Беседа 15

How Paul deals with an obvious adulterer. – For a Christian, every time is a holiday. - Wisdom of Paul. – In what sense is covetousness an old leaven? - The good fruits of almsgiving. 1 Corinthians 5:1–2. There is a true rumor that fornication has appeared among you, and, moreover, such fornication as is not heard even among the pagans, that someone has his father’s wife instead of a wife. And you became proud, instead of crying, so that the one who did such a thing would be removed from among you. 1. When the apostle talked (with the Corinthians) about their division, he did not immediately begin an accusatory speech, but spoke to them meekly in advance, and then moved on to reproof, saying: “For from the household of Chloe it became known to me about you, my brethren, that there are disputes among you” (1 Cor. 1:11). But here it is not so, but he immediately expresses reproach, and directs the force of reproach, as much as possible, against everyone. He doesn’t say: why does such and such commit adultery? - but: “fornication has appeared among you,” so that they, considering themselves completely free from accusation, would not remain inattentive, but would see that their entire society is subject to exposure and their entire church is not free from accusation, and therefore would be zealous in piety. No one will say, he says, that so-and-so committed adultery, but that a crime was committed in the Corinthian church. He does not say: they dare to commit adultery, but: “there is a true rumor... which is not heard even among the pagans.” He often reproaches the believers by the example of the pagans; so in the letter to the Thessalonians he says: “so that each of you knows how to keep his own vessel in holiness and honor, and not in the passion of lust, like ... the pagans” (1 Thess. 4:4-5): also to the Colossians and Ephesians: “so that you no longer walk as other nations do” (Eph. 4:17). If it is unforgivable for them to sin equally with the pagans, then they are superior to the pagans in this regard, tell me how to count this? With them, he says, not only does something like this not happen, but it is called something lower. Do you see how he evaluates this crime? If they allow this kind of immorality, which the infidels not only do not do, but also do not know, then the greatness of their sin is inexpressible. The word “in you” is used here with special force, i.e. you have believers who have been granted such sacraments, who have received unspeakable blessings, who have been called to heaven. Do you see what indignation, what anger against everyone his words are filled with? If he had not felt great anger, he would not have addressed his speech to everyone, but would have said this: I heard that so-and-so is committing adultery; punish him. But now it’s not like that, but directs speech against everyone. If they had previously written to him about this, he would have expressed himself this way; but since they not only did not write, but also covered up sin, he uses a stronger image of speech. "That a man has his father's wife." Why didn't he say: a man commits adultery with his wife? He was putting on something too shameful; Therefore, he spoke about this with some modesty, as we explained above, but at the same time, through this very thing, he again expressed the importance of the crime, showing that something was happening among them that Paul did not even allow himself to name directly. That’s why he continues to use the same image of speech: “he who did,” he says, “such a thing”; again he is ashamed and does not allow himself to say directly, just as we are in the habit of doing regarding too base actions. He does not say: stepmother, but: father’s wife, in order to touch them more strongly. When the names themselves are sufficient for denunciation, then he uses them without adding anything else. Do not contradict me, he says that only one commits adultery; no, this is a sin common to all. That’s why he continues: “and you became proud.” He did not say: by such a sin - that would be reckless - but by his (the sinner's) teaching. However, he did not express this clearly, but omitted the intervening thought in order to touch them more deeply. And look at Paul's prudence. He first laid down external wisdom and showed that it is insignificant in itself, even if it were not connected with sin, and then he speaks about sin. If he had proven the greatness of spiritual gifts in comparison with an incestuous man, who, perhaps, was distinguished by external wisdom, he would not have done anything important; but by deposing it without regard to sin and showing that it was insignificant in itself, he proved its extreme worthlessness. That’s why he made such a judgment about her in advance, and then began to talk about sin. However, he does not deign to speak to him (the incestuous man) - which expresses the excessive dishonor of his act - but tells others that they should cry, sob and be ashamed; and you, he says, are doing the opposite; That’s why he adds: “and you became proud, instead of crying better.” What, they say, should we cry about? That reproach has been brought upon the church community. Why should we cry? “That such a one might be taken away from among you.” He does not call him by name here, or better yet, nowhere, just as we usually do regarding subjects that are too shameful. He did not say: you did not reject him, but, as if speaking about some kind of contagious disease, when it is necessary to cry and pray earnestly, it is expressed: “so that he may be taken away”; you should pray and take all measures to ensure that he is excommunicated from you. He condemns them not because they did not notify him about this, but because they did not cry “so that it would be taken away,” expressing that even without a teacher they should have done this because of the importance of the crime. “And I, being absent in body, but present with you in spirit” (1 Cor. 5:3). 2. Look at his jealousy: he does not allow him to wait for his arrival and, upon receiving him, to punish the incestuous man, but, as if wanting to stop some kind of infection before it penetrates the whole body, he tries to curb him. That’s why he continues: “I’ve already decided, as if being with you.” He said this not only to encourage them to carry out the sentence and not think about any other solution to the case, but also to frighten them by the fact that he knew everything that was going to happen and be discussed there. This is what the expression means: to be a spirit, just as Elisha said that he was with Gehazi: “Did not my heart go with you” (2 Kings 5:26)? This is the power of spiritual talent: it provides the opportunity to be together for everyone at the same time, and imparts the ability to know distant things! “I’ve already decided, as if being with you.” Does not allow them to think about anything else; I have already put it in, he says, as if I were with you; do not present me with excuses and delays; there shouldn't be anything else. And so that his power does not seem too great and so that his words are not taken as an expression of pride, see how he makes them participants in the court. Having said: “decided,” he continues: “he who has done this deed in your congregation in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, together with my spirit, by the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, shall be delivered to Satan” (1 Cor. 5:3–5). What does it mean: “in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ”? This means - about God, guided not by human judgment. Some read this passage like this: “he who did such a deed in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ,” and putting a period or a comma here, continue to read further: “in your assembly, in common with my spirit, hand over to Satan,” giving this reading the following meaning: he who did such a deed in the name of Christ, hand over to Satan, i.e. whoever insulted the name of Christ, who was faithful and called by that name, and yet dared to do such a thing, hand him over to Satan. But the first reading seems more true to me. Which? “In your assembly in the name of the Lord,” i.e. the very name connects you; gather about it. “And in common with my spirit.” Again he introduces himself to them, so that they, holding a trial, as if in his presence, condemn the incestuous man to excommunication, and so that no one dares to recognize him as worthy of forgiveness, meaning that Paul will recognize what was happening. Then he adds more terrible words: “by the power of our Lord Jesus Christ,” i.e. either that Christ can give them the power to betray such a person to the devil, or that He Himself, together with them, will pronounce a sentence against him. He does not say: give him over to Satan, but: betray him, opening the doors of repentance for him and, as it were, handing him over to a teacher. And again: such; nowhere does he allow himself to call him by name. To the exhaustion of the flesh, similar to what happened with blessed Job, although not with the same goal: there for the most glorious crowns, and here for absolution from sins, so that Satan would punish him with malignant wounds or some other disease. In another place he says: “We are judged by the Lord,” enduring this (1 Cor. 11:32); and here, wanting to touch (the sinner) more strongly, he betrays him to Satan, although this also depends on the will of God, so that his flesh is punished. Since desires are born from gluttony and from incontinence of the flesh, he punishes her. “That the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord...Jesus,” i.e. so that the soul is saved, not in the sense that it is saved alone, but understanding the undoubted truth that when it is saved, then the body will certainly participate in salvation. It became mortal because of her sin; therefore, if she is righteous, then it will again receive great glory. Some here understand by spirit a (spiritual) gift that is extinguished by our sins. To prevent this from happening, he says, let him be punished, so that, having corrected himself, he will be worthy of grace and be found to have preserved it intact that day. Thus, these words mean more care and healing than simple defeat, or vain and futile punishment: after all, the benefit is greater than the punishment; This one is temporary, and that one is eternal. And he doesn’t just say: “So that the spirit may be saved,” but: on that day. He perfectly and timely reminds them of this day, so that they too begin to heal more diligently, and he quickly accepts the medicine, seeing that these words do not come from anger, but from the care of a caring father. That’s why he said “for the destruction of the flesh”: here he prescribed laws for the devil and did not allow him to extend beyond the limits, just as God said about Job: “only save his soul” (Job 2:6). 3. Having expressed his decision, expressed briefly and without delay, then he again turns (to the Corinthians) and uses reproof: “You have nothing to boast about” (1 Cor. 5:6); shows that they, boasting of him, were the cause of his impenitence until now. Then he explains that he is doing this for the benefit of not only the sinner, but all of them: “Don’t you know,” he continues, “that a little leaven leavens the whole lump?” . Although, he says, the sin is his, but, if left unattended, it can infect the entire body of the church, because if the first sinner is not punished, then others will soon fall into the same sin. With these words he expresses that they should fear and care for the whole church, and not just one member; This is why he uses something like leaven. Just as leaven, he says, although small, changes the whole dough, so he, if he remains uncondemned and his sin unpunished, will infect others. “Cleanse out the old leaven” (1 Cor. 5:7), i.e. this sinner; or, better, not only speaks about him, but also hints at others, because not only adultery is an old leaven, but also every vice. He did not say: cleanse, but: cleanse, cleanse thoroughly, so that there is no residue or shadow of it. In a word, “cleanse” expresses that there are vices between them; and with the words: “to be a new test for you, since you are unleavened,” clearly shows that evil does not reign in too many. However, the expression: “since you are unleavened” does not mean that they are all pure, but that they should be so. “For our Passover, Christ, was sacrificed for us. Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, not with the leaven of vice and wickedness, but with unleavened bread of purity and truth” (1 Cor. 5:7-8). So Christ calls His teaching leaven (Matthew 13:33). Continuing his figurative speech, (Paul) reminds them of ancient events, of the Passover and unleavened bread, of the good deeds then and now, of suffering and punishment. Truly, the present time is a time of celebration. He said: “let us begin to celebrate” not because it was Easter or Pentecost, but to show that for Christians every time is a time of celebration, due to the abundance of the blessings given to them. What good is really missing? For you, the Son of God became man, freed you from death, and called you into the kingdom. Having received and received such benefits, should you not celebrate throughout your life? So, let no one grieve in poverty, in illness and in adversity; For us, every time is a time of celebration. That is why Paul says: “Rejoice in the Lord always; Rejoice, and again I say, rejoice” (Phil.4:4). During the holidays, no one dresses in unclean clothes; We will do the same, because a marriage is taking place, a spiritual marriage. “The Kingdom of Heaven,” says (the Lord), “is like a man king, who held a wedding feast for his son” (Matthew 22:2). And when a king celebrates a marriage, and the marriage of his son, then what could be greater than such a holiday? Therefore, let no one enter dressed in rags; We are not talking about clothes, but about unclean deeds. If at a time when everyone was dressed in light clothes, only one, who turned up at the wedding in unclean clothes, was expelled with dishonor, then think what kind of care and purity is required of those entering this marriage. However, not only for this purpose does he remind them of unleavened bread, but also wants to show the affinity of the Old Testament with the new and at the same time explain that after unleavened bread it is no longer permissible to return to Egypt, and whoever wishes to return will experience the same thing as those (Israelites), since what happened to them is a shadow of the present, although the Jew shamelessly rejects it. If you ask him, he won’t say anything great; or, better yet, he will say a lot, but will not say anything like what we say, because he does not know the truth. He will say that God brought the Egyptians who held us back into such a situation that they themselves began to forcibly persecute us, although they had previously held us back and did not even give us time to leaven the dough. If anyone asks me, he will hear not about Egypt and Pharaoh, but about freedom from demonic delusion and from the darkness of the devil, not about Moses, but about the Son of God, not about the Red Sea, but about baptism, which abounds in countless blessings and in which the old man is drowned. Again, if you ask a Jew why he avoids leaven in every possible way, then here too he will remain silent and will not say the reason, since one was a prototype of the future for them and had its reason in the present, and the other, on the contrary, was in order to keep the Jews from vices and so that they would not remain forever in the shadow. What does it mean, tell me, for the lamb to be male, immaculate, one year old, and for its bone not to be broken? What does it mean to invite neighbors, eat while standing, in the evening, and anoint the house with blood (Ex. 12)? He will not say anything else to this, but will only talk about Egypt. And I will tell you what blood means and what evening means, so that everyone eats together and standing. 4. Let us first say why (among the Jews) leaven is decisively expelled. What does this mean? This means that a believer must be free from all vice. Just as a Jew perishes if old leaven is found in him, so it will be with us if vice is found in us. After all, if such a punishment befalls those who walk in the shadows, then much more cannot but befall us. If they so thoroughly cleanse their houses of leaven that they even inspect mouse holes, then all the more should we test our souls in order to cast out every unclean thought. However, this was done among them before, but now no longer, because everywhere there is leaven, wherever there is a Jew. If there are unleavened bread in cities, then this is more a joke than the fulfillment of the law. When the truth has appeared, then prototypes no longer take place. Thus, Paul, and by this similarity, very strikingly excommunicates the incestuous man from the Church. He not only, he says, does not bring any benefit with his presence, but also causes harm, infecting the entire body. When putrefaction is hidden inside and it is not visible where the stench comes from, then it is attributed to the whole body. Therefore, the Apostle with special force urges them to cleanse the leaven: “so that you,” he says, “may become new dough, since you are unleavened, for our Passover, Christ, was sacrificed for us.” He didn’t say: he died, but he used an expression closer to the subject: slaughtered. Therefore, do not seek the same unleavened bread, since your Lamb is not the same; do not seek leaven of the same kind, for your unleavened bread is not of the same kind. From sensual leaven the unleavened becomes leavened, and the leavened can no longer become unleavened; but here it can be the other way around. However, he did not express this clearly. And look at his wisdom: in the first letter (to the Corinthians) he does not give the incestuous man any hope of returning, but commands him to spend his entire life in repentance, so that the promise of forgiveness does not make him more careless; does not say: hand him over to Satan, so that after repentance he will be accepted into the Church again, but what? May he be saved on the last day. Indicates this time to make it thrifty; and he does not reveal what he intended to bestow upon him after repentance, imitating his Master. Just as God said: “three more 21 days and Nineveh will be destroyed” (Jon. 3:4), and did not add: if he repents, he will be saved, so he did not say: if he repents properly, then we will love him deeply; but leaves him to do this work himself, so that he can then receive grace. If he had said so at the very beginning, it would have driven away fear from him; therefore, not only does he not say this, but with the likeness of leaven he does not even leave him hope of returning, but excommunicates him until the next day: “clean out,” he says, “the old leaven”; and one more thing: so as not to “celebrate with the old leaven.” When he repented, he with all readiness brings him again (into communion with the Church). Why does he call the leaven old? Either because this is really what our former life is like, or because the old is close to destruction, stinking and disgusting, which is what sin is. However, the old is not always condemned and the new is not always approved, depending on the subject. So in one place (Scripture) says: “a new friend is like new wine: when it becomes old, you will drink it with pleasure” (Sir.9:13), praising an older friendship rather than a new one. And again: “The Ancient of Days sat down” (Dan.7:9); here also dilapidation is accepted as a sign of honor and greatest glory. And in other places Scripture places old age as a reproach. Since different objects are combined in different ways, it uses the same expressions both about good objects and about bad objects in different senses. Look, in one place it takes on oldness in a disapproving sense: “they became decrepit and strayed from their paths” (Ps. 17:46); and again: “I have grown old from all my enemies” (Ps. 6:8); and also: “aged in evil days” (Dan. 13:52). In a similar way, leaven is often accepted in the sense of the Kingdom of Heaven (Matthew 13:33), and yet here it is rejected; there - in one respect, and here - in another. 5. It seems to me that the speech about leaven especially applies to priests who tolerate a lot of old leaven within without throwing it out, i.e. from the Church, covetous people, predators and everything that excommunicates from the kingdom of heaven. Truly, covetousness is an old leaven, and wherever it enters, into whatever house it invades, it makes it unclean. Even if you have acquired a little unrighteously, you will leaven your entire fortune with it. Therefore, often a little acquired dishonestly overthrew a lot accumulated honestly. There is nothing more dangerous than covetousness; Even if you attach keys, doors, and locks to your treasury, you will do everything in vain if you have locked covetousness inside, this worst robber who can take everything from you. How, you say, are many covetous people not subjected to this? They will certainly be exposed, although not suddenly; and if they escape now, then it will be even more terrible then; they are observed for greater punishment. Moreover, if they themselves escape, their heirs will experience this. But, you say, is this fair? And quite fair. Anyone who has received an inheritance acquired unjustly, although he himself did not steal it, but owns someone else’s property, knows this well, and therefore can rightly suffer. If you took something from a robber, and then the robber came to you and began to demand what he had back, could you justify it by saying that it was not you who robbed him? Not at all. What would you answer, tell me, against the accusation? What did the other one take? But you own it. What did the other one rob? But you use it. This is also known from external (pagan) laws, which, without regard to kidnappers and robbers, command to recover from those from whom someone finds their property. So, if you know the offended, then reward them and do as Zacchaeus did, with great abundance (Luke 19:8): and if you do not know, then I will show you another way and will not deprive you of medicine: give everything to the poor, and thus correct the evil. If others passed on such property to their children and grandchildren, then they experienced another evil instead of one. But what am I saying about what happens here? This will not be spoken of on the day when both of them, both the robbed and the robbers, appear naked, or better yet, not equally naked. They will be equally naked from property, but some of them will be covered with sins acquired with property. What will we do on the day when you, offended and deprived of all your property, appear before the terrible judgment seat, and no one will defend you? What will you say to the Judge? Now you can deceive the human court, but then that court will no longer exist; or better yet, you cannot now, because even now that judgment is in force. God sees everything that happens and is close to those who are offended, even when not called upon (Ps. 114). The victim, even if he was unworthy of avenging him, certainly has God as his avenger, because the evil done to him is displeasing to God. How, you say, does such and such a wicked prosper? But not completely. Listen to what the prophet says: “Do not envy those who do iniquity, for they, like grass, will soon... wither” (Ps. 37:1-2). Where, tell me, is the predator who moved from here? Where are his bright hopes? Where's the big name? Isn't everything over? Wasn't everything that belonged to him a shadow and a dream? The same will happen with every such person, present and future. But this is not the case with holy men, and the same cannot be said about them, i.e. that everything that belongs to them is a shadow, a dream and a dream. If you want, let us cite as an example the one whose sayings are before us, the screen-maker, a Cilician, whose father is not even known. But is it possible, you say, for me to be the same? Do you resolutely want, firmly desire and strive to be the same? Yes, you say. So follow the same path that he and others walked with him. Which way did they go? One says: “in hunger and thirst... and nakedness” (2 Cor. 11:27); another: “I have no silver or gold” (Acts 3:6). So they had nothing, and yet they possessed everything (2 Cor. 6:10). 6. What could be more honorable than these words? What is more blissful and happier (such a state)? Others boast in the opposite way and say: I have so many and so many talents of gold, many acres of land, houses and servants; and he - because he has nothing, and is not ashamed of his poverty, as foolish people do, he does not hide, but even boasts. Where are the rich now, counting interest and interest on interest, ready to take away property from everyone and never getting enough? Listen to the words of Peter, who suggest that poverty is the mother of wealth, that although she has nothing, she is richer than those clothed in diadems. She, having nothing, raised the dead, healed the lame, cast out demons and did what those clothed in scarlet and commanding great and formidable armies could not give. These are the words of men who have already migrated to heaven and reached the very top. So, you can have nothing and possess everything, acquire nothing and own everything. And if we try to gain everything, we will lose everything. These words may seem like a riddle, but they are not a riddle. How, you say, does someone who has nothing have everything? Isn't it rather the one who has everything? No, quite the opposite. He who has nothing has everything in his power, as was the case with the apostles: all the houses in the whole universe were open to them, everyone received them with joy, as friends and relatives. They came to the porphyry seller, and she, like a maidservant, offered them her property (Acts 16:14–15); They came to the jailer, and he opened his whole house to them (Acts 16:34); also to many others. So they had nothing, and possessed everything! They “called nothing of their possessions their own” (Acts 4:32), and therefore everything belonged to them. He who considers everything common uses not only his own property, but also the property of others as his own; and he who separates himself and considers himself the master of only his own property does not own it either. This will be clearer from an example. He who has absolutely nothing, no home, no food, no extra clothes, but has deprived himself of everything for God, uses someone else’s as if he were his own, and will receive from everyone what he wants; thus he who has nothing has everything. But he who has something does not own even this, because no one will give anything to him, and his property would rather become a victim of robbers, thieves, slanderers, changes in circumstances and everything else, rather than become his property. Paul flowed through the entire universe, having nothing with him, did not go to friends or acquaintances - since in the beginning he was the common enemy of everyone - and owned everything when he arrived. Ananias and Sapphira, wanting to keep a small part of their property, lost everything along with their lives (Acts 5:1-9). So leave what is yours, so that you can use someone else’s as your own. However, I don’t know how I got to such an extreme, talking with people who like to give at least a small part of their estate. Let our words apply to perfect people; and to the less perfect we say the following: give from your wealth to those in need, and thus increase your wealth, because “he who does good to the poor lends to the Lord,” says (the Wise) (Proverbs 19:17). If you do not want to endure and wait for the time of retribution, then remember those who lend money to people. They do not immediately take interest, but try to keep the capital in the hands of the debtor as long as possible, as long as the return is sure and the borrower is reliable. Let it be the same here: leave what is yours in the hands of God, so that He will give you a multiple reward. Don't try to get everything here; If you get everything here, what reward will you get there? That is why God observes rewards there, because real life is fleeting. True, He also gives here: “seek,” he says, ... the Kingdom of Heaven, ... and all these things will be added to you” (Matthew 6:33): but we will look there, and we will not rush to receive reward for everything, so as not to reduce our reward, but wait for that time. The interest there is not the same as here, but what it is typical to receive from God. Therefore, let us gather them there as many as possible, and in this way we will move from here, so that we may be worthy of both present and future blessings, by the grace and love 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 Antioch around 390. The paragraphs in the text were arranged by us – Editorial staff of “ABC of Faith” In synod.trans.: forty – I.I. You might be interested in: