Беседа 34

Acts 15:35–36. Paul and Barnabas lived in Antioch, teaching and preaching, together with many others, the word of the Lord. After some time, Paul said to Barnabas: Let us go again and visit our brothers in all the cities in which we preached the word of the Lord, how they live. About the disagreement between Paul and Barnabas. – Distinction between visions and dreams. - The wisdom of dumb animals. “The most important thing is to decorate the soul.” 1. Look again at their humility, how they teach the word together with others. Luke depicted to us the morals of the other apostles and showed that one of them was more gentle-hearted and lenient, the other more severe and strict. There are different talents; and this, as you know, is also a gift. One is necessary in relation to people with certain morals, and the other with others, so that if they were changed, they would become useless. Apparently there was some disagreement (between Paul and Barnabas); but all this happens according to God’s dispensation, so that each of them takes his or her proper place. On the other hand, it is necessary that not everyone should be in equal honor, but one should be in charge, and the other should be subordinate; and this is according to the dispensation (of God). Moreover, the Cyprians did not show anything like those who were in Antioch and others; For some, a soft-hearted disposition was needed, while for others, it was the opposite. “Barnabas wanted to take John, called Mark, with him. But Paul decided not to take the one who lagged behind them in Pamphylia and did not go with them to the work for which they were sent. Hence there was grief, so that they were separated from each other; and Barnabas, taking Mark, sailed to Cyprus; and Paul, choosing Silas for himself, set out, having been entrusted by the brethren to the grace of God” (Acts 15:37–40). And in the prophets we see different characters and different morals; for example, Elijah is strict, Moses is meek. So here too – Paul is more firm. But also look at his meekness. He asked, says (the writer), “not to take those who lag behind them in Pamphylia.” Just as a military commander would not want to have a constantly negligent squire with him, so (didn’t want) the apostle. This admonished others and corrected him. So, you say, Barnabas was not of good character? Not at all; it is quite absurd to think of him that way. In fact, isn’t it absurd to consider him bad for such an unimportant matter? And look, firstly, no evil came from this, that they were separated from each other, thus becoming sufficient for all the pagans, but on the contrary - a great good; secondly, if this had not happened, they would not have easily decided to separate from each other. Better marvel that (the writer) did not keep silent about this. You say: if it was necessary to divide, then it was possible without strife? But here their human properties were especially revealed. If this should be in Christ, much more in them. On the other hand, discord would not be reprehensible if everyone argued about such subjects and with such justice. If any of them were upset, seeking their own benefit and their own honor, then indeed (it would be disapproving); If each of them, wanting to teach and instruct, goes one way and the other another, what is reprehensible here? They did a lot according to human reasoning: after all, they were not stones or trees. And look, Paul expresses displeasure (at Mark), but he also gives a reason. He respected Barnabas for his great humility, for the fact that he was with him and shared so many labors with him; but he did not respect him so much as to neglect his duty. Which of them advised better is not our business to investigate; at least, it was a great vision (of God) that some (of the believers) should have been worthy of their second visit, and others not even one. In Antioch they not only stayed, but taught. What was taught? What did they preach? What (was needed) both for believers and for non-believers. There were many temptations, and therefore their presence was necessary. As for their quarrel, we should look not at what they disagreed about, but at what they agreed with each other. Their separation served to the great good that came about on this occasion. So what? Did they part as enemies? Not at all. And after this you see how Paul in his epistles mentions Barnabas with great praise (2 Cor. 8:18). “There was grief,” says (the writer), but not enmity, not discord. The feud caused them to be divided; and it’s good, because after each of them separately undertook something useful, he would not have done it just because they were together. 2. It even seems to me that their separation occurred by agreement, and that they said to each other: since I do not want this, but you do, so that we do not quarrel, we will separate into different places. So they did it, completely yielding to each other. Barnabas wanted Paul's opinion to remain, and therefore separated; Paul also wanted the opinion (of Barnabas) to remain, and therefore he does the same and separates. Oh, if only we were separated from each other in the same way in order to go to preaching! “Paul,” says (the writer), “choosing Power for himself, set out, having been entrusted by the brethren to the grace of God.” This man is amazing and very great! And this feud brought great benefit to Mark. The severity of Paul admonished him, and the kindness of Barnabas ensured that he did not stay: so the discord that existed between them achieves one goal - benefit. Seeing that Paul was deciding to leave him, (Mark) became very afraid and condemned himself; and seeing that Barnabas was so disposed towards him, he loved him very much; Thus, the discord between the teachers corrected the student: so he was far from being seduced by her. If they did it for their own honor, then of course (he might be tempted); but since they argued for his salvation and solely to show how wise the advice (of God) was, who honored him with such an honor, then what is reprehensible here? 3. Consider the wisdom of Paul: he does not go to other cities until he has visited those who have already received the word. “And he went through Syria and Cilicia, establishing the churches” (Acts 15:41). “He came as far as Derbe and Lystra” (Acts 16:1). It would not be prudent to walk in vain. Let us do the same: we will instruct those before us in advance, so that they do not serve as an obstacle to those who follow. “Let us visit,” he says, “our brothers in all the cities in which we preached the word of the Lord, how they live.” He did not know about this properly, and therefore went to visit the brethren. You see how he is constantly awake, cares, does not stay in one place, although he was exposed to many dangers. Do you see that his arrival in Antioch was not out of fear? As a doctor, he went to the sick and explained the need for visiting in the words: “in which we preached the word of the Lord.” Barnabas separated and no longer accompanied him. “Having chosen Power for himself,” says (the writer), “having been entrusted by the brethren to the grace of God.” What does it mean? Those. prayed and asked God. Look how much the prayer of the brothers can always do. And then he went on foot, wanting to benefit those who saw him along the way; and prudent. When they hurried, they swam; but now it’s not like that. “And behold, there was a certain disciple named Timothy, whose mother was a Jew and whose father was a Greek, and of whom the brethren who were in Lystra and Iconium testified. Paul wanted to take him with him; and he took it and circumcised it for the sake of the Jews who were in those places; for everyone knew about his father that he was a Greek” (Acts 16:1-3). Paul's wisdom is amazing! He, who rebelled so much against circumcision, used all measures and calmed down not before reaching the goal, then, when this teaching was approved, circumcised the disciple. Not only does he not forbid others, but he also does it himself. There is no one wiser than Paul. He looked at the benefit in everything and did not do anything simply out of prejudice. “Paul wanted him,” says (the writer), “to take him with him.” It's amazing that he even brought it with him. “For the sake of the Jews,” he says, “who were in those places.” This is the reason for circumcision; they would not listen to a word from the uncircumcised. But what? Look at the matter itself: he circumcised in order to stop circumcision, because he preached the definitions of the apostles. Do you see struggle and through struggle creation? Not prompted by others, but by doing the opposite themselves, they thus organized the Church. They made a determination not to circumcise, but he circumcises. “And daily,” says (the writer), “they increased in number” (Acts 16:5). Do you see the benefit of this circumcision? Then he no longer stays with them, as if he had come to visit them, but what? Moves on. “And the churches were established by faith and increased in number daily. Having passed through Phrygia and the Galatian country, they were not allowed by the Holy Spirit to preach the word in Asia. Having reached Mysia, they decided to go to Bithynia; but the Spirit did not allow them” (Acts 16:5–7). Why they “were not allowed”, the writer does not say, but only says that they “were not allowed”, teaching us to submit and not examine the reasons, and showing that they did a lot of things humanly. “Having passed Mysia, they descended into Troas. And Paul had a vision at night: a certain man, a Macedonian, appeared, asking him and saying, “Come to Macedonia and help us” (Acts 16:8-9). Why was there a vision, and not the Holy Spirit himself commanded? He wanted to attract them in this way. And (other) saints had visions, and (Paul) himself at first saw in a vision a man who came and laid his hand on him (Acts 9:12). In order to encourage him to go there so that the sermon can spread. Also for the following reason, he is forbidden to stay in other cities when Christ encourages him (to go there). These had to listen to John, and for a long time, and perhaps they did not really need it, but they had to come there. Then he leaves, going to the other side (of the sea). “After this vision, we immediately decided to go to Macedonia, concluding that the Lord had called us to preach the gospel there. So, starting from Troas, we arrived straight to Samothrace, and the next day to Naples, and from there to Philippi: this is the first city in that part of Macedonia, a colony. We stayed in this city for several days” (Acts 16:10–12). Thus, Christ himself appears to him, saying: “You must appear before Caesar” (Acts 27:24). Then (the writer), as if telling a story, talks about places and shows where (Paul) stopped, namely in big cities, and passed others. Being a colony is the dignity of a city. But let's turn to the above. (Paul) introduces Barnabas to the need for travel when he says: “Let us go again, let us visit our brothers in all the cities in which we preached the word of the Lord, how they live.” But it was not appropriate for him to ask when he intended to denounce him later. 4. The same thing happened between God and Moses. One asks, and the other is angry; for example, when he says: “If only her (Mariam’s) father would spit in her face” (Num. 12:14), and again: “Leave Me therefore, that My anger may be kindled against them, and I will destroy them” (Ex. 32:10), and when Samuel mourned Saul (1 Sam. 15:35). But great good came from both. So here one is angry, and the other is not. The same happens between us. The quarrel was not in vain, but to enlighten him (Mark), and so that the matter (of preaching) would not seem like a joke. Otherwise, he would have given in now (Barnabas), who always gave in and loved Paul so much that even earlier he found him in Tarsus (Acts 11:25), brought him to the apostles, gave alms with him, and together with him accepted what was agreed with the definition (of the apostles). It was not because of such a matter that grief arose between them; but they separate from each other in order to separately teach and perfect those who need their teaching. So in another place (Paul) says: “But you, brethren, do not lose heart in doing good” (2 Thess. 3:13), and although he reproaches some, he commands to do good to everyone. This is what we usually do. It seems to me that here, along with Paul, others were dissatisfied; He, addressing each of them separately, does everything, exhorts, admonishes. Consent can do a lot, love can do a lot. Even if you asked for too much, even if you were unworthy, you will be heard for your good intentions; don't be afraid. “Passing,” says (the writer), cities. “And behold, there was a certain disciple named Timothy, to whom the brethren who were in Lystra and Iconium testified.” Great is the faith of Timothy if it is witnessed by everyone. When Barnabas separated, Paul finds an equal to him, as he himself says: “remembering your tears, ... your unfeigned faith, which first dwelt in your grandmother Lois and your mother Eunice” (2 Tim. 1:4-5). “And he took it,” says (the writer), “and circumcised it”; and for what, he shows, adding: “for the sake of the Jews who were in those places.” So, therefore (Timothy) is circumcised, or for the sake of his father, who was a Greek and therefore was not circumcised. Look how the law has already been abandoned. Others think that he was born after his (father’s) preaching was announced; but perhaps this is not fair, since “you have been from childhood,” says (Paul), “knowing the sacred scriptures” (2 Tim. 3:15). Therefore, we must accept the first; if not so, then because (Paul) intended to make him a bishop and he should not have remained uncircumcised. The pagans did not need to observe anything like that; and this was important, since they had been tempted by this for so long. The beginning of the abolition (of the law) was laid by the fact that the pagans did not observe it and did not suffer any harm and were not deprived of anything in relation to the faith; That's why they willingly left him. Since he intended to preach, in order not to hit the Jews doubly, he circumcised him, although he was of dual origin - from a Greek father and from a believer mother. And although the matter regarding the pagans was important, he, despite this, circumcised it himself, because the sermon had to spread. And look: from an action contrary to the definition of the apostles, great good comes here. “And they increased in number every day,” says (the writer). Do you see that circumcision not only did no harm, but also brought great benefit? “After this vision,” he says, “we immediately decided to go to Macedonia, concluding that the Lord called us to preach the gospel there.” Notice, not through an angel, like Philip or Cornelius, but how? - in a vision (the Lord) appears to him, only in a human form, and not in a Divine one. Where it was easy to convince, there (He appears) in a more human form, and where with greater difficulty, there is a more Divine image. Thus, when he was attracted only to preach, he had a dream for this, and when he needed to be restrained from preaching, this is revealed by the Holy Spirit. So it was with Peter (when the Spirit said to him): “Get up, come down” (Acts 10:20). The Spirit did not do easy things, but a dream was enough for this. So Joseph, when it was easy to convince him, had a dream, and others a vision (Matthew 2:13). So did Cornelius and himself (Paul). And so, says (the writer), “a certain man, a Macedonian, appeared, asking him and speaking.” He did not say: commanding, but: “asking” for those who needed healing. What does “concluding” mean? That means: guessing. And from the fact that the vision was to Paul, and not to anyone else, and from the fact that they were restrained by the Spirit, and from the fact that they were on the borders (of Macedonia), from all this they drew this conclusion. On the other hand, the voyage itself indicated this, because in a short time they reached the very root of Macedonia. Thus, it turns out that the feud was beneficial. And if the Holy Spirit had not shown His action, Macedonia would not have accepted the word. And such success is a sign that what happened is not a human affair. It is not said that Barnabas was upset, but that “grief arose between them.” If he was not grieved, neither was Paul. 5. Knowing this, let us not just read the Scriptures, but study and be edified. After all, (nothing) was written in vain. It is a great evil not to know the Scriptures. What we should benefit from, we receive harm from. So often medicines that have healing power by nature, when the user does not know how to use them well, cause harm and disorder; and a weapon with which one can defend oneself, for one who does not know how to handle it, serves to harm. And the reason is that we are looking for everything else more than spiritual benefit, and we look more at extraneous things than at our own (true) benefit. We often worry about the strength of a house and would not tolerate seeing it deteriorate, collapse and be damaged by storms; We do not care about the soul at all, but although we see that its foundation and the very building and roof are being destroyed, we do not attach any care. Also, if we have livestock, we try to make it comfortable for it, we hire grooms and farriers, and we strain all our strength: we take care of the premises, we instill in the attendants so that they do not drive it unnecessarily and at random, do not put unnecessary weight on it, do not let it out untimely in the middle of the night, be content with food, and we establish many rules regarding the care of dumb animals; but we don’t care about the soul at all. But what am I saying about animals that are good for us? Many people keep small birds that are of no use, but only amuse them; and regarding them we have many rules and nothing is omitted or forgotten; We care about everything more than about ourselves. This is how we became less valuable than anything else. If someone insults us by calling us a dog, then we are insulted; and disgracing ourselves not in word, but in deed, and not taking care of our souls even as much as we do about dogs, we do not feel any grief. Do you see how everything (with us) is covered in darkness? How many take care of dogs so that they are not fed more than adequately, so that they are fast and suitable for hunting, prompted by hunger and thirst, but do not take care of themselves and do not try to curb their voluptuousness; The dumb are taught wisdom, and they allow themselves to descend into the savagery of animals! It seems like a mystery. Where, you say, are these wise, dumb ones? But isn’t it great wisdom when a dog, prompted by hunger, having grabbed the prey, refrains from the food that has fallen to it, and, seeing ready-made food in front of it, tormented by hunger, waits for its master? Be ashamed of yourselves; train your bellies to be also wise. There is no excuse for you. If you can communicate such wisdom to an animal who by nature cannot speak or think, then all the more could you communicate it to yourself. This is a matter of human effort, not nature; otherwise all dogs would be like that. So, be (in this case) like dogs. You yourself force me to borrow an example from here; it should come from celestial objects, but if I start talking about any of these objects, you say that this is too high; That’s why I don’t even talk about celestial objects. If I cite Paul as an example, you say that he was an apostle; That’s why I’m not even talking about Paul. If I give an example of any other person, you say that he could (do this); That’s why I’m not pointing to a person, but to an animal, and an animal that has not received such properties from nature, lest you say that it does this by nature, and not of its own free will, and, what is even more surprising, not of its own free will, but because of your efforts. It does not reason that it is tired, that it is tired from running, that it has caught prey with its own labors, but, leaving all this aside, it fulfills the will of the master and becomes higher than the belly. Yes, you say, it awaits approval, hopes to receive abundant food. Tell yourself: the dog, in the hope of future happiness, neglects the present, but you do not want to neglect the present in the hope of future benefits. But he (you will say) knows that if he tastes food untimely and against the will of his master, he will lose not only this, but also the food usually assigned to him, and even receive a beating instead of food. But you cannot know this, and what he knows how to do out of habit, you do not do out of reason. Let us at least imitate the dogs. They say that hawks and eagles do the same; What they do with hares and chamois, these do with birds, and also according to the teaching of man. All this can expose us, all this can condemn us. I'll say it again. Having taken wild and ferocious horses, which kick and bite, experienced people in a short time shape them so that the rider who sits on them enjoys their slender gait; and when the soul acts disorderly, no one cares about it; she gallops, and fights, and throws herself to the ground like a child, and does many outrages, but no one puts a lasso, no fetters, no bridles on her, and does not imprison an experienced horseman, i.e. Christ. Thus everything was corrupted. If you force dogs to master their stomachs, tame the fury of a lion and the ferocity of horses and teach birds to speak, then isn’t it strange for irrational creatures to impart the properties of rational ones, and to allow irrational passions in rational ones? No, there is no excuse for us. We will be accused by all who do what is right, both the faithful and the unfaithful - after all, the unfaithful also do what is right - and not only people, but also animals and dogs; Let us also condemn ourselves, who do good when we want, but when we are careless, we are carried away into evil. Often, many of the most vicious people, when they wanted, corrected themselves. And the reason is, as I said, that we are in every possible way looking for the benefit of others, and not our own. Have you built a magnificent house, you have taken care of the improvement of the house, not your own; whether you received good clothes, (you took care of) the body, and not about yourself; if it’s a good horse, so too. No one cares that the soul be good, whereas with the goodness of the soul there is no need for those goods, and without it there is no benefit from them. As for a bride, even if her bridal chamber was decorated with golden coverings, even if she was surrounded by a host of the most beautiful and beautiful women, roses and crowns, even if the groom was beautiful, and the maids and girlfriends were all beautiful, there is no benefit from it if she herself is extremely ugly; if she is beautiful, then even without all this there is no harm for her, but on the contrary (benefit), because the ugly will seem even uglier, and the beautiful without this will be even more beautiful - just like the soul, if it is good, not only does not need this, but it even darkens its beauty. A wise man, as we will see, shines not so much in wealth as in poverty; in the first case, many attribute wisdom to his wealth and the fact that he does not need money; if he lives in poverty, and yet is distinguished by all (virtues) and does not allow himself to do anything shameful, then no one else will share with him the crown that he acquired through wisdom. So, let's decorate the soul if we want to be rich. What good is it if your mules are white, fat and beautiful, and you, sitting on them, are thin, unclean, and ugly? What good is it if your carpets are soft and beautiful and skillfully dotted with various colors, but your soul is dressed in rags, or completely naked and ugly? What good is it if the horse moves smoothly, or looks more like a dancer than a walker, and is decorated as if for a wedding feast, and the one sitting on it is lame (in soul) more lame and upset in the hands and feet of the more drunken and paralyzed? Tell me, if someone gave you a good horse but harmed your body, what good would it do? And now your soul is damaged and you don't care at all. Someday, I exhort you, let us take care of ourselves. Let us not consider ourselves the least valuable. When someone insults us with words, we become annoyed and upset, but humiliating ourselves with deeds, we do not correct ourselves. Let us understand, even though it is late, so that by applying zealous care for our souls and loving virtue, we may be worthy of eternal blessings by the grace and love for mankind of our Lord Jesus Christ, with whom to the Father with the Holy Spirit be glory, power, honor, 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” You might be interested in: