Беседа 35

The gift of prophecy takes precedence over the gift of tongues. – Why did the gift of tongues exist? - The power of vanity. – Vanity is like a wild animal. - Praise of Paul. – How a Christian should treat material goods. - A method of healing the soul. - The plight of the rich. 1 Corinthians 14:1. Achieve love; be zealous for spiritual gifts, especially to prophesy. 1. Having thoroughly shown (the Corinthians) all the dignity of love, (the apostle) finally convinces them to zealously strive for it; That’s why he says: “reach” 58. He who chases something sees only what he is trying to achieve, directs all his attention to it and does not lag behind until he achieves it. When he cannot reach it on his own, he tries to stop the runner with the help of those in front of him, with great zeal persuading those nearby to detain the runner and, having detained him, not to let him go until he himself reaches him. We will do the same: if we do not reach love, then we will ask those close to it to delay it until we get closer to it; and when we reach it, we will try not to let her go, so that she does not run away from us again. She often withdraws from us because we do not treat her properly and prefer everything else to her. Therefore, it is necessary to use all measures to hold it tightly. If this is so, then without much or, better yet, without any labor, but on the contrary, with joy and triumph, we will walk along the narrow path of virtue. That is why (the apostle) says: hold fast to her. Further, so that they would not think that he was talking about love in order to humiliate gifts, he adds: “Be zealous for spiritual gifts, especially to prophesy. For whoever speaks in an unknown tongue speaks not to men, but to God; because no one understands him, he speaks secrets in the spirit; but whoever prophesies speaks to people for edification, admonition and comfort” (1 Cor. 14:1-3). Here he compares gifts and places the gift of tongues lower than others, proving that it is neither completely useless nor very useful in itself. The Corinthians greatly admired him and considered him a great gift - they considered him great because the apostles received it first of all and with such solemnity. But that didn't make him superior to others. Why did the apostles receive it first? Because they had to go everywhere. Just as during the pandemonium one language was divided into many, so then many languages ​​often belonged to one person, and the same one spoke Persian, Roman, Indian and many other languages, according to the inspiration of the Spirit. This gift was called the gift of tongues, because (whoever possessed it) could speak together in many languages. Look how (the apostle) both humiliates him and exalts him; words: “for whoever speaks in an unknown tongue speaks not to men, but to God; because no one understands him,” humiliates him, showing that this talent is not very useful; and then with the words: “he speaks mysteries in the spirit,” again elevates it so that it does not seem unnecessary, useless and given in vain. “And he who prophesies speaks to people for edification, admonition and comfort.” Do you see from what side he proves the superiority of this talent? In terms of its general usefulness. And everywhere he prefers what benefits many. And those, tell me, didn’t they tell people? But not with such edification, exhortation and consolation. To be inspired by the Spirit is equally common to both the one who prophesies and the one who speaks in tongues; but the first, that is, the one who prophesies, has an advantage over the last in that he is also useful to the listeners. Those who did not have this gift did not hear those who spoke in tongues. So what? Did they not edify anyone? Yes, he says, only themselves. That is why (the apostle) adds: “whoever speaks in an unknown tongue edifies himself” (1 Cor. 14:4). How can he do it if he doesn’t know what he’s saying? But here (the apostle) talks about those who knew what they were saying, they knew it themselves, but could not convey it to others. “Whoever prophesies edifies the church.” What is the difference between one and the church, the same difference is between the first and the last. Do you see the wisdom (of the apostle) how he does not turn this gift into nothing, but shows that, although it brings benefit, it is small, and is sufficient only for the one who possesses it? Then, so that they would not think that out of envy he was disparaging tongues—and many had this gift—he rejects their suspicion and says: “I wish you all to speak in tongues; but it is better that you prophesy; For he who prophesies is superior to him who speaks in tongues, unless he also speaks, so that the church may receive edification” (1 Cor. 14:5). The expressions: better and superior do not mean opposite, but advantage. 2. From here it is also clear that he does not condemn talent, but guides his listeners to the better, showing both his care for them and his soul, alien to any envy. Didn't say two or three; but - “I desire that you all speak in tongues,” and not only this, but also that you prophesy, and the latter more than the former, “for he who prophesies is more excellent.” When he has already explained and proved the subject, then he declares his desire, not simply, however, but with the addition: “will he even explain it”; if he is capable of this, that is, interpretation, then, he says, he becomes equal to the prophet, because then many will benefit. It should be especially noted how he seeks it (the benefit) first of all in everything. “Now, if I come to you, brethren, and begin to speak in unknown tongues, what benefit will I bring you if I do not speak to you either by revelation, or knowledge, or prophecy, or teaching?” ( 1 Cor. 14:6 )? But what, he continues, can we say about others? Let Paul be the one who speaks in tongues, and then there will be no benefit to the hearers. He says this in order to show that he is looking for something useful for them, and that he does not harbor enmity towards those who have this gift, unless he refuses to recognize it as useless even in his own person. He always applies the unpleasant to his own face, just as at the beginning of the letter he said: “Who is Paul? Who is Apollos? Who is Cephas? (1 Cor. 3:5, 22). He does the same here: and I, he says, will not bring you any benefit, “unless I express myself to you either by revelation, or knowledge, or prophecy, or teaching.” The meaning of his words is as follows: if I do not tell you something that can be intelligible and clear for you, but only show that I have the gift of tongues, then, after listening to tongues, you will walk away without receiving any benefit. “And soulless things that produce sound, a pipe or a harp, if they do not produce separate tones, how can one recognize what is being played on a pipe or harp?” (1 Cor. 14:7). What good are words you don't understand? And what am I saying, he continues, that this is useless with us, that only what is clear and understandable to listeners is useful? The same can be seen with soulless musical instruments: if, for example, you blow into a pipe or strike a harp without proper rhythm and harmony, but mixed and haphazardly, then you will not give pleasure to any of the listeners, because some clarity is required from inarticulate (instruments), and if you strike the harp or blow into a pipe unskillfully, you will not do anything. If we demand such clarity, harmony and separation from soulless (objects), if we try and strive to give great meaning to meaningless sounds, then all the more is meaningfulness required from animated and intelligent people and spiritual gifts. “And if the trumpet makes an uncertain sound, who will prepare for battle?” (1 Cor. 14:8). From things that are not necessary (the apostle) moves on to the most necessary and useful and says that you can see the same thing not only on the harp, but also on the trumpet. And from it there are harmonious sounds, indicating either war, or something else, sometimes calling for an attack, sometimes for retreat; and whoever does not know this is in extreme danger. To explain this and indicate this danger, he says: “Who will prepare for battle?” And whoever does not do this destroys everything. How, you say, does this apply to us? This especially applies to you: that’s why he adds: “So if you utter unintelligible words with your tongue, how will they know what you are saying? You will speak into the wind” (1 Cor. 14:9), that is, you will not say anything, you will speak for no one. Everywhere he proves the uselessness (of the gift of tongues). But, you say, if it is useless, then why was it given? In order for it to be useful to the one who receives it; and in order for it to be useful to others, it was necessary to combine interpretation with it. The apostle says all this, wanting to unite them with each other, so that one who does not have the gift of interpretation would call for help another who has such a gift, and through him make his gift useful. That is why he everywhere proves the imperfection of the gift, in order to at least in this way connect them with each other; and whoever thinks that this gift is sufficient for himself does not so much elevate it as humiliate it, not allowing it to shine brightly through interpretation. This gift is good and necessary, but only when someone explains what was said. And the finger is a necessary member, but if you separate it from the others, then it will not be so useful; A trumpet is also necessary, but if it makes sounds in vain, it can even be painful. Art will not appear if there is no material; the material will not be processed if the form is not given to it. Put voice in the place of material, and clarity in place of form, without which there can be no benefit from the material. “For example, how many different words are there in the world, and not one of them is without meaning” (1 Cor. 14:10), that is, so many languages, so many dialects, Scythians, Thracians, Romans, Persians, Moors, Indians, Egyptians, and many other peoples! “But if I do not understand the meaning of the words, then I am a stranger to the one who speaks” (1 Cor. 14:11). 3. Don’t think, he says, that this only happens to us; the same thing happens to everyone. Thus, in saying this, I do not blame language, but show that it is useless to me as long as it is not clear. Then, so that the accusation is not severe, he equalizes the guilt: I will be, he says, “a stranger to the one who speaks, and the one who speaks is a stranger to me,” not because of the nature of the language, but because of our ignorance. Do you see how little by little he brought his speech to the essential point? This is what he usually does: he borrows examples from afar and ends up with what actually relates to the subject. Having spoken about the pipe and harp, in the example of which there was much that was insufficient and unnecessary, he moved on to the trumpet, (an instrument) most useful, and then finally to the language itself. So before, when he proved that the apostles were not forbidden to receive (content from their disciples), he began with farmers, shepherds and soldiers, and then turned his speech to the closest to the subject, to the Old Testament priests. Notice how everywhere he tries to show that the gift itself does not deserve blame, but transfers the blame to those who received it; did not say: I will be a stranger, but: “for the one who speaks, a stranger”; and further he did not say: a foreigner speaking, but: “a foreigner speaking for me.” What do you say should be done? One must not only not reproach, but also exhort and teach, as he himself does. It is he who, having denounced, reproached and shown the uselessness of the gift, finally offers advice and says: “So you, being zealous for spiritual gifts, try to be enriched by them for the edification of the church” (1 Cor. 14:12). Do you see his constant goal, how he constantly and in everything looks for one thing in mind - the need of many, the benefit of the church, setting this as some kind of rule? And he did not say: so that you may receive gifts, but: “to become rich,” that is, to have them in great abundance. “I am, he says, not only far from wishing that you should not have them, but on the contrary, I wish that you would have them in abundance, if only you would use them for the common benefit. And how this can be, he explains further: “Therefore,” he says, “he who speaks an unknown tongue, pray for the gift of interpretation. For when I pray in an unknown tongue, although my spirit prays, my mind remains unfruitful. What to do? I will begin to pray with the spirit, I will also pray with the mind; I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding” (1 Cor. 14:13-15). Here (the apostle) shows that it depends on them to receive the gift: “let him pray,” he says, that is, let him apply what is in his power. If you ask hard, you will receive. Ask therefore that you may have not only the gift of tongues, but also the gift of interpretation, so that you may be useful to everyone, and not have the gift confined to yourself. “For when,” he says, “I pray in an unknown tongue, then although my spirit prays, my mind remains unfruitful.” Do you see how (the apostle) little by little brings his speech to the point that such a person is useless not only for others, but also for himself, since his mind remains fruitless? If someone spoke only Persian, or any other foreign language, and did not know what he was saying, then he would be a stranger to himself, and not only to others, because he would not understand the power of words. In ancient times there were many who, along with the gift of tongues, had the gift of prayer; they prayed, their tongue uttered a prayer in Persian or Roman, but their minds did not understand what was being said. That’s why he says: “I pray in an unknown tongue, then my spirit prays,” that is, a gift given to me that sets the tongue in motion, “but my mind remains unfruitful.” What is better and more useful, and what should you do or what should you ask from God? To pray both with the spirit, that is, with the gift, and with the mind. That’s why he says: “I will begin to pray with the spirit, I will also pray with the mind; I will sing with my spirit, I will also sing with my mind.” And here he expresses the same thing, that is, so that the tongue speaks and the mind does not remain ignorant of what is said. If this does not happen, then another confusion may occur: “for if,” he says, “you will bless with the spirit, then one standing in the place of a commoner 59 how will he say: “Amen” at your thanksgiving? Because he doesn't understand what you're saying. You give thanks well, but another is not edified” (1 Cor. 14:16–17). Look how steadily he moves towards his goal here too, always keeping in mind the edification of the church. He calls the commoner ignorant and proves that he, too, suffers considerable harm when he cannot say: Amen. The meaning of his words is as follows: if you bless in a foreign language, not knowing what you are saying and not knowing how to interpret, then a commoner cannot answer: Amen; without hearing the final words: forever and ever, he will not say: Amen. Then he again softens his speech so that it does not seem that he is too demeaning the gift (of tongues), and as he said above that (such a person) speaks secrets, speaks to God, edifies himself, prays in the spirit, offering considerable consolation in this, so here he says: you give thanks well, since you speak according to the inspiration of the Spirit, but the one who does not hear anything and does not understand what is said stands there without receiving much benefit. 4. After (the apostle) said against those who have the gift of tongues that there is nothing great in this, further, so that they do not think that he humiliates them because he himself is deprived of it, look what he says: “I thank God...: I speak in tongues more than all of you” (1 Cor. 14:18). He does the same in other cases. So, intending to overthrow the vain claims of Judaism and show that it is already insignificant, he explains in advance that he himself had (these claims) and, moreover, to the highest degree, and then calls them vanity: “if,” he says, “anyone else thinks to trust in the flesh, then more than I, circumcised on the eighth day, from the race of Israel, the tribe of Benjamin, a Jew of Jews, according to the teaching a Pharisee, through zeal a persecutor of the Church of God, but through legal righteousness blameless” (Phil. 3:4-6). Then, when he proved that he himself had all these advantages, he says: “But whatever was advantage to me, I counted loss for Christ’s sake” (Phil. 3:7). This is what he does here: “I speak in tongues more than all of you,” he says; Therefore, do not be arrogant, as if you alone have this gift; and I have it, and, moreover, much more than you. “But in church I would rather speak five words with my mind, so that I may instruct others also” (1 Cor. 14:19). What does it mean: “to speak with my mind in order to instruct others”? Say what I understand, what I can interpret to others, speak with consciousness and teach listeners. “Than the darkness of words in an unknown language.” Why? “To instruct others too,” he says. The first brings only ostentatious glory, and the last - great benefit. Everywhere he looks for one thing - the common good. Although the gift of tongues was extraordinary, and the gift of prophecy was ordinary, ancient, and already belonged to many, while it became known then for the first time, Paul did not consider it very desirable for himself, and did not even use it, not because he did not have it, but because he was looking for something more useful. He was alien to any vanity and had only one thing in mind, how to make better listeners. That’s why he could see what was useful both for himself and for others, because he was free from vanity; and whoever has enslaved himself to this passion cannot see what is useful not only for others, but also for himself. Such was Simon, who, guided by vanity, did not see what was beneficial for himself (Acts 8); such were the Jews, who therefore betrayed their own salvation to the devil. From here came idols, and the external (pagan) sages, prompted by the same madness, fell into absurd doctrines. And look how perverse this passion is; at her prompting, some of them became poor, others accumulated wealth. Its power is such that it expresses its strength even in opposite things: one is vain in chastity, another in debauchery, one in truth, another in untruth, intemperance and fasting, meekness and insolence, wealth and poverty. Some from the outside, and having the opportunity to take (from others), did not take in order to be surprised. But the apostles were not like that: they were pure from vanity and proved it by their deeds. When they called them gods and were ready to sacrifice crowned oxen to them, they not only stopped it, but also tore their clothes (Acts 14:12-14). When they healed the lame man and everyone was amazed at him, they said: “Why do you look at us, as if we, through our strength or piety, made him walk?” (Acts 3:12). They chose poverty among people who were amazed at poverty; and they were among people who despised poverty and glorified wealth, and fed the needy with what they received. So they did everything not out of vanity, but out of love for humanity! And those, on the contrary, acted in everything, including with property, as enemies and destroyers of all nature. One, like a madman and a madman, vainly and uselessly drowned all his property in the sea: the other left his entire field uncultivated. So they did everything out of ambition! But this is not what the apostles did: they accepted what was offered and distributed it to the poor with such generosity that they themselves constantly suffered hunger. If they were looking for glory, they would not do this, they would not accept or distribute, fearing that they would not incur any suspicion. After all, whoever throws away his own out of vanity will much less take someone else’s, so as not to appear to have need of others and not incur suspicion. They, as you see, served and asked for those in need. So they were more loving than all fathers! Look how their commandments are proportionate and free from vanity: “having,” says (the apostle), “we will be content with food and clothing” (1 Tim. 6:8), not like that Sinopite (Diogenes), who without any need dressed in rags and lived in a barrel, surprised many, but brought no benefit to anyone. But Paul did not do anything of the kind, because he was not driven by ambition, but he dressed with all decency, and always lived in the house, and was perfect in other virtues, which the mentioned Cynic despised, leading a dissolute life, acting shamelessly in front of everyone and being carried away by the insane passion of vanity. In fact, if anyone had asked why he lived in a barrel, he would not have found any other reason except vanity. 5. Paul even gave rent for the house in which he lived in Rome (Acts 28:30). If he endured much more difficult things, then all the more could he also (live outside the house). But he did not seek glory, this wild beast, the evil demon, the plague of the universe, the poisonous viper. Just as a viper tears apart a mother’s womb with its teeth, so this passion torments the one who feeds it. Where can you find a cure for this varied disease? You need to think about those who overcame it, and, looking at their example, arrange your own life accordingly. And Patriarch Abraham... But let no one accuse us of identical words because we remember him often and on every occasion. This is what makes him especially amazing, and deprives those who do not imitate him of any justification. If we showed some part of virtue in one, and part in another (a virtuous person), then another would say that virtue is difficult to fulfill, since it is not easy for one person to accomplish everything in general that each of the saints accomplished in parts. But when there is one and the same one who has everything, then what kind of justification will those who, after law and grace, cannot be compared with those who lived before law and grace? How did this patriarch overcome and defeat this beast when he had a quarrel with his nephew? Being deprived and not receiving the best part, he did not grieve; and you know that in such cases shame is worse than loss for the faint-hearted, especially when a person is the master of everything, as he (Abraham) was then, and when he himself, having shown honor in advance, will not be reciprocally honored. But none of this offended him: having received the worst part, he was satisfied and, being offended by the elder by the younger, the uncle by the nephew, he was not indignant or upset, but, on the contrary, continued to show him love and care. Again, having won a great and terrible war and driven out the barbarians by force, he did not celebrate the victory and did not set up a trophy, because he only wanted to save (others), and not show off (himself). Again, when he received strangers, even then he was not vain, but he himself went out to meet them and bowed, not as a benefactor, but as a benefactor, calling the strangers masters, not knowing who they were, and forcing his wife to serve them. And before that, in Egypt, having turned out to be so amazing, having received his wife back and having received such an honor, he did not boast to anyone. The natives called him king, and he even paid them for the grave (Gen. 23). Also, when he sent his son to choose a bride, he did not order him to say anything great and glorious about himself, but simply to bring the bride. Don’t you want to look at those who lived in the times of grace and see how alien they were to this passion even when the great glory of their teaching spread everywhere? Look at that very (apostle) whose words we listen to, how he constantly attributes everything to God, how he often remembers his sins, but never his exploits; if he is forced to do this for the edification of his disciples, then he calls this matter madness, cedes primacy to Peter, is not ashamed to work for Priscilla and Aquila, and everywhere tries to show himself humble, not boasting in the marketplace and not surrounding himself with crowds of people, but placing himself among the ignorant. That’s why he said: “weak in personal presence” (2 Cor. 10:10), that is, unimportant and alien to all splendor; and again: “We pray to God that you do no evil, not so that you may appear to us to be what you ought to be” (2 Cor. 13:7). And what wonder if he despises this (earthly) glory? If he despises the highest glory, the kingdom and hell, for the sake of pleasing Christ - and he precisely desires to be excommunicated from Christ for the glory of Christ, and although he says that he wants to undergo this for the Jews, he speaks in such a way that any of the madmen would not think that he is appropriating the promises given to him - if, I say, he was ready to despise this, then is it surprising that he despises glory human? But today’s (people) are destroyed by everything, not only the desire for glory, but also the opposite: insult and fear of dishonor; if someone begins to praise you, you become arrogant, and if someone begins to blame you, you lose heart. Just as weak bodies suffer harm from minor causes, so do low souls; They are destroyed not only by poverty, but also by wealth, not only by sadness, but also by joy, and even by pleasant things more than by sad things, because poverty forces one to be abstinent, and wealth often leads to great evil. And just as those possessed by fever are dissatisfied with everything, so corrupted souls suffer harm from everything. 6. Knowing this, let us not avoid poverty and be amazed at wealth, but let us arrange our souls so that it is ready for anything. He who builds a house does not make sure that rain does not fall on it and the sun's rays do not fall on it - this is impossible - but that he can endure everything. And whoever builds a ship takes care and tries not to ensure that it is not hit by waves or touched by a sea storm - this is impossible - but that the walls of the ship are able to bear everything. And whoever strengthens the body also tries not to ensure that there are no air changes, but so that the body can easily endure all this. Let us do the same with our souls; we will try not to avoid poverty or to become rich, but to accept both safely for ourselves. Without worrying about them, let us prepare the soul fit for both wealth and poverty. After all, even if nothing characteristic of people happened - which happens too rarely - in this case, one who does not seek wealth and knows how to easily endure everything is much better than one who always lives in wealth. Why? Firstly, such a (person) has the support of peace within himself, and not outside; just as a warrior who relies on strength of body and military skill is better than one who relies only on the strength of arms, so one protected by virtue is better than one who relies on money. Secondly, a rich person, even if he has not fallen into poverty, cannot be calm, because wealth causes many storms and worries. Virtue, on the contrary, brings only joy and tranquility; it makes a person inaccessible to insidious enemies, while wealth, on the contrary, makes him accessible and flexible. Of the animals, deer and hares can be caught most easily due to their natural timidity, and the boar, bull and lion do not easily fall into the hands of hunters; the same can be seen in the rich and in those living in voluntary poverty; the latter is like a lion and a bull, and the first is like a deer and a hare. Who is the rich man really not afraid of? Is it really robbers? Is it not the rulers? Aren't they envious? Aren't they slanderers? But what am I saying about robbers and slanderers, when he looks at his own household with suspicion? And what am I saying (about the time) when he is still alive? Even in death he is not free from the machinations of predators; and death itself cannot bring him safety, but even when he is dead, villains rob him. Wealth is so dangerous! Not only are homes undermined, but graves and tombs are also torn apart. What could be worse than that, if death itself does not bring him safety, but even having lost his life, his unfortunate body is not freed from everyday evils, if the villains rebel even against dust and dust, and, moreover, with greater cruelty than during his life? Then, entering the storeroom and breaking open the chests, they at least did not touch the body and did not take so much as to expose the body itself; and now the unclean hands of the grave diggers do not refrain from doing this either, but move the body (and the body) from its place, turn it over and laugh at it with great cruelty. When it is buried, they, having deprived it of both the cover of earth and clothing, leave it abandoned in this form. Who is more hostile than wealth, which during life destroys the soul, and after death desecrates the body and does not give it rest in the earth, which even convicted and serious criminals are not deprived of? And with the criminals, having punished them with death, the legislature does nothing more; and even after death their wealth subjects them to the most severe punishment - to be naked and deprived of burial: a terrible and pitiful sight! Truly, their fate is worse than the fate of those who are subject to the same determination and wrath of the judges; the latter, having remained unburied for one or two days, are buried; and the first, when they are buried, then they are exposed and subject to reproach. If the thieves leave without taking the coffin itself, then he owes this not to wealth, but to poverty; she preserves it, so that if we covered the coffin with wealth, or made it not of stone, but of gold, we would lose it too. So false is wealth! It belongs not so much to those who have it as to those who are engaged in predation. Therefore, it would be in vain to prove that it is impossible to retain wealth, while those who have it do not find security even on the day of death. Who does not reconcile with the dead, even if it were a beast, a demon, or whoever? One glance at the deceased is enough to move an iron and ruthless man; when someone looks at a dead person, even if he sees him as an enemy and adversary, he cries along with his closest friends; anger fades away along with life and condolences appear in its place; during the removal and burial, no one will distinguish between enemy and non-enemy: so everyone reveres the common nature and the laws established for it! But wealth, being alien to this, inspires anger against those who have it and makes enemies of the deceased people who were not at all offended by him, because it is characteristic of cruel enemies and enemies to expose a dead body. Nature then reconciles his enemies with him; and wealth arms against him even those who cannot accuse him of anything and torment his body, completely secluded. Much here could incline to mercy, and the very fact that it is dead, motionless, ready to turn into earth and decay and helpless; but nothing like that touches villains devoted to criminal passion. The passion of greed, like some cruel tyrant, urgently demands from them the fulfillment of its inhuman commands and, turning them into beasts, leads them to the tombs. Attacking the dead like wild beasts, they would not give up their bodies if the (bodily) members could benefit them. These are the fruits we receive from wealth: upon death we are subjected to reproach and are deprived of a grave, which even serious criminals are awarded with! After this, tell me, will we still love such an enemy? No, brothers, no, I exhort you, let us run from him without looking back; if it itself comes into our hands, we will not hold it to ourselves, but we will bind it with the hands of the poor; these bonds can hold him much better; it will never escape from these repositories, and the unfaithful will finally become faithful, quiet and meek, through the giving of alms. So, when it comes to us, we will use it for this purpose; if it does not come, let us not search, exhaust ourselves, and consider those who have it blessed. What kind of bliss is this? Can you really call those who fight wild animals blessed because such fighters, having captured valuable animals, guard them, while they themselves do not dare to approach or touch them, they are afraid of them and tremble? The rich also experience something similar, confining wealth in their vaults like a wild animal. and every day receiving thousands of wounds from him, but not like from animals. When animals are released, they then cause harm to those who meet them; and wealth, when it is locked up and stored, then destroys those who acquire and store it. Let us make this wild beast meek. And he will be meek when we do not lock him up, but transfer him into the hands of all those in need. In this way we will receive the greatest benefits from him, and we will spend our present life serenely and with good hope, and in the next day we will stand with boldness, of which may we all be worthy by grace and love for mankind (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” Gr. του ιδιωτου – ignoramuses – I.I. You might be interested in: