Беседа 51

Acts 24:22–23. Having heard this, Felix postponed their case, saying: I will consider your case when the captain Lysias comes, and I will learn in detail about this teaching. And he ordered the centurion to guard Paul, but not to oppress him and not to forbid any of his loved ones to serve him or come to him. The courage of Paul's speech. - No one can harm us except ourselves. 1. See what temptation befalls (Paul), firstly, from many, and secondly, for a long time. It cannot be said that the trial will take place soon. After the rhetorician mentioned Lysias, saying that he took (Paul) by force, the words of Felix were cited in good time (by the writer), about whom it is said: “Felix delayed their work until the captain Lysias comes, and I will learn in detail about this teaching,” i.e. deliberately postponed the matter, having no need for research, but only wanting to remove the Jews. He did not want to let (Paul) go to please them, but it was impossible to punish him, because it would be unconscionable. That’s why he postponed the matter, saying: “When the captain Lysias comes, I will learn in detail about this teaching. And he ordered the centurion to guard Paul, but not to embarrass him and not to forbid any of his loved ones to serve him or come to him.” “Don’t embarrass me,” he says. So he found him innocent. Why, finding him innocent, does he detain? Wanting to please (the Jews), and also hoping to take money. This is why he calls Paul to him. And what exactly for this purpose he called him is clear from the further words of the writer, who says: “After a few days, Felix, coming with Drusilla, his wife, a Jew, called Paul, and listened to him about faith in Christ Jesus. And as he spoke about the truth, about abstinence and about the future judgment, Felix became afraid and answered: now go, and when I find time, I will call you. Moreover, he hoped that Paul would give him money to let him go: therefore he often called him and talked with him” (Acts 24:24-26). Look how the writer adheres to the truth. Felix often called on him, not because he was surprised at him, or approved of his speech, or wanted to believe, but why? “He hoped,” he says, “that Pavel would give him money.” See how he does not hide the judge's intentions here; and this one, if he found (Paul) guilty, would not have acted like that, would not have wanted to listen to a guilty and criminal man. Meanwhile, Paul, although he spoke with the boss, did not say anything that could bend his soul, but said something that frightened and shocked his mind; talked with him, he says, “about truth, about abstinence and about future judgment, then Felix came into fear.” Such is the power of Pavlov’s words that it brings the ruler into fear. Then he gets himself a successor, and leaves Paul in bonds, although he should not have, but should have, finished the matter; but he leaves it like that to please (the Jews). And these were so persistent that they began to attack again, as they had not attacked any of the other apostles, but, having attacked them, they then retreated. Thus it was arranged (by God) that Paul, having to do with such beasts, should leave Jerusalem, where, however, they again ask to bring him to trial. But here, too, God arranged it in such a way that he did not allow the ruler to do this. He, as having recently assumed power, could have decided to please the Jews; but God did not allow it. Arriving (in Caesarea), the Jews began to shamelessly bring even greater accusations against him and, since they could not accuse him of deeds against the law, they again resorted to their usual means, pointing to Caesar, as they did in relation to Christ. This is clear from the fact that Paul is justified in the crimes against Caesar charged against him, as (the writer) explains, continuing: “But after two years, Porcius Festus took the place of Felix. Wanting to please the Jews, Felix left Paul in bonds. Festus, having arrived in the region, three days later set off from Caesarea to Jerusalem. Then the high priest and the noblest of the Jews came to him with a complaint against Paul and convinced him, asking him to do mercy and summon him to Jerusalem; and they plotted to kill him on the road. But Festus replied that Paul was being held in custody in Caesarea and that he himself would soon go there. So, he said, those of you who are able, let them come with me, and if there is anything behind this man, let them accuse him. Having stayed with them no more than eight or ten days, he returned to Caesarea, and the next day, sitting down in the judge’s seat, he ordered Paul to be brought. When he appeared, the Jews who had come from Jerusalem stood around, bringing many grave accusations against Paul, which they could not prove. He said in his justification: I have not committed any crime either against the law of the Jews, or against the church, or against Caesar. Festus, wanting to please the Jews, answered Paul: “Do you want to go to Jerusalem, so that I can judge you there?” (Acts 24:27, 25:1–9). See how he pleases the Jews, all the people and the city. Therefore (Paul) leads him into fear by using human means; and which one, listen. “Paul said: I stand before the judgment of Caesar, where I should be judged. I did not offend the Jews in any way, as you well know. For if I am wrong and have done something worthy of death, then I do not refuse to die; and if there is nothing of what they accuse me of, then no one can hand me over to them. I demand the judgment of Caesar” (Acts 25:10–11). But perhaps someone will say at the same time: he was told: “You must also testify in Rome” (Acts 23:11); Why does he act this way now, as if not believing (these words)? No, on the contrary, he firmly believed. Rather, it would mean tempting (God) if he, relying on this prediction, began to expose himself to countless dangers and say: let's see if God can deliver me from them? But Paul does not do this, but, completely entrusting himself to God, takes all measures on his own part. Moreover, with this justification he in some way applies to the ruler, and only says this: if I did a lie, then it is fair; and if I'm right, then why are you giving me away? “No one,” he says, “can give me away.” Not only did he put (the ruler) in fear, so that even if he wanted to, he could not extradite him, but with this turn of events he also protected himself from the Jews. “Then Festus, having spoken with the council, answered: You have demanded the judgment of Caesar, and you will go to Caesar” (Acts 25:12). 2. Look, (about Paul) it is reported to Agrippa, so that others will listen to him, and the king, and the army, and Bernice. Then again (follows) an excuse. “A few days later, King Agrippa and Bernice arrived in Caesarea to congratulate Festus. And when they spent many days there, Festus proposed Paul's case to the king, saying: here is a man left in bonds by Felix, against whom, while I was in Jerusalem, the high priests and elders of the Jews came with a complaint, demanding his condemnation. I answered them that the Romans are not in the habit of handing over any person to death before the accused has his accusers present and is free to defend himself against the accusation. When they came here, then, without any delay, the next day I sat down in the judge’s seat and ordered that man to be brought. Having surrounded him, the accusers did not present any of the charges that I expected; but they had some disputes with him about their worship of God and about some Jesus who died, about whom Paul claimed that He was alive. Finding it difficult to resolve this issue, I said: does he want to go to Jerusalem and be judged there in this matter? But as Paul demanded that he be left for Augustus’ consideration, I ordered him to be kept in custody until I sent him to Caesar. Agrippa said to Festus: I would like to listen to this man. Tomorrow, he answered, you will hear him” (Acts 25:13–22). Look how again the Jews are condemned not by Paul, but by the ruler. “The chief priests and elders of the Jews appeared,” he says, “demanding his condemnation. I answered them,” look what he answers to their shame: “The Romans are not in the habit of handing over any person to death,” i.e. Before he is allowed to speak in his own defense, it is impossible to simply hand him over. And having acted according to this custom, he found no fault in it; That’s why I was perplexed, as can be seen from the following words: “the prosecutors did not present any of the charges that I expected.” He said so, wanting to cover up his own sin. He covers himself, but Agrippa wants to see himself (Paul). Look how the rulers always avoided the enmity of the Jews, were often forced to act contrary to justice, and looked for excuses for delay; So Festus postponed the matter not out of ignorance, but deliberately. Agrippa not only does not shy away, but he himself wants to listen. It is worthy of surprise, where did his desire come from to see a person, albeit unjustly, accused? Yes, and this was according to God’s dispensation. That is why his wife listens with him and does not refuse to listen; and, moreover, he listens not simply, but also with great honor. So strong was their desire; if he didn’t want to, he wouldn’t listen; he would not have allowed his wife to take part in the hearing if he had not thought highly of Paul; and it seems to me that she herself wanted this. Paul, look, immediately begins to talk not only about faith and remission of sins, but also about what needs to be done. But let's turn to the above. “Now go,” says (Felix), “and when I find time, I’ll call you.” Look how blinding it is. Listening to such a great (teaching), he hoped to take money from him; and not only this is difficult, but also the fact that after a conversation with Paul he did not let him go, but, seeing the end of his reign, left him a prisoner in order to please the Jews; therefore, he loved not only money, but also fame. How, criminal, are you looking for money from a person who preaches the opposite? And that he did not receive them is evident from the fact that he left Paul bound; Having received them, I would have resolved it. He spoke of abstinence; and he expected to receive money from the person who was talking about this. He did not dare to demand them - such is the vice: he is timid and suspicious of everything - but he waited. It was not without reason that he pleased (the Jews), as he had ruled them for so long. When Festus took over, “the high priest and the noblest of the Jews came to him,” says (the writer), “with a complaint against Paul.” Immediately and at the very beginning the priests approached him; they would not have been too lazy to go to Caesarea, if he had not managed to ascend (to Jerusalem), where, as soon as he arrived, they were. “After staying with them no more than eight or ten days, he returned to Caesarea.” Perhaps, I think, he lived with those who wanted to corrupt him; and Paul was in prison. “Asking,” he says, “to do a favor, he called him to Jerusalem.” They asked as a favor; and for what purpose, if Paul should have justly died? But their malice was so obvious to him that he said: “Which of you are able, let them come with me, and if there is anything behind this man, let them accuse him.” In a word: “They convinced him by asking” expresses that they asked him for this mercy and wanted him to pronounce a sentence about him, fearing Pavlov’s word. What are you afraid of? What are you afraid of? It is clearly said, “kept in custody in Caesarea”; therefore can he escape? “And if there is anything behind this man,” he says, “let him be accused.” Then the accusers are again in Caesarea, and Paul is again led out. “The next day,” says (the writer), “I sat down in the judge’s seat.” 3. Look: having returned, he immediately “sat down in the judge’s seat”: they urged him so impatiently, so in a hurry! And he, while he did not yet know the Jews and had not experienced honors from them, answered fairly; and when he was in Jerusalem, he also began to please them, and not only does he please, but he does it with deception - and how, listen: “Do you want,” he says, “to go to Jerusalem, so that I will judge you there in this?” As if he were saying this: I will not hand you over to them, but I myself will be the judge. By saying this, he makes (Paul) the master of the matter in order to persuade him with such honor, since if he had uttered the order, it would have been shameless to take a man there who was not convicted of anything here. Paul did not say: I do not want, so as not to irritate the judge; but he boldly says: “I stand before the court of Caesar, where I should be judged.” Great boldness! And see how he amazes them with his conclusion; as if he were saying this in his own defense: they have already expelled me once and are thinking of judging me for having committed a crime against Caesar; therefore I want to be judged by the one who has offended me. Having said this, he adds: “I did not offend the Jews in any way, as you well know.” He also touched him, who pleased the Jews; having touched on this, he again softens the speech, adding: “for if I am wrong and have done something worthy of death, then I do not refuse to die.” I pronounce, he says, a verdict against myself. These are not words of suicide, but of great boldness; after all, truth must be combined with boldness in order to act more powerfully. “And if there is nothing of what they accuse me of, then no one can hand me over to them.” Even if he wanted to, he says he can’t. He did not say: I am not guilty of death or worthy of liberation, but I am ready to be tried before Caesar; At the same time, he remembered the dream, and spoke with great boldness. He did not say: you, but: “no one,” adding: “I demand the judgment of Caesar,” so as not to offend him. “Then Festus, having talked with the council, answered: you demanded the judgment of Caesar, and you will go to Caesar.” Do you see how he pleases (the Jews)? To communicate with accusers is to please, it is a sign of a corrupted opinion and perverting the order (of the matter). See how the trial (of Paul) is again postponed, and how deceit provides the occasion for preaching. It is so arranged (by Providence) that he arrived in Jerusalem comfortably and with security guards, without malice from anyone. And truly; it doesn’t matter whether you just arrive or arrive on such a matter. This is what caused the Jews to gather here. And he was in Jerusalem for a long time, so that you could see that for a long time evil intent could not do anything to him when God did not allow it. "A few days later, King Agrippa and Bernice arrived in Caesarea." This Agrippa, who is also Herod, it seems to me, was different, and precisely the fourth after the one who was under Jacob. (Acts 12:1-2). Watching how the enemies themselves unwittingly contribute to the cause. So that there would be more listeners, Agrippa himself wanted to listen (to Paul), and he listens not simply, but with pomp. Look at the justification (of Paul) expressed by the ruler: “he himself demanded a trial from Augustus: I have nothing faithful to write about him to the sovereign.” Thus Festus writes, and the cruelty of the Jews is revealed; and the ruler, when he says this, cannot be suspected. He speaks in such a way that the Jews are condemned by him too. And when everyone condemned them, then God punishes them. Look: they were condemned by Lysias, condemned by Felix, condemned by Festus, although they were pleased with them, condemned by Agrippa, and even what? The Pharisees also condemned them. And how he condemned, listen to his words: “he did nothing worthy of death.” They contributed, but did not denounce; slander and insolence raised suspicions against him, but research showed nothing. “About some one,” he says, “Jesus who died.” He rightly said: “about something”, as a person, although he was a ruler, but did not care about it. For the same reason, he said: “it is unwise to send a prisoner and not show the charges against him”; the consideration of such cases was indeed beyond the reason of such a judge. If you are perplexed, then why are you dragging him to Jerusalem? That is why Paul, not wanting to be judged by him, demands judgment from Caesar and says: “I demand the judgment of Caesar.” This is exactly what he was accused of. Do you hear how things are going? Do you hear about the evil intent of the Jews? Do you hear about the outrage? 4. All this aroused in Agrippa a desire to hear (Paul). Festus gives him this pleasure, and Paul is even more glorious. All this, as I said, was carried out by the intrigues (of the Jews). If they had not existed, then none of the rulers would have wanted to listen to him, and no one would have listened with such silence and attention. He apparently admonishes and defends himself, but at the same time he preaches with great dignity. Let us not consider intrigues as something disastrous. If we do not act against ourselves, then no one will be able to catch us in their machinations; or better yet, they may plot against us, but they cannot harm us; on the contrary, they will even bring us the greatest benefit, since we ourselves are the culprits that we tolerate evil or do not tolerate it. Yes, I testify openly and proclaim louder than a trumpet, and if it were possible, I would not refuse to ascend to some elevated place and proclaim that none of the people living on earth can harm a Christian. What am I saying: from people? Neither can a demon, a tormentor, a devil, if (the Christian) does not cause harm to himself; and whoever wants to harm us will try in vain. Just as no person can harm an angel who is on earth, so no person can harm (such) a person. And he himself cannot harm another as long as he is kind. What can be compared with such a person who can neither tolerate harm nor harm another? The latter, i.e. to not want to harm another, no less than the first. This is like an angel and like God, because that is what God is like. But He is like this by nature, and He is like this by will. So, (a Christian) can neither suffer harm nor harm another. However, do not take the words “cannot” for powerlessness (because powerlessness means the opposite of this) - I mean here reluctance. He, by nature, is not disposed either to endure harm or to do evil to another; and the latter is also harmful. We also harm ourselves when we do evil to others, and most of our sins come precisely from the fact that we do not wish good for ourselves. Thus, a Christian cannot tolerate harm because he cannot harm another. And how, by causing harm to others, we harm ourselves, we will explain this with specific examples. Let someone offend another, insult, take covetousness. Who did he harm? Isn’t it first of all to yourself? Absolutely so; the offended one suffered damage in money, and the one who offended suffered damage in his soul, since his soul was subject to destruction and punishment. Let someone hate again. Who did he harm? Isn't it to yourself? This is precisely the property of the evil caused, that it first seriously harms the one who did it, and little to the other, or better, it does not harm at all, but brings benefit. But did I say something incredible? Let us suppose, for example (and this is mainly what it all boils down to), that some poor man has little money and barely gets himself the necessary food; and the other is rich, lives in abundance and has great power; let the latter take the property of the poor, deprive him of his clothes and leave him in hunger, while he himself enjoys luxury at the expense of what was unjustly taken. Not only did he not harm the poor man, but he also brought benefit; and not only did it not bring any benefit to itself, but also caused harm. How? Firstly, he suffers for his evil and is remorseful every day and is condemned by everyone, and then in the future judgment. So, you say, from here it is clear that this one is suffering harm; but tell me, how does he benefit? He endures evil and bears it generously; and this is a great acquisition; patience with evil deserves remission of sins, there is a feat of wisdom, there is a school of virtue. Let's see: which of them is in evil - this one or that one? He, if he is wise, endures generously; and this one is tormented daily by fear and suspicion. Who gets harmed - this one or that one? These are fables, you say; Whoever has nothing to eat, who is forced to grieve and struggle with adversity, or goes to beg for alms and does not receive, does not he suffer in soul and body? No; you speak fables, but I speak deeds. In fact, tell me, doesn’t anyone among the rich mourn? So what? Is poverty the reason for this? But he can't stand hunger? So what of this? It’s even worse that this happens to him when he’s rich. Wealth does not make one generous, and poverty does not make one cowardly; otherwise, none of those living richly would experience sorrow in life, and none of the poor would curse their poverty. And that what you said is really a fable, I will explain as follows. Tell me: did Paul live in poverty or in wealth? Did you suffer hunger or not? He himself says: “in hunger and thirst” (2 Cor. 11:27). Did the prophets suffer hunger or not? And they suffered disasters. But, you say, you again present me with Paul, again with the prophets, ten or twenty people. But who do you want? Present to me, you say, someone from the people who would bravely endure (disasters). But such people are always rare, there are few excellent ones. If you want, let us examine the matter on its own. Let's see whose worries are greater and more painful, and whose are easier? Isn’t it true that one cares only about the necessary food, while the other, with many things to do, forgets (even about food)? The rich man is not afraid of hunger, but he is afraid for many other things, often for his very salvation. The poor cannot help but care about food, but has no other worries, and enjoys security, tranquility, and fearlessness. 5. On the other hand, if insulting others is not evil, but good, then why are we ashamed? Why are we hiding? Why, being reproached for this, are we indignant and upset? If being insulted is not good, then why do we make it known, boast and justify ourselves? Do you want to see how the latter is better than the former? Look at people in both states. What are laws for? What are the courts for? Why punishment? Is it not for the first, as if sick and suffering? But, you say, this is great pleasure. Let's not talk about the future, let's look at the present. What is worse than a person who is under such suspicion? What is more hopeless, what is more pitiful than him? Isn't he constantly worried? Even if he did something just, they don’t believe him; everyone condemns him for his oppression; all those who live with him are his accusers; he cannot enjoy friendship; no one will dare to be a friend of a person about whom there is such a rumor, so as not to incur the same opinion on himself. Everyone moves away from the unjust man, as from a beast, as from a destroyer, an enemy, a murderer who rebels against nature. If he is put on trial, there is no need for an accuser against him; Instead of any accuser, rumor accuses him. But this is not the case with a person who suffers insults; on the contrary, everyone patronizes him, regrets him, gives him a helping hand; he is safe. If insulting is a good and safe thing, then let someone admit that he is an insulter. If he does not dare to do this, then why does he continue (to cause insults) as if it were something good? Let's see how much evil happens in ourselves when something similar happens to us. If something that is in us exceeds its measure at the expense of another, if, for example, the liver, not content with its place, wants to take someone else’s along with its own, then tell me, is this not a disease? Again, if the moisture that forms the juices in us fills the whole body, then is this not a water disease? At the same time, the bile should spread, and the blood would spill everywhere. And in the soul, anger, desire and other similar things, exceeding the limit, do not cause harm to (the person) himself? Likewise, food, if taken in more quantity than can be digested, exposes the body to disease. And where does gout come from? Where does the paralysis and trembling of the body come from? Is it due to excess in food? Also, if the eye wanted to accept something more appropriate, i.e. if he wanted to see more than what was assigned to him, or to accept light that was more appropriate, then this excess would rather harm him than benefit him. If, while light is good, the eye, wanting to see more and more clearly, finds destruction, then think what happens to evil. If the ear perceives a loud sound, the mind is amazed; if the mind begins to think about an object that exceeds its strength, it is amazed, and if it intensifies more than necessary, it is completely lost. Covetousness consists in wanting to have more than what is proper. This happens with property: when we want to collect more and more of it, then, without noticing, we feed the wild beast within ourselves; Having a lot, we need a lot, we bring on countless worries and present the devil with many reasons. Therefore, the devil does not need to work hard over the rich; wealth makes them perfectly ready to fall. This is not the case with people living in poverty – quite the opposite. So (these) things are harmful in themselves. Therefore, I exhort you to refrain from such desires in order to avoid the snares of the evil one and, having loved virtue, to be worthy of eternal blessings, 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: