Беседа 12

Conversation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Rom 6.19. I speak humanly, for the weakness of your flesh. Just as you presented your slaves’ lives with uncleanness and lawlessness as lawlessness, so now will you present your slaves’ lives with righteousness as holy things. Since (the apostle) demanded (from the Romans) great severity in life, commanding them to be dead to the world, to die to vice and to remain firm in relation to the action of sins, and since it seemed that he was saying something great and difficult, even surpassing human nature, therefore, wanting to prove that he did not demand anything excessive and not even as much as should have been from a person who took advantage of such a great gift (grace), but also very commensurate with human strength and easy - he reveals this by contradiction and says: “I speak humanly,” that is: he seemed to speak according to human considerations, in relation to what usually happens; with the word “human” he denotes proportionality (demands with strength), as in another place he says: “temptation has not reached you, only human” (1 Cor 10.13), that is, proportionate to strength and small. “Just as you presented your servants’ lives to uncleanness and lawlessness as iniquity, so now will you present your slaves’ lives to righteousness as holy things.” Although the difference between the masters is great, nevertheless (the apostle) demands equal service to them. It would behoove me to offer much more and as much more as the dominion of righteousness is broader and better than the dominion of sin, nevertheless (says the apostle) I do not demand anything more, due to your “weaknesses.” And he did not say: because of the weakness of your will or zeal, but: because of the weakness of “your flesh,” in order to make speech less unpleasant. But some are unclean, and some are holy, some are lawlessness, and others are truth. And who is so pitiful and poor as not to bring the same zeal into serving Christ with which he served sin and the devil? Listen, however, to what (the apostle says) next, then you will clearly know that we do not bring even this little. Since what was said in this way seemed simply incredible and implausible, and no one would agree to hear that he did not serve Christ as much as he served the devil, then (the apostle) with the following words reveals this and proves the authenticity, bringing slavery itself to the middle and saying how sin was served. Rom.6:20. “Whenever you are a slave to sin,” says (the apostle), “be free from the truth.” This makes sense: when you lived in vice, wickedness and terrible evil, then you lived with such obedience to sin that you did nothing good at all. This is “free from the truth,” that is, you were not subordinate to the truth, but were completely alien to it. You did not divide the work of ministry between truth and sin, but completely abandoned yourself to vice. Therefore, even now, since you have devoted yourself to truth, completely devote yourself to virtue, not doing anything bad at all, in order to fulfill at least an equal measure. But not only is there no similarity in dominion, but in slavery itself there is a great difference; This very thing (the apostle) reveals with great clarity and shows what slavery consisted of before and what it consists of now. And he still does not talk about the harm that came from this matter, but for now about only shame. Rom.6:21. What fruit did you have then, about which you are now ashamed? Slavery was such that even the mere memory of it now brings shame. And if the memory makes you feel ashamed, then even more so. Thus, you have now received a twofold benefit: you have been freed from shame and learned what condition you were in; just as then they suffered double harm: they did something worthy of shame and were not aware of the shame; this is even worse than the first, and yet you remained in slavery. Having thus sufficiently proved the harm of previous deeds on the basis of shame, (the apostle) moves on to the consequence itself. What is this consequence? Since shame does not yet seem to be too heavy a burden, (the apostle) moves on to the most terrible thing, that is, death, although what was said above was enough. Think about the excess of evil, when, having been freed from punishment, they could not get rid of shame. What reward can you expect for such a deed, from which you are covered with shame and blush at the mere memory, although you have already been delivered from punishment and enjoy an abundance of grace? But that is not what slavery to God is like. Rom.6:22. Now, - continues (the apostle), - having been freed from sin, having become enslaved to God, bear your fruit into holiness, and end with eternal life. The fruit of previous deeds, even after liberation, was shame, but the fruit of present ones is sanctification, and where there is sanctification, there is much hope. The end of those things was death, and the end of these things was eternal life. Have you noticed that (the apostle) points to one thing as given, and to another as expected? But according to this there is confidence in what is expected, and according to sanctification - in life. And so that you cannot say that everything is only expected, (the apostle) proves that you have already received fruit here: firstly, you have freed yourself from vice and from those bad deeds, of which one memory brings shame; secondly, he became enslaved to the truth; thirdly, received sanctification; fourthly, he achieved life, and life is not temporary, but eternal. But with all this, says (the apostle), serve God at least to the same extent as you served sin. Despite the fact that the Lord has incomparable superiority, and the difference both in the service itself and in the rewards for which you serve is great, I do not demand anything more for now. Then, since he mentioned weapons and the king, he continues the allegory and says: Rom.6:23. For the pattern of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life, in Christ Jesus our Lord. Having said that death is retribution for sin, (the apostle) did not preserve a similar order in relation to good deeds and did not say: a reward for your merits, but “a gift from God,” showing that we were not liberated by ourselves and received not a debt, not a reward, not a reward for our labors, but all this happened by grace. And from here we can see the advantage of grace, because it not only freed us and not only led us to something better, but also did all this without our efforts and labors; she not only freed, but gave much more - she gave through the Son. The apostle pointed out all this, since he also spoke about grace and had to reject the law. And so that both would not lead to greater carelessness, he inserted a teaching on the severity of life, constantly encouraging the listener to care about virtue. Also, by what he called death as a rent of sin, he again wants to frighten and confirm regarding the future. What reminds (the listeners) of the past, thereby incites them to gratitude and strengthens them against everything that comes their way. So, having finished his moral teaching here, (the apostle) returns to dogmas and says: Rom.7:1. or do you not understand, brethren? To those who lead I speak the law. Since he said that we died to sin, he proves here that not only sin, but also the law no longer has power over us. And if the law has no authority, much more sin. And wanting to make speech pleasant, he explains this with an example taken from human life. And it seems that he is talking about one thing, but offers two proofs of the subject, the first is that a wife, after the death of her husband, is not subject to the law concerning this husband, and she is not forbidden to become the wife of another; and the second is that in the present case not only the husband died, but also the wife, so that double freedom can be enjoyed. If after the death of her husband she was freed from power, then even more so she became free when she herself found herself dead. If one circumstance frees her from power, even more so both circumstances together. So, starting to present the proof regarding this, (the apostle) begins his speech with praise to the listeners and says: “Or do you not understand, brethren? To those who know the law I speak,” that is, I speak about a very well-known and clear matter, I speak to people who know all this exactly. As the law has power over man, it lives for all time. He did not say: over husband or wife, but: “over man,” since this name belongs to both. “If you die,” he says, “be free from sin” (Rom. 6.7). Consequently, the law is laid down for the living, but does not extend to the dead. Do you notice how he depicted double freedom? After; Having hinted at this at the beginning, he speaks about his wife in proof, saying this: Rom.7:2–3. For a married wife is bound to her husband while she lives by the law: if her husband dies, she will be freed from the law of men. Moreover, as I live, the life of an adulterer is with another husband; if her husband dies, she is free from the law, so that she will not be an adulteress, having been with another husband. (The Apostle) reveals this often and with great accuracy, because he is firmly confident in the truth he is proving. And by the name of the husband he means the law, and by the name of the wife of all believers. And then, he draws a conclusion that does not agree with the previous one. It should be said: therefore, my brothers, the law will have no power over you, since he is dead. But he did not say so, but in the previous one he hinted at this, and in conclusion, in order to make his speech not offensive to the Jews, he introduces his wife as already dead and says: Rom.7:4. In the same way, my brethren, you will also die according to the law. If both the one and the other circumstance give the same freedom, then what prevents us from pleasing the law, since this matter does not bring any harm? “A married woman living is bound to her husband by the law” (Rom. 7:2). Where are the slanderers of the law now? Let them hear how (the apostle), being in need, does not deprive him of his dignity, but speaks with respect of his authority, saying that if the law lives, then the Jew is attached to it, and that those who transgress and leave the law during his lifetime are adulterers; and if someone leaves him after death, then this is not at all strange, because even among people he who does this is not subject to condemnation. “If... the husband dies, he will be freed from the law of men.” Do you notice how by this example he shows that the law is dead? But he does not say this in conclusion. “I live for my husband; I live for the adulterer’s wife.” Look how persistent he is in accusing those who violate the living law. Since the law has ceased to exist, then, without any fear, one can replace it with faith, without offending it in the least. “As I live according to the law,” says (the apostle), “an adulterer has a wife, even if he is married to another... In the same way, my brethren, you also” (Rom. 7:3-4) - one should say: since the law is dead, you are not guilty of adultery by marrying another husband; but the apostle did not say so, but how? - “mortification of the law.” If you are made dead, you are not under the law. If a wife, after the death of her husband, is not subject to liability, she is even more free from this when she dies herself. Have you noticed the wisdom of Paul, how he proved that by the will of the law you can separate from the law and become the wife of another husband. The law does not prohibit, he says, marrying another after the death of the first husband. And how can he forbid it, when even during the life of the husband he allows his wife to marry someone else if she received a divorce? However, (the apostle) does not mention what was mainly the fault of women, because although this was allowed, it was not completely free from accusation. And when (the apostle) has the opportunity to gain victory with the help of what is necessary and recognized by everyone, then he does not look for unnecessary evidence, because he does not need it. So, what is surprising is that the law itself frees us from guilt if we deviate from it, so that it is his will that we belong to Christ. And the law itself died, and we died, and the rights of power were doubly destroyed. But (the apostle) is not content with this alone, but adds a reason; he not only mentioned death, but again added that it was the cross that did it, and thus made us guilty. He does not just say: you have been freed, but: by the death of the Master. It is precisely said: death of the law by the body of Christ. And he convinces not only from here, but also from the superiority of the second husband, adding: in the hedgehog you were different, risen from the dead." Then, so as not to object: “What? What if we don’t want to marry another husband? After all, the law does not recognize a widow who enters into a second marriage as an adulteress, however, it does not force her to a new union,” no matter what they say, (the apostle) and proves that we should desire a new union because of what Christ has already done for us. He expressed this more clearly in another place, saying: “carry your own”; and: “purchase... at a natural price”, and also: “do not become a servant of man” (1 Cor 6.19–20, 7.23); and again: “one...he died for all, so that those who live live not for themselves, but for him who died for them” (2 Cor 5.14-15). He meant the same thing here when he said: “with the body.” Then (the apostle) convinces with high hopes, saying: let us bring fruit to God. Then you bore fruit to death, but now to God. Rom.7:5. Whenever we were driven in the flesh, the passions of sin, which were the law in our lives, brought forth the fruit of death. Do you see the fruit of the first husband? And (the apostle) did not say: when we were under the law, - in every possible way avoiding giving any reason to heretics, but says: “when we were driven in the flesh,” that is, in bad deeds, in the carnal life. Otherwise he understands that hitherto they were in the flesh, but now they walk having become incorporeal. Having said this, he does not say that the law was the cause of sins, and does not deliver him from hatred, since the law occupied the position of a strict accuser, revealing sins; and whoever gives greater commands to a person unwilling to obey increases the crime. Therefore (the apostle) did not say: sinful passions that occur under the law, but says: “as the law” (διὰ τοῦ νόμου), he did not even add: those that occur, but simply: “by the law,” that is, discovered or cognizable by the law. Then, so as not to blame the flesh, he did not say: the passions that were produced by the members, but: “even... I acted in our destinies,” showing that in man there is another principle of depravity, depending not on the controlled members, but on the acting thoughts. The soul occupied the position of the artist, and the nature of the flesh was like a harp and sounded as the artist made it sound. Therefore, discordant playing should be blamed not on the harp, but on the artist. Rom.7:6. Now, - continues (the apostle), - we have abolished the law. Do you see how he again spares both the flesh and the law here? He did not say - the law was abolished, or - the flesh was abolished, but - “we are abolished.” But when will we “be abolished?” When the old man, possessed by sin, died and was buried. This is what the apostle expressed when he said: deceased, we keep him alive. By this he seemed to say: the bonds that held us have decayed and broken, so that the one who holds us, that is, sin, has nothing to hold. But don’t fall, don’t indulge in greater carelessness; you freed yourself to serve again, not as before, but for we must work... in renewal of the spirit, and not in old age. What is (Paul) talking about here? It is necessary to reveal this so as not to become confused every time we encounter such an expression. When Adam sinned, says (the apostle), his body became mortal and passionate, many natural defects were revealed in it, it became a stubborn and unbridled horse; but Christ, having come, through baptism made the body lighter for us, lifting it with the wing of the Spirit. That is why we are faced with feats different from the exploits of the ancients, since the path was not so convenient then. Therefore (Christ) demands from us not only to be pure from murder, as was required of the ancients, but even to be pure from anger, commands us to abstain not only from adultery, but also from lustful looks, not only not to break an oath, but also not to swear, and commands us to love with friends and enemies; and in everything else, He appointed us longer paths for exercise, but in case of disobedience He threatens Gehenna, showing that what He requires is not given to the zeal of those who strive, like virginity and non-covetousness, but must certainly be fulfilled. What Christ commanded is necessary and obligatory, and those who fail to fulfill it are subject to extreme punishment. That’s why He said: “Unless your righteousness comes out any more than the scribe and the Pharisee, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 5:20). And whoever does not see the kingdom will inevitably fall into Gehenna. That is why Paul, as he said above: “let sin not possess you: for you are not under the law, but under grace” (Rom. 6.14), and now he says: “so that we should work... in renewal of the spirit, and not in old age.” Now it is not the condemning letter, that is, the old law, but the helping Spirit. Therefore, for the ancients it seemed very surprising if anyone observed virginity; and now this phenomenon has spread throughout the universe; and then only a few men despised death, but now in both villages and cities there are countless hosts of martyrs, consisting not only of men, but also of women. Then, having said this, (the apostle) again resolves the objection that arises and in this resolution proves what he wants. At the same time, he presents the decision not directly, but through opposition, in order, through the necessity of a decision, to get a reason to say what he wanted, and to make his accusation less harsh. So, having said: “in the renewal of the spirit, and not in the oldness of the writing,” he added: Rom.7:7. What the hell are we talking about? Is sin the law? It won't happen. It was said above that “the passions of sin, which the law worked in our lives” (Rom. 7:5), and also: “let sin... not possess you: for you are not under the law, but under grace” (Rom. 6:14), also: “where... there is no law, [there] is no transgression” (Rom. 4.15); and again: “But the law came, that sin might abound” (Rom 5.20); and again: “the law... does the work of wrath” (Rom 4.15). Since all this apparently served as an accusation against the law, the apostle, in order to eliminate such suspicion, presents an objection and says: “What the hell? ...Is sin the law? Let it not happen." He answered negatively before proving it in order to win over the listener and heal the one who was being tempted, since, having heard and made sure of the direction of the apostle’s thoughts, he will, together with him, investigate what seems perplexing, and will not suspect the speaker; That is why the apostle proposed an objection in advance. At the same time, he did not express himself - what should I say? but - “What are we talking about?” as if advice and opinion were given, and as if the whole church had gathered, and the objection did not come from the apostle, but appeared due to the consistency of what was said and from the essence of the matter. That the letter kills, no one will deny, says the apostle; that the spirit gives life, and this is clear, and no one can dispute it. So, if there is no doubt about this, what can we say about the law? That he is a sin? “Let it not be.” So, clear up the confusion. Have you noticed how (the apostle) places his opponent next to him and, adopting the teacher’s tone, proceeds to make a decision? What is the solution? The law is not sin, the apostle says, that “I knew no sin, but the law” (Rom. 7:7). Pay attention to the height of wisdom. That the law is not a sin, (the apostle) stated with the help of an objection, so that, having rejected this and thereby pleasing the Jew, he could persuade him to accept something less important. What is this less important thing? What Rom.7:7. “I knew no sin, only the law: I knew no lust,” he says, “if the law had not said: You shall not lust.” Do you see how little by little he shows that the law is not only the accuser of sin, but also in some way gives rise to it? However, (the apostle) reveals that this happens not through the fault of the law, but from the foolish Jews. He tried to stop the mouths of the Manichaeans, who accused the law, namely, saying: “I knew no sin, but the law, and I knew no lust, unless the law had said: Thou shalt not lust,” and added: Rom.7:8. I received the guilt of sin against the commandment, having committed all lust in me. Do you notice how (the apostle) freed the law from accusations? “The reception of sin,” says (the apostle), and not the law, increased lust, and the opposite of what the law wanted happened, and this depended on weakness, and not on his bad character. Every time we lust for something and then encounter an obstacle, the flame of passion flares up stronger. But this does not come from the law, which imposed a prohibition in order to completely deviate (from passion), but from sin, that is, your carelessness and your evil will used good for evil. But it is not the doctor who is to blame for the poor use of medicine, but the patient. God did not give the law to inflame lust, but to quench it; the opposite happened; but this is not his fault, but ours. It would be unfair to blame someone who does not allow a person sick with a fever to get enough of a cold drink and thus intensifies in him the passion of this disastrous pleasure for him; The doctor’s job is only to prohibit, but the patient himself must abstain. What does it matter if sin received an excuse from the law? Many bad people, through good commands, increase their own depravity. So the devil destroyed Judas, driving him into the love of money and encouraging him to steal the property of the poor; but it was not the fact that he was entrusted with the money box that made him so, but the cunning of his will. It expelled Adam and Eve from paradise, prompting them to eat from the tree, and it was not the tree’s fault, although they were given a reason. Do not be surprised that Paul, speaking of the law, used very strong expressions; he limits himself to what is necessary, making it impossible for those who think differently to find a reason for objection in his words and revealing a great effort to correctly portray the present. Therefore, do not just evaluate the actual speech, but delve into the reason that forced (the apostle) to speak so, imagine the fury of the Jews, and their insurmountable stubbornness, which he tried to overcome. Apparently he speaks a lot against the law, but not in order to accuse the law, but in order to destroy the stubbornness of the Jews. If the law is blamed for the fact that sin through it received an occasion, then it turns out that this happened in the New Testament. And in the new testament there are countless laws and, moreover, regarding many very important subjects; and everyone can see that the same thing happens here not only with respect to lust, but in general with respect to any vice. “If he had not come and spoken to them,” says (Christ), “they had no sin” (John 15.22). This means that sin has found content for itself here too, and the punishment has become greater. Likewise, Paul, speaking about grace, says: “How much do you think that the worst one will be counted worthy of torment, even though he trampled on the Son of God” (Heb. 10.29)? Consequently, the worst punishment received its reason from here - from a greater good deed. Similarly, about the pagans (the apostle) says that they became unresponsive, because, being gifted with reason, contemplating the beauty of nature and having the opportunity to be guided by this path to the Creator, they did not take advantage, as they should, of God’s wisdom. Note that good actions in many cases for vicious ones served as a reason for greater punishment. But, of course, let’s not blame God’s blessings for this; on the contrary, after this we will be even more surprised by them and will condemn the mood of those who took advantage of the good for opposite purposes. We will do the same with regard to the law. But all this is easy and understandable, but only the following difficulty arises. Why does (the apostle) say: “I knew not lusts, except the law had said, Thou shalt not desire” (Rom. 7:7)? After all, if man did not know lust until he received the law, then why did the flood happen? Why was Sodom destroyed? So, what is (the apostle) talking about? About intense lust. Therefore, he did not say: he produced lust in me, but “all lust,” hinting here at its strong development. What, you ask, is the benefit of the law if it has increased passion? No, but even great harm. However, it is not the law that is to blame, but the carelessness of those who adopted the law. Lust was produced by sin, moreover, through the law, but when the law cared not about this, but about the opposite. This means that sin has become much stronger than the law; but again, this is not the fault of the law, but of human ingratitude. Without the law, sin is dead, that is, not so well known. Although those who lived before the law knew that they were sinning, they fully recognized it after the giving of the law. As a result, from that time on they began to be subject to greater condemnation. It is not the same thing to have nature as an accuser or, together with nature, to have the law, which gives clear instructions for everything. Rom.7:9. I sometimes live outside the law. When, tell me? Before Moses. See how (the apostle) tries to prove that the law burdened human nature both with what it did and with what it did not do. When I lived without the law, says (the apostle), I was not subject to such condemnation. But when the commandment came, sin came to life. Apparently, this is an accusation of the law, but if one carefully examines, then one will find praise for the law. After all, the law did not create sin that did not exist before, but only revealed hidden sin; This is the praise of the law. If before the law they sinned unnoticed, then after the coming of the law, although they did not receive any other benefit, at least they knew for sure that they had sinned; and this already meant a lot in the matter of liberation from vice. If people have not freed themselves from vice, then this does not speak at all against the law, which has done everything for that, but all the blame falls on the people’s own will, which was damaged beyond all expectation. After all, it is completely inconsistent with reason to receive harm from something that brings benefit, which is why (the apostle) said: and this commandment was found unto me, even unto life, this unto death. He did not say: it became death or gave birth to death, but: “it became death,” thereby explaining the unusualness and strangeness of such an incongruity and turning everything on people’s heads. If you want to know the purpose of the law, says (the apostle), then it led to life and was given for this; if death occurred from here, then the fault lies in those who accepted the commandment, and not in the commandment itself, which leads to life. The apostle expressed this even more clearly in the following words, saying: Rom.7:11. It is a sin to accept the commandment, deceive me, and thereby kill me. Have you noticed how he touches sin everywhere, freeing the law from all blame? Why did he add it, saying: Rom.7:12. Likewise, the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good. If you wish, we will introduce into our speech interpretations and those who pervert these words (the apostle), since this will make our own thoughts clearer. Some argue that (the apostle) in these words does not speak about the law of Moses, but according to some - about the natural law, and according to others - about the commandment given in paradise. But Paul’s whole goal was to abolish the law of Moses; he does not talk about those same laws - and quite naturally, because the Jews feared and trembled precisely at the law of Moses and, as a result, resisted grace. Moreover, the commandment given in paradise, both Paul and no one, it seems, ever called law. To make this more clear from (the apostle’s) own words, let us turn to his sayings expressed a little higher. Conversing with the Jews about life with all his attention, he said: “Or do you not understand, brothers, that the law rules over man and lives for all time? ...In the same way you will die to the law” (Rom 7.1, 4). So, if this is said about the natural law, then it turns out that we do not have it, and if this is true, then we are no more intelligent than the dumb. But it’s not like that – no! Regarding the commandment given in paradise, there is no need to argue, lest we engage in a vain debate about what is recognized by everyone. In what sense does (the apostle) say: “I knew no sin, but the law?” ( Rom.7:7 ) He does not mean complete ignorance, but the most accurate knowledge. And if this is said about the natural law, then what is the meaning of the following words: “I sometimes live apart from the law” (Rom. 7:9)? After all, neither Adam nor any other person ever seemed to live without natural law; At the same time, as God created (Adam), He put this law into him, making him a reliable cohabitant for the entire human race. Moreover, (the apostle) nowhere seems to call the natural law a commandment, but calls this law a righteous and holy commandment, a spiritual law. The natural law was not given to us from the Spirit, because barbarians, pagans, and all people have this law. From this it is clear that (Paul), both above and below, everywhere talks about the Law of Moses. That is why he calls him holy, saying: “the law is holy, and the commandment is holy, righteous and good.” Although the Jews, even after the law, were unclean, unrighteous and selfish, this does not abolish the dignity of the law, just as their unbelief does not destroy faith in God. Thus, from all this it is clear that the apostle says this about the law of Moses. Rom.7:13. Is it good for me to die? - asks the apostle. Let it not be: but sin, let sin appear. That is, let it be proven how great an evil is sin, as well as a careless will, a desire for the worst, an evil deed itself, and a corrupt mind, because this is the cause of all evil. (The Apostle) increases sin, showing the abundance of Christ's grace and teaching from what great evil it delivered the human race, since this evil became worse from all medical means, and from the means that retarded its development it grew even more. That is why he adds, saying: Let the sin of the commandment be greatly exceeded. Have you noticed how everywhere the law is intertwined with sin? Insofar as the apostle accuses sin, he proves to a greater extent the dignity of the law. And he achieved no little, showing how evil sin is, revealing and depicting all its poisonousness. He expressed this in the words: “Let sin be greatly sinned according to the commandment,” that is, so that it would be revealed what evil, what destruction is sin, and all this was revealed through the commandment. By this (the apostle) he shows the superiority of grace over the law—superiority, and not opposition. Do not look at the fact that having adopted the law they became worse, but take into account that the law not only did not want to strengthen evil, but even tried to suppress the evil that previously existed. If he turned out to be powerless, then crown him for his appointment, and even more prostrate himself before the power of Christ, because He destroyed such diverse and insurmountable evil and, uprooting it, destroyed it. And every time you hear about sin, do not think that it is some kind of independent force, but a vicious action that constantly begins and ends, does not exist before it is committed, and after it is committed disappears again. Because of sin the law was given; and the law is never given to destroy anything natural, but to correct an arbitrary evil action. Both external (pagan) legislators and the entire human race know about this. They (legislators) counteract only those vices that arise from negligence, but do not promise to suppress those that are inherited from nature, because this is impossible. Everything natural remains unshakable, as I have repeatedly told you about in other conversations. Therefore, leaving such works, let us again engage in moralizing speech, or better yet, this is part of those works. If we drive out vice from ourselves and instill virtue in ourselves, we will clearly teach that vice is not a natural evil, and we can easily stop those who ask where evil comes from, not only with words, but also with deeds, when we appear before them free from their vices, although we have the same nature as them. Let us not look at the fact that virtue is difficult, but at the fact that it is possible to improve in it, and if we try, it will be both easy and convenient for us. If you tell me about the pleasantness of vice, then tell me about its end: after all, it leads to death, just as virtue leads us to life. But it is better, if you like, to consider vice and virtue without regard to their end; we will see that vice itself contains great sorrow, and virtue contains pleasure. Tell me, really, what is heavier than a bad conscience? What is more beautiful than good hope? After all, nothing, nothing usually torments and oppresses us more than the expectation of bad things; nothing supports and almost inspires as much as a good conscience. This can also be learned based on the events taking place before us. Thus, those living in prison and awaiting condemnation, even though they have enjoyed countless pleasures, live more restlessly than those beggars who walk along the street, but are not aware of anything bad about themselves, because the expectation of disasters does not allow them to experience real pleasures. And what about the prisoners? Hardworking artisans who work all day long are in a much better mood than free and rich people who are aware of something bad in themselves. That is why we consider gladiators pitiful; although we see that they get drunk, have fun and eat in taverns, we call them the most unfortunate of all, because the bitterness of the expected death incomparably exceeds these pleasures. If such a life seems pleasant to them, then remember what I have repeatedly told you - that there is nothing surprising when someone living in vice does not avoid the troubles and torment of vice. And so a thing worthy only of damnation seems amiable to those who participate in it. But we do not please them for this, but on the contrary, as a result of this we consider them unhappy, because they themselves do not realize what misfortunes they are in. What, for example, can we say about adulterers who, for the sake of insignificant pleasure, are subjected to shameful slavery, waste of property and continuous fear, in short, lead the life of Cain and even more difficult, because they fear the present, tremble for the future, suspect friends and enemies, those who know and those who know nothing. Even during sleep they are not freed from this torment, since their bad conscience creates terrible dreams in them and thereby frightens them. But a chaste person is not like that: he spends his real life in joy and perfect freedom. So, compare the insignificant pleasure with the countless excitements of these horrors, and the short labor of abstinence with the tranquility of a whole life, and you will see that the latter is more pleasant than the former. But whoever wants to steal and appropriate someone else’s property, tell me, doesn’t he endure countless hardships, constantly running, deceiving slaves, freemen, doorkeepers with flattery, intimidating, threatening, acting shamelessly, spending nights without sleep, trembling, tormenting and suspecting everyone? But he who neglects money is not like that. He again enjoys complete pleasure, living without fear and in perfect security. And if anyone wants to look at other types of vice, he will see great confusion everywhere, many pitfalls. The most important thing is that in virtue the beginning is full of work, but the continuation is pleasant, so that this makes the work itself easier; in vice, everything happens the other way around - pleasure is followed by illness and torment, so that as a result the pleasure itself disappears. Just as one who expects crowns does not feel any real heaviness, so one who expects punishment after pleasure cannot enjoy pure joy, because fear leads everything into confusion. Or rather, if you examine more carefully, you will find that the wicked, even before the punishment determined for bad deeds, experience great torment at the moment when they dare to do evil. And if you like, let’s look at people who seize someone else’s property and make money by any means possible. We will not talk about fears, dangers, trepidation, torment, worries and all that kind of stuff, but let’s assume that this person gets rich carelessly and is completely confident in saving what he has. Let us assume all this, even though it is impossible. But what pleasure will this man gain for himself? That he collected a lot? But this is precisely what does not allow him to rejoice; As long as a person desires something else and more, so long will his torment continue. Every passion then gives pleasure when it stops. Feeling thirsty, we then come to our senses when we drink as much as we want, and while we feel thirsty, even though we have exhausted all sources, our torment is greater, and even if we have drunk thousands of rivers, our punishment is more severe. So you, even if you have acquired everything in the world, if you still feel passion in yourself, then the more you will suffer, the more you begin to fulfill your desire. So, understand that some pleasure for you lies not in collecting a lot, but in not wanting to get rich, and if you start wanting to get rich, you will never stop tormenting. After all, desire is endless and the further you travel, the further you move away from the end. Is this not strangeness, not insanity, not extreme madness? So, let us refrain from the first step towards vice, or, better said, let us not touch vicious lust at all, and if we touch it, we will run away at the very beginning, as the Pritochnik admonishes us, speaking about the harlot’s wife: “Depart, do not delay, and do not approach the doors of her houses” (Proverbs 5.8). I tell you the same thing regarding covetousness. Even if you are a little mired in the sea of ​​this madness, you can hardly get out of it; and just as in a whirlpool, no matter how hard you try, you will not easily overcome (the aspirations of the water), so - and even much worse - if you fall into the abyss of this passion, you will destroy yourself with all your property. Therefore, I beg you, let us beware in the beginning and avoid small evils, because from small things greater things are born. He who, in every sin, is accustomed to saying: “It’s nothing,” will little by little destroy everything. It is precisely this habit that says: “it’s not a problem yet” - it introduced evil, opened the doors to the robber and overthrew the walls of cities. Likewise, the most dangerous diseases intensify in the body when attention is not paid to minor ones. If Esau had not sold his birthright, he would not have become unworthy of blessing; and if he had not made himself unworthy of blessing; then I would not have come to the point of desiring fratricide. And Cain, if he had not loved primacy, but yielded it to God, he would not have taken second place; then, taking second place, if he had listened to the admonition, he would not have committed murder; and again, having committed murder, if he had turned to repentance, and when God called him, if he had not given such a shameless answer, he would not have suffered subsequent misfortunes. If those who lived before the law, due to such negligence, little by little sunk into the very depths of evil, then think what we, called to great exploits, will suffer if we do not pay attention to ourselves with all care and do not extinguish the spark of evil before the whole fire ignites. For example, do you often break your oath? Not only refrain from this, but also stop swearing, then the first thing will no longer be difficult, because it is much more difficult for someone who swears not to break an oath than not to swear at all. Are you used to hurting, reproaching and beating? Prescribe a law to yourself - not to get angry and not to shout at all; then the fruit will be uprooted along with the root. Are you lustful and voluptuous? Make it a rule not to look at women, not to go to the theater, not to be curious at the market about other people's beauty. It is much easier not to look at a beautiful woman at first than, having seen her and felt lust, to calm the storm she caused. After all, exploits are easier at the beginning, or better yet, we will not need to fight if we do not open the doors to the enemy and do not accept the seed of vice. That is why Christ determined the punishment for anyone who looks at a woman shamelessly - in order to save us from more work; commands to expel the enemy from the house before he has become stronger, when it is easy to expel him. What is the need to take on extra labor and fight with opponents, when it is possible to get yourself a victorious trophy without a fight and to delight yourself with the reward before fighting? Not looking at beautiful women is not such a big job as, looking at them, pacifying yourself; It’s better to say that the first cannot be work at all, but after you look, there is great trouble and misfortune. So, when labor is less, or even no labor or effort is needed at all, but there is more benefit, then why do we try to plunge ourselves into the abyss of countless evils? After all, not looking at a woman is not only easier, but also gives a purer victory over the passion that arises from this, while the one who looks at her, if sometimes freed from lust, does so with very great difficulty and with some impurity for himself. The one who has not seen a beautiful face is clean from the lust it arouses, but the one who wishes to see it, having perverted the thought and desecrated it a thousand times, then only rejects the filth of lust when he wants to drive it away. Therefore, Christ, so that we do not suffer from this, prohibits not only murder, but also anger, not only adultery, but also an unclean look, not only perjury, but also swearing in general. Even here it does not establish the measure of virtue, but, having legitimized it, it extends further. Having rejected murder and commanded us to be pure from anger, he commands us to be ready to endure evil and to be prepared to endure it not only to the extent that the one who plots against us desires, but also to exceed it to a much greater extent and to overcome the excess of his fury with the excess of our wisdom. He did not say: if someone hits you on the right cheek, bear it indifferently and calm down, but he added that you must offer him the other one too - he says: “turn him the other one too” (Matthew 5.39). This is the brilliant victory to give him more of what he desires, and the limits of his evil desire to be surpassed by the wealth of his long-suffering. In this way you will tame his fury, from the second act you will receive a reward for the first and you will tame his anger. Do you see that it always depends on us not to tolerate evil, and not on those who do evil to us? Or, more correctly, we ourselves have the power not only not to tolerate evil, but even to experience good. And what is especially surprising is that if we are vigilant, then not only are we not subject to offense, but even from those who offend us, we receive greater benefits than from others. Has anyone insulted you? You have the power to turn this insult into praise for yourself. If you offend on your part, you will bring shame upon yourself, and if you bless the one who insulted you, you will see that everyone present praises and glorifies you. Do you understand how, if we wish, we receive benefits from those who offend us? The same can be said about money, blows and everything else. If for all this we begin to repay the opposite, then both by those who suffered evil and by those who did good, we will weave a special crown for ourselves. And every time someone comes to you and says: “Such and such a person has insulted you and in the presence of everyone constantly speaks ill of you,” you praise the offender in the presence of those speaking; thus, even if you wanted revenge, you can also get satisfaction. All those who heard, even if they were very foolish, will praise you, and they will hate your offender, as a man who is crueler than any beast, because he upset you, not being offended by you at all, while you, having suffered evil, repaid him with good. And in this way you can prove that everything said about you is unfair. Whoever expresses annoyance when they say something bad about him, proves by his grief that he recognizes the justice of what was said about him, and whoever laughs, thereby eliminating any suspicion of himself among those present. So, look how much good you gain from this: firstly, you get rid of embarrassment and anxiety, secondly, or better - consider this first, if you have sins, you will be cleansed of them, like the tax collector who generously endured the accusation of the Pharisee. Moreover, with such an exercise you will make your soul wise, you will hear countless praises from everyone and destroy any suspicion about yourself regarding what was said. If you want to take revenge on the offender, then this will follow in abundance, because God will punish him for what he said, and before this punishment, your wisdom will be like a cruel blow for him. Nothing usually hurts our offenders more than the fact that we laugh at the insults inflicted on us. And just as wisdom turns the very insults for our good, so the result of cowardice is completely opposite - we shame ourselves, and we seem guilty to those present of what they said about us, and we fill our soul with confusion, and we please the enemy, and we grieve God, and we increase the number of our sins. Having thought about all this, let us avoid the abyss of cowardice, let us hasten to the haven of long-suffering, so that here too we can find peace for our souls, as Christ predicted, and achieve future blessings, through the grace and love of our Lord Jesus Christ, with whom to the Father and the Holy Spirit be glory, power, honor, now and ever, and to the ages of ages Amen. You might be interested in: