Беседа 16

On evading pagan courts. – The passion for money distorts everything. - About enduring insults and grievances. “Whoever does not give alms to the poor goes to Gehenna.” 1 Cor.5:9–11. I wrote to you in a letter - do not associate with fornicators; however, not in general with the fornicators of this world, or the covetous, or extortioners, or idolaters, for otherwise you would have to come out of this world. But I wrote to you not to associate with anyone who, while calling himself a brother, remains a fornicator, or a covetous person, or an idolater, or a slanderer, or a drunkard, or a predator; You can’t even eat with someone like that. 1. When (the apostle) said: “instead of weeping, let such a one be taken away,” and: “clean out the old leaven,” then (the Corinthians) could have thought that all fornicators must be avoided (since if a sinner communicates his infection to those who have not sinned, then all the more should sinners be removed from those outside); if one should not spare one’s own for the harm that comes from him, then even more so - strangers); and having allowed this, they had to abstain from pagan fornicators. Since this is impossible, and such a demand would only irritate them more, the apostle makes a reservation and says: “I wrote to you not to associate with fornicators; however, not at all with the fornicators of this world.” The word: “in general” is used in the sense of a reservation. So that they do not think that he does not command this to them, only as imperfect ones, and that the perfect can do this too, he explains that this is impossible, even if they wished; otherwise one would have to look for another universe. That’s why he adds: “For otherwise you would have to go out of the world.” Do you see how he does not want to burden them, but always pays attention not only to the possibility, but also to the convenience of the commandments? How is it possible, he says, for a person, having a house and children, performing public duties, being a craftsman or a warrior, with so many pagans, to always avoid fornicators? He calls the fornicators of the Gentiles the fornicators of the world. “But I wrote to you,” if one of the brothers is like that, “you shouldn’t even eat with someone like that.” Here he hints to them about others living viciously. But how can a brother be an idolater? Just like the Samaritans once did, who only half adhered to piety. On the other hand, he here begins a speech about sacrifices to idols, which he intended to present later. "Or a covetous man." Rejects such people too; That’s why he says afterwards: “Why would it be better for you not to remain offended? Why would you rather not endure hardship? But you yourselves abuse and take away” (1 Cor. 6:7–8). "Or a drunkard." And for this he condemns later, when he says: “Some are hungry, and others are drunk” (1 Cor. 11:21), and: “Food for the belly, and the belly for food” (1 Cor. 6:13). “Either a slanderer or a predator.” He had reproached such people before. Then he presents the reason why he does not command not to communicate with such people from the pagans, proving that this is not only impossible, but also unnecessary. “For why should I judge those who are outside?” (1 Cor. 5:12). He calls Christians internal, and pagans external, as he says in another place: “he must also have a good testimony from outsiders” (1 Tim. 3:7); and in the letter to the Thessalonians he says the same thing: “Do not associate with him to shame him. But do not consider him an enemy, but admonish him as a brother” (2 Thess. 3:14-15). However, he does not present a reason there. Why? Because there he wanted to encourage, but here it’s not the same; there is not such a sin as here; there he denounces a lesser sin - idleness, and here - fornication and other grave sins. He does not forbid anyone who communicates with the pagans to eat with them, for the same reason. We do the same: we have full care for our children and brothers, but we don’t care much about strangers. But what? Wasn't Paul concerned about outsiders? He cared, but taught them the commandments already when they accepted the sermon and submitted to the teachings of Christ; and until they were converted, until then it would be unnecessary to talk about the commandments of Christ to those who did not even know Christ. “Are you not judging the internal ones? But God judges those who are outside” (1 Cor. 5:12–13). So that from his words: “Why should I judge those who are external?” , someone has not drawn the conclusion that the pagans will remain unpunished, he points them to another judgment - a terrible one. He says this to frighten those outside and at the same time comfort his own, and to show that this temporary punishment delivers from the eternal and infinite, as he said elsewhere: “having been judged, we are punished by the Lord, so as not to be condemned with the world” (1 Cor. 11:32); and: “destroy evil from among you” (Deut. 17:7). 2. He borrowed a saying from the Old Testament in order, on the one hand, to suggest that they themselves would receive the greatest benefit, freed, as it were, from a dangerous infection, and on the other hand, to show that this was not an innovation, and that the ancient legislator had commanded to excommunicate such people. However, it was stricter there, but more lenient here. At the same time, one can rightly ask why the legislator there allowed the sinner to be executed and stoned, but here it is not so, but leads him to repentance? Why is it legalized this way there, but differently here? For two reasons: firstly, because those of the New Testament are called to greater feats, and therefore have a need for greater condescension; secondly, and more justly, because relief in punishment is more likely to dispose them to repentance and correction, while for the Old Testament it would have led to greater corruption. If they, seeing the punishment of their predecessors, remained with the same sins, then they would have become even more rigid in this state if some of them had not been punished. That is why there the adulterer and the murderer were immediately put to death, but here, if they are cleansed by repentance, they escape punishment. However, one can also find punishments in the New Testament that are more severe than in the Old, and in the Old that are lighter than in the New, from which it is clear that these covenants are related and belong to the same legislator. Here and there, punishment sometimes suddenly follows the crime, sometimes after a long time, and often this does not happen, but God is satisfied with repentance alone. Thus, in the Old Testament, David, who committed adultery and murder, was saved by repentance, and in the New Testament, Ananias, who withheld a little from the price of the estate, died along with his wife. If in the Old there are more examples of severity, and in the New - on the contrary, then the difference in such house-building comes from the difference in persons. “How dare anyone among you, when dealing with another, sue the wicked and not the saints?” (1 Cor. 6:1)? And in this again the apostle convicts them, as in a well-known matter; there he says: “from here you can hear wandering”; and here: “does anyone dare from you”? At the very beginning, he expresses anger and shows that this is an immodest and criminal matter. But why did he start talking about covetousness and what should not be judged by outsiders? Following your rule. And his rule was to correct all sins that occur; for example, while discussing public meals, he started talking about the sacraments. So here too, having mentioned the covetous brethren, out of fiery zeal for the correction of those who sin, he no longer observes order, but denounces the sin that presented itself in the course of speech, and then returns to the previous subject. Let's listen to what he says about this. “How dare anyone among you, when dealing with another, sue the wicked and not the saints?” By its very names it reveals sin, denounces it and deviates from it. At first he does not completely reject judgment from the faithful; but when he has already strongly denounced them, then he completely forbids them to sue. If, he says, it is absolutely necessary to sue, then you should not go to court with the infidels, and it is better not to sue at all. However, he expresses the last thought later, and now for now he only prohibits suing outsiders. Isn’t it strange, he says, to choose an enemy as a mediator to reconcile with a friend? Isn’t it shameful and disgraceful that a pagan sits down to judge a Christian? If the pagans should not be judged in private matters, then how can one turn to them in more important matters? And look how he expresses himself. He did not say: among the infidels, but: among the unrighteous; uses such an expression as was especially necessary for him for the intended purpose, in order to correct and reject. Speaking about the trial and bearing in mind that those on trial do not want anything more from judges than great concern for justice, he thereby admonishes them, as if saying: where are you going and what are you doing, man, acting contrary to your own wishes, seeking truth from unrighteous people? It was hard to hear directly the prohibition to sue; therefore, he does not suddenly command this, but first only changes the judge, turning those on trial from outsiders to the Church; and then, since it seemed humiliating to be judged by one’s own people, especially then - because they, being mostly from ordinary people, were perhaps not capable of examining cases and were not as knowledgeable in the laws and skilled in eloquence as external judges - then look how he makes them worthy of trust, first calling them saints. But since this testified to the purity of their lives, and not to the art of listening to cases, then see how he turns his speech to this subject, and says: “Do you not know that the saints will judge the world?” (1 Cor. 6:2). 3. If you once judged the pagans, how do you allow them to judge you now? The (saints) will judge, not by sitting together and demanding an account, but by condemning. The apostle expresses this with the words: “If the world is judged by you, are you really unworthy to judge unimportant matters?” . He did not say: from you, but: by you, just as the Lord said: “the queen of the south will rise... and condemn this generation,” and: “the Ninevites will rise up... and condemn this generation” (Matthew 12:41-42). They see the same sun with us and participate in the same thing, and meanwhile, if we turn out to be believers, and they are unbelievers, then it will be impossible for them to plead ignorance; we will condemn them by what we have done, and then there will be many similar ways of condemnation. And lest anyone think that he is talking about someone else, look at how he generalizes the speech: “If the world is judged by you, then are you not worthy to judge unimportant matters?” you are judged by those outside; their judgments are of little importance, not those. “Do you not know that we will judge angels, much less the deeds of this life?” (1 Cor. 6:3). Some say that here he means priests; but no, he’s talking about demons. If he had spoken about vicious priests, he would have understood them higher when he said: “through you the world will receive judgment,” because Scripture usually calls vicious people the world, and he would not have spoken about the same thing another time, much less would have said it after the first, as if about something more important. He speaks here about those angels about whom Christ speaks: “go into the fire... prepared for the devil and his angels” (Matt. 25:41), and Paul himself: “his angels 23 disguise themselves as ministers of righteousness” (2 Cor. 11:15). When these incorporeal forces turn out to be worse than us clothed with flesh, they will be subjected to the most severe punishment. If anyone else begins to argue about what is said here about priests, then we will ask: about which priests? Of course, about those who behaved in a worldly manner? But how does he say that “we will judge the angels,” and not the affairs of this life, contrasting the angels with the affairs of this life? This is true in the sense that, due to the superiority of their nature, they have no need (for worldly things). “But you, when you have worldly disputes, make 24 your judges those who mean nothing in the church” (1 Cor. 6:4). Wanting with special force to convince us that we should not, in any matter, turn to external judges, and seeing an objection being presented, he resolves it in advance. The meaning of his words is as follows: perhaps someone will say that among you there is not a single one wise or capable of sorting out matters, but everyone is not capable of this: what then? At least, he says, you didn’t have a single wise person, entrust this matter to the very last ones. “I say this to your shame” (1 Cor. 6:5). Condemns such an objection as an empty pretext; That’s why he continues: “Is there really not a single reasonable person among you?” Is it really possible, he says, that you are so poor? Are smart people really that rare among you? The subsequent addition amazes them even more; namely, having said: “Is there really not a single reasonable person among you,” he adds: “who could judge between his brothers.” When a brother is suing his brother, great wisdom and skill are not needed to mediate the litigation, but goodwill and kinship can greatly contribute to the resolution of the dispute. “But brother goes to law against brother, and that before unbelievers” (1 Cor. 6:6). Do you see how wisely he first humiliated the judges by calling them unrighteous, and now shames (the Corinthians) by calling (these judges) infidels? And indeed, it is very shameful if a priest cannot be a conciliator between brothers, but it turns out that it is necessary to resort to outsiders. Pointing to the humiliated, he not only says that in the place of judges there should be the most worthless people, but he shames them. That the court should be left to people capable of trying cases, he expressed this in the words: “Is there really not a single reasonable person among you?” . And in order to completely stop their mouths, he says that even if there were not a single wise person among them, it would be better to leave matters to the judgment of the unwise than to be judged by outsiders. Isn’t it absurd, in the event of a domestic quarrel, not to turn to any stranger and to be ashamed if domestic matters are disclosed outside the home; and from the Church, which is a treasury of ineffable mysteries, to take everything outside? But brother and brother go to court, and then before the infidels. Double guilt: the one that is being judged, and the one that is being judged among the infidels. If suing a brother in itself is a sinful act, then does the one suing outsiders deserve any justification? “And this is already very humiliating for you, that you have litigation among yourself” (1 Cor. 6:7). Do you see how long he did not express this and how timely he eradicates this (evil)? I have not yet examined, he says, who is right and who is wrong; Just by the very fact that they are being judged, both of them are worthy of condemnation and are in no way better than the other. 4. Whether brother sues brother fairly or unfairly is another question. Do not say who caused the offense; I condemn you already for suing. If not bearing an insult is a sin, then what kind of offense is worthy of condemnation? “Why would you rather not remain offended? Why would you rather not endure hardship? But you yourselves wrong and take away, and that from your brothers” (1 Cor. 6:7-8). There are two crimes here, or better yet, three or even four. One thing is that they do not bear insults; another, that they themselves offend; third, that they seek judgment from the unrighteous; fourth, that they do this to their brother. Sins are not judged equally when they are committed against someone accidentally caught, or against one’s own member; in the latter case more shamelessness is revealed; there only nature is insulted, but here the personality itself. Having thus shamed them with general considerations, and most of all with the rewards awaiting them, he concludes the admonition with a threat, strengthens his speech and says: “Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the Kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor wicked people, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Cor. 6:9-10). What are you saying? When talking about covetous people, why do you mention so many wicked people? Yes, he answers; but I do this without mixing up the subjects of speech, but continuing it in order. Indeed, just as in his conversation about fornicators he mentioned everyone, so again here, speaking about covetous people, he enumerates all sinners in order to prepare for reproof those who are aware of such deeds. When someone constantly hears about the punishment awaiting others, he himself becomes more accessible to admonition, because he applies this punishment to his own sins. The apostle utters a threat here not because he knew all these sins of the Corinthians and reproached them for them; but because the listener’s attention is attracted and maintained mainly when the speech concerns him not directly, but vaguely, covertly striking his conscience. Don't flatter yourself. Here he means some who said, as many now say: God is philanthropic and good, He does not take revenge for crimes, we have nothing to fear, He will never punish for any sin. That’s why he says: don’t flatter yourself. After all, it is extreme seduction and delusion - hoping for something pleasant, getting the opposite, and thinking about God in a way that they do not think about man. Therefore, the prophet speaks on behalf of God: “You thought iniquity that I would be like you. I will reprove you and bring your sins before you” (Ps. 49:21). And Paul (says) here: “Do not be deceived: neither fornicators,” he puts forward the already condemned sinner, “nor adulterers, nor wicked people, nor drunkards, nor revilers will inherit the kingdom of God.” Many condemned this place as too cruel, since the apostle here, along with the fornicator, the adulterer and the sodomite, puts the drunkard and the evil-pagan: sins are not equal - why are the punishments equal? What can I say to this? And the fact that drunkenness and slander are sins of no small importance, if Christ also recognized the one who calls his brother crazy as guilty of Gehenna (Matthew 5:22). Murder often occurred from here; From drunkenness, the Jewish people fell into very serious sins. Moreover, the apostle speaks here not about punishment, but about deprivation of the kingdom. Both one and the other will be equally deprived of the kingdom; But whether there will be any difference between them in Gehenna, now is not the time to talk about that; This is not what we are talking about now. “And such were some of you; but they were washed, but they were sanctified” (1 Cor. 6:11). He strongly reproaches them with these words; think, he says, what evils God has delivered you from, what proof of his love for mankind he has shown you; and did not limit His mercy to deliverance from evils alone, but extended His goodness even further: He made you clean. And is that all? No, he also sanctified it; and that’s not all, and he justified it. To be freed from sins is already a great gift; but He has also enriched you with countless blessings; moreover, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, not in such and such a way, but also in the Spirit of our God. So, beloved, knowing this and imagining the greatness of the blessings given to us, let us live piously, keeping ourselves clean from all the sins counted; Let us flee the external judgments that take place in the marketplaces, and preserve the nobility that God has given us. Think what a shame it is when a pagan sits and carries out judgment on you! 5. But, you say, what if he judges his own unfairly? Why is this so, tell me? By what laws does a pagan judge and by what laws does a Christian judge? Isn’t it known that a pagan is human, and a Christian is divine? Therefore, there is more truth here, because the laws were sent down from heaven. In external courts, in addition to what has been said, there is still a lot of suspicious things: the art of rhetoricians, and the dishonesty of judges, and many other things that violate justice; but here there is nothing like that. What to do, you say, when the enemy is strong? Then it is especially necessary to judge here; in external judgments he will certainly overcome you. If he does not want this and, despising internal judgments, is forcibly drawn to external ones, then it is better to voluntarily endure what you will be subjected to against your will, and not go to trial in order to receive a reward. “Whoever wants to sue you,” says (the Lord), “and take your shirt, give him your outer clothing too”; and: “Make peace with your adversary quickly, while you are still on the way with him” (Matthew 5:40, 25). However, do we need to expand? The defenders of external courts themselves very often say that it is better to do without them. Oh, money, or better yet, oh, the mad passion for money! She subverts and overthrows everything; For money, everything seems like a fable and trifle to many. That worldly people initiate litigation in courts is not surprising; but when many of those who have renounced the world do the same, it no longer deserves any forgiveness. If you want to see how Scripture commands you to move away from this need, i.e. from the judgment seats, and for whom the laws are, then listen to what Paul says: “The law is not made for the righteous, but for the lawless and disobedient” (1 Tim. 1:9). If he says this about the (law) of Moses, then even more so about external (laws). And truly, when you insult yourself, it is obvious that you are not righteous; and when you are insulted and you endure - which is especially characteristic of a righteous person - then you have no need for external laws. But, tell me, can I tolerate being insulted? And Christ commanded even more. He commanded the insulted person not only to endure, but also to do good to the insulter and, through readiness for patience, to overcome the (evil) disposition of the insulter. He did not say: give the robe to anyone who wants to sue you and take your robe, but along with it, “give him the swearing as well.” Defeat him, he says, with patience, and not with insult on your part: here is a glorious and brilliant victory! That is why Paul further says: “And this is already very humiliating for you, that you have litigation among yourself. Why would you rather not remain offended?” . Victory belongs to the one who suffers the insult rather than to the one who does not; I'll try to explain this to you. Let us suppose that one who does not tolerate offense leads his opponent to the court of justice and gains the upper hand; but then he himself remains defeated. He was subjected to what he did not want: the enemy forced him to grieve and sue. What's wrong with you having the upper hand? What's wrong with getting all the money back? You suffered what you did not want, being forced to go to court. If you endure the insult, you win; you lose money, but gain victory with such wisdom, because, therefore, the enemy could not force you to do what you did not want. To see that this is true, tell me: who won - the envious one, or the one sitting on the rot? Who is defeated - Job, deprived of everything, or the devil, deprived of everything? It is obvious that the one who has taken everything away is the devil. Whom do we glorify as the winner - the devil, who defeated, or Job, who was defeated? Obviously Job. True, he could not save the lost property and save his children; What am I saying: property and children? – could not even maintain physical health; however, he remained the winner, having lost all his property. He could not keep his property, but he completely preserved his piety. He could not prevent the deaths of children; but what of this? What happened made them more glorious and helped him in the midst of temptation. If he had not suffered and suffered attacks from the devil, he would not have won such a brilliant victory. If it were evil to endure insults, then God would not have commanded us to do this, because God does not command anything evil. Or do you not know that He is the God of glory (Ps. 23:10), and does not want us to be subjected to dishonor, ridicule and destruction, but gives us everything opposite to this? He commands us to endure insults and does everything in order to divert us from the vanity of life and teach us what glory and dishonor, loss and gain consist of. 6. But, would you say, is it hard to endure insults and insults? No, man, it's not hard. How long will you be addicted to present goods? God would not have commanded this if it had been difficult. And look: the one who caused the offense leaves with money, but also with a vicious conscience: and the one who suffered the offense, although he lost his money, received boldness before God - an acquisition that is more precious than countless treasures. So, knowing this, let us be wise of our own free will, and we will not suffer the fate of foolish people who do not consider it an insult to themselves when they are deprived of something by the verdict of the court. On the contrary, we suffer the greatest loss when we practice wisdom in this way not of our own free will, but when we are forced to do so, because the loser of a case does not derive any benefit from the court: his philosophy is a consequence of necessity. What is the brilliant victory? It’s when you despise offense, when you don’t resort to court. What are you saying, what are you saying? All my property has been taken away from me, and you command me to remain silent? I am offended, but do you advise me to bear it with meekness? How can I do this? You can easily if you look at the sky and its beauty, if you remember where God promised to accept you for generously enduring insults. Do this and, looking up at heaven, think that through this you become like Him who sits there on the cherubim. He was also insulted and endured; was scolded and did not take revenge; He was spat upon and did not answer, but on the contrary, he rewarded those who insulted Him with countless good deeds, and He commanded us to imitate Him. Remember that you came naked from your mother’s womb, naked you will depart from here ( Job 1:21 ) - both you and the one who offended you, or better yet, he will die with a thousand sores that give rise to worms. Think that the present is temporary; imagine the coffins of your ancestors; take a closer look at the matter, and you will see that the one who offended you made you stronger: he made the passion of the love of money stronger in himself, but weakened it in you, taking away food from this beast. Moreover, he saved you from worries, troubles, the envy of slanderers, anxiety, confusion, incessant fear, and brought a lot of evils upon his own head. But what do you say if I have to fight hunger? You will endure this together with Paul, who says: “Even to this day we endure hunger and thirst and nakedness” (1 Cor. 4:11). But he, you say, is for God? And you are for God: when you do not take revenge, you do it for God. But the one who wronged me enjoys with the rich? Better say: with the devil; and you will receive crowns together with Paul. Do not be afraid of hunger: “The Lord will not allow the soul of the righteous to suffer hunger,” (says the Wise One) (Prov. 10:3); and another says: “Cast your sorrow on the Lord, and He will nourish you” (Ps. 54:23). If He feeds the birds of the field, will He not feed you? Let us not be of little faith and cowardly, beloved! Will He who promised us the kingdom and such blessings deprive us of real blessings? Let us not desire too much, let us be content with little, and we will always be rich. Let us care only about clothing and food, and we will receive both this and much more. When you are grieving and upset by an insult, I would like to show you the soul of the offender triumphant in victory: it is like ashes! This is the property of sin: while it is being committed, it still gives some pleasure; and when it is accomplished, the slight pleasure passes and sorrow sets in. We experience the same thing when we offend someone: then we condemn ourselves. In the same way, when we satisfy our greed, we rejoice; and then our conscience pricks us. Do you see anyone's poor house? Weep not for the one who lost it, but for the one who took it; He did not harm another, but himself; He deprived the poor of the present blessings, and himself of the indescribable blessings. After all, if the one who does not give to the poor goes to Gehenna, then the one who takes from the poor will suffer what kind of torment? But what, you say, is the benefit of my suffering evil? Great benefit. God does not provide retribution for you in punishing someone who has done you harm: that would mean little. What good is it if I suffer evil and he suffers evil? I know that many consider it their greatest consolation and remain completely satisfied when they see those who offended them punished; but God does not provide reward for this. Do you know what blessings await you? He opens all heaven to you, makes you a companion with the saints, includes you in their ranks, absolves you from sins, crowns you with truth. After all, if those who forgive those who have sinned receive remission of sins, then not only those who forgive, but also those who do good to them will not receive any blessing? Therefore, do not be upset, but still pray for the one who offended you; it will benefit you yourself. He took your property and took away your sins, as happened to Naaman and Gehazi (2 Kings 5:27). What wealth would you not give to have your sins forgiven? This can happen now; If you endure and do not curse, you will receive a brilliant crown. These are not my words, but Christ’s: “Pray,” He said, “for those who offend you”; and think about the reward for this: that you may be like your Father who is in heaven (Matthew 5:44–45). In this way you do not lose anything, but still gain, you do not suffer harm, but still receive a crown; your soul becomes more wise; you become like God, get rid of worries about property, and acquire the Kingdom of Heaven. So, considering all this, beloved, let us be wise when we are offended, in order to get rid of the worries of this life, free ourselves from useless sorrows and be counted worthy of the joy of the future, 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” So in the synod.translation. In glory “You are not worthy of nature by evil judgment,” i.e. you are not worthy (to be subjected to) unimportant judgments, which is closer to the Greek. text and understanding of Chrysostom - I.I. In the synod. translation: “ministers” – I.I. In synod.trans. "supply" This reading of the Greek text is acceptable from the point of view of grammar, but does not correspond to the connection between speech and I.I. You might be interested in: