the doctor; realized that (Philip) both knows this and wants to teach. He noticed (his) humility - since he was not in shiny clothes. He had such a desire to hear and listen to his words that the words (of Scripture): “he who seeks finds” (Matthew 7:8) were fulfilled on him. “And he asked,” it is said, “Philip to come up and sit with him.” Have you seen the diligence? Did you see the desire? “He asked Philip to come up and sit with him.” He didn't yet know what he would tell him, but he just thought he would hear something about the prophecy. It is a great honor (to Philip) that (the eunuch) not only imprisoned him, but “asked” him. "Philip came up and heard what he was reading." Approaching shows (in Philip) a desire to speak, and reading is a sign of diligence (in the eunuch). He read at a time when the sun produces intense heat. “And the passage from the Scripture which he read was this: He was led like a sheep to the slaughter.” And this serves as proof of his wisdom that he held in his hands such a prophet who is higher than others. That is why he speaks (to Philip) not with vanity, but calmly, and, moreover, he does not say this before being asked, when he asked him. In exactly the same way, he further says: “I ask you to tell me: about whom is the prophet saying this?” It seems to me that he did not know that the prophets spoke about others; or, if not so, then he did not know that they were talking about themselves in another person. Let us be ashamed, both poor and rich, of this keeper of treasures! Then “continuing their journey, they came to water; and the eunuch said, “Here is the water.” This is (a sign of) a strongly flaming soul. “What prevents me from being baptized?” Do you see his readiness? He does not say: baptize me, and is not silent; but he says something in between, expressing both desire and reverence: “What prevents me from being baptized?” Look how he has already received perfect (knowledge) of dogmas; after all, the prophecy contained everything: incarnation, suffering, resurrection, ascension and future judgment; This, in particular, produced in him a strong desire (to be baptized). Shame on you who remain unenlightened! “And he ordered the chariot to stop.” He said and at the same time commanded before he heard (the answer). “When they came out of the water, Philip was taken away by the angel of the Lord.” It was good (done) so that it would be clear that what was happening was the work of God, and so that (the eunuch) would not think that (Philip) was a simple man. “And he continued on his way, rejoicing.” This (the writer) said, expressing that he would be saddened if he knew (about the removal of Philip); so, out of great joy, upon receiving the Spirit, he did not notice what was happening around him. “And Philip,” he says, “ended up in Azoth.” And Philip received great benefit from this. What he heard about the prophets, about Habakkuk, Ezekiel and others, he saw fulfilled in himself, finding himself having instantly traveled a long way; “and ended up in Azoth”, stops where he was supposed to preach. “Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, came to the high priest and asked him for letters to Damascus to the synagogues, so that whoever he found following this teaching, both men and women, would be bound and brought to Jerusalem” (Acts 9:1, 2). In good time (the writer) talks about Paul’s jealousy in order to show that he was carried away by jealousy. Not yet satisfied with the murder of Stephen and not satisfied with the persecution and dispersion of the Church, he comes to the bishop. Here the words of Christ spoken to the disciples are fulfilled: “Whoever kills you will think that he is serving God” (John 16:2). This is what he did, but not like the Jews - let it not be! He acted out of jealousy, as can be seen from the fact that he also went to foreign cities; and they did not care about what was happening in Jerusalem, but sought only one thing - to enjoy honor. Why did he go to Damascus? It was a large, metropolitan city; he was afraid that (the believers) would not penetrate there either. And look at his zeal and zeal, how he acted according to the law. He does not come to the ruler, but to the bishop. “He came to the high priest and asked him for letters to Damascus to the synagogues, so that he would find someone who would follow this teaching.” “The following” (the writer) calls believers, whom everyone then called that, perhaps because they walked along the path leading to heaven. Why did he not receive the power to punish them there, but leads them to Jerusalem? To carry out punishment here with greater authority. And look, exposing himself to such danger, he is, however, afraid, lest he suffer something bad; therefore, he takes others with him, perhaps out of fear, or because he went against many, he takes many, so that more boldly, “whoever he finds following this teaching, both men and women, he will bind and bring to Jerusalem.” On the other hand, with this journey he wanted to show all of them that all this is his (business); and they didn’t care about it. And mind you, he has thrown (into prison) before. So, what they could not do, he could do out of jealousy. “As he walked and approached Damascus, suddenly a light from heaven shone around him. He fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to him: Saul, Saul! Why are you persecuting Me? (Acts 9:3, 4). 3. Why didn't this happen in Jerusalem? Why not in Damascus? So that others could not tell about it otherwise, but so that he himself, who walked with such a goal, would tell and be worthy of belief. This is what he tells in his defensive speech before Agrippa (Acts 26:10–18). He suffered with his eyes, because excessive light usually blinds, but vision has its own measure. They say that excessive sound deafens and amazes; but he (the Lord) only blinded him and extinguished his rage with fear, so that he heard the words: “Saul, Saul! Why are you persecuting Me? He does not say to him: believe, and nothing like that; but he reproaches, and in a reproach he seems to say: for what offense from Me, great or small, are you doing this? “He said: Who are you, Lord?” Here he recognizes himself as a slave. “The Lord said: I am Jesus, whom you persecute” (Acts 9:5). As if he were saying this: don’t think that you are fighting with people. “The people who walked with him stood dumbfounded, hearing” Paul’s “voice, but seeing no one” (Acts 9:7) to whom he answered. Naturally, because they were honored to hear less. If they had heard that voice (of the Lord), even then they would not have believed; and when they saw Paul answering, they were amazed. But “get up and go into the city; and it will be told to you what you must do” (Acts 9:6). See how (the Lord) does not immediately reveal everything to him, but (first) only softens his soul; and commanding him what to do, at the same time gives him good hope that he will again receive his sight. “The people walking with him stood in a daze, hearing the voice, but not seeing anyone. Saul got up from the ground, and with his eyes open he saw no one. And they led him by the hand and brought him to Damascus” (Acts 9:7, 8). They bring in the spoils (taken) from the devil, his vessels, as if after the capture of some city or capital. And it is truly amazing that the enemies and opponents themselves introduced it before the eyes of everyone. “And for three days he saw not, nor did he eat, nor drink” (Acts 9:9). Has anything like this ever happened? Paul's conversion serves as a consolation, rewarding the sorrow for Stephen, which, although in itself there was something comforting in the fact that he departed (to the Lord) in such a way, but now received this (consolation); Also, the villages of Samaria brought a lot of consolation through their conversion. Why, you say, did this happen not at the beginning, but after? To show that Christ is truly risen. Whoever persecuted Him, did not believe His death and resurrection and persecuted His disciples, how, tell me, would he have believed if the power of the Crucified One had not been great? Let us assume that those (disciples) acted out of devotion to Him; but what can you say about this? On the other hand, he converted after the resurrection, and not then, so that his enmity would be revealed more clearly. He who was so furious that he shed blood and threw him into prison, suddenly believes. It was not enough that he did not treat Christ; but it was necessary that he cruelly persecute the believers, and he reached the extreme degree of fury and was crueler than everyone else. But when he lost his sight, then he recognized the signs of His power and love for mankind. Or so (this was) so that someone would not say that Saul was pretending. How could he pretend to be someone who thirsted for blood, came to the priests, exposed himself to danger, persecuted and punished even outside (Jerusalem)? And after all this he recognizes the power (of Christ). But why did the light shine upon it not inside the city, but in front of it? Because (then) many would not only not believe, but would also begin to mock, just as when they heard a voice descending from above, they said: “It is thunder” (John 12:29); and they should have believed him when he told about what happened to him. And they led him bound, although not by the bonds imposed on him, they led him who himself hoped to lead others. But why didn't he eat or drink? He repented of his deeds, confessed, prayed, and asked God. If anyone says that this was a matter of necessity - after all, Elymas also suffered (Acts 13:11) - we will say: yes, he too suffered, but remained as he was. Therefore, did he not do this without coercion? What could be more striking than the earthquake that occurred during the resurrection (of Christ), - the soldiers who announced (this), - other signs, - and the fact that they saw Him risen? But this was not coercion, but suggestion. Otherwise, why wouldn’t the Jews believe when they hear about all this? It is obvious that he acted sincerely. He would not have converted if this had not happened, so everyone had to believe him. He was no less than those who preached about the resurrection (of Christ), even more reliable than them, (as) he suddenly converted. He had no relations with any of the believers, but was converted in Damascus, or, better said, this happened to him before Damascus. I ask the Jew: why, tell me, did Paul convert? He saw so many signs and was not converted. His teacher (Gamaliel) was converted, but he was not converted. Who convinced him? Or better yet, who suddenly aroused such jealousy in him that he himself wanted to be excommunicated for the sake of Christ (Rom. 9:3)? The truth of the matter is obvious. However, (let us remember) what I said, and we will be ashamed of the eunuch who is enlightened and reads. Do you see what power he had, what wealth, and yet he did not rest along the way? What kind of person was he, therefore, at home, if even during the journey he did not allow himself to be idle? What was he like at night? 4. You who are distinguished by honors, listen and imitate humility and piety. Although he was returning home, he did not say to himself: I am returning to my fatherland, there I will take a bath (baptism), as many would say indifferently. He did not demand signs, did not demand miracles, but only from the prophet did he believe. That is why Paul, grieving for himself, says: “But for this reason I received mercy:” “He recognized me as faithful, appointing me to serve, who was formerly a blasphemer and a persecutor and an offender, but received mercy because I acted this way out of ignorance, in unbelief” (1 Tim. 1:12-13, 16). And truly, this eunuch is worthy of surprise. He did not see Christ, did not see the signs; saw Jerusalem still standing (safe), and believed Philip. Why did he become like this? He cared for his soul, listened to the Scriptures, and practiced reading (them). After all, the thief saw the signs, and the wise men saw the star; but he saw nothing of the kind and believed: how useful is reading the Scriptures! What about Pavel? Didn't he also study the law? But, it seems to me, he was deliberately left (in such a state) for what I said above, by the will of Christ, who wanted to attract the Jews to Himself by all means. If they had intelligence, nothing would benefit them as much as this (reading the Scriptures). After all, it could attract them (to Christ) more than signs and anything else, just as nothing usually tempts more rude people. So, look how, even after the scattering of the apostles, God creates signs. The Jews accused the apostles and threw them into prison; but God does signs. And look what they are. The bringing out of prison was His sign: the bringing of Philip was His sign; Paul's conversion was His sign; His appearance to Stephen was a sign. And notice what honor is given to Paul, and what honor to the eunuch. Here (to Paul) Christ Himself even appears, perhaps because of (his) bitterness and because otherwise he would not have believed. By listening to these miracles, we will make ourselves worthy. But now many do not even come to church and do not know what is read (in it); The eunuch was outside, sitting on his chariot, carefully reading the Scriptures. But you are not; none of you has a Bible in his hands, and would rather (take) anything else than the Bible. Why does he meet with Philip not before (visiting) Jerusalem, but after that? He should not have seen the apostles persecuted, because he was still weak; and before it would not have been as convenient as when the prophet instructed him. So now, if any of you would like to listen to the prophets, then he will not need signs. But, if you like, let’s consider the prophecy itself, which it says. “He was led like a sheep to the slaughter; in His humiliation His judgment was completed.” From here he learned that (Christ) was crucified, that His life was taken from the earth, that He committed no sin, that He could save others, that His race was inscrutable, that the stones were broken, that the veil was torn, that the dead rose from their graves; or better, Philip told him about all this, only regarding (reading) from the prophet. Truly, reading the Scriptures is important. This is how what Moses said was fulfilled: “When you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise up,” remember the Lord your God (Deut. 6:7). Especially on the way, in the desert, when no one interferes, we are more capable of reflection. And the eunuch believed on the way, and Paul on the way; but it was not another who attracted him (Paul), but Christ Himself. This is more important than what the apostles did; more important because, while the apostles were in Jerusalem, and not one of them was in Damascus, he returned from there as believers; and those in Damascus knew that he was still coming from Jerusalem as an unbeliever, since he was carrying letters to bind the believers. Just as an excellent doctor (uses medicine) when the fever is still in full force, so Christ (at this time) gave him weakness, because it was necessary to keep him in the midst of his fury. Then he had better humble himself and repent of his cruel enterprises. But again we need to turn the floor to you. What, tell me, are the Scriptures for? If it were up to you, they would all be destroyed. What is the Church for? Bury books in the ground: perhaps not such a condemnation (will befall you), not such a punishment. If someone had buried them in the dirt and not listened to them, then even then they would not have offended them as much as they do now. What, tell me, is offensive there? That someone buried them. What's here? That we don't listen to them. Tell me: when does someone offend the most, when he does not answer the silent one, or when he does not answer the speaking one? Of course, when the speaker. So now, the greater the insult, the greater the neglect (you render) when you do not listen to the speaker. “We do not hear from you,” the Jews said in ancient times to the prophets (1 Sam. 8:19, Jer. 44:16); You make it worse by saying: don’t talk, we won’t do it. They kept the prophets from speaking, as if out of some reverence for their words; and you, out of extreme negligence, don’t even do this. Believe me, if you had stopped our mouths by placing your hands on them, you would not have offended us then as much as you do now. Tell me, is he who listens and disobeys more disdainful, or is he who does not even listen at all? 5. But let us delve into this subject regarding insult. If someone restrained the reproacher and stopped his mouth, feeling his reproaches, and the other did not care at all and did not pay attention to him, then which of them would show more disdain? Isn't it the last one? After all, he shows that he feels the blow; and this one seems to block the mouth of God himself. Were you horrified by what was said? But listen to how it happens. The mouth through which God speaks is the mouth of God. Just as these lips are the lips of our soul, although the soul itself does not have lips, so the lips of the prophets are God’s. Listen and be horrified. The deacon, on behalf of everyone, stands and, exclaiming loudly, says: “let us come”; and this is often. This voice that he emits is the general voice of the Church, but no one listens. After him, the reader begins: “the prophecies of Isaiah,” and again no one listens, although the prophecy does not contain anything human. Then he proclaims in everyone’s ears: “This is what the Lord says,” and no one listens either. But what am I saying? Something terrible and terrible is read; but even then no one listens. And what do many people say? They always say the same thing is read. This is what especially destroys you. If you knew all this, then all the more you should not show disdain; and at the spectacles the same thing always happens, and, however, you do not know (in them) satiety. What “same thing” do you dare to talk about when you don’t even know the names of the prophets? Aren’t you ashamed to say that you don’t listen because the same thing is always read, when you don’t even know the names of those you read (writers), although you always listen to the same thing. You yourself admitted that you read the same thing. If I were saying this to (your) condemnation, then you should have turned to another justification, and not (to one that serves) to your own condemnation. Tell me: do you not admonish your son? But if he said that it’s always the same, wouldn’t you take it as an insult? Then it would be possible not to say the same thing, if we knew it and showed it with our deeds; or better, and then reading (the same) would not be superfluous. What can compare with Timothy? But, however, in his letter Paul also said to him: “engage in reading, instruction, teaching” (1 Tim. 4:13). It is impossible, never possible, to exhaust the meaning of the Scriptures. This is a source that has no limit. They say: I have learned, and that is enough for me. But do you want me to show that not everything is the same? How many people do you think have talked about the Gospels? And they all said something new and special. The more one studies the Scriptures, the more clearly one sees, the more one contemplates the pure light. How much more can I say? What, tell me, is a prophecy? What are narratives? What is a parable? What is an allegory? What is an image? What is a symbol? What are the Gospels? Tell me only what is clear: why are the Gospels called that way? Although you have often heard that the gospel (ευαγγέλια) should not contain anything deplorable, however, there is much that is deplorable in it. “Where their worm does not die,” they say, “and the fire is not quenched” (Mark 9:44); also: “and he will cut him in pieces, and subject him to the same fate as the hypocrites” (Matthew 24:51); also: “And then I will declare to them: I never knew you; Depart from me, you workers of iniquity” (Matthew 7:23). Let us not delude ourselves by imagining that they are called that (only) in Greek, or that all this does not apply to us. But you are speechless, and, as if amazed, you stand, bowed down. The gospel should not contain any of the (rules of) activity, but only express what is favorable; and, however, they contain many rules of activity, such as, for example, the following: “whoever... does not hate his father and mother cannot be My disciple” (Luke 14:26); and again: “I did not come to bring peace, but a sword” (Matthew 10:34); and again: “in the world you will have tribulation” (John 16:33). Beautiful (suggestions); but this is not the gospel. The gospel would be this: it will be good for you, as people usually say to each other. What would you like to say to me? Your father and your mother will come. But they don’t say: do this. Tell me again: how do they differ from (the books of) the prophets? Why are they not called Gospels, although they also contain good news, such as: “The lame shall leap like a deer” (Is. 35:6); “The Lord gave the word to those who brought good news with great power” 22 (Ps. 67:12); “I create new heavens and a new earth” (Isaiah 65:17). Why are they not called Gospels, or are they called prophecy? If you, not knowing what the Gospels are, so neglect reading the Scriptures, then what will I tell you? I’ll also ask about something else: why four Gospels? Why not ten, why not twenty? Why did not many people begin to compile the Gospels? Why not one? Why disciples (of Christ)? Why not those who were not disciples? Why (holy books are called) Scriptures at all? Meanwhile, on the contrary, the Old Testament says: “I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah” (Jer. 31:31). Where are those who say that it is always (read) the same thing? If you knew that even a person lived for thousands of years, and then (for him) it would not be the same here, then you would not say this. Believe me, I will not tell you anything more about this, either privately or publicly; but if anyone asks, I will not refuse (to answer); if not, then I'll leave it. And we have already caused you grief by always speaking directly about everything and not leaving out what is needed. You've heard quite a few questions: consider and tell me the reason: why are the Gospels (that's what they're called)? Why not prophecies? Why are there rules of activity in the Gospels? If one is perplexed, then let the other think, and communicate your (thoughts) to each other. And then we will shut up. If what was said did not bring you any benefit, then even more so (it would be useless) if we added something else. Truly, we would pour (water) into a leaky barrel; and therefore you (would have suffered) a greater punishment. So we'll shut up. And to prevent this from happening is up to you. If we see your zeal, then perhaps we will again begin to say that you too will prosper more and more, and we will rejoice over you, glorifying in everything the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, to Whom be glory, power, greatness, honor with the beginningless Father and His Holy Spirit, now and ever, and to the ages of ages. Amen. These conversations were delivered by the saint in Constantinople in 400 or 401. The paragraphs in the text were arranged by us – Editorial staff of “ABC of Faith” Translation by P. Yungerov – Editorial office of “The ABC of Faith” You might be interested in: